Here's the thing, putting up horrible #s and winning doesn't mean the QB helped the team win. Misconception. It isn't black and white. Most of the time if you put up horrible numbers, your team loses. That's why it's not a consistent strategy (see Tebow) to have a QB that shows up for one or two drives a game and hope your defense/ST/rest of the offese shows up the other 55 minutes. Palmer would be a good pickup for us and he played okay last year, clearly better than Sanchez. Had one less win than the mighty Sanchez even though that's a team stat. Your argument boils down to Flacco going 4/10 in which BAL wins a playoff game is more impressive than Rodgers throwing 4 TDs and losing a playoff game? Fine, that makes no sense by carry on. first off, are you talking about 2011 or 2012, they are two different years. Because we didn't comeback vs BUF this year and we didn't play @WAS. Hahaha the classic Junc. Funny how you don't mention the comeback against ATL where he tied the game with 30 seconds left then his defense gives up the game tying FG.You don't include that in You clearly are too tied to the name on the jersey of the QB than what you see. If Brady did that, the QB did his job and the defense let him down. If Eli or Peyton did that, the QB didn't do his job and should have stopped the opposing team/did something earlier/ didn't play great for 60 minutes. If Sanchez did that, the defense let him down. If Carson does that, it doesn't count as bringing his team back? Junc keep your arguments straight. Nobody ever said "he is damn good" or "sign him at any cost". Way to make up an argument nobody said. I was arguing Palmer played okay, you are arguing he is "damn good". Also I asked what "much worse is". You are arguing that 4-5 is not as good as 4-3. Except you argued "much worse" not that 4 wins in 7 games is better than 4 wins in 9. Campbell left when they were 4-2. Boller started the next game that they lost that Palmer subbed in for. If you don't read what I write, don't respond.
Did you watch the games? LOL, way to consult the stat sheet. I happened to have watched that Oakland/Tampa Bay game...I had money on it. Here is how you sum it up: "down 28-10 to TB, throws 3 TDs in 42-32 loss. Great fantasy #s though!" Normally, being down 18 points and scoring 22 points would win you the game, wouldn't it? You are the one skewing "fantasy stats" in this case. Now, if you watched the game, you'd know that Palmer had his team within 3 points of winning with a little under 4 minutes left. It was 35-32 with a little under 4 minutes left, and there were no more "fantasy #s" after that. NONE of Palmer's "great fantasy number" stats happened in garbage-time. The Raiders simply could NOT run the ball in this game, either...they got like 20 yards on the ground. Meanwhile, the Bucs got damn near 300 yards rushing. Palmer threw FOUR touchdowns in that game...over 400 yards too. Again, these are not fantasy stats either, but real-time PRODUCTION to keep his team in the game. The Raiders did not stand a chance without him playing like he did...but he was unable to bring them back all the way. Palmer was really the only reason they were in it at the end. I have absolutely ZERO doubt that, if Sanchez did what Palmer did in that game, you'd be talking about how Sanchez led his team back into the game, and it was the defense that let him down. The defense DID allow SEVEN touchdowns. Instead, since it was Palmer, you spin it in a different way. Here, you are either lying, misinformed, or delusional. I really don't think you watched the game, at any rate. Also, there is no way that Sanchez would have made a game of this like Palmer did IMO, to carry the team in a game like this, winning or not. EVERY quarterback has garbage-time stats, every one of them. Pretty funny that you focus on a "garbage time" TD in the Baltimore game too, instead of, you know, focusing on the fact that the Ravens scored FIFTY-FIVE points against the Raiders. You'd rather focus on the fact that "Palmer" only won four games and add it to the list of HIS losses. Yeah, he should have been able to score 56 points, right? In fact, only 4 teams allowed more points than the Raiders did last year. Now, of course, if you are Mark Sanchez and your team allows that many points, it makes you "force throws" to compensate and you give him the benefit of that excuse. If you are Carson Palmer, then it's evidence that you are a bad QB since you didn't win games, and you start to look for garbage-time stats to prove how overrated he is by the average fan who consults the fantasy stat sheet. I don't even know HOW to play fantasy football...never did it. By the way, Palmer really only played 14 games last year. While 4-10 is not good, neither was this Raiders team. For all of the crying about Sanchez's hardships this year with injuries and "lack of help," it's pretty hard to believe that you'd spend your time looking into games that happened in 2011 with Palmer, in an attempt to nitpick all that for some reason, as though people were saying how great he played. After that crazy trade, Palmer was thrown into a game when he didn't even know the offense. He was in Oakland for about 5 minutes before actually playing in midseason. He also hadn't even been training or working out. He even did well at times that year. Call the 2011 season a wash due to the circumstances if you have any sense of fair-play. I don't think I've ever seen a team commit like 10 penalties a game like the Raiders did that year, either, BTW. Is Palmer great? Of course not. I don't recall anyone here saying that he is. Is he better than Sanchez? That very well could be. Nobody in their right mind has a high opinion of Sanchez right now. Just stop with the double-standards in your "evaluations." Your whole post is arguing a strawman from what I see.
