You guys have gone off the deep when does the season start. The Sanchez haters refuse to give Sanchez any credit whatsoever. If you watched the playoff games especially in 2010 Sanchez played extremely well. If you watch the Tennessee game after the failed Tebow drive Sanchez played terrible. ArmandJ, You lost all credibility with me when you said you hate Sanchez because your friends are making fun of you. (get over it) Name the four games Sanchez lost all on his own? The rest of you get over it Sanchez seems like the worst QB because of the scrutiny of the media there is just no relenting. Notice how the attitude toward the team has already changed. Even the harshest critics of the NYJ and Sanchez (Kriegal comes to mind) knew that Sanchez was in a no win situation last season they just did not care and piled on. The fact remains Sanchez has to perform well this year. Even if the whole team gets hurt because this fan base likes to stick with the negative instead of finding the positive. Shoot most of the Sanchez haters want to see him fail. I don't he might but he might not if he sucks again I will be calling for his head but I am hoping and betting he makes a turn around. Rehashing the same arguments over and over is getting old even in the off season. Sanchez has never played well and crowd and the HE can do no wrong crowd.
It does say it all, I'm not wowed b/c ESPN tells us how great certain players are. I feel bad that you need others to help you evaluate players. Peyton Manning gets 14 free pts from his STs, gives up a TD on an INT and sets up the GW FG for the opponent in OT but he's not a choker. 9-11 in postseason w/ top 3 talent to work with every year. Eli is clearly elite, elite QBs always lead their teams to missing the playoffs 3 of the last 4 years(his prime years w/ SB talent around him), they always throw 25 INTs in year 7. Foolish me, he is elite! ESPN says it so it must be true!
You are right- the hell with ESPN, NFL Network, FOX/CBS/NBC networks, every coach and player in the league, every major newspaper and sports outlet in the country and world. I'll just refer to Junc for now on haha
Think for yourself, most of these "experts" give their "opinions" to get a rise out of people or to be outrageous. They also sway in the wind, In Dec Flacco stunk but a month later he's elite. They sway in the wind, watch the games w/ your own eyes. That's the best way to evaluate, trust me. More people that make football decisions think like myself than think like you do or like the media "experts" do.
Eli has played great in Two playoff runs beside that he has been pedestrian. He throws a lot of INT with much better talent than the Jets. I still think he his a great QB but you cant look at Eli and say that he is great and then say that Sanchez has no chance.
So the experts are trying to get a rise out of people- but saying the Manning brothers are overrated and defending Mark Sanchez in virtually every situation is NOT trying to get a rise out of people?
Peyton Manning is an all time great QB, don't confuse 2 separate arguments. My argument about him is that he is not a big game QB and the facts back me up. I apologize that this bothers you. Eli is a good QB and at times great. His problem is you never know which QB you will get, one week he looks like a top 5 guy, the next week a mediocre guy. Great QBs, elite QBs aren't that up and down. My defense of mark Sanchez is not to say he is a great QB or will ever be one, I have NEVER said that. I defend him from those that solely blame him, he was awful last year but he had a lot of help to be that bad and he's shown we can win big with him. he's still young and I don't want to throw away a QB we KNOW we can win big w/ when surrounded by the right cast. The easy thing to do is to throw him away, it's way "experts" will tell us, it's what the average fan tells us but I'm not one who gives up on people the second they fail.
I fully believe if we switch the QBs- put Mark on '07 & '11 NYG and Eli on '09 & '10 NYJ we end up w/ the same team results. That doesn't mean Eli isn't better b/c he clearly is- a lot better right now but w/ the talent on both teams I think we see the same result. The biggest difference btw the teams in those years was NYG's D's stepped up in title games.
Seattle, Tennessee, Houston were three games he definitely had a major contributing factor in losing. As for the second New England game, he accelerated the loss. I can mention the first New England game, but he DID lead us back to have a chance...before fumbling in overtime. There's a lot more he did wrong last season than he did right, obviously. He turned the ball over 50 times in the last two years. 50. That's honestly an extremely amazing stat that puts him in the discussion as one of the worst quarterbacks. What was one thing you feel as though he did last year to help the team? Just one thing...? People who argue that Sanchez is better than Peyton Manning and that he will be here for 17 years lose more credibility with the masses than I have.
Bad analogy. Ever hear of Ted Williams? How many championships did he participate in? You don't get there on your own batting skills.
