Nothing.. At 25 Sanchez had outplayed both... After three seasons in the league both Brees and Rodgers had stats that would be laughable compared to Sanchez. The test and the big question is what can Sanchez do in year four. All three were being doubted by their teams after year three and no one knew if they would be quality starting NFL QBs, let alone good or great ones. Both Rodgers and Brees stepped up and launched what could be HOF careers, and we seem to forget when they were Sanchez's age they had done little on the field. If Mark can grow a pair and grab this team by the neck, we might still have that franchise QB we had hoped for. Forget about Rex controlling the locker room, Sanchez needs to be the guy. I do believe two years under Peyton would make him a great QB, just like Montana did for Young, Farve did for Rodgers and to a lesser extent Flutie and Bledsoe did for Brees and Brady. Mark has not had the advantage others may have been afforded, but I truly being he doesn't need it to be the guy we would like. Would I mind seeing Peyton as a Jet, nope, and it would be far better than seeing him a Dolphin. Mark has the ball and he should have an opportunity to run the team, if he drops the ball next season, then he will be no more a franchise QB than Alex Smith is. Who should be real worried, since he is the guy who Peyton could be pushing out in San Fran. Mark needs to take the reins or he will be no better than Flacco. A QB who can't get you to the BIG dance, even with a top defense holding his hand. Just venting.... I don't want a prettyboy, I want a junkyard dog.... Show some teeth
Does that mean he will turn into them? No. To make such assumptions is just dumb. Of course we all hope he does.
This has got to be a joke. The Brees part is an ok point, but to expect Sanchez to become the player he is is a tad foolish. Rodgers wasn't even starting his first 3 years, so you're just being moronic for even mentioning his name.
This thread is beyond ridiculous. Brees sat a year as most QBs do and Rodgers sat 3 years. You seriously want to compare Sanchez to that? Try comparing the three after each played for three years and see where your argument goes.
No, he said Brees and Rodgers had stats that were laughable when compared to Sanchez after three years....that's where it all went south.
yeah, i didn't get the rodgers comparison either, as it seems ever since he became a starter he has only had great seasons
When Rodgers was the age Sanchez is now he'd only ever played in relief of Favre, never started a game and there was no way to know how successful he'd be.
So between Sanchez and Rogers, I guess the argument will be: "Who benefited more in their first 3 years, Mark playing or Rogers sitting behind Favre?" The Sanchez/Rogers comparison starts day one of their 4th year.
Hardly. Your point reaches a new low in idiocy. Bree's, famously got BENCHED (guess who his coach was). Sanchez is the greenest of the 3. What is he 1600 snaps out of high school?
I guess I should start a thread saying what do Sanchez and Jamarcus Rusell have in common? 50% completions rates and around 5 ypa thru 3 years but I will just post it here.
i get what he is saying though, think about it, we are jumping down sanchez's throat bc of his play but he is ONLY in year three. brees and rodgers got to sit a couple of years, and sit behind good qbs(great in rodgers case) so while these guys got to sit back and learn sanchez had to do it on the job, and lets be honest he didnt really have a decent veteran on the team to learn from(all respect to brunnell) so im willing to give mark 1 more year to show a big leap in improvement, dont forget shotty is gone and so is his complex playbook. id hate to see us get rid of him and he starts beasting somewhere else, a la brees.
Where your argument loses is steam is why then did Sanchez become pure shit this year when his first two weren't? It wasn't the OL, that doesn't make you throw into the ground or over the receivers head or into the arms of a 300 pound lineman twice in the same game. It wasn't his receivers, without Buress he would have been even worse. Was he just lucky in his first two years and this is the real Sanchez? Whatever, he has the FO worried to be talking about what they should do.
Give it a rest. Getting plowed play after play can largely influence how, when and where you throw. Go back to the drawing board and make some more garbage up.
Garbage? Oh then you are one those that thinks he is just the best thing that ever happened to the Jets, right?
No, but I certainly don't claim that he is as bad as you and your colleagues seem to think. I also don't go into every thread ever created and find a way to make sure that every one knows just how bad of a quarterback Mark is.
