This is just silly. So, we know a team can win with Sanchez because he has played in two AFC Championship games, but we don't know a team can win with Rivers because he has only played in one AFC Championship game? Rivers has "won" division titles, while Sanchez hasn't "won" any . . . Rivers also has a better career winning percentage than Sanchez does . . . don't either of those two things count in this illogical "winning" argument that you seem to be obsessed with? Is the ultimate barometer of a quarterback the number of conference championship games he reaches? How does any of this make any sense? Do you see the inherent problem with solely relying on TEAM statistics to assess the merits of an INDIVIDUAL position yet? Now, when you look at their INDIVIDUAL performances, Rivers is miles ahead of Sanchez. And even if we do decide to illogically limit ourselves to discussing their respective teams W/L record, it doesn't drastically sway the argument one way or another. Neither has a Superbowl. They have each played in two very different situations. Rivers has had more weapons, but Sanchez has had a better defense. But at the end of the day, two facts remain in this rather silly comparison between a borderline pro-bowler and your golden boy: 1) One player passes the eye test (the guy with markedly better individual statistics, of course) and the other fails it miserably. 2) One player lost his status as a starting NFL quarterback and was summarily cut by the team that drafted him, while the other guy is still playing.
you do understand that Rivers made his lone title game with the backup leading SD to the GW TD, right? let's review: Rivers 8 full years as starter, 1 title game app(reached when backup got them there), more talent around him, weaker division 4-5 playoff record including 2 HOME losses and one of those wins came when his backup led team to win. 11 TDs 9 INTs Sanchez 4 full years as starter, 2 title game apps including beating Rivers' team head to head on the road. 4-2 playoff record, 9 TDs, 3 INTs, 4 road playoff wins. played twice as long, same # of playoff wins, only 2 more TDs and 6 more INTs all w/ more talent around him in weaker division. Rivers has won division titles b/c he doesn't have Brady and the Pats in his division. he won a division at 8-8. Rivers doesn't pass my eye test, he passes the fantasy #s test though. the player that lost his job lost it b/c of injury(the same way Rivers got his job).
Wait, so Rivers gets no credit for the title game appearance because he got hurt in the middle of the divisional playoff game (a playoff game that he was playing quite well in, btw) in Indy? An entire season is boiled down to a few quarters? The backup "got them there"? Wow . . . just wow. Wait, so these numbers do matter? I thought these were all "Fantasy" numbers? Or, do they only matter when they seem to support your hopelessly delusional arguments? I guess I can leave these here, then: http://www.nfl.com/player/philiprivers/2506121/profile http://www.nfl.com/player/marksanchez/79858/profile Ouch. You continue to do irrecoverable damage to your credibility with stuff like this. Compared to Sanchez, he passes every conceivable eye test. Sanchez lost his job because of injury . . . and then got CUT several months later. He got CUT, Junc. He got CUT. The team that drafted him gave up on him. I wonder how seriously the Chargers have ever considered cutting Rivers? I have a serious question for you: Do you believe there is a general manager or head coach in the NFL right now who would take Sanchez over Rivers?
I don't think Sanchez has the arm for Chicago. You have to have a gun there or you just can't throw the ball after mid-November or so.
you like to say "wow" a lot. yeah, a guy w/ a history of choking in postseason finally made his first and only title game after he got hurt and his backup led them to the win. what is so difficult to comprehend about this? those #s helped one guy help his team to 4-2 on the road and 2 title apps and they helped the other guy under .500 w/ multiple home losses. keep posting irrelevant #s of a guy w/ more talent around him, in better offenses and w/ weaker divisions. It really helps your argument. Notice how SD won their playoff game last year? he got cut b/c a new GM came in, we had cap issues and that GM drafted a QB he wanted. Mark then got hurt and we cut him. if he's healthy we make the playoffs last year and he's still here. If all things were equal in terms of salary I think they'd take Rivers.
Not sure what you are trying to say . . . they played two playoff games last year, winning the first one and losing the second. In their win, Rivers played very efficiently, going 12-16 for 128 yards, a td, and a rating of 128.8. Then they went to Denver and got smashed. So? Who knows how things would have turned out had Tanny gotten another year, but considering that the biggest single reason for his dismissal was probably the absurd contract he gave Sanchez following his highly disappointing third season, I think it's safe to say that barring a career year for Sanchez, he would have been cut. Sanchez sucked. No one, other than you, apparently, was shocked to see him go.
Oh, you think so, huh? Yeah, I think so, too. And something tells me that, even with their respective salaries being exactly what they are today, so does everyone else with a functioning brain. I know that admission was tough . . . reality can be no fun.
they did play two but they only won ONE hence the comment "Notice how SD won their playoff game last year?" in their win they took the ball out of his hands and that's why they won. the contract wasn't absurd at all, it was actually a good contract. the problem was not surrounding him with talent.
it doesn't matter, we have a body of work that shows Mark w/ less talent has done more than Rivers w/ more talent around him in postseason. This game is about winning. mark has done a better job of it despite playing 4 less years.
Oh, you mean like the 2009 New York Jets did with Sanchez?? Haha, another wow moment. No, it was absurd.
Haha, as per usual, you miss my point entirely. Classic. The point was that your statement was meaningless.
Rivers did "nothing"? Really? Rivers' season last year was better than Mark's first three years combined. Get real.
Haha, what I have clue about is that you highlighted a playoff game in which Rivers had a 128.8. rating that his team won. You probably highlighted the most efficient playoff game of his career. Really good point you made there. Do you actually analyze your posts while you write them?
So? Shonn Greene has more playoff appearances than OJ Simpson did in his entire career. Was he a better running back? Sanchez had more playoff appearances in his first two seasons than Luck did in his first two seasons. . . is he better than him too? Do your arguments ever make sense?
