thank you again for that dynamite post. oh wait... you said nothing, referenced nothing, had no statistics, videos, or articles. so yea, thanks for wasting space. you seem good at it
The bear defense allowed 13 ppg on the year. i never said for the playoffs. I chose to use the much larger sample size of the entire season. unless you think the bears regular season team wasnt good? But to clarify... our points allowed/rushing was on par with the 1985 bears points allowed/rushing during their magical 1985 season. id say thats pretty good. and you brought up the 85 bears, not me. We averaged 16 points allowed per game in our playoff wins. what we averaged in our playoffs losses doesnt matter, since my point was we won those games mostly because our defense held opposing offenses to low scoring totals. But even if you want to factor those in, 18.5 PPG allowed is still fantastic over a sample of 6 playoff games, and the best of any team over the '09-'10 span for the playoffs who played at least 2 games the fact that we DIDNT win anytime the defense didnt hold the opponents to low point totals further cements why they were so key to our success, and why sanchez wasnt.
You can compare Mark's stats with a great Qb like Peyton and find something positive about Mark (if that's what you're looking for). OK Peyton had 28 picks his rookie season and Mark's team made the playoffs and went to the AFC Championship and the Colts were 3-13. And don't cut Mark short and say well let's not count the Bills game in 2012 because he had a good game. Count everything but please no excuses about the OL or his skill position players who were usually decent. Mark's record rests on it's own, good or bad. You can get your calculators out and try to make a case for Mark but you can't. He's regressed big time and he's had plenty of chances to prove that wrong. Over 60 starts. So Mark can't complain that he never got a chance. Believe me Woody and Rex and Tanny wanted Mark to succeed. But he didn't. You can add up the numbers but his turnover ratio and lowest QBR in the NFL for four years seals the deal. He has to go. As a Jets fan I want to win not spend a decade on one player who doesn't perform.
The bold part explains it perfectly. Mark has made some plays to win games. I wont disagree with you on that. But the team around him being so good put him in position a lot of times to be able to play below average for the majority of the game, make a play or two late, and come out with a W. That's all well and good but that doesn't make a great QB. Guys like Cutler and Stafford are counted on a lot more then Mark. That's not debatable. There looked at as guys capable of controlling and running an offense. They've proved it through performance in games. They can't play defense, they can't run the football. They can only control what they do when they are asked to throw the football. And they throw it really well. Mark was asked to manage games in 2009 and 2010 and then when the Jets tried to let him loose in 2011 he fell flat on his face and the Jets tried to real him back in. That's why Sparano was brought in, to "ground and pound" again in 2012. When has Mark ever had a RB dominate a game like Cutler had with Forte? Marks had plenty of RB's dominate games for him he's played in. Are you serious with that comment? Greene in Cincy and San Diego in 2009, hell the guy averaged 5.6 yards a pop against the Chargers. Please explain to me how Mark is somehow responsible for that. LT and Greene against the Colts the next year, LT average 5.1 yards a carry that game. Those aren't great performances?
the '85 bears also scored 41 pts on D, the '09 jets 14 the bears also never blew a late lead, the Jets did it FOUR times including a double digit lead in the Championship Game. seriously, you are comparing our D to the '85 bears?:rofl::rofl: losses count too, right? we won w/ Defense first, when have I ever argued that? the point is a truly big time D doesn't stop in the div rd, they finish the job. we never had a big time D.
the team around mark was good NOT great. it was nothing special, remember that a future HOfer had a similar cast the year before and couldn't get to the playoffs w/ a weaker sched and no Tom Brady around. Cutler and Stafford are not counted on more, they have elite talent to throw to and hand off to something Mark has NEVER had. he's had good WRs and Rbs but never what those guys had. Greene in Cincy and SD had 2 big runs, he was not dominant. LT and Greene had a great game against the Colts the next year, the ONLY great game we got in the ruin game that was consistent and not just the product of one run. Mark on Chi they played SF yesterday, mark on Cincy they are in NE this week.
no, i wasnt comparing our D ot the 1985 bears. If you had better reading comprehension skills you would have noticed that. what I compared(which is clear and clearly outlined/prefaced) was the 1985 bears defense and rushing output against out defense and rushing output DURING OUR 4 PLAYOFF WINS. With the point being just that... it took nearly all-time 1985 bears level defense and rushing in order for us to win those playoff games... because we didnt have a good quarterback. never did I imply our defense was as good as the 1985 bears... you decided to run with that because you had nothing to stand on. but if you are still confused: Comparison: -IN OUR 4 PLAYOFF WINS our ppg/rushing output was similar to what the 198 bears did during the 1985 season. Points: -It took an all-time type performance from the defense and running game for us to win those 4 playoff games. -it isnt difficult to win at QB when your team allows 16 points and runs for 170 yards.
Cutler and Stafford are counted on more. A lot more. Your not being fair. Your giving all the credit to the players around them and none to them. In your book the receiver makes the QB. I guess teams should be more interested in franchise receivers and franchise running backs instead of franchise QB's. Why do they get no credit and Sanchez gets all the credit in the world for going 12-23 for 100 yards with 1 td and 1 int? Your caught up on Sanchez for some reason and just don't want to admit your wrong about him. You'll defend him no matter what. So if Greene just had 1 or 2 big runs then I can say in the New England playoff game that Mark wasn't really all that good. He just threw 3 nice touchdown passes I guess. Why do you take big plays away from other players to diminish their performance but not take them away from Sanchez? Your not being consistent. You defend Marks "plays to win games" but diminish the other guys who made big plays as well and just chalk it up to " 2 big runs".
