Sanchez-Romo

[#27TheDominator]

Well, with the time running down we should have been running the ball since we had timeouts. Secondly I have confidence in my kicker, his job is to make FG's.

Overall the playcalling after the Revis INT was just as bad if you ask me. Granted, we should have gotten a first down, im not disagreeing with that. I really didnt like the playcalling more than Sanchez performance overall.

Mark Sanchez is the last player on earth that can complain about the running game not taking the heat off.

[Stonehands]

I can't understand all of this Sanchez harping after an opening day victory.

Sanchez lost Braylon Edwards and Jerricho Cotchery during the offseason, and still performed with Plaxico Burress and Derrick Mason last night, despite the fact that DeMarcus Ware and the Cowboys pass rush harassed Sanchez and our offensive line for 4 quarters strong.

Sanchez threw for 335 yards last night. Only Newton, Brees and Rodgers have thrown for more yards than Sanchez thus far through week one.

Some are acting as if Sanchez had a 0 TD/5 INT type of game with a QB rating of 8.3 such as his game against the Bills back in 2009. The bottom line is this, Sanchez had an 88.7 QB rating last night with 2 TD's thrown. The one INT was a mistake, but mistakes happen in the NFL. Brees threw 22 INT's last season and even Peyton Manning threw 17.

Some of you ask for improvement out of our developing franchise QB, but yet, it's either you expect it to come over night or you're refusing to give credit as Sanchez has continued to improve. If you can't admit that Sanchez didn't improve from 09 to last season... Well, then, you don't deserve to be considered a fan. Last season he improved during each and every statistical category when compared to his rookie season.

How am I seeing a few Jet fans saying they seen no improvements out of Sanchez last night? Are you kidding me?

Sanchez has a career QB rating of 70.2. Last year he had a QB rating of 75.3. Last night he had a QB rating of 88.7.

Sanchez has a career completion% of 54.6. Last year his completion % was at 54.8. Last night his completion% was at 59.1.

Sanchez started 37 career games before last night, the only time he's ever thrown for 300+ yards was against the Texans last year. He threw for 315 yards against the Texans in a 3 point win. Last night, during week one of the season, he broke his record for most yards during a single game with 335 passing yards during a prime-time game.

But yet, you all failed to see improvement out of Sanchez last night? Even though his yardage, completion %, TD/INT ration and QB rating were all above his career averages? Sad.

You must be in the wrong thread with all of your logic and intelligence. Well said.

[SpartanJet]

A lot of people are missing the point about our run game. We aren't running the ball as much because we aren't getting much out of it when we do. How many first downs did we put ourselves in a hole by rushing 1-2 yards making it 2nd and long? People are framing it like we are passing more which is lowering our rushing numbers when its the lack of rushing production that is causing less rushing opportunities. Our O-line took a huge hit with Woody retiring, and I think the entire line had a horrible night in pass and rush blocking so I find it hard to judge Sanchez fairly this game even though I'm not a fan of his.

Sanchez came up big at the end of the first half and at times in the 2nd half but not when it mattered most. Depending on 50yd+ field goals is a recipe for disaster.

[Aten]

Mark Sanchez is the last player on earth that can complain about the running game not taking the heat off.

Second last.

[The Crusher]

Sometimes during games Sanchez plays no better than Clemens would have. Whats an enigma about Mark is he turns around minutes later with an awesome throw for 6. Dude is a steady head case thats always up and down.

He's a bit of a pouting baby, but not a headcase. Just young and inexperienced. In the end he will be serviceable.

[#27TheDominator]

Second last.

*Active

[RutgersJetFan]

Matt Ryan sucked donkey balls yesterday against Chicago...watched most the game...also thought Ryan was better coming into this season...he's my fantasy football QB...but yesterday at least he sucked donkey balls.

Not saying he was anything great yesterday, but the level of Ryan hatred based on yesterday does seem a tad bizarre. The dude was running for his life on literally every play. Had Sanchez put up the same performance under those circumstances everyone would be ripping the line to shreds and totally excusing Sanchez.

[Integrity28]

I'm starting to think Sanchez's ceiling is that of a T. Romo level.

Stopped reading here... Sanchez has already won more playoff games, a national championship, and pretty much reminds me nothing of Romo.

[The Crusher]

Stopped reading here... Sanchez has already won more playoff games, a national championship, and pretty much reminds me nothing of Romo.

