Haha, he's gotten called out on a ton of things and then never responds... Its what he does. And then if he responds, he happens to beat around the bush and write a paragraph that has nothing to do with anything.
To your last point, you contradict the whole you would rather a QB who plays bad but wins then plays well and loses. You just said that more often than not the play of the QB will help determine who wins, but earlier you said you would take a bad QB who wins. Well more often than not, the bad QB is not going to win, they're outliers. So what exactly are you saying? Just like having a QB who puts up bad numbers and we lose is no help. Palmer is a good stopgap who can hold over the fort for 2-3 years if Sanchez keeps on regressing. Again, if you aren't going to read what I write, just say you didn't feel like reading it and move on. I would like more than Garrard not from a competition standpoint, but from a future standpoint. I see Palmer or Kolb as better 2-3 year options if Sanchez fails. This argument again? Hitting a simple crossing pattern, not throwing off your back foot and leaving the ball where every defender can grab it. Ball security? Throwing the ball away, spiking it into the dirt when nobody is open. These are all things that regardless of talent around you, a QB can improve on his own. Sanchez looked lost in these moments when the talent around him is not a factor. That's all on him looking lost. You see I don't mention many throws except screen passes and crossing patterns with Sanchez? These are the easy routes we as fans know where the ball should be placed. Anything that is down the field, we know less of and can't squarely put on Sanchez. Maybe Schillens cut one yard too far, etc. But the things I listed are Sanchez looking lost without even bringing in his OL, RB, or WR. What's meaningful vs garbage? Down 2 scores, you get a TD with 1 minute left forcing an onside kick, meaningful or garbage? Down 17, you get a TD with 3:30 left in the game and 3 timeouts, meaningful or garbage? So Junc in the SB the NE Patriots were up 4 points on NYG with 2:30 seconds. In the WC game, the IND Colts were up 2 point lead with 57 seconds left. So yeah, what exactly do you want? Oh and don't give me the garbage "well if Peyton led his team to more points as Brady would" because Brady led his team to 14 points and Peyton 16 and Brady and that offense average over 30 ppg a that year. So actually address the issue, both defenses gave up late leads yet you say Peyton should have scored more then give Brady pass for scoring less. Stop letting the media influence you. You complain it affects everyone else, yet your in line with the media more often than not and their narratives. Then depending on late score, the 7 point lead against BAL this year with 1:04 left in the game :breakdance: Fun game, but not for any Broncos fans. Rahim Moore. Funnily enough, it was Sterling Moore who knocked the ball out of Lee Evans' hands 2 years ago in NE that would have won BAL that game against NE. Live by the Moore, die by the Moore. :smile: There is no evidence to show if Sanchez will perform better with a new OC. It's his head man, nobody will know until we see him next year in real games (if he wins the competition) and then what happens if things go bad in a game for him.
I don't recall saying I'd take a "bad" QB who wins, I was discussing QBs w/ lesser numbers. You aren't winning w/ a bad QB. There isn't any contradiction. W/ Sanchez if he gets back to normal we could have a future at the position, w/ Palmer we have no future. he does nothing for us. How many QBs do we need? Garrard was a successful starter and if healthy I think he's better than palmer at this point. He'll provide enough competition to push mark but mark will still beat him out. Palmer would have done a similar thing but to have 2 vet QBs late in their careers doesn't make a ton of sense. He fell into bad habits w/ awful talent around him, he had no chance w/ receivers who couldn't run crisp routes or gain any separation. he didn't just look lost he WAS lost. I think when up or down where the other team isn't coming back is garbage time. Brady didn't get it done in SB XLVI(though Welker's drop cost them the game). In XLII he led a late game 80 yd TD drive in the final minutes to put his team up 4 only to watch his D blow it. In the '10 WC game Manning had the ball in his hands needing one more 1st down to win, he failed like he has done so often and settled for a 50+ yd FG. Both failed but did Manning have a WR drop what would have been a huge 1st down? Brady gets the benefit of the doubt from me b/c he has come through so often where Peyton has failed more often. Brady of the last few years has basically been Peyton- great reg season #s, fails in postseason but he can always point back to his great first half of career- Peyton doesn't have that to fall back on. He was handed FOURTEEN points by his STs, yep the D blew it but then in OT he had multiple possessions and his INT set up the GW FG for Baltimore. Peyton was THE reason Denver didn't win.
