Watching Mark Sanchez get flattened over and over again has resulted in me having new found respect for Ken O'Brien. Here is a guy who was sacked a whopping 102 times over a 2 year period where he threw for 7,500 yards, won 19 games, and the Jets made the playoffs both years. What did O'Brien have that Sanchez doesn't? And don't say an offensive line!
Freeman McNeil, Al Toon, Mickey Shuler, Johnny Hector, Wesley Walker and Kurt Sohn. You gotta have decent skill players around you as a QB and O'Brien had some great ones. McNeil, Toon and Shuler are arguably the best at their position ever for the Jets. They were certainly the highest impact in their best years.
O'Brien held the ball too long looking for big plays and most of his sacks were givign up and not taking big shots unlike sanchez last year who took a beating I have never seen taken by a Jets QB before. I loved Kenny as a kid, he was a good QB but he brougth a lot of those sacks upon himself and never won a playoff game for us.
I am not one of these Jets fans who thinks that Sanchez is above any criticism, but I will say this: anyone who questions his toughness is out of his or her everloving mind.
O'Brien was ridiculously tough but it took just two seasons of getting hit hard to begin to degrade his skills.
Obrien also had a very slow wind up and release...guys like namath, bledsoe, marino...flick of the wrist and the ball goes 60 yards. OBrien had to set up longer to make the big pass, which led to holding the ball longer...which led to sacks but when he was on he was very mistake free and accurate. What he needed was a fortress of an offensive line. Because with how long he held the ball...he'd make an average line look poor. Plus zero mobility. And he wasn't exactly a big tall statue either
I say this again, O'Brien was sacked a lot but MOST were of the lay down variety where he wasn't hit. He didn't get worse b/c he took a beating, he did hurt his trowing shoulder in 1986 which started the downward spiral but it wasn't from taing a pounding. Most of his sacks were from holding the ball too long looking for big plays and most were him laying down giving himself up.
I couldn't give an accurate percentage but I would say the majority of his sacks were lay downs avoiding big hits.
We're supposed to go back and review film from the 80s? He's right, O'Brien caused a lot of his own sacks by holding the ball too long and having absolutely no mobility. Countless times he would be sacked when you saw the rush coming from a mile away on the old-style TV and he never sensed it or moved. He threw very few INTs but as a result took a lot of needless sacks and beating. That said, he was as tough as nails, a leader on the field and a class act through thick and thin. When he had protection and good receivers early in his career he showed his best, but when he needed to adjust to what was around him he didn't do it enough to win. Our only winning season with him after 1986 was 1988 when we were 8-7-1 and Pat Ryan played a handful of the games. As junc pointed out, we never won a playoff game with him, we've won four already with Sanchez.
So you are saying that Ken O'Brien voluntarily lied down on the ground over 50 times within a two-year peroid?
When the hit is coming, a good quarterback will tuck the ball and duck his head to keep from taking a savage blow. Doesn't mean he actually hits the ground before contact -- he just means they weren't savage hits, they were sacks where he got a chance to go down and keep his head on his shoulders. Anyway, sometimes the most savage hits a QB takes are the ones where he gets the ball off. So sacks is an imperfect measure of the punishment -- sometimes sacks are the one where he can lessen the punishment.
spot on - the 5 and 7 step drops walton had him doing was suicide. waltons offensive pass plays took a long time to develop. that along with the points u mention above about obrien were a lethal combination when the OL talent eroded. piss poor drafting in the 80's of course didn't help.
QBs were also allowed to get hit a lot more then than they are now. You still had some silly rules like in the grasp, but none of this can't hit high, can't hit low, etc.
