I don't think it's gonna take Peyton Manning caliber improvement to unseat the likes of Sanchez...Doug Flutie caliber of play would be more than enough to send the Sanchize back to Mexico.
It's not about having little regard for Tebow. Is your blind love and worship of him really clouding your judgement that bad? Mark Sanchez is a solid QB. You guys are joking if you think Tebow's going to oust Mark. It's not happening unless Mark gets injured. Bottom line, end of story. They will, however, make each other better and improve our offense on many fronts.
"Mark Sanchez has nothing to worry about – as long as he plays well." Well duh, same for any QB in the NFL. “The one thing is you look at Tebow, he can win games in the NFL,” Marino, said. Yeah, last season he went 8-5 for a 1-4 team with a playoff win over the Steelers. And it took a future HoF P. Manning along with an El' Dim-way decision to get Tim out of Denver without riots. "But I’m not the one sitting there every day watching film on him." "So, it’s hard for me to make that prediction." Except where Mark and Tim are concerned anyway.... (ole forked tongue speaks) The same could be said for those posting here,,, and it can be applied to any player in the NFL. ============== "I think the real issue is that most people realize that right now Mark Sanchez is the more polished passer in a pro style system..." Unless of course you actually look at and compare their 'passing results' in their first 16 NFL starts. ================ This: "Even being hamstrung he outplayed Sanchez on a worse team with a worse coach. Imagine what he could do on a decent team with a good coach." ================ But Tebow has ZERO chance as a Jet and the Jet organization has now proven themselves totally incompetent for even looking at Tim, much less paying him any 'backup' money. Dan was a great 'no SB wins' QB, but he's a below average commentator, except for maybe Nutra-Systems selling to other old washed-up fat guys.... :beer:
Instagator... As a gator myself I respect you so adamantly defending Tebow... but you're not winning people here over by bombarding each thread with the same copy/pasted stat sheet and being SOOO defensive. I don't disagree with anything you say but your posts are the kind that are only going to continue to alienate all of us "Teboites, 3/12ers, whatever else they want to call us". Just tone it down a bit. :wink:
So Sanchez didn't dominate every level he played at? And he doesn't have the work ethic? And how exactly was Tebow more successful than Sanchez, at what? Don't say winning, when was Tebow in a AFC Championship game? The Broncos were impatient with Tebow, mostly because the coach who believed in him was gone and the coaches they had in place didn't believe in him at all. And ask the Panthers fans after 2010 if they thought they had a loaded offense. They have 2 very good RBs and a WR, but they're hardly loaded.
Sanchez had the most talented team in college football.. likely significantly more talented than Tebow's Gators and everyone else.. yet his college career was nothing compared to Tebows. Sanchez did play in a pro style offense that prepared him for the NFL more than Tebow though... I didn't say Sanchez didn't.. I don't really know. I just know Tebow's work ethic is said to be legendary. My point was just that it is a matter of time and Tebow will develop his ability to play in a pro style offense. And in the mean time you can play his style offense and win. Tebow was more successful with a far worse team and coach. People mock the AFC west yet the Chargers and Raiders were supposed to be contenders and Tebow beat the Steelers who were definitely contenders. That is my point that if he had the Jets team he could be just as successful as Sanchez if not more. Likely more. Tebow's style fits exactly into what the Jets can do too and will make them better than they appeared to be just like it did the Broncos. I agree. They had 2 great tight ends.. 2 excellent runningbacks, a stellar receiver and a completely dominant Oline.. Cam went untouched nearly all season. Every pass I saw him make the receiver was wide open and he had no pressure. The only reason the Panthers O looked so bad before Cam was there was because Fox was the coach. He used the same awful system there he did in Denver. This is why the Panthers players were overjoyed he was gone and looked incredible without him there. The same reason the Panthers looked so terrible with Fox is the same reason Tebow and Orton did too.. but the benefit is it made Fox's D look incredible. Did you see Cam in the pro bowl? That's what would have happened to him if he didn't have that stellar Oline in Carolina...