Fuck you. His exact quote from the combine, was, "he makes throws that make you say WOW, then makes another that makes you say WHAT?????" followed by his cutup of sideline throws seven yard out of bounds. You dont Know what youre talking about, moron. Yes, he was impressed at Smiths pro day, but as was pointed out....throwing to your guys and no Defense...is pretty easy. The film cutups, were...well...you know...FILM. Not practice action. If you like Smith, fine. the Front Office liked Gholston, so...youre probably doing better. But, second week of September...Smith is not better than Sanchez, nor is he worthy of the 9 pick. Which is not to say he wont be picked top 10, but thats another discussion... I was not inaccurate in asessing mayocks comments, or film from the combine, and name calling...is trash, but then again...so are you
Look, Unless tou are Miss Cleo, there is no...its in his head crap worthy of comment. After being benched agains AZ, and the following week, he iced the game with a money throw, into triple coverage, at about the two minute mark from his own 10. Big spot for him. Big play in response. A guy with a head problem, throws the ball away or pulls it down in that spot, not makes a money throw 25 yards down the field over the right ear in stride. The head stuff is media bullshit. He is, by any measure lacking maturity, but thats a process. He aint shy about sticking the ball in there, otherwise hed not be a turnover machine.
That's because defending Sanchez IS a contradiction. He's never been a good overall NFL QB, but he's been to 2 consecutive Championship games. His few defenders hang their hat on that and think there is some sort of magical quality to him for those playoff games, which they figure is somehow a personal accomplishment of only his on a certain level, while ignoring that football is the ultimate team sport. They think that there is some unidentifiable reservoir of special sauce in there somewhere, if you will...something that will allow them to relive those two exciting playoff years if only the Jets surround Sanchez with the right personnel. Of course, this won't happen. Sanchez has never been good enough to actually build a team around. At the very best, the few Sanchez supporters say that he "makes plays in big spots." This happened a handful of times. But what these people with their head in the sand fail to realize (or fully admit) is that the rest of the team is what made these "big spots" possible. The Jets stick around, stick around, stick around because of different things besides the QB, then the QB makes a throw or two, the Jets win, and therefore the QB is clutch...nevermind that his game was generally weak or uninspiring if you look at the whole picture, the way he consistently plays and what he is asked to actually do. Sanchez also shit the bed royally in "big spots" too...the Jets had a shot at the playoffs at the end of 2011, and Sanchez played absolute horribly in the last few games. You gotta GET to the playoffs first... The Sanchez circle jerk has been wowed to the point of no return because of a handful of plays. The team set him up for those plays... his success was as a game manager, first and foremost. The more they ask Sanchez to do on a consistent basis, the worse he looks, and the more the team loses. A truly good QB should be the figurehead of the team basically, and Sanchez was never that. Never. Football, at it's best, is about overcoming adversity. Sanchez needs to do that now and make a name for HIMSELF outside of what he's done in the past, which was riding on his team's coattails, making a memorable play here or there, and having decent overall games sporadically. I've seen plenty of QBs make clutch plays...I don't see how this is something to build on if your QB skills and basic mentality aren't there to begin with, though. It's about the fundamental game first. In other words, fleeting moments do not define a person. That's no kind of foundation. You have to be sound and solid on the basic level. Sanchez has never been that, so there is no reason to think that he ever will be.
More comparison news. http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/56823/afc-east-quarterback-allocation
Wasteaverde? Certainly you could do better than that. :rofl: Which assertion? The one I have quoted in my sig where you state that the team with its current roster can win 11/12 games and win the division get a bye week and a home game ect....ect....? That one? Yes, I completely disagree! You say we won 6 last year. Were Keller, Greene, Landry, Bell, Scott, Pace, Devito, Po'uha, Moore and Slauson still on the team? Will they be next year? Will our schedule be the same? Holmes coming back from injury, Hill having 1 season under his belt and a new OC isn't going to compensate for all of our losses. As it stands right now, this team will be lucky to win the same amount we won last year. If we don't trade Revis, and really nail the draft, maybe we can win 8 or 9. That is pushing it. There is no chance that we win 11/12 games and the AFC East to get a bye and a home game. Another Hoebama classic. :rofl2:
Ummm laxative, i had posted mayocks comments accurately in the first place... And I always respond,, and apologize, when late See my earlier comment to you. If you have a thirst for vinegar and water, that should be your own business, but difference of opinion, while vigorous, is no reason for outright douchebaggery.
