Jump to content

  •  

Welcome to JetNation.com


Sign In  Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter

Create Account
Welcome to JetNation.com, your home for New York Jets talk. We are an independent site, which means we aren't affiliated with the NY Jets or SNY. The opinions here are never censored. We want you to join in on the conversation, but don't worry this is a simple and FREE process. Be apart of JetNation.com by signing in or creating an account. When you create an account, you can also opt to use your existing Facebook or Twitter login.
  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
Also be sure to check us out on Facebook and Twitter.
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

Tanny: "I don't think I would have signed a QB to an extension knowing he'd have 26 turnovers"


  • Please log in to reply
86 replies to this topic

#1 Bleedin Green

Bleedin Green

    SuperTwat

  • Members
  • 21,502 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 10:59 AM

*
POPULAR

http://www.nfl.com/v...ook_videos_jets

 

Someone want to break it to this moron that Sanchez had 26 turnovers in 2011 too?


  • 6
By day he's the (not so) mild-mannered Bleedin Green, but by night...

TL;DR

#2 bitonti

bitonti

    Draft Bathroom Attendant

  • Members
  • 15,198 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:06 AM

everyone jumps on the extension as Tanny's big mistake. It wasn't a mistake at all. That money was coming to Sanchez anyway. It was a pure salary cap move. The mistake was drafting Sanchez to begin with. People think that somehow if Mark didn't get extended, the team would be better off. I don't really see how that's true. There's 1 year less of Mark, yes but there's also no Pouha, no Landry, no free agents at all. The jets would have been absolutely cap strapped with mark's salary 10+ mil in 2012.  The Jets would have no QB in 2013 when the QB draft class is   toilet bowl quality. in fact if the Sanchez extension prevents the Jets from being in the Geno Smith/Matt Barkley market then it's a blessing in disguise.

 

The extension was a neutral move. the original pick was the problem.  Let's be honest if Tanny doesn't extend Mark, and Mark has the same year,he's getting fired either way. No one says "hey at least that Tanny didn't extend Mark let's keep him for another year" The original sin was picking Mark. that's what got Tanny fired... not the extension. 


Edited by bitonti, 14 February 2013 - 11:09 AM.

  • -1

My posts have to get worse, so they can get better.


#3 JiF

JiF

    Say yer prayers Varmint!

  • Members
  • 38,525 posts
  • LocationSomewhere between Heaven and Hell

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:08 AM

http://www.nfl.com/v...ook_videos_jets

 

Someone want to break it to this moron that Sanchez had 26 turnovers in 2011 too?

 

Lulza.  That dude was on it!

 

everyone jumps on the extension as Tanny's big mistake. It wasn't a mistake at all. That money was coming to Sanchez anyway. It was a pure salary cap move. The mistake was drafting Sanchez to begin with. People think that somehow if Mark didn't get extended, the team would be better off. I don't really see how that's true. There's 1 year less of Mark, yes but there's also no Pouha, no Landry, no free agents at all. The jets would have been absolutely cap strapped with mark's salary 10+ mil in 2012.  The Jets would have no QB in 2013 when the QB draft class is absolutely toilet bowl quality.

 

The extension was a neutral move. the original pick was the problem. 

 

A lot of good that freed up cap space did...


  • 0
Posted Image

#4 Bleedin Green

Bleedin Green

    SuperTwat

  • Members
  • 21,502 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:11 AM

everyone jumps on the extension as Tanny's big mistake. It wasn't a mistake at all. That money was coming to Sanchez anyway. It was a pure salary cap move. The mistake was drafting Sanchez to begin with. People think that somehow if Mark didn't get extended, the team would be better off. I don't really see how that's true. There's 1 year less of Mark, yes but there's also no Pouha, no Landry, no free agents at all. The jets would have been absolutely cap strapped with mark's salary 10+ mil in 2012.  The Jets would have no QB in 2013 when the QB draft class is absolutely toilet bowl quality.

 

The extension was a neutral move. the original pick was the problem. 

