Baltimore did get quality QB play which was why they were able to win./ Obviously they won with D first but as great as that D was they needed quality QB play and they got it. Notice how they never got back to a SB until Flacco started playing well in January? Teams could win games here or there w/o a good game from their QB but 4 road games in 2 years? Pitt won 2 playoff games(both at HOME) in 5 full years of Kordell starting. Like I expected, you couldn't provide examples and you strengthened my position. He was good for a rookie in 2009 top 10ish in 2010 mid of the pack in 2011 bottom QB in 2012. You clearly have no idea what you are watching.
i want everyone to note how junc didnt bother to address my post about the things sancho doesnt do well. see he cant because those facts are undeniable, he would rather get into these little bullshit debates about playoff wins and any other cockamamie (that ones for you 227) garbage he can strum up. its all bullshit so he can continue to "debate" pointless points. he will tell you in his next breathe that sancho is better than ernie from the ravens because he had a better supporting cast in leading his team to the playoffs every year and winning playoff games. its all bullshit designed to create "debates" about pointless stuff nobody can ever in his eyes prove to him. then he will tell you he never said that and you cant read because he never said that, and that peyton manning isnt any good and that you are an average fan and that he is here to help you. he is the ganggreens version of a heel just like pro wrestling, he has been doing it for years and will never stop.
I was livid at that mistake, I can deal w/ many of the TOs but that was an inexcusable mistake. It is a mistake a pop warner QB cannot make.
what post was that from? I didn't even see it but keep patting yourself on the back over nonsense. Your weak argument shave been destroyed over and over and over again and you pick a spot where I didn't see a post to call me out? pathetic.
One thing that I have found particularly telling (and amusing) about your Mark Sanchez related posts is your incessant need to label yourself as "Fair", "objective", and "unbiased". Generally speaking, objective people don't feel the need to constantly remind everyone else about how objective they are. Out of all the posters bashing Mark Sanchez and ridiculing your delusional defense of him, I haven't noticed any of them going out of their way to make sure that we knew they were being "fair". And guess what? Coincidentally, you seem to be the only person on this message board who would characterize your stance on Sanchez as being close to "Fair".
I have to when I am dealing w/ people that are unfair. Stop deflecting, respond to my last post which shredded your weak argument.
You keep harping on this, as if we are talking about Tennis, Golf, or some other individual sport. We aren't. We're talking about football, a team sport. Mark Sanchez hasn't won ANY road playoff games. Instead, the Jets have won 4 road playoff games with him as their starter. There is an enormous difference here, both in practice and in principal. During the entirety of his career, Dan Marino only "won" one road playoff game. Mark Sanchez "won" four. Dan Marino "won" 8 playoff games and "lost" 10. Mark Sanchez "won" 4 playoff games and "lost" 2. I guess Mark Sanchez has had a more successful career than Dan Marino . . . How about a more recent example: Peyton Manning "won" 9 playoff games and "lost" 10. Peyton Manning has only "won" one road playoff game. Gee, Maybe Mark has had a better career than Peyton, as well. Do you see how your insistence on equating team wins with the merits of an individuial (a quarterback) is so flawed? Do you see how quintessentially terrible your logic is? Pitt won 2 playoff games(both at HOME) in 5 full years of Kordell starting. I did provide examples, you ignored or distorted most of them . . . like usual.
Another amusing trend I notice with you is your tendency to adamantly proclaim victory in the middle of an argument (usually after you have been exposed). And once again, you are one of the only posters on there who feels the need to do this. Once more, most people who feel they are winning an argument don't feel the need to proclaim victory.
i love the top 10ish... not really top ten but it sounds so much better than top 20. which is more where he was. but thats "debatable" of course. because you know there are no numbers that can quantify it.... well other than road playoff wins. i guess thats why he was only good in 2011, instead of top 10ish but 27th ranked... of course because we missed the playoffs. 9-7 11-5 8-8 6-10 this does not a great quarterback make. not even a good one really. he was a middling qb every year but 2010, even in the only important thing that junc looks at. oh wait no thats not it either its only about playoffs. even though we didnt make it 2 of his 4 years.
So you are admitting Sanchez is nothing more than a pop warner QB. Sir, that's an insult to pop warner QB's.
Name me the teams that won as much w/ a bad QB/poor QB play? I keep harping on it b/c it doesn't happen. it's not about ranking them based on playoff wins, it's about being a quality QB in order to win those games. A bad QB isn't winning 4 road playoff games. How about this recent example? 2010 WC game at Indy, mark gets ball w/ under a min left needing a FG to win, sets up chip shot for the W. Peyton 2005 costing Pitt in the div rd after 2 gifts to keep them in the game needed a FG to get game to OT, sets up long FG and they lose. Peyton is a great reg season QB, mediocre postseason QB. mark is kid of the opposite(though not a great postseason QB he's been really good). Peyton ahs had MUCH more talent and has hosted a million playoff games yet struggles to win. Indy is 9-11 in postseason mostly b/c of the failures of peyton Manning. Our success hinged more on the D but we still needed quality QB play and we got that. w/o it we don't win any postseason games. Your examples were awful and I showed you that. anyone paying attention knows how easily I thrash your weak arguments. He was in the 8-12 range depending upon how you evaluate. No lower than 12, I saw him as closer to 8 but I understand for folks like you that evaluate strictly based on fantasy rankings that you don't agree. You keep relying on stats w/o context, I'll rely on knowing this game.
The bolded is what makes junc's argument so laughable. Not only is the logic of his argument seriously flawed, in and of itself, but even if we were to erroneously accept his dopey reasoning as being valid, we would still come to the reality that the Jets have only been a playoff team in 2 of the 4 years that Mark has been here. Our regular season record under Sanchez is 34-30 and we are 38-32, overall. Combine this with the fact that we have seriously regressed over the last two seasons and where does that leave us?
"Only" yet only Brady, Peyton, Flacco, Rodgers, Brees & Ryan have ben ther more than 2 times so obviously it must be easy? and only Flacco and Rodgers have helped their team win more playoff games. he's regressed playing w/ awful talent, NO QB would have succeeded a year ago w/ our healthy talent but somehow it was all Mark's fault.
1. In retrospect, I can't fault Rex or Tannenbaum for retaining Brian Schottenheimer. He is, after all, coming from Coryell offense tree, and it involves good dose of power running and vertical passing game. As Rex Ryan was going to emphasize the ground attack oriented offense, retaining Schottenheimer does have some merit. 2. This is where things fall apart - Matt Cavanaugh. In Ryan's scheme, the offense cannot commit turnovers. If the offense played efficient football while minimizing mistakes and turnovers, Ryan was supremely confident that his defense could seal the deal. It is indeed one of the tried and true winning formula. Ravens won the SB with that formula back in 2000. In order for that, though, the QB must play mistake free. He must conduct efficient offense and minimize turnovers. Enter Matt Cavanaugh. Sanchez's mechanics and fundamentals have eroded season after season, to the point where he looked nothing like NFL worthy QB at all by the end of 2012. If Schottenheimer's designs are one thing, Cavanaugh's near worthless performance as a QB coach is another. Sanchez of 2013 has retained nearly all the bad qualities from the instructions he got during the 4 years while losing nearly every good quality he once had. Thanks, Debbie Downer - or in more exact description, steaming sack of horse shit. 3. Like I have been joking all along, Schottenheimer/Cavanaugh tag team will ruin any promising QB prospect in a heart beat. In that regard, R.I.P, Mark Sanchez. Your career was dead before it even got started. So, there we go. Sub-60% QB in WCO era, whose yardage per attempt cannot even eclipse 7.5, and good for minimum 1 pick a game, with a few fumbles to go with the whole joke. 4. Stats cannot tell the whole story - that I agree. However, there is a very telling stat that you cannot ignore. It is related to QBR - not exactly QBR, but the differential of QBR within the game. For instance, during the Niners dynasty and Cowboys dynasty, Montana and Aikman both enjoyed healthy 30+ QBR rating superiority over the other team on average. Simply put, it's the differential of QBRs - your QB must perform well while your defense must kill the other QB to have that kind of massive discrepancy. By now, we all know, Ryan's defense made most of the QBs very miserable - even the likes of Tom Brady suffered defeat at critical juncture. I am more than positive that, on average, QBs facing Ryan's defense are good for 75 QBR if not lower. This means, mere pedestrian 80+ QBR would seal the deal for the whole franchise. Instead, Sanchez pulled sub-70 QBR, making the whole point moot. As good as Ryan's defense is, it cannot cover a deficiency of such a colossal magnitude that is Mark Sanchez. =================================================== By now, the entire league knows Sanchez is a bust. The only ones denying that fact are Sanchez homers and these ilks only. True, Jets, as a franchise, did their absolute worst to raise the kid up, but as it stands now, Sanchez is a failed experiment.
Again, your logic here is nonexistent. It is entirely possible for a football team to win playoff games with a mediocre to poor quarterback. More significantly, it is entirely possible for a football team to win a playoff game by overcoming poor quarterback play, during the very game, itself. I provided you examples of both. The fact that you deny this obvious verity only further illuminates how silly you are being. You are all over the place here. First of all, you ignored the crux of my entire argument (because you obviously have no viable response) and opted for a half-baked comparison of Mark Sanchez and Peyton Manning. This is a pretty poor strategy, even for you. It's funny that you chose the 2011 wildcard game @Indy as your prime example, because Sanchez was pretty mediocre in this game. He was particularly bad in the first half. (He threw an awful interception right before halftime that took away a scoring opportunity) What saved the Jets in this game was their running game.They went on two long, time-consuming drives in the second half that really took control of the game. They pounded the ball on both drives. Mark was 18/31 for 189 yards, with 1 int and 0 TDs. We ran for 169 yards in this game. LT averaged 5.1 yards/carry. We possessed the ball for over 33 minutes. As usual, we played around Mark Sanchez and we won. In typical misleading fashion, you boiled Sanchez's entire performance down to the game-winning drive, while ignoring the fact that our offense played around him for the majority of the game AND that Cromartie set him up with a kick return past the 40 yard line on that final drive. You are either delusional or dishonest. (probably a little bit of both) Despite possessing the ball for 10 fewer minutes then Sanchez, Peyton was 18/26 for 225 yards, with 1 TD and 0 int. What you always miss in all these dopey arguments you make, is that the vast majority of the starting quarterbacks in the NFL could have given us the mediocre production that Sanchez gave us in these instances. You act as if Sanchez was one of the only quarterbacks in the league who could have won with those 2009 and 2010 teams. Do you have any recognition for how utterly foolish this makes you look? Again, more of your self-doubt creeping in. People truly confident in what they are stating don't feel the need to keep reminding everyone about the veracity of their rhetoric.
1) Again, this is assuming your logic is sound, but as I have repeatedly illustrated . . . it isn't. 2) I have seen virtually no one on this board write that the team's decline has been "all" Mark's fault . . .what many have suggested is that he's been a bottom tier NFL quarterback for the duration of his reign here. Only the fringe elements of the pro-Sanchez crowd have denied this reality.
anything is possible, it's possible to win games 2-0 but how often does that happen? show me the examples throughout history of 4 playoff wins in 2 years( road wins no less) w/ poor QB play? As usual you will post blind #s w/o context. Mark had a poor 1st half but bounced back and had an outstanding 2nd half including leading us to a chip shot FG at the gun to win it. But that's not good enough for jet fans, if a QB doesn't have great fantasy #s it's meaningless! You know Peyton had the ball in his hands w/ a chance to have his K kick the GW FG at the gun, right? you know he failed in that situation leaving "awful" Mark Sanchez less than a minute, right? You know "awful" Mark Sanchez came through, right? Take those meaningless #s and throw them away. mark wasn't the only but not many could have b/c most QBs try to do too much like Philip Rivers, Romo, etc... They wind up making he killer mistakes trying to do too much. There's no self doubt, these arguments aren't even a challenge. I prefer a challenge but I'm not getting one. Your argument is so weak you have to deflect all the time. NEVER have I said mark is great or will ever be great but he was a lot better than whiny, pathetic Jet fans who don't understand the game give him credit for. Fans like that are why we don't deserve to see a winner.
You haven't shown anything. You guys don't have to write it is all his fault specifically, you do it w/ every post acting like any QB could have helped us reach those title games or w/ any QB we would have made SBs(magically making the D play like a big time D in each title game of course).
This is sublime silliness. We can't just "throw" the "meaningless" numbers away because, as time has elapsed, we have seen that they are anything but meaningless. Mark's consistently bad statistical performances perfectly jive with most people's impressions of him as they watch him play . . . he's somewhere between a mediocre and bad, starting NFL quarterback. No amount of "unbiased" (*snicker*) rationalizations or convoluted excuses will change that reality. Yet another insecure assertion about the strength of your position that has no relevance to the discussion at hand. Did you say . . . "deflect"?
