You Bash vick for his completetion %, when its the same clip Sanchez is throwing around in the regular season. Playing on our run first offense with a QB who can be very good at times and very bad at otehrs is not helping Holmes. You can't bash the QB's White has been with an ingore how similar Sanchez career has been to thiers as far as regualr season numbers go.
Vick avg in 2005-2006: 53.95% for 2443 yds Sanchez in 2010: 54.8% for 3291 yds It would be hard to shine for a WR in both situations... but imo it would be harder in the "Vick's Falcons" scenario, and the numbers agree with me. Also let's not forget the Joey Harrington year AND Ryan's rookie year. That's 4 years of bad QB play (in terms of passing) vs 12 games with Sanchez for Holmes.
For me it is... you just want to argue the distance between good and great in a hypothetical scale of goodness. If I change Great with Very good will you agree with me?
Its very interesting that you leave out the fact that vick ran for over 900 yards that year. Vick was one of the hardest QB's to gameplan against at that time. Teams were constantly leaving a player as a spy on him to try and stop him from taking off, taking away a pass defender on every play. To compare that to a team that had a very good running game and a very erratic QB is still not the same. You claim numbers back you up, but fail to look at the entire picture of what the offense does to a defense and only look at raw stats. Its bad analysis at it worst. You also binrg up Ryans rookie year. Ryan threw from almost 3500 yards and over 60% that year. Better than any year of Sanchez. Those numbers do not support your argument. The year that Joey harrington and Chris Redman split starts, they combined for over 3200 yards and over 60% completetions. That same season was Whites first 1000 yard season. More numbers that do not support your argument. I'm also not saying that Holmes is better than White, just that your using some flawed ways of looking at it.
Ok, take the Harrington-Redman and Ryan's first year away. You're right (really, I'm not being sarcastic). I still think it's harder to produce as a WR on the Vick-led Falcons than the Ground-and-Pound Jets of 2010. Vick took a player away from the pass D... but didn't we do the same by constantly having 8 men in the box (against us)?
Well, and this is off a very foggy memory, I belive the Vick falcons were harder to game plan against and our offense was more physically dominant. With our offense of last year, you knew we wanted to get the ball out of marks hands quickly. Most of our deep routes were run off of playaction to draw defenders up as you said. If you could stop our run you could slow us way down, but thats if you could stop the run. Vicks falcons were at times seemly disorganized. He held the ball to long and ran too soon too often, but it was maddening to prepare for if you were a DC or pass rusher. Both teams scored over 350 points (351 for the falcons, 367 for us) so its not as if one or the other was vastly more sucessful at putting points up. I think biggest difference was our offense focused on staying "on schedule" and not turning the ball over, where as the Vick falcons were more of a big play based offense. Btoh QB's had very good games and horrible ones. I would tend to say it would be about even in terms of the chances you were going to receiver as a play maker with a slight advantage going towards the Jets.
