1) still plugged in. 2) 100% incorrect, was vital to both runs. 3) I am 100% fair, never called Mark great, never said he would be great. I give him proper credit which is difficult for many jet fans b/c they always need a scapegoat.
I'm guessing Sanchez has a couple more seasons before his comeback year, assuming he has one. 29 and a grizzly vet and somebody suddenly has a job opening and everybody realizes that Sanchez is no longer a mistake-prone young QB looking to make the front page of TMZ all the time. If he gets to play this year and throws a few bad INT's that cost his team games he's done. He should be looking to keep his head down and hoping that Foles can hold onto the job. Everything he does with the Eagles this year will be related directly back to what he did with the Jets. He doesn't want those connections to exist at all.
He does have a choice. He could stay in Philly, or bolt out of there at the end of the season. He's better off staying in Philly, but then I wouldn't be up in my arms if he makes his return to NY. [I am just being hypothetical. It is not happening.] And a note to slimjasi: You can always learn to 'ignore.' After all, talking to a wall is not exactly a wholesome practice in terms of 'mental health.'
he will be a starter next year if not sooner. NFL men and women know what he actually did w/ the Jets which was why a highly respected offensive coach like Kelly went after him immediately and why numerous other teams were interested. as fans it is harder for us to see but they have all the tapes and they know the circumstances around his bad 2012 year.
Cali, somewhere in Cali. Maybe the Raiders job comes open if Carr can't hack it or as Rivers successor in SD.
I don't think I like the prospect at Raiders. They will remain in sewers for at least 2-3 more years, if not longer. Becoming the starter is of course the primary objective here, but at the cost of all the physical abuse for years to come? Just when you came out of it barely a year ago? Not a good match to say the very least. SD or Chicago look pretty viable option - especially Chicago since Cutler is breaking down rather hard these days. Trestman is a very good offensive mind too, so if Sanchez ends up there, he'd be in pretty good hands.
1) Why do you insist on continually embarrassing yourself? Did you even listen to the Florio link you posted? It is OBVIOUS (again, only to the objective and rational) that he was talking out of his ass. It was his, PERSONAL speculation about what MIGHT happen. Quotes like "Maybe Mark Sanchez could end up being a more effective quarterback than Nick Foles?" are obviously not based on any "inside sources" or being "plugged in" or anything else particularly meaningful, for that matter. There is currently NOTHING to suggest that Sanchez will be starting for the Eagles anytime soon. Why are you pretending otherwise? Don't you realize how patently ABSURD you look talking about Sanchez being the future of the Eagles? 2) Mark was vital to both runs only because they needed to field a starting quarterback to actually participate in the games. There are SO many guys who we would have been better off with. To pretend that Sanchez was a strength of the team (as you have done for years now) is just utterly comical. 3) You have incessantly refused to acknowledge the reality of Mark's mediocrity. You have repeatedly referred to his poor and mediocre seasons/single game performances as anything from "good" to "solid" to "clutch" to "under-appreciated." Generally speaking, these compliments have been horribly misplaced and completely inappropriate. Your posts on Sanchez have filled avatars for years now. Your opinions on Sanchez have become a universal source of comic relief for the rest of this message board. A similar thing occurred years ago with Pennington, and while you were equally stubborn in your refusal to acknowledge reality when it came to Chad, at least he was a definitively good quarterback when healthy. Sanchez . . .not so much
I actually enjoy Junc. (It would probably be more accurate to say that I'm fascinated by him) I find his delusional support of Sanchez to be a fascinating (and rather amusing) study in fan psychology.
the only one embarrassing themself is the one that thinks mark is a career backup. yes he was speculating, I never said otherwise. please read more carefully. so many supposed better QBs couldn't win as much w/ more talent teams. average fan want fantasy #s, they don't understand what it takes to win. they think you need 300 yd passing games to win. we have seen so many QBs that have supposedly been much better that have done less w/ more than Mark did. Rivers, Schaub, Romo, Ryan(thought I think he will eventually get it), Dalton, Palmer, Stafford, Cutler, etc... I understand the game better than you and better than average fans. I have properly evaluated Mark, he has had excellent games, mediocre games, horrible games but he only has had one bad SEASON and that was a season where no QB would have succeeded outside of MAYBE Brady. if you ever get a chance to talk to a player, coach, exec please ask them about mark. You will be SHOCKED what they tell you.
No, you didn't say otherwise. But, as per usual, you are ignoring the salient point entirely. The point is that, BECAUSE it was baseless speculation on the part of one reporter, it means NOTHING. It has ZERO bearing on whether or not Sanchez has ANY chance in hell at being the future franchise quarterback of the Eagles. Once more, there is ZERO reason to believe that, as of right now, Mark Sanchez is anything other than a backup quarterback. You are still illogically and inappropriately using TEAM statistics (wins) to assess the merits of an INDIVIDUAL. This is the quintessential flaw in virtually ALL of your pro-Sanchez arguments. Just because the Jets made it to two AFC Championship games doesn't mean, in and of itself, that Sanchez is better than any of the quarterbacks that you mentioned. That is what you just can't seem to comprehend. Your argument just isn't logical.
what you don't understand is where there is smoke there tends to be fire. Let's see how this plays out. Foles was not impressive in camp or week 1. Mark will get his shot at some point. Yes I am using BETTER teams than ours w/ supposed better QBs that couldn't win as much. you think 300 yard passing days signal good games. the difference in our div rd game at SD in 2009 was at QB where the rookie outplayed the supposedly superior Rivers.
If you honestly think Sanchez has been even close to the quarterback that Phillip Rivers has . . . then there is simply no hope for you. You are irrecoverably lost in a fantasy world of delusional Sanchez worship. I shudder to think of how many games those 2009-2010 Jets teams would have won with Phillip Rivers at QB. If you want to boil their respective careers down to one playoff game (Sanchez did very little in that game, btw) in which Rivers played against a markedly better defense, then be my guest. In doing so, you only serve to highlight the astounding depth and magnitude of your absurd bias. The sublime Sanchez silliness continues.
Rivers is a better #s guy, I'd MUCH rather have Mark as my QB if I want to win. It's been proven. Rivers has had MUCH better teams around him in weaker divisions and hasn't even gotten his team to a title game(lone title game app came after backup led SD to GW TD drive. we wouldn't have made either title game w/ Rivers as our QB. Sanchez had a really good game, again you just look at stats. you guys act like we had the '85 Bears D. we had a good/very good D- nothing special and even actual great Ds need good QB play to win.