 

Only problem with this is that at this point Tanny is even saying it was a mistake (and indicated that it is probably one of the main reasons he was fired).  Besides, of all of the people that the Jets allegedly would not have been able to sign last season, what good did they really do the Jets in their 6-win season and how many of them are even still going to be on the team in a month from now?  Being able to pull off a few one year rentals comes nowhere close to offsetting the mess that Sanchez's guaranteed money (and frankly, his mere presence on the team) this year puts them in.


Edited by Bleedin Green, 14 February 2013 - 11:12 AM.

  • 0
By day he's the (not so) mild-mannered Bleedin Green, but by night...

TL;DR

#5 bitonti

bitonti

    Draft Bathroom Attendant

  • Members
  • 15,198 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:18 AM

Only problem with this is that at this point Tanny is even saying it was a mistake (and indicated that it is probably one of the main reasons he was fired).  Besides, of all of the people that the Jets allegedly would not have been able to sign last season, what good did they really do the Jets in their 6-win season and how many of them are even still going to be on the team in a month from now?  Being able to pull off a few one year rentals comes nowhere close to offsetting the mess that Sanchez's guaranteed money (and frankly, his mere presence on the team) this year puts them in.

 

that's probably all true but Sanchez gets the money either way. 

 

also saying "alot of good it did" in hindsight isn't realistic. The GM has a duty to try to win. not rebuild. that goes for Idzik too. He's not gonna get a 3 year grace period. He's gonna have to win, soon. 


  • 0

My posts have to get worse, so they can get better.


#6 Bleedin Green

Bleedin Green

    SuperTwat

  • Members
  • 21,502 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:23 AM

that's probably all true but Sanchez gets the money either way. 

 

also saying "alot of good it did" in hindsight isn't realistic. The GM has a duty to try to win. not rebuild. that goes for Idzik too. He's not gonna get a 3 year grace period. He's gonna have to win, soon. 

 

I do get what you're saying, but it seems like of all the ways they could have tried to work with last year's situation, they picked literally the worst possible option by locking themselves into Sanchez for no less than two years.  It was pretty clear by the end of 2011 that Sanchez was not progressing the way he should have been and frankly, they should have been bringing in some real competition for him, not committing to him even more.  The entire handling of the QB position was an unmitigated disaster.


  • 0
By day he's the (not so) mild-mannered Bleedin Green, but by night...

TL;DR

#7 bitonti

bitonti

    Draft Bathroom Attendant

  • Members
  • 15,198 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:37 AM

I do get what you're saying, but it seems like of all the ways they could have tried to work with last year's situation, they picked literally the worst possible option by locking themselves into Sanchez for no less than two years.  It was pretty clear by the end of 2011 that Sanchez was not progressing the way he should have been and frankly, they should have been bringing in some real competition for him, not committing to him even more.  The entire handling of the QB position was an unmitigated disaster.

 

 

you mention "real competition" the fact that tanny saw Tebow as competition is part of the reason he got fired. And the lack of overall depth. 

 

If tanny wants to tell him self the extension is why he got fired, that's between him and his pillow. 

 

The way i see it, the extension was neither good nor bad. It took money that was already coming to Mark and spread it out. Picking Mark at 5 overall was the mistake that got him fired. If Mark played better no one would care about the pick or the extension. 

 

and let me reiterate this QB class in 2013 is so bad, i'm actually glad for the extension. Geno Smith looked Sanchez-like in the snow vs Syracuse getting 2 safeties. The other QBs are such a crapshoot. If this extension prevents the jets from playing russian roulette with these QB's, and wait til 2014 and a much better class, that's actually good news. 


  • 0

My posts have to get worse, so they can get better.


#8 slats

slats

    9 5/8" hands

  • Moderators
  • 19,722 posts
  • LocationAcross the Universe

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:41 AM

that's probably all true but Sanchez gets the money either way. 
 
also saying "alot of good it did" in hindsight isn't realistic. The GM has a duty to try to win. not rebuild. that goes for Idzik too. He's not gonna get a 3 year grace period. He's gonna have to win, soon. 


Why did he agree to a contract extension if he didn't get new money? That runs contrary to everything else you have to say about contract restructures. Which is it?

A GM has the responsibility of ensuring the team's long term success. Idzik probably has this year as a grace period, if he wants it.
  • 0
back in my room
wish you were dead
you bawl like the baby
in Eraserhead

#9 bitonti

bitonti

    Draft Bathroom Attendant

  • Members
  • 15,198 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:51 AM

Why did he agree to a contract extension if he didn't get new money? That runs contrary to everything else you have to say about contract restructures. Which is it?

