Let's see -- Reports say that Vick is out, Schaub does not want to backup so he is probably out, Cutler re-signed already....now McKnown is the rumored target - a guy that was on the fence to retirement after the season. If you have to select from the never weres and career flops available in free agency or Mark Sanchez you go with Sanchez. At least the guy is young, has won, can play in NY, says he wants to, would be in the same spot he was in last year - there is no drama, no scandal, no distraction. He comes back at a reduced rate, comes into camp to battle Smith with a lot of new weapons, and see who wins. I have no issue with that. If Smith fails to beat Sanchez for the second straight season he was never the guy and woul dd make a nice backup. If he beats out Sanchez they have a veteran QB behind Smith if things go south. Sanchez, if cut, costs $4.8 million. Work that deal over to get below that number and after the 2014 season they have options. Cut him and have $3.6 million hit the cap, trade him with his modified contract, or keep him.
If you told me some team hadn't scored on its first three possessions in five years, in a league where every rule is designed to help the passing game, I would think a couple of things ... And one of the first things I would think is - "I bet they didn't have a very good QB". What would you think?
The most recent reports say that Vick is likely the guy we are after. I'll post the link in a second. Here you go:
Ian Rappaport on NFL network reporting right now ... "Jets the likely landing spot for Vick". I hope not. No to Sanchez ... And no to Vick.
We get it. But why do you have a problem if people "hate" Sanchez? And what revisionist history has people posted?
If Vick is willing to take a backup role then I'd love to have him. He knows Marty's system and he's a capable vet that could step in if needed.
That's probably the hate talking. I'd think they probably had a shitty OC. The first few possessions are usually scripted ones, they are usually more a reflection of game planning than QB play excluding, of course, the top tier QBs like Brady, Manning, Brees or Rodgers. I've posted before that Schittyheimer has had the distinction of having 2 double digit streaks of consecutive games in which his teams failed to score a TD in the 1st quarter. That's with 2 different teams mind you. That doesn't even include numerous other similar but smaller streaks of 5, 6, 7...etc.).
I disagree I think Sanchez being here would create a distraction. Geno is the guy ( for now) and we need everybody on the same page. We don't need another quarterback competition, Geno needs all the reps he can get, and to build some chemistry with the receivers. We need a QB here that will accept being a backup and based on Sanchez own words he felt he won the competition last year. So that gives us an idea that Sanchez may not be on the same page with the rest of the team. If Geno has a rough patch here and there you want your young QB to play through it and figure things out. Not looking over his shoulder at the former starter of four years. Imagine how much worse things would've been in SF when Kap was struggling, there would be people calling for Alex Smith which would create a distraction. If god forbid Geno gets hurt and Sanchez plays a good game in relief, you now have a controversy on your hands. If the organization wants to go with Geno it should be able to without creating a big deal.
Why not? ... A few reasons for me --- #1. He's a reckless turnover machine. I'd rather have a backup who's steady and takes care of the ball. #2. He's an underachiever, who failed to succeed with MUCH better players in Philly than we have here. #3. He wants to start and won't be content in a backup role. #4. He's always hurt. #5. Even tough he paid his price, the dog thing still bothers me. A tough guy to root for.
Have to disagree here on all points. I'm pretty sure our organization is making it clear that he will battle for a spot but if he loses he will backup Geno. I also don't care if he is a turnover machine if he is a backup. A backup rarely plays and when he does, it is only for a short stretch of time. If he wins the starting job, then he is the better QB on the roster. We would be playing with the best option. Simple
Anybody who thinks that the "buttfumble" was anything butt 100% Sanchez's fault is crazy. He FORGOT the play...that HE called in the huddle. Anything that transpired after that don't matter. Sanchez owns up to his boneheaded play..why can't his fans? For the record...I think Sanchez can indeed stay in NY and salvage his career...we may not have a choice. All he's got to do is play flawless football.
QB controversy is a media term to drum up clicks and drama. Teams will get behind whoever wins the job in TC and support them untill they're pulled. beyond that Sanchez has always been a good teammate. The one time he slightly steps out of line in the middle of a season that he's on IR and you're going to claim that he'd be a drain in our lockerroom? even more so, One of the biggest mis-handlings of Mark was that we never had anyone for him to look over his shoulder at... And now you're saying that'd be a bad thing for Geno?
As a team if you've had a competition between your QB's. If on one corner you have the incumbent, while on the other corner you have the new guy. History tells us that you usually get rid of the incumbent. Why? Because it creates a distraction. Half the team may prefer Sanchez, while the other half prefers Geno. If Geno has a bad game or so, we don't need BS stories like "should Sanchez start"? We need everybody on the same page about who the starting QB is. That is how you create a controversy free environment. Also I do want the Jets to bring in a capable vet QB. But you Sanchez supporters seem to think only Sanchez is the best candidate for that role. We don't need Geno looking over his shoulder, but we do need someone that can step in if needed. And we need someone that will come in and accept his backup role. With Sanchez I'm not sure he'd accept it. In his mind he won the competition last year.
I'm confused, You don't want Sanchez. You DO want a capable Vet. And your concern with Sanchez is that he'd create "controversy" for who to start if Geno were to start to falter. You think if Vick is sitting behind Geno and he has a bad game they're not going to be asking even more fervently "Should Vick start?". My previous post speaks to this point directly and Smith will have a longer leash ( at least with the fans ) if Sanchez is behind him on the bench. If/When Sanchez loses the competition, he's done nothing in his career to give you the idea he'd be a poor teammate or try to cause a divide in the locker room. If he wins it, What's wrong with Geno learning from the bench for a little while? ( Which is what he should have done last year ). I'll say it again, This "Controversy" shit is just that, media born and raised shit. The team will get behind whatever QB is behind center.
You're not confused. 1985er is. He's all over the place, can't control his thoughts. Don't try to have a rational discussion with someone who's narrative changes based on hysteria and emotion. _
First of all they won't be asking for Vick more "fervently". He doesn't have the same history on the Jets as a Sanchez. Fans would be more willing to ride with Geno longer. Like I said before if you have a competition or you have a QB in place you want to go with. You don't keep the incumbent. See Montana/Young, see Staubach/Morton, see Doug Williams/Schroeder, see Randall Cunningham/Rodney Peete, see Brett Favre/Dan Majkowski, see Michael Vick/Chris Chandler I can go on and on. When you have a "guy" you don't bring back the previous guy. It has potential to split a locker room and cause a distraction in the media.