Virtually every intelligent Jet fan is in the "hope he doesn't take the field" crowd, rather then the "hope he fails" crowd, because his failure has been confirmed too many times. As far as Palmer goes, I hope the Jets pass on him. He has taken a lot of shots and I don't think he's the future of the Jets. That aside, he is a much, much better quarterback than Sanchez, and at least he wouldn't be an embarrassment. I'd rather see them draft a rookie to compete with Gerrarrd and Mcelroy during our rebuilding year, even if it's not a high round pick.
Absolutely, a QB that cannot come through when it matters most is useless. Yes Mark was horrible last year, how many times can I say that? When has Palmer had the lead and not needed to come back? You guys try to change the argument but we are discussing Carson Palmer and mark Sanchez. Carson Palmer has been a decent stat guy post injury and nothing more. You aren't winning anything w/ Carson palmer, we KNOW we can win big w/ Mark Sanchez b/c he's done it. Their best WR was heyward Bay who was a 3rd year WR and was steadily improving until 2012. He had almost a 1,000 yd season in 2011. W/ Jason Campbell he was on pace for 1157 yds, he had good a good Rb to throw to in Bush. Bush, McFadden(limited) and Reece caught 83 balls. Denarius Moore wasa promising rookie, Kevin Boss a decent TE. He had more talent to work w/ than Mark had in 2012. The LG isn't responsible for the entire offense, the QB is. It can, it depends when they are accumulating the positive #s. Mark's #s were good in 2010 but he played MUCH better than his #s, in 201 his #s were much better and he wasn't half the QB in 2011 that he was in 2010. #s tell PART of the story. The Flacco thing is silly as he did nothing in that particular game and Rodgers was great in that Ari loss. When you put up 38 pts you should win. This goes back to the peyton debates but peyton isn't putting up 38 pts in losses. If he was I wouldn't blame him. In losses his high powered Os have averaged slightly more than 14 pts per game. The highest point total he led his O's to in a playoff loss was 24 but he threw 2 critical INTs that helped cost his team the game. That's very different than what Rodgers did. I was discussing the last 2 years. The Atl game where ina tie game in the 4th w/ Oak in FG range he threw an INT for a TD? strange I didn't bring that up. Thanks for reminding me. The point is the misninformed that blindly follow meaningless fantasy #s thinking Palmer is an upgrade over Sanchez. Palmer would be fine as a low cost backup but it makes no sense to invest any $ or time in him. he's going to put up better #s and lose. How does that benefit us?
He was great down 28-10 then when he had a chance down just 3 what happened? Plenty of time on the clock and he throws an INT. GREAT job by Carson! W/ no pressure down big he performed, when the game was w/in reach he failed both early and late in the game. He's a good garbage time QB. Most QBs pad stats in garbage time, I agree. Oak 4-2 pre Palmer in 2011, Cincy stunk w/ palmer in '10. Oak falls apart w/ him and Cincy thrives w/o him. Not a coincidence. Every INTELLIGENT Jet fans wants him to succeed b/c he's our best hope to compete this year. The whiny Jet fans will root against him in hopes of securing the next great hope only to boo him out of town in 2-3 years as that vicious cycle continues.
How can anyone say Carson Palmer is a bettter QB then Sanchez?? Where and when has Carson Palmer proven anything?? Weve seen Sanchez be clutch in playoff games on the road so theres that. With Palmer the only playoff game he has played in is the one he lost to Mark Sanchez,and im no Sanchez fan but Palmer is washed up and never did anything special and never will at this point he wll go down in hstory as one of the great scrubs
Nobody is saying he will lead us to the SB. He's just a good backup/competition if Sanchez mentally keeps on spiraling downwards. The kid is in a 1.5 year and half slump right now and we aren't adding elite talent around him. It would be nice to have capable other QB who isn't injury prone/old like Garrard. Palmer or Kolb would be nice additions.
Kolb, would be ideal, because he would be more of a threat to win the job, but...for the offense being installed ill take Garrard over palmer. With the ball out quickly, Garrards injury issue mitigates, like Sanchezs decision issue.
