Rumor was that the Jets were interested in Signing Tavaris Jackson when he resigned with the Bills. Now that he has been cut it would not be surprising to see him sign with the Jets especially considering his connection with Idzik. Jackson would take Garrard's spot and if he performs moderately well may mean goodbye Sanchez. Jackson may not be as accomplished as Garrard but he is still an upgrade over Sanchez. The point here is there is still hope. With Jackson cut loose. We still have a chance to rid ourselves of Sanchez this year. Jet football could be worth watching after all. My guess in the problem will be money and will he accept a Garrard like deal. We lost out on Daniels, Kolb and Campbell from what appears to be money. Jackson has already pocketed 500k form the Bills and this late he will likely not have many suitors and certainly not an opportunity to start like he will with the Jets.
Oh the joys of your world Junc where you can re-write history and make statements as fact of what would have been or should have been. Brilliant, got Next weeks powerball numbers? Guess not, or you would have your own internet connection and computer Fact, the Jets 2008 Strength of schedule, after the season not BEFORE it, but based on the results of the 2008 season the jets opponents had a .568 Winning percentage. Source http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft09/news/story?id=4027503 in 2009 season the teams the Jets played wound up with a .combined .500 winning percentage. Translation, the Jets in 2008 face a much tougher schedule than the Jets of 2009. Those rankings are based on the actual results of each season, you know the draft orders in the following draft are resolved, and not based on the prior seasons winning percentage, which is just a pre-season indicator and not an actual measure of how tough the schedule actually was that year. news flash, it's not a teams prior record that determines how they will perform in the given season, you tried to save face in the post by sluffing it off...but that's the reality. But every post you make it becomes more clear just why you think like you do, 30 years ago I woulda asked you to share what your smoking cause it must be some really whacked stuff.
I like that, putting the nail in the coffin...but don't worry, Junc will rise from the grave tomorrow at work.
Is there anything Sanchez does better than Jackson? Certainly he is not more accurate. His arm is worse. He turns the ball over more. He has worse pocket presence. Jackson can also run the ball. The problem with Sanchez is he has the worst qualities of all QBs with none of the upside. He makes the mistakes of a Grossman but lacks the ability to throw the ball down the field. Sanchez can only complete passes when he has a clean pocket and his receivers are left uncovered like the Bills game 1 last year where the Bills sold out on the run and left receivers wide open. He has no pocket presence. A weak arm and unable to throw outside the hashmarks. Panics like a little girl under pressure. Gives up on plays. Is soft and afraid to take hits. Runs blindly with his head down. Is always throwing the ball late into coverage. Is one of the most inaccurate QBs of the modern era. Cannot read or understand defenses. Almost never looks at more than 1/3 of the field. The list of bad things could go on for a week. But there is no list of things he does well. A Qb with high turnovers like Testaverde or Grossman can still take a game over and throw pinpoint accurate passes. Sanchez does not have this ability he can complete passes only when the defense is expecting the Jets to run and does not cover the receivers. in 2009 and 2010 he was not allowed to throw in passing situations as he made to many mistakes and had to be given the color coded wrist band. When he had to play in conditions a normal QB plays in he led the league in turnovers the last two years. Sanchez cannot throw and complete passes into coverage. He cannot throw a receiver open. At best Sanchez is a game manager who can hand the ball off that turns the ball over frequently. Jackson may not be great or even good but simply because he is not as bad as Sanchez makes him better. Because he can run the ball gives him something he can actually contribute. Jackson unlike Sanchez has shown actual flashes of making plays. He is a stop gap until Smith develops and an upgrade over Sanchez.
A few thoughts: 1.Something tells me Sanchez will remain on roster no matter what, unless on the off chance he's worse than the two behind him in addition to Smith. If he's earned his spot he stays for the year and is cut come next if he doesn't start. 2. I'm not sure the Jets can afford to sign Jackson and cut Sanchez at the same time if he gets vet min, so your hopes of that seem pretty likely to be dashed. I believe they have yet to sign Dee, Sheldon, and Geno as well so thats another increase in the cap to worry about. Sanchez is here to stay (for 2013) he's uncuttable. 3. A tryout would have to occur after Mini camp at this point, meaning he won't be as acclimated as the other QB's are. He'd be guy brought in specifically for training camp, not as lucrative as if he had been here say a couple weeks ago. I don't think this happens, I think they've settled on the 4 we have. If anybody bombs maybe you see him brought in, or at least considered. Who knows maybe its make or break for McElroy and Simms. Whats guaranteed is that #6 and #7 will be on the roster come september.
I won't say that if Sanchez doesn't start He'll be here all season, but I will say he won't be cut...Traded however is an entirely different question.
I imagine the money he would make would be cut massively. Somebody would have to be deadly sure he would work out to take on his current contract. But we'll cross that bridge when it comes (if it comes... which is likely that it will)
Not really, only this years salary is guaranteed. what makes Sanchez so expensive to just cut is the prorated bonuses, which the Jets would have to pay if he's traded.. the team he was traded to, assuming anyone actually would trade for him and assuming he doesn't win the starting job, would only be on the hook for whatever is left from this seasons salary, they could cut him or renegotiate his contract after the season with no hits.
