Jump to content

Braylon Edwards: blame idiots calling shots, not Mark


Lizard King

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

http://www.nj.com/je..._blame_the.html

Braylon Edwards says 'blame the idiots calling the shots' for Mark Sanchez's struggles

By Conor Orr/The Star-Ledger

on December 04, 2012 at 7:43 AM, updated December 04, 2012 at 7:54 AM

8906685-large.jpg Braylon Edwards (17) and Mark Sanchez celebrate together back when Edwards was a Jets wide receiver. William Perlman/The Star-Ledger

Braylon

Edwards has apparently weighed in on the Jets three-way quarterback controversy.

In a Tweet posted early Tuesday morning on Edwards' official page, the former Jets wide receiver said (sic): "Don't blame Sanchez. I played there. Blame the idiots calling shots. Mark is a beast and will probe it when given a proper chance."

Edwards did not specify who the "idiots" were that he was referring to. By all indications, Edwards had a close relationship with head coach Rex Ryan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Sanchez sucks, but you can rightfully point to the incompetence of the front office for much of his sucking. They thought it was a good idea to surround him with Plaxico, Derrick Mason and Santonio at one point. There's no spinning that kind of idiotic thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Sanchez sucks, but you can rightfully point to the incompetence of the front office for much of his sucking. They thought it was a good idea to surround him with Plaxico, Derrick Mason and Santonio at one point. There's no spinning that kind of idiotic thinking.

And Braylon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Sanchez sucks, but you can rightfully point to the incompetence of the front office for much of his sucking. They thought it was a good idea to surround him with Plaxico, Derrick Mason and Santonio at one point. There's no spinning that kind of idiotic thinking.

I suppose Sanchez probably would have sucked no matter who the cast was....but the 2010-2011 offseason made absolutely zero sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Sanchez sucks, but you can rightfully point to the incompetence of the front office for much of his sucking. They thought it was a good idea to surround him with Plaxico, Derrick Mason and Santonio at one point. There's no spinning that kind of idiotic thinking.

I feel really dirty right now but, GULP, I agree...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark Sanchez sucks, but you can rightfully point to the incompetence of the front office for much of his sucking. They thought it was a good idea to surround him with Plaxico, Derrick Mason and Santonio at one point. There's no spinning that kind of idiotic thinking.

sanchez is a bigger locker room cancer then those guys... BOOK IT!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose Sanchez probably would have sucked no matter who the cast was....but the 2010-2011 offseason made absolutely zero sense.

It seemed like Sanchez had some rapport with Edwards and 2010 was a step forward from 2009, it seemed anyway. They removed Braylon from the equation, gave Holmes a boatload of money, and Sanchez has regressed these last two seasons. I'm not saying Braylon is the ONLY reason Sanchez has sucked, but it's obvious now that it is part of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seemed like Sanchez had some rapport with Edwards and 2010 was a step forward from 2009, it seemed anyway. They removed Braylon from the equation, gave Holmes a boatload of money, and Sanchez has regressed these last two seasons. I'm not saying Braylon is the ONLY reason Sanchez has sucked, but it's obvious now that it is part of it.

See this is where you're dead wrong. There was no progression in 2010, and no regression since, unless you count going from "sucking" to "sucking just as badly while sprinkling in an attitude of 'I don't want to be here'" as regression.

2010 was probably the most talented Jets team EVER, or at least top 3. It hid Mark's flaws quite nicely. When you have a HOF back, some solid receivers, an outstanding O-line, and the top pass defense, of course he's going to look like he improved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sanchez is a bigger locker room cancer then those guys... BOOK IT!

There is no bigger locker room cancer than Holmes.

But Sanchez is a negative force in the locker room, but not because he's an ahole like those guys. It's because he sucks and by sucking, he has drained the life out of the locker room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See this is where you're dead wrong. There was no progression in 2010, and no regression since, unless you count going from "sucking" to "sucking just as badly while sprinkling in an attitude of 'I don't want to be here'" as regression.

2010 was probably the most talented Jets team EVER, or at least top 3. It hid Mark's flaws quite nicely. When you have a HOF back, some solid receivers, an outstanding O-line, and the top pass defense, of course he's going to look like he improved.