The simple answer is being anything other than a Sanchez Homer. All other football fans would say exactly that. As for the playoff win thing, the simple answer to that is this - it's a team sport.
First line, if the QB is responsible for the whole offense, that's just silly. By that implication Sanchez is responsible for the whole offensive struggles last year? Nope, wrong. Sanchez played much better in the 1st half of 2011. The second half of 2011 was where he had serious problems. If he didn't start regressing he was on a great path. But he started regressing. He needed the defense/run game a lot less in 2011 for a while. It was nice not to hope the defense keeps the game close for 55 minutes and then have a late drive. Statistically, you don't consistently win one score games at a high rate season to season just like statically you don't recover fumbles or lose fumbles at a very high rate season after season. That's why Sanchez played better for part of 2011 until the regression than 2010. By your logic though, Flacco won the game and Rodgers lost it. You called your own logic silly. You said you'd rather a QB who plays bad and helps win games than a QB that plays good and loses. Welp Flacco played and won the game, Rodgers played and lost it. You are arguing against yourself. I just used an example of your own logic. No I recall Peyton giving his team a lead with 50 seconds left wasn't good enough. But Brady when did in the SB, his defense let him down otherwise he would have 4 Super Bowl. But when Sanchez gave his defense a lead (After throwing a pick 6 like Carson), they let him down in Denver, but when Carson ties the game with 40 seconds left and his defense gives it up it's on Carson. Double standard because you only address the plays before the last drive for Carson and Peyton and not for Sanchez and Brady. If you want your arguments to hold up, you have to apply them everywhere. You can't cherry pick game situations and blame one QB for one thing then overlook that another QB did in a similar situation. That's the problem ,you can't pick and choose when you want to apply your own logic. You have to apply throughout and make choices off of that. This applies throughout most of your arguments, the name matters more than the whole of what happened. The name shapes what happens in your eyes instead of recalling what happened, then putting names to it. Narratives, narratives, narratives. Don't let the media influence your views. Like you can't pick and choose wins as a QB stat and then disregard TDs, INT, INT%, etc. I mean you make a big deal of garbage time TDs, but isn't it worrisome that Sanchez couldn't even manage that last year? He was so mentally gone that he let back games spiral and couldn't even give us a puncher's chance at the game. That's worrisome, his whole mentality has changed in the last 1.5 years. We have a kid now that looks terrified to play the QB position instead of embracing the challenge We have a QB who instead of escaping defenders left and right in Clevleand, panics and fumbles the ball on a lot of hits. We have a QB who had poise and knew how to make big plays to a QB who is now afraid of making the wrong play. We went from a QB who didn't let bad things spiral but went to a QB that's leading the spiral. He's letting all his bad come out from his rookie year and the last good we saw was against NE for two drives! Then we saw none of that. So much for "clutch" gene, throwing 4 picks in a must win game against TEN, throwing 3 picks against MIA last year in a must win game. Palmer would be a good addition to have. We have no idea what we are getting out of Sanchez. There is nothing telling us if he will rebound or continue to regress. THe whole "but if we add more talent" argument is out the window because we aren't going to be adding two great receivers, a stout OL, an attacking defense, a great ST and a great running game with 2 solid backs in one offseaosn. He's going to have to overcome some bad odds, something we haven't seen him do in a long time. It would be very good to have a capable QB like Kolb or Palmer on the roster in addition to Garrard and Sanchez. Sanchez is coming off a mental collapse of 1.5 years and Garrard a surgery. Would be nice to add another QB to crew. The Jets 100% are praying Sanchez turns to gold, but you can't base your offseason plans on hope that Sanchez flicks a switch. It's what got us into a problem in 2011 and 2012 with Sanchez and with other positions. We hoped Hunter would flip a switch, Greene would flip one, Ducasse one, etc etc. You need backup plans for a realistic scenario. There is a very real, unfortunate chance Sanchez doesn't improve. We have seen as many good games as bad games from him and as many bad years as good years from him. You have to plan for the worst, not pray and hope Sanchez regains his form. Oh and to answer your last question: he's going to put up better #s and lose. How does that benefit us? So the future of this team is we are rebuilding. If your QB can put up good #s as the team around him loses, you can hang onto that QB for 2-3 years while finding another QB to train, learn, get ready to become a solid QB. Because if the QB is consistently putting up good numbers, wins are going to come with it. If your QB puts bad #s and is a main reason you lose and look bad, you need to get rid of him. You then are forced to rush and fill the QB hole because you didn't have a backup plan. Carson/Kolb are that backup plan. It means as you put the team together, you have a QB who is not throwing everything away. He is helping the offense and the offense is gelling. You have a few QBs out there who had ojay years last year vs Sanchez who had a terrible, rookie like year last year. For some reason, you think getting a QB that had an okay year is a bad idea. From my view, it's a good idea and a great safety net if Sanchez keeps on struggling. Palmer and Kolb can fill a void that Sanchez can potentially create. They can stopgap if Sanchez blows up in our faces. Would be a smart pickup
Just like Fitzpatrick - Sanchez comparison, Carson Palmer - Mark Sanchez comparison is just like Special Olympics competition. Whoever wins is still a god damn loser. P.S. I didn't intend to disparage the disabled.