Which is it, is the SEC the closest thing to the NFL or is the USC trojans the most talented under achieving team ever, of course, all because of Mark Sanchez. All I hear is how teblow played against NFL talent in college and was so great. The Raiders and Chargers were never contenders, not with the way Rivers was playing, the crappy Raiders D, and McFadden always hurt. The Steelers that the Broncos played were a shell of themselves due to injury. There was no way that anyone was picking the Steelers at the start of the playoffs with the shape Ben was in and on their 3rd string RB.
USC has the most talent.. but that doesn't make them the best team. Look at the Dream team in the Olympics in the NBA. They clearly underachieved with Sanchez. He has been fortunate to play on great teams and has not excelled. He hasn't failed but he hasn't excelled either. And the SEC has all the competition the PAC12 doesn't. That is what makes what Tebow did in college so much more impressive than Sanchez who faced soft defenses.. like Luck and RG3 this year. Colt and Sam Bradford looked great for the same reason. That's exactly true.. Sanchez played WITH NFL talent but not against it.. Yep... he like Sanchez lost his run game.. Yep.. it's not easy keepin QBs healthy in the NFL especially the AFC west.. let's see how Peyton handles it.. Tebow made it through the season at least... with a bad team and coach too. [quotes]The Steelers that the Broncos played were a shell of themselves due to injury. There was no way that anyone was picking the Steelers at the start of the playoffs with the shape Ben was in and on their 3rd string RB.[/quote] The Broncos were terrible when Tebow took over and they had injuries at the end of the season too. Tebow had both his best receivers moved before he was made starter.. The Broncos brass was clearly trying to sink Tebow and he STILL won...
As much as I despise any and ALL things Dol-ph@g; enduring major pain EVERY GOT-D@MN TIME he played, slayed, toyed and destroyed the JETS & developing an extreme "fan-h@tred" of him; without a DOUBT CowboysFan, I TOTALLY agree with you! Marino was 1 sick-@ss cue-bee. The "Michael Jordan" of football during his time! If Dan cosigns Mark remaining as starter, than I cosign Dan too!
The argument that SEC quarterbacks face tougher teams during college has absolutely nothing to do with how they perform at the NFL level. Zero. Zip. Out of the 31 quarterbacks in the Hall of Fame, care to guess how many played in the SEC? 5. 5 out of 31. On top of that, the last SEC quarterback that made it to the Hall of Fame hasn't taken a snap in 35 years, and happens to be a Jet. The only SEC QBs in the Hall are Namath, Tarkenton, Starr, Tittle, Blanda FWIW, the Big 10 and PAC 12 are tied for the most with 6 Hall of Famers each.
Phaytal, good to see you trolling here again. What ? Did you get banned from the Broncos forum and have come here to play ? If I thought for even a second about taking you seriously, I'd point out that the SEC didn't become anything close to a "passing league" offensively until the 90s, so the "long view" of QBs in the HoF really wouldn't apply. that said, let's look at NFL QBs from the SEC today. Hmm, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Matt Stafford, Cam Newton, Jay Cutler, Matt Flynn (soon to be starter),
The SEC only really pulled out away from the pack in the past 15 years or so. They keep cranking up the level of competition, recruiting, and national championship football. So while your statement may be true (beside the point), an argument using Hall of Fame entrants is flawed if in fact the SEC has been trending upwards (and has generated quarterbacks like Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Matt Stafford, Jay Cutler, and perhaps Matt Flynn) But in any event, the point is not so much that SEC quarterbacks are better, but rather that they face better defenses in the SEC, so their numbers and experience are a shade more predictive of NFL success. Edited to add -- forgot Cam Newton. Maybe Ryan Mallet will pan out as well.
Problem is that predicting QB success is difficult to do, regardless of what conference a guy plays for. Take the MAC for example. Hardly known as a powerhouse conference, let alone one with strong defenses. Yet, iirc, that's where Roethlisberger played. PAC10 isn't known for being a strong league defensively, but quite a few QBs coming out from there have done very well.
There are examples abounding everywhere of good players from all sorts of places. And ones who look good and don't work out. The individual is much, much more important than the conference. It's just that performance against SEC defenses is likely to indicate the guy can actually play. Phrased another way -- if a quarterback plays a dominant level in the SEC, and he's got the size, then he's an NFL prospect. That's all.
Agreed. If you tear up the Pac 10, then perhaps you might be a good NFL QB. If you tear up the SEC, well, then you are definitely worth a much closer look