You think all records are equal? so 9-7 this year is the same as 9-7 5 years ago? That tells us a lot about you. Actually they were 8-3 against a creampuff sched and then our QB tanked it and we finished 9-7 against the easiest sched we have had in my lifetime. Actually he had many more ups than downs it's just that his downs were bigger. he played 15 games: 4 bad ones(NO, at NE, Buf, Atl): 50-109, 619 yds, 1 TD, 15 INTs, 27.4 rating other 9 games: 146-255, 1825 yds, 11 TDs, 5 INTs, 85.8 rating The O was not good that night playing a top defense and although our D only allowed 10 pts they allowed Baltimore's O to control the ball and move the chains all night. It was a team loss, seeing 10 pts allowed everyone thinks it was all on the O but the D was not good that night. One was the difference btw GB starting at their 40 and possibly inside their 20. The other would have given us a 2nd down at the GB 43 down by a FG in the 4th qtr. They were big. Nothing is guaranteed, it doesn't mean we would have scored but that didn't help us. Sometimes punting isn't a bad thing, do we know there was something open 15 yds down the field? if we punt there we could pin them inside the 20 or 10. In a defensive game that is HUGE. I don't recall that specific play, if you can find a clip that would be great. I didn't say mark played great anyway. No excuse for 0 pts scored, the O stunk but It was a low scoring game dictated by weather conditions. We can't ignore that. If ever you would watch football instead of just looking at rankings we wouldn't have many issues. One of the teams to bring up the SOS was 11-5 NE who had Matt Cassell at QB and didn't make the playoffs, they won 11 games b/c the sched was so weak. Another was 11-5 Miami who won 1 game in 2008 and hasn't been close to a winning record since. In 2008 we played 5 games against playoff bound teams, one was at 8-8, 2 of them were against Miami and one was vs. NFC Champ Ari who lost by an AVERAGE of 50-21 in 3 NE games. In 2009 we played 5 games against playoff bound teams including 2 w/ NE and Tom Brady and 1 at SB Champ NO. use your eyes rather than rankings and you won't look quite as silly.
2009 the schedule was much harder imo. Brady was returning to the Patriots, the Texans were heavily favored. The Titans went 13-3 the year before. The Saints were an epic machine. Its hard to judge the 2009 team because of the benching week 16. We were more of an 8-8 team tbh, like the 2011 team was prolly better than the 09 but the 2011 team didnt get handed the win either.
this is why its so frustrating to talk to you. you use statistics to try and prove your point in one part then use them in another then you tell people to stop looking at stats. in reality the teams were COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from 08 to 09, new head coach and coaching staff and quite a few new players. which is why your the 08 team couldnt make hte playoffs bullshit is just that, its bullshit. yet they still had the same record, but those records dont count because miami and that awful patriots team WITHOUT TOM BRADY those guys yeah their records dont count because they were 11-5 against weak competition. but then we will completely disregard the fact that neither the indianapolis colts OR the cincinnati bengals gave a shit about the regular season games that the jets won to sneak into the playoffs in 09. here is where you tell me how we beat them the next week. we can also disregard that we brought in both jim leonhard and bart scott and the defense went from 18th in points allowed to 1st. because you know stats dont matter without context. this is just sillyness at this point.
I never say #s aren't useful, #s w/o context aren't useful which is what most of you guys post. I think there was a pretty clear line btw quality play and poor play in that season and the poor play overshadowed what was mostly a good year. The teams were different but we still had more than enough to win and a HOF QB vs. a much easier sched in 2008. Indy played starts midway through the 3rd qtr, it was a 5 pt game. I promise you the starters wanted to pound the Jets and give the backups a big cushion to work w/ the preserve the undefeated season but it was only a 5 pt game. Cincy played starters for a half, we led 27-0. We had a seasons worth of Indy 4th qtr and Cincy 2nd half throughout 2008 and could only win 9 games.
In those 4 bad games: led O to 9.3 PPG 10 at NO, 13 vs. Buf, 7 at NE, 7 vs. Atl In 10 good games(I mistakenly wrote 9 last time): Hou 24 NE 16 Ten 24 Mia 27 oak 38 Mia 25 Jax 22 Car 10(Keller fumbled going in for TD too) Buf 19(led O to 16 through 3 then got hurt). prorating would give us 21, I'll put 19 down. Ind 22 Cin 37 26.4 PPG take away last 2 if you think they shouldn't count and it's still 25.6
not to mention, most of his damage was done in a small amount of games, and alot of that had to do with plaxico being a beast inside the redzone. i mena, i think plax had 3 redzone TDs in one game alone. that skews the numbers a bit.... but anyhow... the facts show that sanchez was bad in the redzone prior to 2011 and bad in the redzone after 2011. to dismiss that by saying he was coached well in 2011, but coached poorly before and after is simply moronic. especially with the samr OC in 2010 and 2011
