Ah, so it's just as I thought. You are comparing their situations early in their career, not their QB ability. Yet people yell at you for that thinking that any comparison is automatically saying that Sanchez is just as skilled. Such simpletons. It's funny how adamant some people are with the hate. 2 separate people got annoyed because I dared say "sanchez slander". Trust me, there is PLENTY of slander in that thread, and not just people saying he sucks. People bash him blindly, they'll say anything regardless of whether it's true.
'Cause they ain't too bright? Or...if they came out and said Sanchez starts, the fans and media would go friggin' nuts. Hmmm....Maybe they ain't so stupid. They are stuck with him after all.
Salary cap. Sanchez's contract has crippled the team thus making it necessary to bring cripples in. Garrard was the cheap, quick-fix solution that backfired. There wasn't many other options like him out there.
To be fair I did say Young might be a valid comparison, but I also said I didn't want to wait 6 more years to find out since Young didn't blossom until around age 32 or 33 if I recall correctly. I also stated that players like Young who figure it out late are very rare. However, they also tried to pin guys to Sanchez, Like Favre for example, who was traded without ever really having played at all and immediately made a big impact in his first year starting, his second year. Or the argument they tried to make with Unitas, who in his second year led the league in several offensive categories. Or when they tried to compare Sanchez to Aaron Rodgers because Rodgers didn't "hit it big" right off the bat, but what they don't mention is he was sitting behind one of their other examples in Favre who was still a hall of fame QB and whom when it was clear Favre was nearing the final couple years of his career let him go and put In Rogers...Trying to compare a QB who was sitting behind a HOF QB to Sanchez who was starting was laughable. They did have a couple other valid comparisons, Testeverde, though he only had 2 good years and again didn't hit them till he was in his 30's. and I forget who the other semi valid comparison was off hand. The reality is players who were good for more than 1 or 2 seasons and developed after 4 years as a starter are very few and very far between. As evidenced by some of the reaches made in this and other threads. I've said it before, I'll say it again. I'm a Jets fan first. I don't care who the player is or isn't, if they're underperforming after 3-4 years they go or they demand so much salary cap they cripple the teams flexibility then regardless of if they are my favorite player or least favorite player as far as I'm concerned they're gone. I loved Revis, but I also knew his salary demands far exceeded the value of a cornerback, you can't pay 1/10th of your salary cap year in and year out to a CB, Loved Revis, possibly the best player ever at his position. But realistically he had to go under the circumstances. For me the TEAM comes first, Sanchez is a focal point because he plays the leagues most important position, QB. He's not the only problem, but in football no other single player on either side of the ball effects the game as much as a QB does...it's why top flight QB's get paid 20 million a year. Yes the offensive line sucks, But so do a lot of O-lines in the NFL, Indianapolis, Greenbay, etc. They are factors, but not excuses. If I seem harsh on Sanchez it's only because A) he plays the most important position on any football team and B) some of the ridiculous arguments posted saying he's a top 10 QB. I'd probably stay out of the Sanchez thread if they just admitted to this point he's been at the very best in any given season Average (although that would still be rating him too highly IMHO, but at least you could for one year make that argument reasonably.
The Sanchez Squad just gets upset when people make fun of their boy. Then they ask why we can't get good offensive players. It's because your boy's contract is so damn stupid that we don't have the MONEY to get good offensive players.
Laugh, whatever home boy...that year, his worst year, he had a 3.4% interception rate...compared to Sanchez's career average of 3.7%. so yes Einstein a 3.4% interception rate is throwing fewer interceptions per attempt than 3.7%..... so to recap, my statement was accurate. Thank you good night
Making stuff up again? He tossed 17 tds and 16 ints, and followed that up with a 10/9 year. TDs to INTs was what you were speaking of. Now, Sanchez final two years, were what? Right..17/13 and 26/18. Now youre math might dffer from mine, but +4, +8, is not less than +1, +1. In fact Penny only threw 6 more interceptions, in his entire carrer..than he did in two seasons under schotty. Yes...System plays no part. You couldnt even man up to that You're welcome. Enjoy your pipe dreams.
And you still believe in Santa Claus? We never tried to do anything of the sort--we waited and he was there at 39. We didn't covet him--we grabbed him as a value pick. No need to make stuff up. _
I have to think the happiest day in Sanchez's young life will be the day he's finally gone from the NY area.
i remember there being talk that the jets thought about trading up early in the second. nothing official though, as a matter of fact i think i remember idzik saying they didnt want to trade up. either way its safe to assume we took him there as a value, he was not taken to immediately replace mark sanchez because he had to be replaced. he was taken because he was one of the top qbs in the draft and will only cost 4 million over the next 4 years, in other words check him out see how he does and if he isnt any good junk pile him. its really a no lose situation. the only thing you can say about it is that we wasted the 39th pick on a qb who isnt that good when we have so many other holes. its really a no lose situation, but i as the guy who has always wanted sanchez gone will say that he was not drafted because he has to replace sanchez. he was drafted because he had great value at 39 and could be the guy to replace sanchez. if he proves not to be that guy having him will not stop the jets from drafting a starting qb next year.
I never heard a peep about us wanting to trade up and if we did we could have done so in an eye-blink. This was the draft where EVERYONE was trying to trade down for multiple picks in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th. And I agree--it was a total value pick. If the Jets honestly thought he was THE franchise guy they would have taken him at 9 and no one would have blinked. It only became an issue with him going 39th because...he went 39th. And the know-nothing talking heads all had him much higher. It was a mediocre QB draft class, kudos to Idzick for not overdrafting the position and grabbing the best QB in the class. Although I am interested to see what EJ does in Buffalo. He's a physical specimen, but that doesn't guarantee success. _
i agree, but if smith was drafted at the 9 i would have been PISSED, it would have been a terrible terrible pick. i didnt like the cb but would have liked geno at the nine even more. i dont think geno is an nfl qb who will be any good, but thats ok with a guy drafted at 39. it doesnt matter nearly as much in what we would have passed up or money at the 39 as it would at the 9. i think at this point it was a great pick. not that i think he will be good just that i think it was a good pick at that spot.
Still had to pay the draft picks, still had to get new RB's, nothing to trade for Flyn or Kolb if they wanted to use every pick to add more to the team (which seemed to be the strategy) Holmes restructuring wasn't a done deal... There were a lot of variables between the beginning of FA and Bricks restructuring. Some of the other QB's might have asked for more and taken a bit of that away without them knowing how much they'll need to get what they want.
