They are certainly veteran coaches but what is the criteria you are using to define them as good. Surely there is objective criteria to support that.
Well the excuse that it was the coaches fault rests on deaf ears with me. He had veteran coaches who have regularly been hired in the NFL. So I assume they're good at their jobs and provided professional coaching for Sanchez while he was here. In the words of Parcells you are what you are. And Mark's stats are what he is.
By that logic Marty Morningwhig was a good head coach because he had been hired as a head coach. Why was Sporano fired if he was a good OC? Hell, nobody is bad at any job by your logic if they are employed. You're right, that is an objective criteria, it is just an easily disputed one.
Well, he's using a broad term ("bad coaching") to refer to two distinct aspects of coaching. However, it is/was clear from context that two different aspects of coaching are being discussed. The contradiction/error is in loose language, not logic. None. To me, there really isn't much evidence either way. None of us really know how well Sanchez was coached from an x's and o's point of view.
The Jets invested millions in Mark Sanchez. And dearly wanted him to succeed. Everyone from the HC who even put a Mark tatoo on his ass (or somewhere), the owner who helped make the final dccision on drafting Mark, the GM (who basically went down for re-signing him). And that's why they stuck with him so long when it made no sense. So when Idzik came aboard they said right away: Qb competition. I hope they mean it because we have another guy who is also underwhelming.
One game does not a season make stokes, the eagles were playing a bad team that doesn't take advantage and was without it's top 2 corners and Foster after the 3rd quarter. Eagles are a good team that ran the ball VERY well. Make those mistakes against a good team and the Eagles don't win. YOU can screw up vs bad teams and still win. Unless of course you want to take the completely asinine position that turnovers don't matter and don't impact and change games..... Now you're in to the land of hyperbole and you know it. I stand by my point, he keeps turning the ball over, and he will, it will cost the Eagles games against the good teams. Book it. And it doesn't matter if your name is Sanchez, Foley, etc, consistent turnovers and lack of ball security will cost you games...plain and simple... Show me one team that wins consistently and turns the ball over 2-3 times a game? Good luck.
you're making excuses again, are you going to man up on passes that DB's should have picked? nope, because those are "made up" stats....in the end it all balances out...a pick is a pick is a pick is a pick. man up.
No Junc, I just dont' want to go back through 15 pages to find it...and No I didn't have time because I was on lunch...but you know it's the truth. tell you what, if Sanchez averages 30 or more throws over the next two games and doesn't average at least 2 turnovers per game over that two day span I won't post or mention Sanchez for the rest of the season, no matter how badly he may play or how well... If I win you admit sanchez is a turnover machine who is who he is...a player who doesn't read defenses and is easily fooled. Bear in mind you have the advantage here, the Panthers are one of the worst pass defenses in the league and the Packers are only middle of the pack on pass defense.... Of course I still win if he average 2 or more turnovers and has fewer than 30 passes per game.. and well the next game is on Monday night and he's never done well on monday nights....and well he's been rather even more craptasitic on monday's.....
Thats not true, they built around Sanchez in 2009, 2010, but in 2011 failed to resign a true deep threat but wanted him to have a high powered offense. He deserves blame for 2011, I dont disagree with that. He could have come it bigger, but thats where the evaluation of Mark Sanchez ends, period. Three years, two out of three years he did above average, 4 playoff wins, showed he could win games and play in this league. The fanbase turned on him in 2012, but people forget how lackluster the guys around him were. Holmes went down 4 games into the season, Keller only played half, at one point this was his receiving corp: -Stephen Hill -Jeremy Kerley -Chaz Schilens That was what he had in the Arizona game, and people booed him out the door. While guys like Joe Flacco had Ray Rice, Anquan Boldin, and Torrey Smith around him, they built around the QB while the Jets stripped Sanchez of everything. If Sanchez had what he had in 2010, for the rest of his time here, he would have succeeded here. Period, no debate, but we never replaced Edwards, we never replaced L.T.'s production, etc.
The Jets screwed with his career, that will become more and more evident over the following weeks, but im sure all the haters will start claiming this Eagles defense is as good (if not better) than the 85 Bears.
Eagles- 22nd ranked defense, lets get this on record haters, alright? can you agree that the defense he has is below average? and you can't run around claiming the defense is carrying him if they win?
http://mmqb.si.com/2014/11/03/nfl-week-9-peter-king-monday-morning-quarterback/ Damn shots are fired at the Jets. Just don't have a culture that screams, we want to win games I guess. Sounds like he's right to me. He's laughing at the Jets right now.
Mark's got a lot more class than that. He isn't laughing at the Jets when they're down. At least publically. But he hasn't proven anything yet. If he plays well and wins games like yesterday then he can say something. As for 2012 he was terrible and if he was a good Qb and a leader he would have made chicken feathers out of chickenshit. The worst player on the Jets O wasn't Schilens etc. it was Mark.
None of this bullshit means ANYTHING in the context of : This. One. Game. We get it, you hate Sanchez, you picked the wrong game to come out from under a rock to dump on an ex-Jet. Wait till next week until he inevitably fucks up. This week is not the week. It's just pathetic dude, let it go. _
You're already making excuses just in case the Eagles lose with Mark. Laying it on their defense. Well they won with Foles so logic says they can with with Sanchez. Of course if he throws picks and pick 6s and they lose his fans will start pointing fingers at somebody. We'll see next Monday night vs the Panthers. Personally I don't care because the damage is already done here with the Jets and that's all I care about. As for the Jets ruining his career. It's just the opposite. They gave him a great chance over 60 starts.
They can't let the hate go, they still think that he held the Jets back from winning the Super Bowl. (Despite Sanchez being one of the best Jets players on the field in both championship games). This whole thing though has redemption written all over it. Thanksgiving day redemption, and how about coming back to New York week 17? How perfect. Sanchez can return and silence all of his Giant/Jets haters....... you can't script this shit more perfectly.....(the only thing better would be Sanchez going on a game winning drive against his old rival Patriots in the Super Bowl....)
This one game was 2 picks...sorry, the Eagles won the game, he was on the field when the Eagles won..this is true, but my point on sanchez remains...he does not take care of the ball and until he shows he can take care of the football it will be the team carrying him. you can say I hate Sanchez but my point is consistent, I apply the same criteria to all QB's regardless of their name or the team they play for.
I'm confused; you keep harping on the TOs as though you know something that no one else knows. Does Junc or any poster believe Sanchez is not turnover-proned?