I base a comeback mostly on reversing his previous season or close to that. But I'll settle for more TD's and less interceptions. The team can win with that improvement.
Tennessee is brought up because it was a must win game and Sanchez threw 4 picks including one off his back foot down 4 in the 4th quarter on 1st down on the TEN 20 yard line. Situational awareness!!! You throw that away or take the sack. You DO NOT force a throw there and yet Sanchez forced a throw there. Sanchez gave up that 99 yard TD just like Peyton gave up the 70 yard bomb to Jacoby Jones and Tom Brady stripped the defender who picked him off against SD. Be consistent. Can't kill a player for one thing and turn around and ignore it for a different player. (Oh just noticed this was Junc I was quoting. Makes sense now) January 1st against Miami, 3 interceptions including one in the RZ when we needed a score. You mean playoffs. So we expect our defense to pitch shutouts? The defense is going to give up points, they aren't going to be perfect for 16 games. That's where not throwing a pick 6 helps (Denver). They are going to fold, it's really rare you hold a team to no offensive TDs in a game, yet that's what your asking our defense to do. There are times when you need the offense to bail you out, the offense instead in the TEN and DEN games just put the defense in worse spots. We don't throw Denver 7, game over. We don't turn the ball over 5 times, game over in TEN maybe. Den game I'm guessing? It's funny because if you are criticizing the defense for this and ignoring the 55 minutes that happened before this. You sound like a Tebow fan. You again? I just went through and multi quoted the posts that were extremely wrong and lo and behold Hobbes and Junc, surprise surprise. How are you wrong that Peyton is a chocker? We went over this. But in football you have offense, defense, and special teams. Following me? Now there are 50ish players on an NFL roster that get fitted into these 3 units. All 3 units see the field at important times during the game. The quarterback is one player on the offensive unit. Yes if you followed me up to this point, you see that the quarterback only plays on one of the 3 units. Now the next step is there are 11 players on the field for a unit at one time. The quarter is 1 of those 11 players on 1 of those 3 units. Are you following me? At times, the quarterback can be on the field from 20-40 minutes at a time. The quarterback does not play defense or special teams. Are you still following me, because this is where it gets tricky: Define a "clutch" QB? If a QB is clutch, what does it mean? How many times are they allowed to be not "clutch" to lose the "clutch" label? How many times do they have to be "clutch" to get the label? Is "clutch" QB play related only, or team related? Is Tom Brady "clutch" because he has 0 game winning TD drives in the playoffs with under 2 minutes. Joe Flacco, Peyton, Eli have this. Are they "clutch" because of this? Is Russell Wilson "clutch" because he helped his team get a lead with 34 seconds left in the playoffs, or is Matt Ryan "clutch" because he gave his team an opportunity to take the lead with 14 seconds left in the playoffs? Can both QBs be "clutch" in the same game? Is if a team wins or not the best indicator if a QB is "clutch"? Is Tim Tebow "clutch"? I know I rattled a bunch of clutch questions, but answer the ones below: What is clutch? Is Tom Brady clutch? Why or why not. Is Tim Tebow clutch? Why or why not. Is Mark Sanchez clutch? Why or why not. Is Matt Ryan clutch? Why or why not For someone who criticizes people for using TDs and INTs as "fantasy" stats you pick a non stat as "clutch" to define QBs. That's not even the funny part yet. Not only do you pick a not a real stat (so by english language you picked a "fantasy" stat) you pick a term that ESPN and many media outlets use to define a QB. You criticize people for using numbers that are used to to judge a QB, then around and use not a stat that ESPN loves to push. You are literally arguing against yourself. You tell others don't use ESPN terms and numbers then turn around and use a made up term that ESPN uses. You argue yourself from post to post :breakdance:
I added numbers to your points, hope you don't mind: (1) I give Sanchez credit. He played well in 2010, not extremely well. Extremely well is what Russell Wilson did this year. But that's just language, we both agree Sanchez played well and helped the team in 2010. Here is the thing, I think we can both agree his play wasn't out of this world for 2010 and that he was average overall in the playoffs. He had two bad first halves and a bad 1st quarter in the playoffs. In the quarters I listed Sanchez led the offense to 3 points with a fumble for 6 points the other way and an INT in FG range down 7-0 in the first half. The second half of these games and the second quarter onwards against NE he played much better. That's 7 good quarters with 5 bad ones overall. In Pittsburhg, I think we can agree Sanchez was one of the reasons we got back into the game but also one of the reasons we lost it. Just like the defense was one of the reasons we got back into the gmae, but one of the reason we lost it. We gave up 7 points offensively to Pittsburgh. We also scored 0 points on the GL against Pitt when we needed 7. This wasn't Sanchez leading the team to victory but the defense slowing him down. It was a team loss and Sanchez himself was a part we lost. He was also a reason this was a game not a blowout and was close til the end. New England, another great team effort. We held the Pats to 3 points in the first half I believe. We also had a ST turnover and Sanchez executed well in the RZ minus the first trip. This was probably Sanchez's best playoff game. The defense though should get major credit and so should the Special Teams for forcing a TO and recovering two onside kicks. Indy, Sanchez had an average game. He had one late FG drive that started because we had a 40-50 yard kick return.He had a good throw to Braylon and good catch by Braylon to set up an easy FG. We were in this game because the defense slowed down Peyton Manning and the run game just ran over IND. Our first TD came because we primarily took the ball out of Sanchez's hands. He had one good drive late, but does one drive make up for the whole game? If you believe that, then Tim Tebow should be one of the best QBs in the league by this logic. (2) No Sanchez does not seem like the worst QB because of media scrutiny. He seems like the worst QB because statistically he was one last year and because we saw him make rookie mistakes. That's very frustrating from a fan perspective. We saw him go backwards. There is no argument there, he regressed and played bad. You cannot argue that. Now the argument is primary reasons why that happened and if he can bounce back. That's for a different number maybe or different post. Your point was how did Sanchez look, and he looked bad because he played bad. Don't bring up reasons why, that's not the point. The point is we all think he played bad because he did play bad. (3) We agree Sanchez has to perform well. He needs to show great improvement. You can't bank on Sanchez being the exception and being one of the few late blossoming QBs. We need him to improve. And not just improve because we have a better OC. We need to see improvment that involves Sanchez mastering the offense and brining out the best in the offense, not the offense bringing out the best in him. (4) I honestly think only 5-7 people here want him to fail. There are more than 10 Sanchez "haters" so no most don't want him to fail. Most want him to flip a switch and become Aaron Rodgers, but realistically this won't happen and it would be stupid to place your hope in a <1% chance of something happening. Better to talk about the future, who we can draft, how this team can remain comeptitive until we find a QB. If it's Sanchez, GREAT, we saved a ton of time. If not, well that was expected going into his 5th year, hopefully the FO planned for it. (5) Yes rehashing the same things is annoying. But we have made progress through the thread. There are just one or two outliers on each side who won't give ground for some reason. Other than that, it's been narrowed down that I) Sanchez has basically no place to go but up from last season. However, a better season than last year should not guarantee his future here. II) We aren't getting an influx of huge offensive talent. Sanchez is going to have to deal without the 09 or 10 talent level and find ways to protect the ball and not make brutual game changing mistakes III) Sanchez doesn't look confident anymore. He seems to be mentally shaken. THis needs to be fixed, you can't have a mentally weak QB because ALL QBs run into plays they need to bounce back from during the course of a season. IV) Sanchez needs to improve his footwork, consistency, and decision making. Those 3 things can shore up a lot of problems he has. Those 3 things are on him, regardless of talent. V) Schotty and Sparano were average to below average coordinators. MM inspires some hope and should be able to max out Sanchez. VI) We want/need Sanchez to perform better than what the system looks. Yes you don't need your QB to play amazing to win Super Bowls (look at Brady's 1st, Peyton's, Eli's 1st, Rodgers' 1st). But you need a QB who can protect the ball, make smart decisions, and pick you up for a drive or more. You need a QB you feel confident as a strength, not a QB who you feel you need to hide to win games.
