I don't even know why I bother responding to him anymore. He is a walking contradiction. Facts that only apply when you are trying to defend your boy. Most everyone sees your double talk for what it is. I'm sure Sanchez appreciates the effort.
you bother w/ me to educate yourself which is a good thing and you should be thanking me rather than taking shots. The next step is to actually allow the info to absorb into your head so you don't look quite as foolish the next time you try to debate someone.
I don't take bits and pieces, I take your arguments. If you consider your own words and sentences and paragraphs and opinions bits and pieces, you should put down your full thoughts. Also I'm the one trying to get something by people? How do you know Carson knew the system back and front? Is it because Hue Jackson was there? That's a major comment you say without addressing why it's true or why you believe it's true. You're the one who just tried to pass opinion off as fact without giving anyone a reason why. Just like when you tried to write that certain drives were "soul crushing" for the team. Again, passing off opinion as fact without a reason why you believe so. You actually need to be more upfront, beginning with why do you think Carson Palmer knew the Oakland Raiders system back and forth? And what does what Carson was traded for have to do with chemistry? That would be nice to explain, or did you just write he was traded for draft picks including for a 1st round for the fun of it? And how come you mention only the system for Oakland and not the Jets system in 09. Again that's you not being upfront and trying to get information past people. If you want to explain yourself, that would be nice. Here's a list: Why does what Carson was traded for affect chemistry with his new team? Why did Carson know the Oakland system in and out? Was Carson Palmer traded in the middle of the season without practicing with a team since August of 2011? Was Braylon Edwards traded midseason? Were the Jets a primarily run offense or pass offense in 2009? EDIT: Also facts can be excuses. I don't get why people think they are exclusive from each other. Also it doesn't address the fact that you asked for a time when you blamed Sanchez's struggles on the wide receivers and the bold were times that you used wide receivers being hurt or less talented or being traded as a reason why. Not sure also how "NO QB could carry those guys." is a fact. That's an opinion. Also this is an opinion, not fact "2008 Coles was better than 2009 Edwards." So yeah in conclusion, you are the one trying to pass opinions off as facts, even calling them facts. Looks like you are the one trying to get stuff past people, not me. Again, if you a problem, you can quote me and say "examples a and b I disagree with because you didn't talk about c and d" And then I would respond with "yeah but we also have to consider the weight of a and maybe e also" etc etc. I'm said it before, if you have a problem, you can quote me, bold the line, and ask why I think something or said something. You don't choose to do this for whatever reason, but I've offered it up.
You interpret what you think I am saying, if you don't know please ask. B/c situations may be somewhat similar doesn't mean they are exactly alike. It was common knowledge at the time, he was walking into a good, competitive team that was on their way to a div title in a weak division. They expected he'd deliver them to the playoffs but instead we saw a rookie lead his former team to the playoffs(a team he led to 4 wins the year before) and we saw Carson lead Oak out of the playoff hunt as they were 4-2 when they acquired him and would finished 8-8. Carson wasn't brought to oak to put up #s, he was brought to oak to win. He failed. He wanted out of Cincy so bad and thought he was going to a better situation. Are you saying Braylon played in Schottenheimers system pre week 5 of 2009? http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/19/s...-palmer-from-bengals-trade-deadline.html?_r=0
Matt Moore has a combined 48 Ints and Fumbles since 2007. Mark Sanchez has a comnbined 112 Ints and Fumbles since 2009. Source NFL.com Mark is a turnover machine, Matt is not. That's why. PS Ryan Leaf only had 60 combined Ints and Fumbles in a 4 year span. This is more comparable to Mark. Ryan fucking Leaf. Let that sink in.
It isn't a shot at you. I'm just stating the facts. If you shared some real info instead of assertions, I would be happy to absorb it. There are only a couple of people in this thread that look foolish in their debates. Hobbes is one and I'll let you figure out who the other one is.
