Obviously his health is yet to be determined but he has absolutely no intention on retiring so I am guessing he and his doctors think he is right where he should be at this time.
Favre led us to 8-3 and then got hurt, the following year he had the best year of his career. The decision to bring him in was absolutely correct.
wasn't sanchez playing hurt this year? why doesn't he get that excuse? and Favre got hurt in OCTOBER, he played his best football(and only good stretch of the year) in NOVEMBER. He was handed a talented roster w/ an incredibly weak sched and no Brady and he still couldn't get us to the playoffs. The decision was asinine, it worked out unintentionally b/c of the way favre sabotaged our season we fired mangini and brought in rex & sanchez which set us up for a bright future but the decision itself cost us a division title.
The best thing about the Favre signing was that it gave the FO cover to get rid of Chad. It is also intensely amusing how the left over Chad Fans around here love to talk about the regular season he had with Miami, and also how some of them complain that those skeptical of Sanchez do not focus enough on his playoff games, when Chad absolutely crapped the bed in the wild card game that year, and then was hurt again the following year. China Dollington. We were lucky to get rid of him, and thanks to Brett Favre.
Well, you are probably in for some more pain then because if there is any way for the Jets to get any QB they think is better that Sanchez, they will. I'm not sure they can get Manning even if he is a FA but that won't stop them for trying to find any upgrade out there.
Chad had half the talent we had and led Miami to a div title. It is better to get to postseason and lose than not to make it at all.
there's no shot, this isn't happening but feel fre to get your hopes up that they could ruin this franchise.
why? b/c we made it 2 times in his first 3 years? Just like Peyton except we won 4 games and Peyton won zero at the same stage. Yeah let's take a major cap hit getting rid of a promising YOUNG QB who could guide us for the next decade and pay an old QB coming off major surgery. A player who, at his peak, was a choker in January and never gave discounts to his team so they could have more cap room. Makes sense, I'm glad the Jets FO doesn't think the way you do.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7...s-peyton-manning-short-throws-were-game-ready i guess he's throwing them underhand.
No it wasn't. That decision lead directly to the firing of Eric Mangini, due to the total shift in focus it produced in 2008 with a premature Super Bowl or bust mentality. It put Brian Schottenheimer out at sea without a sail for season as his system got thrown to the side in favor of an aging influential QB who had no vested interest in learning the system and lots of evidence that something else worked better. It lead to the trade-up for Mark Sanchez because the failures of 2008 were too much to bear with a new stadium opening and the need to sell PSL's. That in turn lead to the attempt to win it all with a rookie QB which greatly stunted Sanchez development in 09 and 10 and lessened the value in acquiring him. It was like cotton candy on the tongue. Tastes great for all of 3 seconds and then it is gone.
I can't recall whether you said that starting Sanchez in 09 and 10 was something you were opposed to at the time. Or is this just another excuse for Sanchez's poor performance? How about the supposed parallels with Eli? Eli won an SB in his fourth year after starting his first year, and ending up ranked 18th in the league in his second year. Would Eli have won an SB more quickly if he had sat his first, or even second, year? Your position here is confusing. What has lessened Sanchez's value is that however he looked at the time he was drafted, when he played, where the rubber met the road, he didn't progress as much as he should have. There is no evidence he would have done so if he had sat on the bench for his first two years. Plus you ignore that around the league whether a team starts or sits a young Qb is almost always based on whether there's a better short term option at Qb, or not. Rodgers sat in Green Bay becuase they had a future HOF'er on the roster. By comparison once Favre left the Jets, who should the Jets have started instead of Sanchez? So they started Sanchez. You can't decide what to do about your team and the season you are in the middle of based on some theory about whether it is better for a young Qb to sit or to play.