Marks running games have ranked higher then anything cutler or stafford have had. that '09 team was firts in the NFL in rushing i believe. mark on chicago and they are picking first in the NFL draft. Mark in cincy and they go 6-10 at best
please stop, you are just embarrassing yourself. they throw more b/c of the weapons they have in the pass game, something tells me mark would be ok w/ Calvin Johnson or a tandem of marshall and Jeffrey while handing it/passing it to guys like Bush and Forte. what credit do Cutler and Stafford deserve? I don't value meaningless fantasy #s, Cutler has ONE playoff win over a 7-9 team at home, Stafford has ZERO and both have had more talent to work with. stop relying on rankings and watch games, this will help clear up confusion. mark on Chicago and they are NFC North Champs mark in Cincy and they actually would have had a 2 seed and would have a great chance at a SB.
What would I prefer the Jets to do? Ideally, I'd prefer that they identify a franchise Qb who can win in both tight games and shootouts. Since they erred badly in thinking Sanchez is a franchise Qb, I now prefer they cut bait with him since he's just another failed Qb here.
yes they erred badly by winning more postseason games than w/ any other QB in Jets history by double the amount. Where they screwed up was by allowing the talent to erode, if they kept adding weapons he'd be fine and we'd be playing right now.
JUNC ... If you really think he played well at SD, you're worse than an average fan. You have no f@#~ing idea what you're watching. Thank Jim Leonhard for winning the game. Thank Darrelle Revis for winning the game. Thank Shonn Greene for winning the game. Mark Sanchez failed to move the offense the entire game. Do you possibly dispute this? Were you watching the first three quarters? We had a parade of 3 and outs, A Sanchez INT and one FG on the scoreboard courtesy of Thomas Jones as the 4th Q started. Hardly a classic playoff performance for a QB .... and then he completed a 2 yard TD pass after the Leonhard INT and a SD penalty gave the offense 1st and goal from the SD 7. Other than that, he was horrendous. If Leonhard doesn't set up the offense for a cheap score, followed by Greene's 50 yard run, we lose that game ... Despite the postseason heroics of Sanchez The Great. Please step into reality and stop pretending that he "led" us to the win.
Yeah, sorry about that. :up: Just felt you and junc have your own views, and this debate is not changing them. No need to make things ugly. Just how I felt.
Thats the thing. Marks numbers wouldnt be a lot better with Calvin Johnson. They would improve dont get me wrong. But they wouldnt be great. Wouldnt be anywhere near what Cutler or Stafford do. He's just nowhere near as good. Like I said, I guess the key moving forward from now on is to draft franchise receivers and franchise running backs. Most good QB's have good receivers they throw to. I guess Andrew Luck is so good because of the great TY Hilton. I mean it couldnt possibly be that Hilton is good because he has a capable QB throwing him the football. I guess Phillip Rivers is so good because of how great Keenan Allen is... You know how many first round picks Aaron Rodgers throws to in Green Bay? Zero. A good QB is going to help make his receivers. Your thinking "well if only we could have got Jordy Nelson, Randall Cobb, or Alshon Jefferey, then everyone would see how good Mark really is". But in reality we don't know what those guys would do here without really good QB's throwing them the football.
As opposed to a franchise QB that can only do one and not the other? Very strange statement even for a Sanchez hater. Even if Idzik shared your "opinion" that the organization "erred badly in thinking Sanchez is a franchise Qb", that does not automatically mean that cutting bait is the best course of action. There's a lot more to consider (i.e., team need, what's available, cap room, draft position, number of draft picks...etc.). If Idzik want to bring in veteran competition/back-up, he can very well come to the conclusion that Mark on a 1 year incentive laden contract is the best option available for 2014 even if he believes, like you, Sanchez sucks. Also, there have been many players who were originally drafted with the expectation they would be perrenial Pro-bowlers or "franchise" guys but their careers played out differently but still successful. It's all about making sure that you don't have guys on your roster with contracts not commensurate with their production. If Sanchez were to return for peanuts, lose the competition and end up getting relegated to back-up duty, the organization shouldn't feel ashamed about (he might). The weird thing about Sanchez haters is the whole deal that he must not return under any circumstances. As though, his banishment is his punishment for his 2011-2012 crimes.
If Mexico City got an NFL franchise, they wouldn't even want Sanchez. Mark is toxic. He has baggage and his highlights are on blooper reels for years and years to come. Cut him quick Idzik.
Good, because I am sure there are Raiders fans who believe JaMarcus Russell wasn't given a fair shot.
I see Andy Dalton going 0-3 in the playoffs...Romo has failed in the playoffs...say what you will but when push comes to shove Sanchez does have the ability to show up in the playoffs. Get some weapons on the offensive side of the ball and see what Geno, Mark, and a 3rd entry can do in 2014. If they can modify his deal to make it financially feasible to have him on the team in 2014 and he can prove he is the starter you end up with a starting QB, new weapons, and maybe get some real trade value out of him at the end of the season. Worst case you get a veteran backup that would be better than Chad Henne or Josh McCown.