A GM has the responsibility of ensuring the team's long term success. Idzik probably has this year as a grace period, if he wants it.

 

 

I never said he didn't get new money. He gets a little more new money. It took a 10+ mil salary in 2012 and turns it into salary cap friendly bonus. 

 

as for Idzik yeah maybe he gets a year but there's gonna be pressure, right away. 


  • 0

My posts have to get worse, so they can get better.


#10 Bleedin Green

Bleedin Green

    SuperTwat

  • Members
  • 21,502 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:52 AM

you mention "real competition" the fact that tanny saw Tebow as competition is part of the reason he got fired. And the lack of overall depth. 

 

If tanny wants to tell him self the extension is why he got fired, that's between him and his pillow. 

 

The way i see it, the extension was neither good nor bad. It took money that was already coming to Mark and spread it out. Picking Mark at 5 overall was the mistake that got him fired. If Mark played better no one would care about the pick or the extension. 

 

and let me reiterate this QB class in 2013 is so bad, i'm actually glad for the extension. Geno Smith looked Sanchez-like in the snow vs Syracuse getting 2 safeties. The other QBs are such a crapshoot. If this extension prevents the jets from playing russian roulette with these QB's, and wait til 2014 and a much better class, that's actually good news. 

 

I seriously doubt they ever saw Tebow as a real competition for Sanchez as much as they saw him as a backup and potential gimmick player.  They declared Sanchez as the #1 and Tebow as #2 from the moment he was acquired.  They never even gave him a shot, even early in camp long before the team had clearly become disenchanted with him.

 

And I am aware Sanchez was getting that money either way, but when you're talking about a player as awful as him, you need to treat it like a band-aid and get it over as quickly as possible, not continue to chain yourself to him for years to come and hurting your future teams.  If the Jets didn't make that move they might have been marginally worse last year, but would be in far better shape this coming year.  I also think even with Sanchez still around we'll still likely see the Jets snag a QB at some point in this draft, but that won't necessarily preclude them from hitting the position again in next year's draft depending on how things turn out.


  • 0
By day he's the (not so) mild-mannered Bleedin Green, but by night...

TL;DR

#11 Bleedin Green

Bleedin Green

    SuperTwat

  • Members
  • 21,502 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 11:54 AM

I never said he didn't get new money. He gets a little more new money. It took a 10+ mil salary in 2012 and turns it into salary cap friendly bonus. 

 

as for Idzik yeah maybe he gets a year but there's gonna be pressure, right away. 

 

Actually, this Sanchez contract is the exact reason nobody is going to give Idzik any grief about this year.  He's stuck with arguably the league's worst starting QB whether he likes it or not, and he had nothing to do with that.  Not to mention a disaster of a salary cap situation (made only worse by that very same contract).


Edited by Bleedin Green, 14 February 2013 - 11:54 AM.

  • 0
By day he's the (not so) mild-mannered Bleedin Green, but by night...

TL;DR

#12 bitonti

bitonti

    Draft Bathroom Attendant

  • Members
  • 15,198 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:18 PM

And I am aware Sanchez was getting that money either way, but when you're talking about a player as awful as him, you need to treat it like a band-aid and get it over as quickly as possible, not continue to chain yourself to him for years to come and hurting your future teams.  

 

 

at the time of the extension, Mark had 2 AFC CG appearances, 4 road playoff wins and 1 down year. the assumption was he would get better by firing Schotty (somehow), not that he would ruin the team no matter what.

 

Obviously we know what happened now, looking back on it. Last spring I don't think there was the same urgency to purge the team of Mark. 


True story I was talking to a Chiefs fan about Geno Smith and mentioned that he had similar Sanchez qualities in terms of no pocket presence in the Syracuse bowl game. and like Sanchez he was bad in the snow.

 

His response was that Sanchez went to 2 AFC CG and the Chiefs hadn't won a playoff game for 15 years.  So i guess it's all relative. 


  • 0

My posts have to get worse, so they can get better.


