Yeah, Sanchez sure is clutch. But still ...I'll go out on a limb here ... I'd bet everything I own that "Big Game" Mark Sanchez will NEVER win an MVP of any kind in this league. Comparing him to a multiple MVP and future HOF'er is beyond laughable. Anything Sanchez can do on a football field, Brett Farve can do 10x better. And he probably still can, at age 40+. I'll say this though ... I bet Mark Sanchez can bang Jen Sturger if he wants to.
This is the worst argument ever. Am I the only person who watched Brett's last 5 games as a Jet? Terrible. He has no interest, at all, in being here. So how can this be debated? Are we changing his views? Does he suddenly want to play here? Is he going to be a team player? Maybe, be more conservative in his decision making? Okay, maybe he can win a Super Bowl with that 2009 team then. That is like a million "What ifs?" though.
Is there a reason people are discounting Favre's torn bicep tendon for the last 5 games of that 2008 season? It was clear he was playing way better before that injury happened and while we probably wouldn't have won the Super Bowl I do believed we were poised to make a good run
he threw away SB chances for his last 3 teams(GB and Minny in title games and our chances to get to the playoffs),. In his lone SB winning year he was decent in the SB watching his D and STs win that game. he's thrown 4 INts in a postseason game and SIX INTs in a postseason game. w/ a 1 seed on the line in week 17 of 2002 he was humiliated at the Jets then a week later lost the first game for the packers in postseason in the history of Lambeau Field putting up 7 pts in an ugly loss. This notion that we would have won if we had Bret is so beyond laughable. You are right, he never had one half as good, he had ones BETTER! our D was never great, it was very good. It choked away many leads and choked away the title game. the problem is Brett had his chance w/ similar talent against a weaker sched and no Brady to deal with in 2008- how did that work out? Maybe we win the Buffalo game in 2009 and that gets us an extra win but maybe we lose the first NE game b/c he tries to do too much? we didn't miss the SB b/c of the QB. Sorry, I am not buying it. he was out there playing, his trademark is playing through pain. His arm was more than good enough, if he stopped throwing balls up for grabs we would have won more games and easily won the division like we should have. Favre was huge for them w/o a doubt but let's not forget the Vikings won 10 games and made the playoffs in 2008 w/ Gus Frerotte and Tarvaris Jackson as their QBs so the talent around the QB was pretty damn good. Put mark 2009 on that team and they make it just as far. NE had the division wrapped up w/ weeks to play, they didn't take week 17 seriously. They could have won the 11th game easily meaning we would have needed 3 more wins to win the division and considering Brett won only 9 w/ an easier sched and no Brady the year before I find that hard to believe that we could have overtaken them. and IF we had we play Bal in rd 1, we never beat Baltimore. mark gave us a late lead at jax and the D blew it, the game vs. Atl was a weather dictated game, Atl's O struggled too except of course w/ the game on the line where our "great" D allowed them to march for the GW TD. Favre +2009 team +'85 bears D + Adam Vinatieri + Vince Lombardi= Super Bowl!
either you have an argument and can refute what I post or you don't, it looks bad when you have nothing to come back at me with. stop whining about cherry picking and try to prove your argument.
Your argument is so all over the place and purely based off of opinion its hard to counter it. You cherry pick single games, prop them up to support your cherry picked argument and then analyze them to death. Basically what you're arguing is a rookie Mark Sanchez on the 2009 Vikings team would have gone to at least the NFC title game. How? Seriously, how does this happen? Also- if we substitute 2009 Brett Favre onto the Jets- they still only win 9 games and finish behind New England. We'd have the number one defense, a top rushing attack and a QB completing over 65% of his passes with 33 TD's and 7 Ints. These arguments are absurd in themselves anyways. You cant narrow guys careers down to single games or single plays. Yeah Brett threw bad picks at bad times- but the guy started games for the Packers, for what, 16 years? And made it to the playoffs how many times? Singling out bad games in Favres career and then comparing it to Sanchez's meager 6 playoff games just doesnt make any sense. They arent comparable when you realize how much better a player Favre was. If Sanchez starts for 16 years and wins a SB then we might be able to have this conversation. Saying you'd take Sanchez in a "playoff setting" over a first ballot Hall of Famer is so absurd its hard to take seriously.
stop wasting time deflecting that you have no idea what you are talking about. How does it happen? How did it happen w/ a less talented Jets team in a tougher division to win? would Adrian Peterson still be on the Vikings? would their D still be top 10 good? would they have 4 games w/ Chi and Det? I didn't say we'd still be 9-7, I said we'd still be behind NE. we may have been 9-7, we lost plenty of games not on the QB even though you try to pretend every loss was on him and we won some games where maybe Brett doesn't win b/c he tries to make a foolish play? we don't know but what we do know is both QBs made it to the same round. Brett took over a 10 win Viking team and advanced them 2 rd further, mark took over a 9 win Jet team and advanced them 3 rounds further. singling 3 season ending performances that cost his team then discussing his SB run, his 4 INT and 6 INT games is singling out? mark is not Brett Favre, never will be but based on postseason history I'd trust him in a big game over Brett any day. Please try and come up w/ a valid argument rather than just bash everything I say w/o proving any of it wrong.