Sanchez sucks, but this is complete nonsense. The Jets D blew a good number of leads in 2010 and needed Sanchez to bail them out in last minute drives. That was the start of "Rex's D sucking on 3rd down" and "can't stop anyone when it counted." Sanchez got most of his 4th quarter comebacks in his career that year because of blown leads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes a guy just sucks.

There is no bigger locker room cancer than Holmes.

But Sanchez is a negative force in the locker room, but not because he's an ahole like those guys. It's because he sucks and by sucking, he has drained the life out of the locker room.

ill take either of these answers. But if sanchez takes the field again i can see the other jets players rolling over to die

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanchez sucks, but this is complete nonsense. The Jets D blew a good number of leads in 2010 and needed Sanchez to bail them out in last minute drives. That was the start of "Rex's D sucking on 3rd down" and "can't stop anyone when it counted." Sanchez got most of his 4th quarter comebacks in his career that year because of blown leads.

I said 2010 was a great TEAM. Not just defensively. Mark's comebacks were engineered by some great catches by the Holmes-Edwards tandem. Remember the slant that Holmes took to the house against the Lions?

The defense had two spectacular playoff performances against Peyton and Brady. That's what I remember most, not the "couldn't get off the field on 3rd down" issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said 2010 was a great TEAM. Not just defensively. Mark's comebacks were engineered by some great catches by the Holmes-Edwards tandem. Remember the slant that Holmes took to the house against the Lions?

The defense had two spectacular playoff performances against Peyton and Brady. That's what I remember most, not the "couldn't get off the field on 3rd down" issues.

Selective memory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanchez sucks, but this is complete nonsense. The Jets D blew a good number of leads in 2010 and needed Sanchez to bail them out in last minute drives. That was the start of "Rex's D sucking on 3rd down" and "can't stop anyone when it counted." Sanchez got most of his 4th quarter comebacks in his career that year because of blown leads.

I saw the stat recently, Rex's elite defenses have given up 7 4th quarter game winning drives by the opponent during his tenure with the Jets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the stat recently, Rex's elite defenses have given up 7 4th quarter game winning drives by the opponent during his tenure with the Jets.

Sanchez has lost 6 games in his career when the D gives up under 10 points. And maybe if Mark played better over the course of his career we wouldn't have been in a position to lose so many games on the final drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanchez has lost 6 games in his career when the D gives up under 10 points. And maybe if Mark played better over the course of his career we wouldn't have been in a position to lose so many games on the final drive.

He is not a great qb, I think that has been gone over ad nauseum.

I am sure, if you would ask Rex, if he would like to have the game in his defenses hands, in order to win a game in teh 4th quarter, you would receive an enthusiastic "yes!".

They have failed to protect leads. That is not a big secret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanchez's numbers were terrible that year. The defense's were superb. You're choosing to remember what you want to remember as well.

Actually, I'm remembering everything. And Sanchez sucks, but he wasn't "terrible" as you say. In 15 starts (remember, he only took 1 snap in game 16 because Jets had clinched the playoffs already), he had upped his TDs by 5 and reduced his INTs by 7 from the year before. He also threw for nearly 1,000 more yards and upped his QB rating by 10 points.

Sanchez won games for the Jets that year. For you to ignore that is revisionist history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no bigger locker room cancer than Holmes.

But Sanchez is a negative force in the locker room, but not because he's an ahole like those guys. It's because he sucks and by sucking, he has drained the life out of the locker room.

Sucking at your job and pouting about it. Not exactly the way to win over a room full of men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw the stat recently, Rex's elite defenses have given up 7 4th quarter game winning drives by the opponent during his tenure with the Jets.

This.

I'm surprised the number is that low, it has felt like a lot more to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I'm remembering everything. And Sanchez sucks, but he wasn't "terrible" as you say. In 15 starts (remember, he only took 1 snap in game 16 because Jets had clinched the playoffs already), he had upped his TDs by 5 and reduced his INTs by 7 from the year before. He also threw for nearly 1,000 more yards and upped his QB rating by 10 points.

Sanchez won games for the Jets that year. For you to ignore that is revisionist history.

Those stats show improvement, not absence of terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...