#13 T0mShane

T0mShane

    When it's over, that's the time I fall in love againlolo

  • Members
  • 28,287 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:20 PM

The most unemployed genius ever?
  • 0
Well, that's the internet, man: 9 billion tough guys who secretly want to touch your pee-pee.

#14 Bleedin Green

Bleedin Green

    SuperTwat

  • Members
  • 21,502 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:28 PM

at the time of the extension, Mark had 2 AFC CG appearances, 4 road playoff wins and 1 down year. the assumption was he would get better by firing Schotty (somehow), not that he would ruin the team no matter what.

 

Obviously we know what happened now, looking back on it. Last spring I don't think there was the same urgency to purge the team of Mark. 


True story I was talking to a Chiefs fan about Geno Smith and mentioned that he had similar Sanchez qualities in terms of no pocket presence in the Syracuse bowl game. and like Sanchez he was bad in the snow.

 

His response was that Sanchez went to 2 AFC CG and the Chiefs hadn't won a playoff game for 15 years.  So i guess it's all relative. 

 


I agree there was no reason to feel to the same extreme about Sanchez then as there is now, but I still think there was plenty of cause for concern.  Enough concern that the correct path was to at least hedge your bets on him, not go all in on him.  Speaking for myself, I know at the time I was rather adamant about the Jets needing to bring in some real competition for Sanchez (though I felt Tebow was the worst possible choice for the Jets) and that I never liked or understood the extension from moment one.


  • 0
By day he's the (not so) mild-mannered Bleedin Green, but by night...

TL;DR

#15 slats

slats

    9 5/8" hands

  • Moderators
  • 19,722 posts
  • LocationAcross the Universe

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:38 PM

I never said he didn't get new money. He gets a little more new money. It took a 10+ mil salary in 2012 and turns it into salary cap friendly bonus. 
 
as for Idzik yeah maybe he gets a year but there's gonna be pressure, right away. 


Just pointing out that you've said repeatedly that Sanchez wouldn't do a contract restructure without new money, but now you're defending Tannenbaum extending him claiming that Sanchez was gonna get that money anyway. Contradictory.

Idzik has two paths he can go down, IMHO. In the first, he believes in Rex, builds a team that fits Rex's vision, and makes some cap saving moves for 2013 to help him win immediately and get the fans and press off his back. In the second, he can't wait to fire Rex, absorbs as much cap pain as he possibly can in 2013, and scapegoats Rex at the end of the season to bring in his own man.
  • 0
back in my room
wish you were dead
you bawl like the baby
in Eraserhead

#16 bitonti

bitonti

    Draft Bathroom Attendant

  • Members
  • 15,198 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 12:48 PM

Just pointing out that you've said repeatedly that Sanchez wouldn't do a contract restructure without new money, but now you're defending Tannenbaum extending him claiming that Sanchez was gonna get that money anyway. Contradictory.
 

 

to be clear I'm not defending Tanny. it was a neutral move. the new money (yes there was new money) and extended time to Sanchez washes out with the cap space and getting players like Landry. People say that the Jets should have just kept Sanchez on his old deal but that was never a realistic option. 


  • 0

My posts have to get worse, so they can get better.


#17 dbatesman

dbatesman

    Failgoat 2.0

  • Members
  • 8,886 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:33 PM

People think that somehow if Mark didn't get extended, the team would be better off. I don't really see how that's true. There's 1 year less of Mark, yes but there's also no Pouha, no Landry, no free agents at all.


Thank goodness those guys were here or we might have finished 6-10.
  • 0

This is like having a cat with leukemia.


#18 JetsFanInDenver

JetsFanInDenver

    Franchise Player

  • Members
  • 8,624 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:34 PM

Tanny is in damage control mode so he can get a job. This is nothing but silly excuse making to defend what was and is always going to be a culmination of BONEHEADED decision making.


Edited by JetsFanInDenver, 14 February 2013 - 01:36 PM.

  • -1

#19 SenorGato

SenorGato

    Schottenhomer

  • Members
  • 20,583 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:39 PM

I think he would have done it. He leaves it open and says he doesn't THINK he would do it, not that he wouldn't do it.