The first quote said they worked together before, not that Carson knows the system. Hue was WR coach in Cincy during 04,05,06, WR coach not OC or HC. He was Carson OC or HC at USC but he left after 2000 and Carson played 01 and 02 without Hue there. The second quote shows what, that the Raiders though Carson needed practice with a brand new team and teammates? So supporting my argument? Not sure what you mean with that quote. Carson had to play that game against KC too so that went against Oaklands plan and Carson's rust/newness was shown that game. Brutal game for OAK in general. Third quote, what is that for? Again nothing that says Carson knows the system. 4th quote you picked, still nothing about Carson knowing the system back and front. 5th quote, again what Jackson hopes. None of those addresses Carson knowing the system inside and out. It does address Hue Jackson has been on the same team as Carson, but he's never been Carson's HC/OC in the NFL until Carson went to Oakland. It also doesn't address chemistry one bit, it actually shows that OAK thought Carson needed time to adjust to Oakland as their plan was to let him practice for 3 straight weeks without a game which backfired since Carson had to play against KC. I know the situations aren't exactly alike, I'm the one saying they are similar. You are the one saying they aren't. What does the bold (3) above have to do with chemistry? I don't know what that paragraph there is for. No, I'm not saying Braylon played in a Schotty offense. But he came to an offense that was last in passing attempts. The Jets attempted an NFL low 393 pass attempts in the 2009 season. That total number includes WC attempts and Kellen Clemens' one game in TB. So Braylon Edwards was joining a run heavy offense (led the NFL in rushing attempts in 2009). He wasn't joining a high flying NFL passing offense. If we are going to make distinctions of what system Carson was joining, we need to examine the Jets' situation to be fair. Correct me if I'm wrong. I said (1)"I do find it funny that Braylon joining the team in week 5 means chemistry needed to be found with the QB, but when we were discussing Carson Palmer and how he joined the Raiders midseason with a whole new playbook, OL, RB, TE, and WRs you didn't mention chemistry as an issue once" (2) Then you said "Carson was traded for multiple picks including a 1st rounder, he was playing for a coach and a system he knew front to back. That's very different than a WR coming to a new system week 5 w/ a rookie QB." What you said (2) was in response to my chemistry comment in (1) right? If it wasn't in response, then this is just misunderstand and neglect the rest of this comment. I don't understand how (3 in bold) has anything to do with Carson having a lack of chemistry in Oakland. I am saying Braylon joining a team midseason and Carson joining a team midseason, both are going to have chemistry issues. But when I tried to make a point about chemistry however many pages back, it was considered an excuse. But then I just quoted a comment you said about Braylon joining the Jets in 2009 and chemistry issues and then in your followup post you said " I'm not making excuses, I am stating facts." So I am confused why Carson joining OAK and saying chemistry is an issue there is an excuse, but Braylon joining the Jets in 2009 and mentioning chemistry is a fact and not an excuse? That's the consistency (inconsistency) I'm talking about. Both will have chemistry problems, but you mentioned in one scenario only. Also I don't understand why what Hue Jackson/the Raiders expected Carson Palmer to perform has to do anything with the fact that he joined a team midseason just like Braylon joined a team midseason and both are going to have chemistry issues. Both are playing with completely new teammates, it's a a whole new playbook language, it's a new, it's a place. Chemistry is going to affect both of them regardless of the expectations placed on them. I just don't understand what you are trying to argue by talking about Carson was traded for multiple draft picks and 1st rounder or why that OAK expected him to take them to the playoffs has to do with chemistry of a starting QB joining a team in midseason. I have no idea what that is important in the discussion of whether Carson joining a team midseason talking about chemistry is an excuse, but Braylon joining a team midseason talking about chemistry is a fact not excuse. It can't be both. They aren't exactly alike, I don't think I said that, I said they were similar. That's the inconsistency issue. They both are going to have chemistry issues, but you only mention the Braylon and brush aside the Carson Palmer one. Again if you weren't using (2) to respond to the chemistry comment in (1) then neglect everything mostly.
awesome, Matt Moore has a combined 13 wins 2007-2012. Mark Sanchez had 13 wins in 2010 alone. Mark has 89 total TOs since 2009, the great Eli Manning has 88 in the same span. Sometimes TOs happen.
The ones that look foolish are the average fans that don't truly understand this game. The ones that use stats and rankings w/o context, the ones that don't account for circumstances. The ones that rely on the media to tell them how to think rather than thinking for themselves.
So you don't think Hue ran a similar system? It addresses the expectations that Carson could come in right away and win in a weak division where the Raiders were 4-2 at the time of the trade. what is the point about the running system? mark still needed to get comfortable w/ him and he was Mark's favorite target who only got to play 12 games w/ him. We saw a huge difference w/ mark and Braylon the following year w/ a full offseason and TC, we didn't see any difference for Carson in Oakland in year 2. By the way, by the end of the year in '09 mark & Edwards were clicking, at what point has Carson clicked in the last 2 years? Chemistry is less of an issue for a team that was 4-2 in a bad division, 8 wins won that division. 1 more win and they make it. Outside of 8-8 Den they played one other playoff bound team(GB) in those last 9 games. Clearly Hue Jackson who had spent a long time w/ Carson thought he was capable of coming in midseason and succeeding, that's why they gave up those picks and that's why I bring up that point. Hue knows him as well as anyone and thought he could handle it- Hue was wrong.
You can't be serious? People seem to completely underrate or overrate Mark's 2009 and 2010 season. Mark's 2010 season wasn't lights out, but he was valuable. Could other top QBs have done better, yeah, but that's why they are top QBs. Sanchez played well, limiting his turnovers, and making the throws when necessary. The problem was inconsistency which I blamed more on Schotty than Sanchez that year. That offense overall put up some atrocious halves and even games of football that Sanchez was a part of. It all came together for Sanchez and the offense for the 2nd-4th quarters of NE and fell apart the 1st half of Pitt and at the GL in the second half. for Sanchez and the offense. Those were promising times.