Kolb would be idea, but Palmer is also a safe bet. It's hard to say the injury mitigates because of quick decisions because we still have to see Garrard move on that knee. Even quick decision making requires backpedaling and planting and following through. I do get your point, that quck reads and throws would lessen the chance of sacks/getting hit. I'm just talking coming back in general vs reinjuring the knee. To your end point, Junc disagrees. He thinks playoff wins is a QB stat which ironically is what the media, the one Junc tells everyone to stop listening to, pushes incorrectly. When a W and L can come down to a FG kicker, a bad call, a fumble not being recovered, it can't be a QB stat. Too many variable, too small a sample size of games. I mean it's just silly we market games as Brees vs Rodgers when in fact Brees and Rodgers never face each other. It's just Brees vs the Packers D, Rodgers vs the Saints D, special teams vs special teams. X's vs O's
It's not silly, it's a fact. The QB is responsible for the entire offense. No player has more pressure on them than a QB. Look at sanchez, he IS blamed for everything that went wrong despite only being part of the problem. That comes w/ the territory of being an NFL QB especially in NY. He was better in the 1st half of '11 than he was in the 2nd half of '11 but he wasn't very good the 1st half of '11. Nothing like he was in 2010. The D gets way too much credit especially for all their failures. Our D was good to very good but never great. They weren't doing what Denver's D's were doing for Tebow in 2011. When did Peyton give his team a lead w/ 50 secs left? Never has it happened that peyton led his O to a late game score only to watch his D blow it like Brady did in XLII but keep making things up, it will help deflect. I don't disregard anything, stats are important in context. What good are TD passes I garbage time? I'd rather have a QB tjhrow 20 TD passes w/ the majority in big spots than one throw 30 w/ 2/3 in meaningless times of the game. Sanchez does look lost but any QB would when their weapons are Kerley, Schilens, Gates, Cumberland, reuland. He didn't look bad at all early in the season when the receivers weren't as banged up. I don't think they are banking on sanchez turning it around at all. I think they are bringing in competition and see what happens w/ Mark. If he falls again he's gone after this season and they draft a QB, if not maybe he's turned it around and the franchise will be much better off for it. Palmer will put up decent #s and lose for years, that doesn't benefit us in any way. The goal is to win not to put up #s. No one player is more responsible for their teams success or failure. That doesn't mean every game is on the QB, some games the QB plays great and they still lose, other times the QB sucks and they still win but more often than not the play of the QB will help determine who wins.
This from a guy with a 24 tatooed on his asscheeks, and a slippery when wet sign in the middle. People rooting for the QB to succeed are Jets fans, people rooting for Mevii$ to get 15 percent of the salary cap, are morons. Join a Revis fan board, to go with your New Kids on the Block membership.
I'm pretty sure your boy junc doesn't want to trade Revis either. You just called your fellow Sanchez fanboy a moron. :rofl:
I dont want to trade Revis. My hope is he realizes the relative value of his position. Id like him to remain. a Jet, but not to the detriment of the team, and a CB is only worth so much in the Cap, my view is around 8 mil + or - 10 pct I like to take the shot at BB, because he instigates it.
So, Wasteaverde, you disagree with my assertion, I see. Interesting...with skill players missing about 25 games, and a shit oc, they got to six. So tell us.... What are a healthy Holmes, grown hill, a TE not named Rueland, and Tebow not trotting in on Second Down worth, in terms of net wins....? Then beyond that...a real OC?
So Hobbes you ever gonna get around to the post where you got called out for flat out lying about Mayock's take on Geno? Or are you gonna parade around here like you actually have credibility? The nerve of this coward...
Hobbes, did you really just reply 2 separate and completely different times, to the same one sentence post? haha And Junc some of your posts are just cringe worthy. You will make a completely over the top point and then contradict the same point a sentence later.
