Let's not forget NE was resting starters week 17, if they needed to win that game they would have and been 11-5 so now it is a 2 game difference. Now let's look at tiebreakers: head to head: 1-1 div record: NE 4-2, NYJ 2-4 so we lose tiebreakers so now we would have needed to win 3 more games. Rivers wasn't giving us 3 more wins. The only 2 games he probably changes the outcome would be Buffalo and Atlanta and I'm not sure about Atlanta b/c it was a bad weather day where both O's couldn't score until of course the game was on the line and our overrated D allowed Atl to march down the field for the winning TD. and there are games we won that we probably don't w/ Rivers so it balances out. so we are still likely facing Cincy and SD and we likely don't win both games w/ a QB like that. In 2010 we had no chance to catch NE and could have gotten 5 seed instead of 6 seed, we could have beaten KC but Rivers on the road at Pitt in div rd? not happening. Rivers was a top NUMBERS QB in the league, he wasn't a top QB. we were MUCH better off w/ Sanchez than we would have been w/ the overrated Rivers. Rivers was handed the keys to what should have become a dynasty in SD and couldn't even get his team to a title game let alone a SB. Sanchez had a good rookie year, had 3-4 awful games to skew the #s and make the year look bad on paper but he was good the majority of the year including throughout the playoffs. His inconsistency in 2010 plagued the Jets? seriously? not the D melting in big spots? mark had some bad moments that most QBs have, we lost the title game b/c the D didn't show up not b/c of the QBs play.
The whole "well if we had Rivers in 2009 and 2010 we would have had a bye is irrelevant", first off im not sure if we would have had a bye in 2009, but in the end we would have been on the road in Indy regardless. Same applies for 2010, New England won 14 games, we were not matching that, sorry. So the way I view it, the loss in 2009 was on the defense. Mark Sanchez gave the Jets two touchdowns, and three field goal attempts, EXACTLY the same that Brees gave the Saints 2 weeks later. The difference is that Brees's team gave him a pick 6, AND hit all three FGs, and the opposition missed the FG. While Sanchez had his team miss 2 FGs, and never got a pick 6 either. And yes I am aware that the Jets defense had a fumble recovery but the Saints gave Brees an onside kick so it weighs itself out. Brees played better, but he is not winning if he had the Jets defense. That is a fact.
NE won 0 true road games in 2009. They ended the season on a road game. There is no guarantee they beat HOU in 2009. Either way, the Jets went 8-7 with Sanchez. Rivers definitely could have swung 2-3 games if not more. ATL, BUF, NO are 3 off the top of my head. Rivers was a top QB in 2009 and a top QB definitely improves the Jets. 2011 or 2012 Rivers is a different story,but 2009 vs 2009, Rivers improves 20+ teams in the NFL that year. Also you are assuming again we don't win with Rivers in CIN or SD. What makes you think Rivers has no shot in Pit on the road? In 2008 he played decent in Pit on the road in the playoffs. There's no history against or for him in Pitt. That's just a bad assumption. Why wasn't Rivers a top QB in 2009 0r 2010? Watching him play and then looking at his numbers, both point to being a top QB in the league those years. The Chargers played in a title game with Rivers also. He got hurt but played 3 quarters against IND and left the game in the 3rd with a FG lead I believe. If you want to discredit that from him, then go back and history and take away credit for all the QBs who played less than 4 quarters of football and readjust their history as players. Here's the thing, 3-4 games make up 25% of a NFL season. That's not skewing the numbers, that's part of the numbers. If I throw away 25% of any average QB's career and select the bad games, to throw away I could make them look amazing. That's what separates QBs, the ability to not have those 3-4 horrific games a year. The ability to play well across a season. Sanchez as a rookie was not a good QB, but he was a good QB for us. Stack him up against his peers, and it's bad for him. But the Jets didn't need a top QB at the time and Sanchez was able to make some plays, have a short memory, and not ruin a ton of games so the Jets had a winning season. He worked out well for the Jets that year, but his QB play left a LOT of room for improvement. Yes Sanchez's/Schotty's inconsistencies plagued the Jets in 2010. For some reason you take this statement to mean nothing else plagued the Jets. I never said that, you just read something that wasn't there. And yes Sanchez was inconsistent in 2010. His inconsistency, which I also assign blame to Schotty, led to games or halves where the Jets offense was stuck in the mud. It usually was because the passing offense couldn't get going or was stalling drives. So yes, it plagued the Jets as it impacted them all season that inconsistency.