How can you win or lose this argument? IF we had this guy or that guy we win. No, we lose you're wrong.
You dont have a grasp on the sport and clearly play favorites and still dont understand the big picture. But I will go through this again. You're replacing Brett Favre's production(MVP like) with a QB who threw for less than 2500 yards, completed under 55% of his passes and threw 20 interceptions. I mean, please. This doesnt deserve to go on any further. and spare me with the "bbbbuutt Mark only cost the Jets the Saints game!" We dont know, but we do know? ok then...Brett threw 7 picks all season. Where do these foolish plays mix in? Basically we dont know anything other than what the raw data tells us. The Jets had a better defense and running game than the VIkings but worse QB play. Do-the-math. Of course its singling out when you take into account how long Favre played the game. He went to two SB's and went 1-1. How many QB's in NFL history can even say that? How many QB's had to get over the hump of the Niners and Cowboys early in their careers? There arent any teams Sanchez beat during his "magical" playoff performances that could even hold a candle to either of those 90's Dallas/SF teams. Even with these bad games you're singling out Favre still has 44 career playoff TD's(2nd all time) to only 30 INTs. And this makes no sense whatsoever until Mark even sniffs the amount of playoff games Favre has played in. The sample size gap is outrageously wide to come to any conclusion that Sanchez is a better post season QB than Brett Favre. To prove I'd rather have Favre in a playoff game than Sanchez I dont even have to say anything. Most Americans just know that already.
Pretty much. All you can go by is the data from that season(or go by their careers, which is a better indicator) But yeah the substitute this guy for this guy and we'd obviously get this doesnt work. But Favre's 2009 was on a different planet compared to Sanchez.
:rofl2: you saying I don't have a grasp on the game. so we just plug in Brett's #s to our team and problem solved? weeks 1-4 he would have had Chansi Stuckey starting which was worse than the weapons he had in 2008 when he struggled. In week he would have gotten Braylon w/ no offseason in a new system but yeah the #s would have been the same. 15 of his 20 INTs came in 4 games, 2 of them Brett makes no difference- at NO and at NE, 1 we win- vs. Buf and 1 was a maybe in bad weather(where Brett has been horrible late in his career) vs. Atl. how do we know he wins the NE game in week 2? a year earlier against a weaker NE team in week 2 w/ a better supporting cast he led us to the loss against a Matt cassell led Pats team in his first start since High School. Brett had 7 INTs all year then 2 in the biggest game of the year, that's really all we need to know. Minny had ADRIAN PETERSON, they had a better run game. Don't let 2 games against Buff and the oak game along w/ the wildcat fool you. We had 883 of our rush yds those 3 games on 6.4 YPC, the other 13 games: 470-1873, 3.98 YPC. heavily favored in both SBs, won the first one b/c of a STer and failed in the 2nd one. Most Americans are average fans like you who blame one player for everything that went wrong on a team where no QB would have succeeded. 511-2273
What are you even arguing now? There's no silver bullet to winning SB's in the NFL. Favre on the 2009 team just increases the Jets shot- that's all. The only reason the Packers won the SB against NE was because of Desmond Howard? lol...stop jesus. And you still havent brought up the sample size difference between Sanchez's and Favre's playoff careers and how you can even compare at this point.
You may not "buy it" but that is the reality of the situation. He was playing with an injury and he should have sat out, instead he wanted to maintain his iron man streak. The injury affected his play.
He may have but he may not have, again w/ similar talent, an easier sched and no Brady he couldn't get us to the playoffs in 2008, he would have given us better #s and more pts but when? in meaningful time or in garbage time? I love when you make things up in order to deflect from your weak arguments. where did I say the "only" reason GB won SB XXXI was b/c of Howard? mark doesn't have the amount of playoff games Brett has but if we prorate: Brett(25 games): 481-791, 5855 yds, 61%, 44 TDs, 30 INTs, 86.3 rating, 13-11 record Mark 396-654, 4813 yds, 61%, 38 TDs, 13 INTs, 94.2 rating, 17-8 record
I watched every snap, he was healthy enough to beat the awful teams we played down the stretch but instead we won one of those games when Shaun Ellis scored a late TD to beat Buffalo.