Fact is that extension costs the Jets another decade.
  • 0

We sick an' tired of-a your ism-skism game. Dyin' 'n' goin' to heaven in-a Jesus' name, Lord. We know when we understand:

Almighty God is a living man. - Bob Marley "Get up Stand up"


#20 Bleedin Green

Bleedin Green

    SuperTwat

  • Members
  • 21,502 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 01:59 PM

to be clear I'm not defending Tanny. it was a neutral move. the new money (yes there was new money) and extended time to Sanchez washes out with the cap space and getting players like Landry. People say that the Jets should have just kept Sanchez on his old deal but that was never a realistic option. 

 


Of course it was, they would have just had to handle other situations differently.  Their cap situation last year was far better than this coming year's.  How much money did they even save off of last year's cap with that deal?


  • 0
By day he's the (not so) mild-mannered Bleedin Green, but by night...

TL;DR

#21 jetsjetsjetss

jetsjetsjetss

    3rd Year Veteran

  • Members
  • 2,666 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 02:09 PM

keeping someone longer who sucks is always worse.


  • 0

#22 bitonti

bitonti

    Draft Bathroom Attendant

  • Members
  • 15,198 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 02:40 PM

it's my understanding that the Jets don't restructure sanchez in 2012, they get no free agents and lose Pouha. With 6-10 in the rearview we say hey who cares, but going back to the time of the extension, it was a move to make the team as a whole better, for the upcoming season. thats what a GM should be doing. Idzik is going to make some of these restructures for example Harris and Mangold. It's team management. 

 

Tanny can't obviously tell others (or himself) that Sanchez was a failure and he doesn't know how to pick a QB. It's easier to blame the whole mess on an ill timed extension. I see that as a cop out.

 

the extension was a fine decision, considering his previous decisions. heck there's a sizable portion of the board that wants to restructure Sanchez again. The problem was the original 50 million dollar mistake. That really really high pick in rd 1 that he traded up for... is what got him fired. Not the extension. 


  • 0

My posts have to get worse, so they can get better.


#23 unbanmadmike1

unbanmadmike1

    rebanmadmike1

  • Members
  • 3,075 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 03:06 PM

everyone jumps on the extension as Tanny's big mistake. It wasn't a mistake at all. That money was coming to Sanchez anyway. It was a pure salary cap move. The mistake was drafting Sanchez to begin with. People think that somehow if Mark didn't get extended, the team would be better off. I don't really see how that's true. There's 1 year less of Mark, yes but there's also no Pouha, no Landry, no free agents at all. The jets would have been absolutely cap strapped with mark's salary 10+ mil in 2012.  The Jets would have no QB in 2013 when the QB draft class is   toilet bowl quality. in fact if the Sanchez extension prevents the Jets from being in the Geno Smith/Matt Barkley market then it's a blessing in disguise.

 

The extension was a neutral move. the original pick was the problem.  Let's be honest if Tanny doesn't extend Mark, and Mark has the same year,he's getting fired either way. No one says "hey at least that Tanny didn't extend Mark let's keep him for another year" The original sin was picking Mark. that's what got Tanny fired... not the extension. 

This is simply untrue. The 2013 potion of the contract was not guaranteed before the extension.


  • 0
Tank for Teddy.

#24 HessStation

HessStation

    FightThePower

  • Members
  • 24,132 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 03:23 PM

that's probably all true but Sanchez gets the money either way.

also saying "alot of good it did" in hindsight isn't realistic. The GM has a duty to try to win. not rebuild. that goes for Idzik too. He's not gonna get a 3 year grace period. He's gonna have to win, soon.


The job of the GM is to have the foresight to make the right move. It's why they are there. You want to debate how much of it is fair or how much is just luck, fine. But it's about the bottom line and Tanny ****ed up twice. First, a you stated, for drafting him, Second for extending him. 0-2.
  • 0

#25 unbanmadmike1

unbanmadmike1

    rebanmadmike1

  • Members
  • 3,075 posts

Posted 14 February 2013 - 03:30 PM

I actually think the extension was worse than drafting him because it showed a TOTAL AND COMPLETE lack of self scouting and when you hear him justify it with horsesh*t like QB Wins as a stat, it's just unfathomable that a moron like that was allowed to run a football team for so long.


  • 1
Tank for Teddy.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users