If It's the Eagles #1 and Eagles #2 and Mark Sanchez for The Sixth Pick, Do You Do It?

[SAR I]

Let's buy-in for the moment that the Eagles got Bradford and signed Sanchez so they have the ability to package an experienced QB on draft day for Mariotta.

 

If the draft pick compensation is higher for a deal with Sanchez than it is for Bradford, do you take the Sanchez deal?

 

SAR I

[slats]

No one does this. No one.

[chirorob]

Let's buy-in for the moment that the Eagles got Bradford and signed Sanchez so they have the ability to package an experienced QB on draft day for Mariotta.

 

If the draft pick compensation is higher for a deal with Sanchez than it is for Bradford, do you take the Sanchez deal?

 

SAR I

Can I cut Sanchez immediately?

[CTM]

No one does this. No one.

 

 

I dunno, we'd be upgrading from the worst starting QB to like the 4th or 5th worst

[bitonti]

The Eagles are going to roll with Bradford and Sanchez. 

Chip's philosophy appears to be not committing to a QB (or any offensive player) 

 

trading that much for Mariota would be a commitment. 

[SouthernJet]

Let's buy-in for the moment that the Eagles got Bradford and signed Sanchez so they have the ability to package an experienced QB on draft day for Mariotta.

 

If the draft pick compensation is higher for a deal with Sanchez than it is for Bradford, do you take the Sanchez deal?

 

SAR I

[19andOhWait]

lmfao 

[Vinny16]

Um, no.  We're only swapping 1st rounders and getting a 2nd rounder along with Sanchez?  Sorry, but no.  The cost of Philly trading up to #6 for Mariota must be much higher.  Throw in their 2016 1st round pick and that would be a base from where negotiations could begin to take place.

[Ghost]

Lmao.. Thank God you isn't the GM, yo.

[dbatesman]

#SAR

[Jets Voice of Reason]

Sorry, i thought we were trying to upgrade at QB.

[Morrissey]

No. First of all to go from 20th to 6th we need two first rounders and if the QB coming back is Sanchez and not Bradford they need to throw in 2 2nd rounders. 

[RutgersJetFan]

Mods, please merge.

[The Crusher]

Mods, please merge.

 

 

With what?  I'm at a loss.

[RutgersJetFan]

With what?  I'm at a loss.

 

I don't know. Something in the hockey forum? He really hates it when you merge things. Which is why you should do that.

[shuler82]

I don't want Mark Sanchez anywhere near the Jets balls. 

 

Classic Sar

[boxman]

[CrazyCarl40]

With what?  I'm at a loss.

 

The deleted bin?

[SAR I]

Um, no.  We're only swapping 1st rounders and getting a 2nd rounder along with Sanchez?  Sorry, but no.  The cost of Philly trading up to #6 for Mariota must be much higher.  Throw in their 2016 1st round pick and that would be a base from where negotiations could begin to take place.

 

I ran out of room in the subject line, but what I'm trying to say is if we're given the option of Bradford and lower draft compensation or Sanchez and higher draft compensation would you not take Sanchez?

 

It's not like either is going to be the long-term answer.  The idea is to extract as many picks as you can for the #6 if that's where Mariotta is and that's what Chip wants.  Would it not be better to take Sanchez and the better 2016 and 2017 picks than Bradford?

 

SAR I

[SAR I]

I don't want Mark Sanchez anywhere near the Jets balls. 

 

Classic Sar

 

Forgetting the Jets backstory for a moment, if you have a choice of Bradford, Sanchez, Mariotta, or Smith, isn't Sanchez above two of those guys on the list?

SAR I

[shuler82]

Forgetting the Jets backstory for a moment, if you have a choice of Bradford, Sanchez, Mariotta, or Smith, isn't Sanchez above two of those guys on the list?

SAR I

 

If it's not the Jets.. maybe. But there's no way you could bring him back to NY. 

[#27TheDominator]

I am sure that Philly signed Sanchez just so they could trade him back to us.  I am sure that the Jets did not bid on Sanchez as a FA so that they could trade for him.  Sanchez got a $2M signing bonus that would accelerate, so Philly does not want to move him.  It hurts their cap.  Guess it makes only slightly less sense than that they traded for Bradford so that they could trade him to us.

[SoFlaJets]

No, but maybe we can coerce Matt Leinart out of retirement to resume his career as the New York Jets starting quarterback instead of that of his son Cole's babysitters

 

on edit; I can't believe it took 23 posts for the other failed USC QB's name to be mentioned in a Sar1 thread.

[SAR I]

If it's not the Jets.. maybe. But there's no way you could bring him back to NY. 

 

Why not?  We just brought back Darrelle Revis who committed the mortal sin of singlehandedly giving the New England Patriots a Super Bowl ring and people are going wild, crying tears of joy at his triumphant return.

 

All Mark Sanchez did was watch helplessly as the Jets decided to ignore offensive football, none of the other QB's on the roster were able to succeed with that pile of horsesh-t either.

 

SAR I

[Sperm Edwards]

There is no forgetting the Jets backstory. He was here for years and sucked here for years. He buttfumbled here and he's an emo baby.

 

This isn't a video game where players don't have personalities and emotions and egos.

Nothing says "progress" like bringing in the poster boy for ineptitude and deflating the team. Because Sanchez sucks and our team knows it and we all know it. The only one who is left holding out hope is Chip Kelly, who just gave up a 2nd round pick and a young QB who had the value of another 2nd-3rd round pick and another 4th round pick for Bradford with a $13M salary that no one else would ever give him as a FA. Oh, and a 5th rounder.

[Sperm Edwards]

I am sure that Philly signed Sanchez just so they could trade him back to us.  I am sure that the Jets did not bid on Sanchez as a FA so that they could trade for him.  Sanchez got a $2M signing bonus that would accelerate, so Philly does not want to move him.  It hurts their cap.  Guess it makes only slightly less sense than that they traded for Bradford so that they could trade him to us.

 

Really. With >$50M in cap room we wouldn't just sign him outright? We'd wait for him to sign with the Eagles just so we could trade a pick for him? 

[SAR I]

No, but maybe we can coerce Matt Leinart out of retirement to resume his career as the New York Jets starting quarterback instead of that of his son Cole's babysitters

 

on edit; I can't believe it took 23 posts for the other failed USC QB's name to be mentioned in a Sar1 thread.

 

Today, just as in 2006, the Jets are still searching for their franchise quarterback.  We need to keep drafting the best quarterback available until we get lucky and find him.

 

Back then, with Vince Young off the board, Matt Leinart was the highest rated quarterback.  If he turned into a great player you wouldn't be here congratulating me, so don't sit here berating me.  I don't watch college football, never saw him play a down.  We need to keep drafting quarterbacks.  Nothing else matters.

 

SAR I

[Irish Jet]

I jokingly suggested this earlier. Even if he was the upgrade we need be answer is still no. He's the poster boy of incompetence with the Jets. It would be a terrible move for both the Jets and Mark. He has a decent thing going in Philly and he should stay there. I like the guy but I never want to see him here again, although I think he's better than Geno. Much better actually.

Fitzpatrick seems the logical way to go.

[CTM]

The Eagles are going to roll with Bradford and Sanchez. 

Chip's philosophy appears to be not committing to a QB (or any offensive player) 

 

trading that much for Mariota would be a commitment. 

 

seems insane, bradford and sanchez.. is there a clear starter or training camp battle (lol)

[SAR I]

 

 I like the guy but I never want to see him here again, although I think he's better than Geno. Much better actually.

 

 

So we shouldn't take the superior quarterback because he made some Jets fans ashamed 3 years ago?

 

The team is different, there's barely a coach or player still on the roster from back then.  He's better than Geno and he's an obedient backup when asked whose had some success in New York.  I'd see no reason to pass on a lucrative draft day trade that includes Sanchez in the bundle.

 

SAR I

[Sperm Edwards]

lol

[SAR I]

seems insane, bradford and sanchez.. is there a clear starter or training camp battle (lol)

 

That's why it's so obvious that Chip Kelly is creating a draft day trade package for a willing team that includes a seasoned quarterback.

SAR I

[Ken Schroy]

No way. But I did get a good laugh though.

[CTM]

That's why it's so obvious that Chip Kelly is creating a draft day trade package for a willing team that includes a seasoned quarterback.

SAR I

 

I live in philly area.. basically they are really high on bradford, kelly thinks his sports science stuff (lol nerd) can make chronically injured players more durable, and there is no other deal coming.

 

Sam is their guy, Consuela on the pine... Sanchez will start more games because Bradford is the white Chad Pennington

[Ex-Rex]

I ran out of room in the subject line, but what I'm trying to say is if we're given the option of Bradford and lower draft compensation or Sanchez and higher draft compensation would you not take Sanchez?

 

It's not like either is going to be the long-term answer.  The idea is to extract as many picks as you can for the #6 if that's where Mariotta is and that's what Chip wants.  Would it not be better to take Sanchez and the better 2016 and 2017 picks than Bradford?

 

SAR I

Simply apologize for starting this dumb a$$ thread and get on with your life. Forget Sanchez EVER coming back.....period.