There is a difference between familiar and "he was playing for a coach and a system he knew front to back". Expectations don't deal with the chemistry issue. If you place higher expectations on a player it doesn't mean the chemistry issues immediately goes away. And they didn't expect Carson to come in immediately, like you quoted from the article, they expected Boller to start and let Carson get up to speed. They weren't expecting Carson to play in KC like you posted. The point of the running system? Me personally, I think a QB joining a team is at least equal but more important chemistry wise to WR joining a team that primarily runs the ball. From my understanding, the Jets offense in 2009 relied on WR blocking, but the assignments for WRs were straighforward, block the corner in front of you. While the QB has to adjust blocking or call the play off for running the ball and etc etc. Why is chemistry less of an issue for a good team? He has to go a team that lost their starting QB and guide them along at a high level, I would say chemistry is more important for a QB on a good QB because they have to perform at the bar set before them without rocking the boat. Hue thought Carson could come in and keep the team going after they lost their starting QB. He also thought Carson needed 3 weeks with the team without playing a game to get familiar with the team and whatever else in the Raiders organization. Wouldn't that say he was worried about chemistry issues as he was trying to avoid inserting Carson immediately in the KC game? The situations are similar and chemistry was an issue for Carson joining Oakland, Sanchez getting a new WR in Braylon, and Braylon joining the Jets. It isn't an excuse for one of them only, it's a hurdle they have to overcome. In addition Carson had the whole not seeing NFL action for 5 months hurdle but that's a separate problem he caused for himself by being selfish.
Sure they used drugs, alcohol, steroids back in the day. But they do it now too just as much and more so. If you don't think the rule changes that were put in place to "help" the passing game are not more important than the extra 25-30 pounds per player difference between old players and today's, you must not watch football. If you think that older players aren't tougher than today's players then again, you must not watch football. Look at the care that players receive today, in comparison to yesterday's players. Look at their equipment for Christ sake. You couldn't run a good 40 time in the shoes they wore either. If you think that the onslaught that Qb's faced in the past is less than today's, you seriously need to do some research! Qb's of today are pampered in comparison!
This statement is so damn true. There is a lack of insight given from the media, who are there for controversies and ratings. Unfortunately so many fans depend on espn or other sports ENTERTAINMENT related sources. There are so many issues with the Jets but all we hear abt is Sanchez, Tebow, and now Revis trade. We need our fans to come up with their own independent opinions, challenge what the hype machine is telling us, or should I say selling us. There is so much to elaborate on with what you have said.
Interesting stat, in games started by both QBs: In games started by Moore, pts allowed by defense: 16.6 PPG In games started by sanchez, pts allowed by defense: 17.9 PPG Interesting, isn't it?
There is a difference, maybe I exaggerated a bit but every word isn't meant to be taken literally. I think you get the point. They expected Boller to start one game then they had a bye and expected Carson to start after that so he had 3 weeks of practice before starting. chemistry isn't less of an issue but the margin for error is greater ona team like that in a division like that. You know you don't have to win 10-12 games to make the playoffs. They only needed 5 more wins to guarantee a spot(or 4 if they won the right games), that's not asking a lot. Braylon wasn't brought here and expecting to lead us to the playoffs, Carson was brought in w/ that expectation and his team paid an extraordinary amount for him. the equipment, rules, etc... have been changed to SAVE LIVES. under the same equip and rules of the old days we'd se players losing their lives just about every week. QBs of today may be helped by the rules but they are getting hit by much larger, stronger, faster, more athletic men. I like your posts:beer:
Ironically enough, in 2010 the games that you could argue the "defense won for us" we lost. 10-9 to BAL, 10-6 to MIA, and 9-0 to GB. The other games were some solid play overall with ST teams chipping greatly at times. In most other games in 2010 it was a combination of the offense doing enough and the defense/ST putting together some great performance. I believe this was the year if we scored 10+ points we went 10-1 that year in the regular season. But most of the time we scored 20+ points from the O/D/ST and that was enough most of the time
Most people would see Favre throwing for 20TDs and 14 Ints before his injury and 2 TDS and 9 Ints after as a sign that the injury affected his play. I sure am glad that I can talk to a Super fan that knows exactly when the injury occurred and that it didn't affect his play. Forget the stats. Unless we are talking about Sanchez, then we can bring them up....unless they are bad stats, then they are stats without context...until we talk about a QBs winning %, then context isn't needed. I don't rely on the media to tell me how to think about things. I can come to my own conclusions and back them up. I don't constantly assert things and then change the rules when they contradict what I am saying about something else.