Brady led his team 80 yds in the final minutes t give his D a 4 pt lead in the SB, he wasn't great that day but he put them in position to win it but the D blew it unlike Peyton who threw away the SB 2 years later. In the 2006 WC game Peyton threw 3 INTs, KC scored 8 pts all game In the 2003 title game he threw FOUR INTs and the INTs only led to 6 points The answer is yes. Brady's D gave up 17 but they allowed the GW Drive in the final minute moments after Brady got them the lead. NE scored a TD, Indy kicked a long FG to take the lead on us. One more 1st down and we never get the chance to win. The situations were very different. Both teams had enough talent around the QB to win multiple championships, the difference in 3 vs. 1 has been b/c of QB play in January. 14-2 is better than 10-5, right? 14-2 gets them homefield and likely another SB trip vs. missing the playoffs entirely. You want to discuss scoring in postseason vs. reg season? I'm not going throuhg and taking out reg season D/STs scores which NE had more of so this skews towards Manning but let's see how it plays out. Brady: 2001: 23.2 reg, 18 post(I took out title game since he was hurt) -5.2 2003: 21.8 reg, 24.3 post. +2.5 2004: 27.3 reg, 28.3 post, +1 2005: 23.7 reg, 20.5 post, -3.2 2006: 24.1 reg, 27 post, +2.9 2007: 36.8 reg, 22 post, -14.8 2009: 26.7 reg, 14 post, -12.7 2010: 32.4 reg, 21 post, -11.4 2011: 32.1 reg, 34 post, +1.9 Total: -39, -4.3 per playoff year Brady led positive postseason 4 times in 9 years(44%) Peyton Manning: 1999: 26.4 reg, 16 post, -10.4 2000: 26.8 reg, 17 post, -9.8 2002: 21.8 reg, 0 post, -21.8 2003: 27.9 reg, 28.7 post, +.8 2004: 32.6 reg, 26 post, -6.6 2005: 27.4 reg, 18 post, -9.4 2006: 26.7 reg, 24.5 post, -2.2 2007: 28.1 reg, 24 post, -4.1 2008: 23.6 reg, 17 post, -6.6 2009: 26 reg, 22.3 post, -3.7 2010: 27.2 reg, 16 post, -11.2 Total: -85, -7.7 per playoff year Manning led positive postseason 1 time out of 11(.09%)
This is my point: signing Favre lead to a vacuum at the QB position for the Jets, which lead to the Jets drafting Sanchez AND playing him right off the bat despite their avowed intention to win it all that season. Yeah, but you also can't do something that is cock-a-mamie on the face of it, like drafting a rookie QB with one year of starting experience in college and then loudly proclaiming your intention to win it all that year with the guy starting for you. Think about it. This was a comedy of errors on the Jets part that almost turned into a win at the end due to everybody they were competing with sucking at the end of the season and two teams resting their regulars. The Jets had no realistic shot at the Super Bowl in 2009 and yet they took one of their most important assets, Mark Sanchez rookie season, and put it on the line. I can't tell you what lessons Sanchez learned that year but I can tell you they were probably the wrong ones if the Jets ever wanted to develop an elite QB.
Again your changing my argument. Did I ever say 14-2 wasn't better than 11-5, nope. You originally stated I see a huge dropoff from the two years and I said I don't think it is that big especially compared to the Colts drop off when maning was out. Then you responded saying how 14-2 is better than 11-5 which we all know is true. The Pats went - 5 games assuming they go 16-0 again for a second staight year. The Colts went -8 with a relatively poor year before from Manning because of his injury. They are similar situations because both QB's put their team in position to win and both defense blew leads, yet Brady gets no blame and Manning does in your arguments. Look at years 06-10 for Brady. Out of the 2 QB's, Brady has 3/4 worst differentials. Funny how 06-10 were also the years their defense started to slip and they didn't win super bowls. Which brings together my whole initial point, Brady has a better defense,special teams, and coaching than Manning during his Super Bowl runs, but when that defense slipped off, no super bowls. To look at the Colts and Pats equal teams beside QB is drastically unfair to the Pats and the defenses,special teams, and coaching they had. To use super bowls to judge QB's is also unfair because is a team game. In basketball this works because you are usually 1/10 in all phases of the game if you have a deep rotation. In football you are 1/11 in 1/3 phases of the game. My initial point was "Rings are a team accomplishment, thats why not only the QB gets them. Put Manning with a solid defense, run game, and special teams and he has 3 easily. Look at Brady the last few years playing with a team that isn't balanced like the Colts were with Manning, 0 super bowls." I think the stat you provided show a big drop off for Brady when his defense slipped up. We can end there as I know we will not agree. It's funny how opposing pats fans jump in on this conversation saying to give Brady credit for all 3 super bowls and the 4th (we all know my feeling on that) and the runs leading up to the Super Bow, but Sanchez gets no credit for any of his playoff wins. At least you stay constant and try to argue the same points in different scenarios. We can agree to disagree and I think we can both agree on the OP and say that Mark Sanchez deserves more time based on the way hes played in the playoffs, and how he improved each year in the league. :beer:
Both teams got worse after they went down, The pats went from great to ok, The Colts went from ok to awful. How did Manning out his team in a position to win the Saints SB? The Pats D this year was as bad, or worse, than the worst Colts Ds the past decade. Rings are a team accomplishment but a great QB can make the difference btw winning and losing. The difference btw Indy and NE has been the QB play in january NOT the defenses. Sanchez deserves his share of credit for helping us win 4 road playoff games too. I am 100% confident Sanchez is our long term answer at QB
This was the most relevant,current Sanchez thread so I am throwing it here: http://longisland.newsday.com/sports/football/jets/mark-sanchez/ This is basically just has simple graphs game by game for Sanchez's yards, td, int, and comp. %. It also shows how he progress cumulatively compared to his previous two seasons. Nice graphs to visualize all his main stats from the last 3 years.