did mark Sanchez gets 2 STs TDs like peyton did in the Jacoby Jones game? did he have 3 possessions needing just a FG to win? The situations are different. Our D played great for 55 mins but w/ the game on the line against a QB who can't throw backed up to his 5 they allowed Den to go 95 yds. No one said it was all D, the O contributed greatly to the defeat but the D killed us on that drive. They couldn't even hold them to a tying FG and give us a chance. You didn't prove anything was wrong but thanks for replying. we have been over it many times, peyton is clearly a choker. It's amusing the new and exciting excuses we see w/ every new choke job. Isn't it funny how when his teams win 12-14 games every year Peyton gets all the credit, then when they lose in January it's b/c of everyone but Peyton? The man was given 14 free pts at home in a div rd game and STILL found a way to lose. I know it was the Dbs fault on the Jones TD. That DB threw an INT for a TD, that DB set up another TD w/ a TO, that DB threw an INT that's et up the GW FG for Bal. It's always someone else's fault w/ Peyton. Clutch is pretty much what Peyton isn't, a clutch QB makes big plays in big games. leads his teams to wins, plays his best at critical moments. The anti-peyton manning. It doesn't mean coming through every time but you have to come through more often than not. Eli is not elite but he is clutch, he's a great 4th qtr QB and is 8-1 in his last 9 postseason games. Is Brady clutch? most of his career yes, lately no. Tebow? he had a nice little run, need to see more. Sanchez currently is awful so no but through his career he has been a clutch QB in late game situations. Ryan is nowhere near clutch. I can only imagine what people would say about him and Sanchez if Sanchez had his weapons and Ryan played w/ Mark's '12 weapons. what stat that espn loves to push am I using? I use my eyes, espn doesn't help me evaluate at all. I am in the minority(though correct) about Peyton manning, espn slobbers all over him. I just love when people don't have arguments that they have to make stuff up to deflect.
Yes. The leading reciever was the backup tight end. Kerley, is a slot guy that got pushed outsode, and...my timing may be off, but Im fairly certain Edwards was signed that week. So...to put it simply, in deference to you...its not really possible to speculate on the calls, the routes, or the passing game. Sanchez did however drop the snap, that powell booted that did cost them a shot at winning late. And for those defense apologisits...when Jeff Cumberland, is your most tenured receiver that week...you cant give up 94 yard running plays..... There are times a defense needs to step up, and when your skill players are more worthy of a MASH unit, than the field....kinda hard to blame one guy...unless youre actually in the film room. Though throwing into triple coverage always sucks when you dont make the play. Like the one he made against Jacksonville to Cumberland.
You avoided the point. You avoided the point. No idea what this is about. Who gives him the credit? The people on ESPN? Why are you listening to them? Also avoided the point. Interesting. A clutch QB leads his team to wins? So Russell Wilson wasn't clutch for leading his team to the lead with 34 seconds left against Matt Ryan but your standards? Peyton wasn't clutch for leading his team to a 2 point lead with 57 seconds left against us? Brady wasn't clutch for leading the Pats to a 4 point lead over the Giants with 2:45 left? That's peculiar. But if by your definition, plays his best at critical moments, Brady has not been clutch most of his career. Actually it would be 7 years underperforming in the post season vs 4 years playing his best. So most of his career, would be a no by your standards interestingly enough. Funnily enough, Matt Ryan has the highest success rate in one possession 4th quarter drives out of all active QBs, but isn't "clutch". So by your definition of Sanchez/Tebow clutchness can change? How does it change? Could it maybe be if the team helps a QB be "clutch"? Alright I guess I have to make the ending more clear: You complain about people using fantasy stats like TDs, INTS, yards, etc. You say they are too influenced by the media. BUT then clutch is something that the media itself pushes a lot more than your so called fantasy numbers. And clutch isn't a stat, hence it by the definition of fantasy according to dictionary.com, "Something, such as an invention, that is a creation of the fancy", you are using a fantasy stat called clutch. You are doing what you complain others do. You listen to the media and use a fantasy stat, something you tell everyone else to stop doing. So I wasn't deflecting, I was explaining the irony of the situation. You are using a fantasy stat or idea that ESPN and the media pushes. How is that a deflection or making things up. You are the one who makes things up. You said that after the BAL/DEN postseason game "The difference is Brady hasn't thrown away games like Peyton has so many times and and Brady has given his D's late game leads which they have blown unlike Peyton."
Now, throwing into triple coverage always sucks. Even if you make the throw, it doesn't make it a good decision. It's a bad decision you got lucky on. I think we agree though, if Sanchez improves his situation awareness, he probably cuts down on 5-10 INTs from last year
You completely dodged the question. How in the world can you look at WR stats for a game and determine that because their stats suck that means it was their fault and not the shitty QB throwing them the ball? How come when you claim sanchez had a good game you don't need to be in the film room but when he plays like ass you go off of WR stats and claim nobody knows that wasn't in the film room? Clown logic bro. I am disappointed
