I apologize, I meant I don't think a defense who he has beaten/played well against is in the top half of the league right now. And I still don't think a team stat of PPG should reflect on the QB. And if you can mention that Sanchez wasn't getting help from the run game, then you have to note that Foles got very little from Shaddy on the ground outside for the Giant game.
they have played under similar circumstances for the most part and Mark has been better. it's close, both are quality NFL QBs. Can't go wrong w/ either.
I love it. PPG is a reflection of QB play, but all other stats are bullshit. Some consistency there junc.
1. Because Foles absolutely played out of his mind last year. Sanchez has not. If Foles were healthy, he'd play Sunday. But since he's still out, they have no choice but to stick with Sanchez. 2. Against quality opponents he is 1-3. In those games he has seven turnovers to six total TDs 3. Yes, he is. The last two losses were absolutely crucial and potentially season-defining 4. Completely subjective Stop cherry picking. 11 total touchdowns, 12 turnovers.
I bought up TD, INT, Fumbles, QBR, PR, record, combacks, game winning drives Foles beat Sanchez 7 to 1. But yeah, PPG. Sanchez is a great QB, you're the only one who can see it.
all TDs and INTs are not created equal, Mark has only thrown 2 bad INTs. Let's look at Foles' comebacks/GW drives: Jax: came back from 17-0 down at half, Mark came back from 21-0 down to Dallas. difference? Philly didn't let up another point against Jax, they let up 17 more against Dallas. Indy: came all the way back from 7 pts down, a miraculous comeback. Wash: came all the way back from tied at 27 heading into 4th qtr. this list is damn impressive! you do know Foles has attempted 88 more passes, right? prorate 88 more passes and Mark has 14 TDs which is more. The INTs go up too but let's look at the meaningful INTs: Foles: at SF: didn't lead O to a single point. leading 21-20 threw INT in Philly territory setting up FG for SF to take lead. at Ari: tie game, 1st down at Ari 25 throws INT. up by 3 in 4th qtr throws INT that sets up game tying FG at Hou: threw pick 6 to tie game when Mark came in and led them to win. Sanchez: vs. Dallas: trailing by 4 to end 3rd qtr. dig deeper.
Even by your standard of QB wins that isn't a true statement...Sanchez is .500 and Foles was 6-2. There isn't a single metric, including your metrics, that says Sanchez is playing better than Foles. Not one.
I hope you didn't include those garbage time touchdowns in GB. I looked at Foles and non of his TDs were garbage time.
again Junc, Sanchez is barely over .500 for his career, he's exactly .500 this year with an elite offensive talent around him. His Pick was worse than the Fumble because the Pick led directly to a short field TD by the Cowboys that put the game two scores out of reach, a margin that the Sanchez led offense couldn't catch. Yes Sanchez 'led' the Eagles offense for a scoring drive on the next possession, a FG...on a drive that had a 44 yard pass play, a dump off short pass that had a great run by by Huff. And yes that FG did technically put them within 'a score', a TD and a 2 point conversion. The next drive after the fumble? Punt...... There were a lot of games Favres teams were down by 14 that they came back from...we're not talking 4th quarter come backs, we're talking any game where at any time in the game the team had been down by 14 points.
Haha, I was going to point that out to him but he only looks at end of game results, it's only garbage time if the end result was a loss by more than 10 points.
Stop cherry-picking. That pick 6 in Houston was in the first quarter. Let's do a more valid comparison: Foles taking over for Vick last year (will just count the games from the Oakland game onward since he was knocked out against Dallas) 7-1 record, 23 total TD, four total turnovers, crucial wins over Green Bay, Detroit, Chicago, and Dallas. Sanchez taking over for Vick: 4-3 record, 11 total TD, 12 total turnovers, crucial losses to Green Bay, Seattle, and Dallas. Just stop.
Why bother digging deeper? You are just going to keep cherry picking the data because you're only interesting in supporting the conclusion you've come to already.
1). Yes 2). No 3). No 4). Yes, but since he has been in control, the team is semi-spiraling. ( not spiraling upward either) In contention, yes (like the Jets in 2012 until he laid egg after egg in Tennessee!)
You can't pro-rate Qb play in the NFL! Stop already. You are obviously arguing on the behalf of Nacho and everyone can see it but you. I understand he is your favorite player, we all see it. Everything you say that was wrong with Nacho surrounding him in NY has been corrected to a positive extent, trouble is Nacho hasn't changed a bit. He is still below average in his overall play as a QB in the NFL. He can't lead an offense, the offenses he plays in are hamstrung due to his incompetence, obviously, and now that it is crunch time and he isn't getting the job done, just like when he played for the Jets, you are blaming everything but him, and using context as the main excuse. It's a dead horse Junc, nobody that knows anything about football is buying this garbage. Your ability to argue is good, I will give you that, but you have nothing to argue with, there is way too much proof that he is below average for the biggest majority of snaps he takes as a pro QB, average at best. Teams are suddenly wise to this "New look" he has had in Philly. It's been short lived at that! The more you defend him as a quality player, the more foolish you look, football knowledge wise. He just doesn't have it, no matter how you keep bending things to make him look respectable. Sorry man, it is what it is.
in 3 qtrs. of play he led his team to 24 pts, why I can't I prorate to 4 qtrs.? the sched has been much more difficult than Foles faced yet they are averaging many more points per game on offense. Anyone blaming Mark Sanchez has absolutely no idea what they are watching. I expect it from the tbruners of the world but we have some intelligent posters here that should be able to see through their blind hatred.
Because it's a laughable fallacy that completely disregards real-life situations. The 4th quarter is a completely independent event so the law of averages do not apply. You can't do this in sports Because 4th quarter comebacks and game-winning drives are real statistics. It's a reason why Romo gets hate for choking. Continue to cherry-pick. Any idiot could lead this offense. In the three losses, the Eagles have averaged 20 points per. That's terrible, especially considering he's faced all but one legitimate defense. 11 total TDs to 12 turnovers and three crucial losses is all that matters. Enough, already.
yep, did you know trailing by 1 pt is the same as trailing by 21 when factoring in "4th qtr comebacks"? as far as "game winning drives" game could be tied, you get ball at opponent 10 and kick GW FG is the same as trailing by 6 leading a TD drive starting at your own 10. did you know the INT down 20 or up 20 looks the same as the INT late in a game needing a score? stop w/ the real statistic nonsense, even if you don't prorate that extra qtr he is STIL leading his O to many more PPG than Foles was against BETTER competition. NEXT excuse.
I don't know why you guys are wasting your time - dude said Mark had a good game against the Cowboys. You guys are wasting your time. Mark has 1 win when his team is down 10+ points. He's a backup at best.
Oh, so now you're using the better competition crutch. Give me a break, dude. Against quality teams they've averaged under 24 PPG with Sanchez, which would be good for in the middle of the league. The numbers against bad teams (Houston, Carolina, and Tennessee) juice your numbers. But hey, let's totally ignore that Foles faced the Cardinals (17.4 PPGA, 3rd in NFL), 49ers (20.4 PPGA, 9th in NFL), and St. Louis (21.2 PPGA, 12th in NFL). The only quality defenses Sanchez faced were Seattle and Houston. Keep picking cherries.
