Right, I forgot, you dont like Chicks, but still Thats pretty rich, for a guy with palms so hairy the Wolfman looks bald by comparison since your idea of a good time, hasnt changed since you discovered something other than urine shot out of your willie....
Lacin, we disagree on the subject, but I respect you as a bright guy amd a good poster, but c'mon man..when you descend to the worst QB in the league canard, you lose all credibility. Does Mark need to play better, only someone as Insane as Dierking could say otherwise.... But... Between Jacksonville and Arizona alone, they started 5 worse QBs. Thats without getting to Fitzpatrick,Freeman,Tannehill, even McElroy. And lets not haggle over Tannehill. He performed marginally better, but without the storm Sanchez weathered...
and by the way, WHat is VCASH and why do I have more than anybody in this thread? Must be some sort of logic/reason indicator with point given for rational posts...
Okay. So lets recap. It took you 8 whole minutes to come to the conclusion that your first pathetic attempt at a snappy comeback fell completely flat, so you needed to try again, fail again, and give it one more go. The third edited comeback obviously representing the apex of your laser sharp wit: "You don't like chicks and you masturbate." You got me. Can't keep up with this.
Chris is a highly respected reporter and I don't think you understand sources. First off him saying those sources think Sanchez has regressed as a passer are probably people in FO who evaluate football each day. You think Chris is highly respected in the meda and around the league but he makes stuff up? At least have a real retort to what he's saying instead of falsely accusing the guy. Also explain how Sanchezs ball security had not regressed? It has. In what world did mark have a better rookie campaign than Wilson? Wilson's QB play was much better than Sanchez as a rookie. Unless you mean the 2009 JETS went farther than the 2012 SEAHAWKS.
Yes, Sanchez took his team further than Wilson. I consider that a better rookie campaign as my goal is to win a title, not compile stats. What I do find amusing is that people on this board are focusing on the Wilson VS Sanchez portion of my post (that another poster used as an example to my initial argument). How come nobody has yet to question that question, you knowthe loss of wepons from 09-today? What QB has done more than Mark with less? I think I know the answer to that...
Sanchez hasnt regressed, as has been pointed out, ad nauseum....the entire offense sucked last year. Now, a highly respectable reporter would actually add some context..the simple fact is, the guy progressed each of his first three years, in terms of completion percentage and scoring. Turning around after'12 and pointing the finger at Sanchez using 'sources' is retarded, but then again he works for the outfit thats pimping the alleged Jets QB battle, likeits already training camp.
Hobbs, I'm not saying that Sanchez hasent regressed, I believe he has, but why has he? Most here think it's because "he sucks", that just not the case. He has not been given the tools to improve, and I blame the Jets for that. I dont know of a QB who would have done drastically more with the decline in weapons Mark has had to endure over the past 2+ seasons (Yes any QB).
If Sanchez was worth his weight in gold he'd overcome the so called lack of weapons and bad oc's. Everybody knew Sanchez was shakey and they put all their eggs in the Sanchez basket and failed. They got rid of Cothcery and Edwards and only Cothcery was replaced with a player of equal talent (Kerley) we still haven't replaced Braylon and Hill is still a question mark. The Jets should have loaded up on weapons for their shakey QB and let him prove he can be a QB that can lead a team. Not assume he can lead. That's why Tanny was fired.
Mark Sanchez was not a sure fire, cant miss prospect, I don’t know of many that are. Look at the A. Luck situation in Indy, they surrounded him with outside weapons in the draft and FA to ease the transition and allow him the ability to develop chemistry. Mark has had the opposite happen to him as our front office has made some poor decisions (thats another thread, leading the Tanney being fired). The Jets Drafted Mark out of need, and knew they had a short window. We have now been paying the piper for the past two years (we will this year again). But don’t think Mark isn't paying as well. If he was allowed to develop, have consistent weapons and line play; he would be a top 15 QB in the NFL, no doubt. Sounds like you and I are on the same page here bud...
I think we can win with Mark as evident by 2010. The problem is that his contract and draft position dictates that he's supposed to play a bigger role than simply being a caretaker like Dilfer and Johnson were to the Ravens and Bucs. The Jets made several mistakes with handling Sanchez. They handed him the starting job. They should have brought in a veteran QB to mentor Sanchez while he sits. They also had a carousel of skill position players coming in and out. They should have done everything to keep the combination of Braylon and Holmes together. Because Sanchez had chemistry with both of them especially Edwards. While drafting and developing young receivers to eventually take their place. Instead they patch together weapons and expect him to have success. You can use that approach if you have a good/great QB. For Sanchez chemistry and consistency is key. But like I said if Sanchez was really THAT good he'd overcome bad OC's and lack of weapons.