Yes, that assertion. Kiper also printed the same take today...though not with the same level of enthusiasm. Maybe ill see you on ESPN in april. We should have won 7 last year except for Hillls drop in NE. And holmes, hill, cumberland, are worth 1 pr 2 more than Gates and Gilyard. One more for MM over Sparano. Lucky to win 6, why dont you explain to the class how we are worse than last year? We cut the old and slow feom the defense, have replaced one of two guards, have another on the roster, and the two FAs arent going anywhere. And we return all skill players healthy, except greene and keller, neither of which will be missed. Or do you mean to say the loss of keller, is devastating.....? Ill wait. The only thing classic here, is the epic comedy of you parading as a Jets fan. You say worse, I say better. Ill put a hundred on 7 wins. I go to the annual tailgate, so you can collect in person.
Hes also one of five fastest to thirty wins EVER. You know, as in, in NFL history.. But thats all the team, but last year, the lack of offensive depth, and a multitude of drops and non throw give aways, were solely his fault. The Jets put it up close to 40 times in seattle with their playoff hopes on the line, and failed miserably.wirh one of fhe greatest QBs to ever play. There are considerations, beyond the QB, but hey pretend they dont exist. The Jets were 8-3 under Farve, tell me how that turned out unde Sanchez future "mentor" What a joke. And please Rexs all star defense has let the team down repeatedly. Tebow, Denver anyone
You just don't listen, bro. There is really no point in talking to you. If you want to continue to show your ass on this board, go ahead. You'll always get somebody to bite. But every time you've responded to one of my posts, you haven't even begun to demonstrate that you've even understood what I've said, even on the most basic level. You just click on anybody that says negative things about Sanchez and continue on your random rant...but this...but that...what about Eli Manning and the price of tea in China! To which I'm supposed to say something like "Rex Grossman" led his team to the Super Bowl or Sanchez led the league in turnovers...or that you included last year's Cardinals game in the list of "Sanchez" wins, which I already tried to teach you something about saying that. Sanchez is Sanchez, not anybody else. I'm talking about HIM and his quarterback skills as I see them...not anything else! You seem to be so easily sidetracked. What Brett Favre did has zero to do with the conversation. You can find an example of anything if you look hard enough. It's all relative, but Sanchez is Sanchez. Talk about Sanchez if you are talking about Sanchez. It may sound redundant or stupid to say that...but what the fuck? What Brett Favre did or didn't do doesn't make Mark Sanchez any better or worse. Read what I wrote again in my post that you quoted. That is exactly what I think about Sanchez. In your response to my post, you try to change the subject in about ten different ways, even though what I said was very straight-forward. I'm really not stupid enough to bite.
that is categorically false. guys have to remind you time and time again when they call you out. you ignore until called out again about why you didnt respond and then babble like uncle si about some other stuff and completely disregard what you were called out on. at least be honest about what you do. some of us say stupid shit sometimes. own up to it.
Let's try and recap what we have here so far. Pro-Sanchez: -Schottenheimer and Sparano -No talent around him in 2012 -Good in playoffs -No continuity at WR -Only 26 yrs old Anti-Sanchez -Too many turnovers -Inaccurate short and mid range throws -Gets rattled easily -Very clumsy -Can't lead the receiver consistently
How about we throw in that he was a fantasy football pick in the first place? How many guys have been really good at the NFL level with under two years of play in college?
If that's the case then why did we pick a guy with under two years of play in college? At the time of the pick I remember this being raised as a key flaw.
No I dont mean to be a douche. I like our "rivalry" or whatever you may call it... Just one thing. I know you love Mark and believe that he can be fixed with good coaching. You believe that he will elevate his play to be worth while... Take a few steps forward from his previous 4 steps back. With whatever flaws you believe Geno has, why cant that good coaching that you believe in mold Geno into a good QB? And lets keep in mind that those throws that make you say "what???" happened a very few number of times. He threw 6 interceptions in over 500 attempts. Thats fucking good if you ask me. At this point, Geno is an empty canvas. He has not been marred by poor coaching, a poor surrounding cast or simply just poor development. The fact of the matter is, Mark was mishandled by Tannenbaum and the organization. MM doesnt get a clean canvas with him. MM is going to turn on the film and not like exactly what he sees from Mark in his recent years. It seems like theres a double standard here. MM can fix Sanchez, but he cant mold Geno. Honestly, I think the former is a much harder task. And let me say this, it is not necessarily Mark's fault that the organization mishandled him, but the fact of the matter is, is that is happened. (and Ive asked this a bunch of times, but I would still like to know what major flaws you see in Geno and why he is not a 1st round talent)
Rodgers started 1 year, but he also sat 3 in the NFL. Cam played 1 year at Auburn, but also had played 2 years I believe at the JuCo level. Plus, his athleticism took pressure off of what he had to do with his arm initially (even though he still lit it up). Outside of them, I cant think of any, although Im sure Im missing some.
