No he didnt,they had to convince him to come up and consult for the season...Even today, hes only consulting for Arizona.
You have to throw last year out. You need the Red Zone Sanchez from 2011. 30 or more scores. And in the other 80 yards, over 60%, and 75% pr less pf the ints, and 50% less fumbles.
You can't throw out last year. It happened and he needs improvement. He isn't starting from 2011 Sanchez, he's starting from 2012 Sanchez. You need 2011 RZ Sanchez plus 2010 Sanchez luck/lack of turnovers.
I actually don't care if Peyton was a choker or not, I'm not the one who brought that Steeler game up. My point was that you like to devalue other QBs and then you just actually went ahead and did it by comparing those situations. My point was that when you pump up Sanchez for the playoff wins, we always hear about the plays he made that helped his team win. When other qbs win, you always seem to give them backhanded credit. "He played well but this receiver did this, his defense that, the other team is known choking etc etc etc.". You'll say that Sanchez was excellent in the Charger game in which he threw for 100 yards but you'll devalue Flacco's Super Bowl performance (going as far to say he did very little) because Jones made a couple of plays. Again, it's not that Jones wasn't excellent but so was Flacco. As for the stats, it's no coincidence that Sanchez's numbers are close to those of rookies or journeyman every season. That's the level at which he is playing. I happen to agree with Cosell's assessment of Sanchez before the 2012 season: Because of limited arm strength and inconsistent progression reading and decision-making, he’s at his best working with a strong running game that provides a play-action element. Play-action almost always gives a quarterback a defined “either-or” read, with a check-down available if needed. This allows Sanchez to get the ball out quickly, within the structure and timing of the pass game. Through three years, this is what the film shows Sanchez to be. He’s a function of the team around him. He needs a consistent running game and solid offensive line to have a chance to be a quality starter.
No. Last year was total systemic failure. Thats the same as holding the head coach responsible for Pennington, and Fielder going out for the season in the same game. The extenuating circumstances are beyond any ability to conclude.
Why did you qute Juncs post and attribute it to me? PS. Every QB needs a decent OL. Every QB plays better with play action available. Sanchez, historically has not been afforded check downs and easy throws. If you watched rhe replay of the Pitt game, Schotty said it in the pre game interviews with the announcers. And in 2012, Sparano had 41 catches out of the backfieild, compared to 91 previously.
I see why you are so optimistic. You throw out 20% of Sanchez's career, one of his worst years. yeah throwing out the worst result makes things look better. Too bad Sanchez can't throw out last year. It happened and impacted his game. It's worse now than it was before 2012. It happened and things have to be fixed because of it.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8...es-tennessee-titans-wants-o-coordinator-again I speak honestly, it may seem like I am giving mark more credit but that isn't the case. I have never once said he carried us to playoff wins and I always credit the D. I give the D a tough time b/c I have higher expectations for the D but don't confuse that w/ thinking I am saying Mark is great and carried us. In 2010 he was a top 10-12 QB, don't worry about what the #s say. 2011 he was middle of the pack, 2012 he was at the bottom. His arm strength is fine, now he has limited arm strength? His decision making has regressed which is partly his fault and partly the fault of not trusting his terrible weapons.
No it isnt. He was flawless in St.Louis, when the playcalling suited his stregnths. After being benched he made a big time play to seal the Jaguars game. The psychobabble bullshit, is...bullshit. And factoring in 2012, for Sanchez...is like blaming Herm for 2005. Yeah, they went 4-12, Herm got fired. Then what happened. Mangini inherited a 10 win team, and got labeled Mangenious, by winning 10. Herm wasnt as bad as 4-12, and Mangini wasnt anything special.
Because of limited arm strength and inconsistent progression reading and decision-making, he’s at his best working with a strong running game that provides a play-action element. Play-action almost always gives a quarterback a defined “either-or” read, with a check-down available if needed. This allows Sanchez to get the ball out quickly, within the structure and timing of the pass game. Through three years, this is what the film shows Sanchez to be. He’s a function of the team around him. He needs a consistent running game and solid offensive line to have a chance to be a quality starter. I don't agree 100% about the arm strength...accuracy is more the issue in my mind. Overall it makes sense. No mention of recievers role? We need to start moving the chains...and hold on to the ball. Last years offense was such a clusterfuck.
Lol. You simply cant throw out an entire year. You may be able to call a game here and there and outlier, but in no way can you justify forgetting an entire year. No matter what you say Sanchez's circumstance was last year, it certainly does count, and he had to have played better. The organization is noncommittal to Mark, which shows that you simply can not throw out an entire year.
What does Peyton's team being favored, an Int being overturned and failing on downs have do do with the last drive? You brought up those things, not me. I thought that you didn't just look at the stats. I thought you would know that 34 of the Colts rushing yards came on 3 carries on one drive right before the half. Take away those 3 carries and they had 24 yards on 11 caries the rest of the game. Are we only allowed to take long runs away when we are trying to belittle our own running game in defense of Mark, or are we allowed to do the same for any other QB? I'm still trying to figure out these rules. You answered your own question on why they didn't run it. Besides not being able to run it very well, the Colts D allowed 21 points in 3 quarters. Sorry, but I missed the part where you debunked that the Colts 23rd ranked D being much weaker than the Steelers 3rd ranked D that Manning faced. I also fail to see how leading your team to 8 more yards against a much weaker defense proves anything. Somehow I think Manning would have done just fine with Keller, Holmes, Edwards, and Cothchery, with Tomlinson and Green rushing for 169 yards against his 23rd ranked D. I would take those guys against that weak Colts D over the weapons Manning had facing the tough Steelers D any day. I haven't hurled any insults. You have tried to insult me and many others. All I am doing is admitting that I am not on your SuperFan level. With the displays of your arguments, I don't think that I will ever be on that level.
I saw that article, but at the end of the day, the guys resume says he can basically have any job he wats, You have to wonder, if his wife has some say in it. Arizona, is starting from Scratch....if he wanted that job, he could have had it.
He goes on to say that Sanchez is most effective throwing between the numbers, in the middle of the field. He lacks the arm strength to drive the ball outside with the necessary velocity, but he’s made some outstanding seam throws. I wouldn't call Sanchez's arm weak but I wouldn't call it strong either. It's just okay.
He doesn't even get that last drive if not for the overturned INT and the fumble return to near midfield. You know that one drive was the ONLY drive they scored pts in that 1st half, right? Edge ran for 10, 4, 15, 9, 2, 1 and Rhodes ran for 2. That is half of their attempts in the game and the only successful drive they had until the 4th qtr. The Colts D allowed 14 pts in the 1st half, the only pts they allowed in the 2nd half came when Pitt began their drive at the Indy 30. Pitt also started drives at: Pitt 45 Pitt 44 Indy 2 they didn't allow a pt from any of those drives and the last one set up the chance to tie the game by not only forcing and recovering a fumble at their 2 but returning it to near midfield. Of course it was the D's fault:rofl2:
