OK - stop piling on nyjunc. There is an ignore option for people you don't want to interact with. If you respond to him it's on you. I feel like I say this monthly. To be fair every pass is risky when it comes to Sanchez.
:grin: Damn it! I was just saying to myself how much better I would feel if the uniform bomber didn't think I sounded like a douchebag. I'll try harder next time. I will always have plenty of people to debate with so if some folks are scared or don't like me it's their loss. Go bash our players somewhere else, go whine somewhere else but if people are posting misinformation I will be here to correct them. Just b/c the majority of fans(average fans) think a certain way doesn't make it right.
This is a huge oversimplification . . . You can point to the handful of late game comebacks all you want, but if you are going to go that route (which is fine), you also have to acknowledge the handful of games in which the passing game was absolutely putrid. So yeah, we had games like Houston (awesome comeback), NE (Great second half performance), @Cleveland (thrilling OT win),@Detroit (terrific 4th quarter comeback), and @Denver (Another terrific 4th quarter comeback). Sanchez had legitimate clutch performances in all of these games. However, we also had games like: Baltimore (10-9), @NE(45-3), Miami (10-6), and Green Bay (9-0). These were four of our five losses. We failed to score an offensive touchdown in any of them and Sanchez was anywhere from mediocre to bad in each one. This is why I always characterize Sanchez's overall performance in 2010 as mediocre. He was up and down. He had some wonderful moments, but he had some really disappointing ones, as well. He also sucked in most of 2009 but he was a rookie, so we all (correctly) gave him a pass. He also sucked towards the end of 2011. That's a lot of sucking through 4 seasons. And by no means was last year all his fault . . . but he was just ridiculously bad.
haha, indeed. Sometimes I start to actually feel bad for Sanchez . . . but then I remember how much money he made last season.
which games did we win where the pass game was putrid? Throw away NE b/c the team was not ready to play that night, we were beaten soundly in all phases. Baltimore has a pretty damn good D and they won a low scoring game GB was a very windy day and neither O was good, 2 bogus INTs cost us a chance to win The Miami game our O stunk but Holmes did drop a wide open TD which was the difference in the game. Bal: O and D were equal, I know we only allowed 10 pts but the D allowed Bal to convert a ridiculous amount of 3rd and longs to sustain drives and control the clock. NE: O and D were equal GB: O Mia: O so 2 of our losses were pretty much solely b/c of the O, 1 was solely b/c of the D(Chi) and 2 were equal. Of our wins I would say we won primarily: NE: O and D equal at Mia: O at Buf: O & D Min: O & D(D tried to blow it but made big play late) at Den: O & D equal at Det: O & D at Cle: O vs. hou: O vs. Cin: D/STs at Pit: O/D/STs Buf: exhibition game he did not suck most of 2009, he was good most of the 2009. he sucked in a few games which skewed his #s. he sucked at the end of 2011 as did the entire team.
Of course Sanchez and the Jets did something right . . . Of course. But my point is, you can't count on winning this way in the modern NFL, consistently. We had very deep, talented teams in both 2009 and 2010. In addition, a lot of things broke right for us down the stretch of 2009, and in 2010, we won a slew of one score games that could have gone either way. In essence, we had right combination of overall talent and good fortune to overcome our consistent lack of production from our passing game in each of those two seasons.
again, our pass game led us in 2010. In 2009 I'd agree though we passed enough when we needed to but relied on the run. In 2010 we relied on the pass. It's a weapons issue, the more weapons we have in the pass game the better we will be.
The problem is, Sanchez ain't no weapon. And if a team's Qb isn't one of its Offensive weapons, then that team won't be a consistent contender.
I was referring to the weapons to help the QB not the QB himself. he has proven he can play when he has quality weapons and proven he sucked when he had awful weapons. we were a consistent contender when we had offensive talent around the QB, we didn't contend for postseason for the first time last year when we had very little quality weapons that were healthy.
The passing game (and Sanchez, in particular) was pretty bad in the Thanksgiving night win over the Bengals. However, that wasn't particularly relevant to my point. My point was that Sanchez played rather poorly in 4 of our 5 losses. We failed to score an offensive touchdown in any of those games. That alone, should serve as a very good indication of how inadequate our quarterback play was in each of those games. Haha, we can't just "throw away" a performance because it doesn't suit your position - This simply isn't a fair, equitable way to analyze things. I am aware that the entire team played extremely poorly, but that doesn't change the reality that Sanchez (our person of interest) played extremely poorly. As a result, there is no logical reason to "throw away" the performance. This is entirely true . . . but once more, Sanchez still played very poorly. He looked tentative and inherently unsure of himself all night. I agree that both called interceptions were highly tenuous, at best. However, once again, Mark didn't play very well. He was typically inaccurate and failed to see a wide open Cotchery, for what would have been something like a 70 yard td pass, in the first half. Yep, horrible drop by Holmes. Inexcusable. And yet, as before, the fact still remains that Sanchez played extremely poorly. He opened the game with a ridiculously bad interception that served to perfectly epitomize his routinely slow starts that season. Lol, no . . . just no. The offense was ridiculously bad that night. Not only did the defense hold them to ten points, it also forced several huge turnovers that gave us the ball deep in their territory, and naturally, our offense failed to convert any of these opportunities into touchdowns. He was consistently turnover prone (amazingly so, actually) and inaccurate that entire season. But again, he was a rookie. It was all gravy back then. I agree, but once more, when it comes to franchise quarterbacks, that isn't a valid excuse. He sucked . . . that was my only point. He has sucked for a large percentage of his career.
It really didn't. Fact: The more weapons we have in our passing game, the better we will be. Fact: The better quarterback we have, the better we will be.
Correct. Sanchez is limited. He needs things around him to be anywhere from good to very good to be a tenable starting quarterback. He's not a franchise quarterback. We won when we played around him. In 2011 and 2012, the team around him wasn't as good as it had been, and naturally, we needed him to carry more of the load. . . he shit the bed.
That should show how important he was to our success. Played poorly in 4 of 5 losses, played well in 9 of 11 wins(one he had a cameo in and sat most of the game). when Sanchez played well, we won. I throw that game away b/c everyone sucked, the D was humiliated. is it reasonable to expect an O to score more than 45 pts? The D was not good that night against Baltimore, they did a good job keeping the pt total down but they allowed the following 3rd down conversions(of 5 or more yds): 3rd and 9 3rd and 28 3rd and 9 3rd and 9 3rd and 10 3rd and 5 3rd and 7 3rd and 10 3rd and 10 The D played poorly, they allowed Bal to control the clock for almost 40 mins. He wasn't consistently TO prone. He threw 20 INTs, 15 of them came in 4 games. the other 11 games he threw 5 so he wasn't turning it over consistently.
UH, Fumbles dont count as TURNOVERS? Poor throws on like 3rd and 2 or 3rd and 3 though techinically not a TO is much the same. SANCHEZ is not only a consitent TURNOVER machine but is also a consistent DRIVE KILLER! Just awful when we really need him to at least complete a 3 yard out!
ohhh so now it's poor throws on 3rd and 2, can you cite all the examples of this? he lost just 3 fumbles in 2009. One at NE in one of the high TO games One at NO in one of the high TO games and one vs. Ten in a game he didn't throw just one pick.
You make my points for me, only 3 in 2009, but how many in 10, 11, 12, far more than just 3 so not only does he turn it over on a consisitent basis, BUT he turns it over more, the more "VETERAN SAVVY" the bum gets!