Let's count all FGs as makes. The Saints scored 2 TDs and 3 FG on 8 possessions. 24 points on 8 possessions, 3 points per possession. The Jets scored 2 TDs and 3 FG on 12 possessions. 23 points on 12 possessions, 1.9 points per possession. The Colts scored 3 TD and 3 FG on 10 possession against us. 30 points on 10 possession, 3 points per possession. Considering the Saints had a more aggressive coach and ST executed an onside kick, replacing the Jets D with the Saints D, the Saints still have a good shot at winning the SB. Remember the Jets D folded late, but started strong. The Saints D was opposite. The Saints only had to play defense for 8 possessions though, while the Jets played D for 11. BIG difference between the two. Also the Saints crossed the Colts 30 yard line in the 2nd half, something the Jets offense didn't do in the 2nd half. It stinks, the offense couldn't get anything going in the 2nd half of the Colts game, the special teams unit couldn't do anything, and the defense couldn't do anything. All 3 together not doing anything, well you basically didn't show up for the 2nd half
Sanchez had plenty of time to avoid that hit, he was hoping he'd get hurt so he could skip the season
Oh please, this is ridiculous. Perhaps if the Jets defense didnt give up a 30 second drive they would have had one less possession? and was it Marks fault the Jets played conservative and ran the ball after Leonhard fumble recovery? was it Sanchez's fault the Jets ran the clock into halftime? NOPE, NOPE Sanchez was carving up the Colts and the Jets decide its time to play conservative..... Brees NEEDED that missed FG and pick 6 or else he isnt winning the Super Bowl. If you cant see that then you are just crazy.
I know the Bills stink but they did beat them at orchard Park so they had 1 and they were up 27-13 at Houston so I assume they would have won that game. against Buf and maybe Atlanta I agree. against NO? I don't think so. mark struggled and was the main reason we lost but how many times have we seen that D play great until they late in games? and would he have beaten NE? would he have beaten Houston? we wouldn't have won the division and if we had we probably go one and done like Philip has done so many times before w/ more talent around him. he was awful 2008 at Pitt in the div rd, he had good #s but he was awful. It was 28-10 in the 4th qtr and the game was over, they never got close to getting back in that game and he compiled meaningless #s to make it look like he had a good game on paper. top #s guy in a weak division padding stats. Rivers has never impressed me, I have never thought he was capable of winning a SB and he's never even led his team to a title game despite year after year SD being considered the favorites. they played in a title game but he was on the sidelines as his backup led the GW TD drive at Indy. mark played well in 11 of his 15 games, I will take that from a rookie any day. Not all rookies are dan marino or Andrew Luck. the Jets had a HOfer w/ an easier sched and no Brady the year before and couldn't even make the playoffs. Mark was not a great QB obviously but he was vital to those runs. the pass O carried the load in 2010, we don't make the playoffs w/o the pass O being as good as it was.
Looking at the feeds on twitter - it appears Mark is really reviving his career with the Eagles. You could argue he's outperforming Foles in TC.
He apparently went 5 for 5 in the redzone for 5 TDs, im not sure what defense it was against? maybe New Englands? but regardless its good stuff to hear. Im hoping Foles falls flat on his face (despite me supporting him the last two years due to my hate of Vick), because I want Sanchez to get redemption. Im calling it right now, week 17, METLIFE stadium, Eagles vs Giants on Sunday Night Football, Mark Sanchez returns to metlife and silences all the trolls/haters from the NY area, by ending the Giants season and sending the Eagles to the playoffs.
Albert Breer @AlbertBreer 2h Mark Sanchez looks really good, again. And Zach Ertz is gonna be a problem for opponents. Matt Lombardo @MattLombardo975 Jun 10 Mark Sanchez looks a little sharper today. Just threw a TD to Will Murphy in a red zone drill. #Eagles Reports out of Eagles camp is that Mark is playing just as good if not better than Foles. watching the Eagles - Bears preseason game Mark was throwing the ball better than I've see in the past 2+ yrs.
So clicking links and supporting sites with ad revenue, thus supporting the NFL and contributing to people getting concussions. You're a bad person
You know who else are bad persons? Those money loving scumbag owners. Destroying lives and families. _