You seem to be ignoring the fact that most of Sanchez weaknesses have nothing to do with his supporting cast: No touch on short passes- not related to surrounding playmakers No ability to throw a screen -not related No accuracy - not related Poor deep ball - not related Inability to read defenses -not related Degrading footwork -not related No ability to hold on to the ball when sacked - not related None of these things have anything to do with the talent around Sanchez. It just points out that he is not any good. And your argument to give him another chance because of his lack of talent is completely tied in with his original draft position, you would not give that benefit of the doubt to McElroy You are also the only person on the planet who thinks Sanchez had a better rookie season than Wilson.
Well are we judging their team or their individual performance? IF we are judging how the QB played the QB position, Russell Wilson was leaps and bounds ahead of Sanchez in his rookie year. It's not even close. Wilson played the QB position better than Sanchez did in both their rookie year. But you want to use the flawed win statistic in a team sport where the QB only plays on 1/3 of the units. Okay, I'll entertain you here. Russell Wilson had 12 wins his rookie year, Mark Sanchez had 10. When comparing QBs, we should actually look at how the QB played and not how the team played. Look at Russell Wilson's loss to ATL in the playoffs for example. He gave his team a 2 point lead with 13 seconds left. Are we seriously going to say after completing 67% of his passes for 380 yards 2 TDs,7 1 INT, 7 rushes for 60 yards and a TD, and putting his team up with 13 seconds, he didn't do enough for the team stat of a win? Russell Wilson played very well that game, incredibly well for a rookie, yet he gets a loss. Wins and losses are not a QB stat. You want another reason it's not a QB stat? How about Mark Sanchez gets a win on his record for the ARZ game this year. The game where he threw 3 picks and led his team to 0 points he gets a win while the backup comes in and leads the team to 7 points, the 7 points that wins the game. This is a team sport, or does everyone forget that fact when talking about wins and losses and then suddenly remembers it's a team sport this year when Sanchez struggles? It's always been a team sport, that's why you can't use wins and losses to accurately judge QBs. That's why you look at QB stats and watch how the QB plays the QB position. When comparing QBs you have to compare how they play the QB position, not what the team does. That's why QB A can outplay QB B in a game, yet get the loss. Because there is defense and special teams not including all the other pieces on offense like OL and RB and WR and TE and etc. That's why everyone focused on that Russell Wilson comment, it was really ridiculous trying to even say that. If I post a reasonable post then say that Mark Sanchez is the worst QB to ever play on the earth, what you gravitate to, the reasonable argument or the ridiculous statement thrown in it? I can quote the whole post and break it down, just let me get on a computer and not my phone. So now Chris isn't making stuff, he actually has to add context. At least that's reasonable instead of just saying Chris is making stuff up. Wait so if Sanchez progressed his first 3 years, what happened the 4 year. If he progressed you would have said he progressed his first 4 years. So did he plateau or regress? Guess what Sanchez's situational awareness and ball security got worse. That's what I call regressing. They got worse this year compared to his previous years. The entire offense sucked so Sanchez didn't regress. That's terrible logic. So if the offense is excellent next year, Sanchez didn't improve, the whole offense just got better? That's the logic you are sticking to?
You have this backwards. His team took Sanchez farther than Wilson's team took Wilson. The difference is that Wilson actually looked good for most of the season and Sanchez actually looked horrible for most of the season.
This makes sense at least, but it absolves Sanchez of all blame. Yes the talent gets worse, that doesn't excuse him from down 4 at the opponents 20 with 2 minutes left throwing the ball up for grabs on 2nd down instead of taking a sack, throwing the ball out of bounds, spiking the ball, throwing it out of the back of the EZ. Just because there is a lack of talent doesn't excuse Sanchez from making some terrible decisions in game. That doesn't excuse him for flipping a one handed pass in the first game of the season for an INT. It doesn't excuse him for forgetting how to hold onto the football. It doesn't excuse him for missing throws on short crossing routes. It does excuse him when Cumberland runs the wrong route drawing an extra DB into the area. It does excuse him when Clyde Gates breaks a yard early. It does excuse him when Hill drops a picture perfect pass in NE. There is a balance. Just because the team lacked talent doesn't mean Sanchez has to forget how to do basic things. It also doesn't mean he single handedly brought the offense to a grinding halt.