Brown hair and boyish grins. Ends their though.

[#27TheDominator]

I am still getting used to the new system. I managed to quote myself! Next I will give myself rep. Luckily I won't be able to give myself negative rep. BTW that nice new Under Armour commerical is on. A bunch of guys running and working out while Brady pensively looks through his hair.

[#27TheDominator]

There is a simple answer to all of this. Trade for Romo. The last coach I remember running a platoon at QB was Buddy Ryan. He mixed snaps with Cunningham and Jaworski depending upon down and distance. Hell I think he even slipped Matt Cavanaugh in there a few times! This will be even easier. Romo goes the first 4 1/2 innings and then bring Sanchez in from the bullpen.

[JustInFudge]

Stopped reading here... Sanchez has already won more playoff games, a national championship, and pretty much reminds me nothing of Romo.

Sanchez never won a National Championship. He won the Rose Bowl. Romo has one playoff win.

I get that playoff wins matter, but you know who else has playoff wins, Chad Pennington. Sick of hearing this as a Sanchez defense.

[Klecko73isGod]

Sanchez never won a National Championship. He won the Rose Bowl. Romo has one playoff win.

I get that playoff wins matter, but you know who else has playoff wins, Chad Pennington. Sick of hearing this as a Sanchez defense.

Its relevent because he has raised his level of play in the postseason, unlike Joe Flacco who, despite winning as many road playoff games as Sanchez, only has one good postseason performance.

In other words, Baltimore has won postseason games in spite of Flacco while Sanchez has been a part of the reason the Jets have won postseason games. This isn't exactly rocket science but I guess when your brain is clogged by malted hops and bong resin it can be hard to figure basic things out.

[JetsFanInDenver]

Disappointing to see this thread go only 10 pages. The Henne > Sanchez thread is laughing at you!

[Sperm Edwards]

Very skeptical of a QB rating system that was developed by two mediocre QBs.

So it's more reliable for a ratings system to be designed by some suit in an executive office? Please.

The current passer rating system was developed before systems like a WCO were "invented" that balloon numbers up. It also doesn't take into account importance of the game or importance of the pass or down & distance or anything frankly.

Ideally, the best QB should have the best QB rating (or there should at least be some relation). Well the current rating system has Tony Romo as the 4th-best passer in NFL history. 5th and 6th respectively are Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. Those two, faggitude and horefaceness notwithstanding, are just about the 2 best QBs most of us have ever seen. And Tony Romo is ranked as a better passer. Dan Marino checks in at 19th, 2 slots below Carson Palmer and 7 slots below Chad ******* Pennington.

I'd at least give a Dilfer/Jaws system - or any system - a serious gander before dismissing it in favor of one that suggests Tony Romo is the 4th best QB in NFL history.

[Klecko73isGod]

So it's more reliable for a ratings system to be designed by some suit in an executive office? Please.

The current passer rating system was developed before systems like a WCO were "invented" that balloon numbers up. It also doesn't take into account importance of the game or importance of the pass or down & distance or anything frankly.

Ideally, the best QB should have the best QB rating (or there should at least be some relation). Well the current rating system has Tony Romo as the 4th-best passer in NFL history. 5th and 6th respectively are Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. Those two, faggitude and horefaceness notwithstanding, are just about the 2 best QBs most of us have ever seen. And Tony Romo is ranked as a better passer. Dan Marino checks in at 19th, 2 slots below Carson Palmer and 7 slots below Chad ******* Pennington.

I'd at least give a Dilfer/Jaws system - or any system - a serious gander before dismissing it in favor of one that suggests Tony Romo is the 4th best QB in NFL history.

Again Sperm, this is a misuse of the stat. The current passer efficiency rating isn't a "QB rating." It was never meant to judge total performance.

This new rating weights 2nd half performance heavier than first half, so over time it will favor QBs of a sh*tty teams who pad their stats throwing a lot of passes trying to come back in unwinnable games.

[Jetlag]

And because Jimmy Leonhard wasn't about to let Jason Whitten score...

And because Joe McKnight made a hell of a play.

[Sperm Edwards]

Again Sperm, this is a misuse of the stat. The current passer efficiency rating isn't a "QB rating." It was never meant to judge total performance.

This new rating weights 2nd half performance heavier than first half, so over time it will favor QBs of a sh*tty teams who pad their stats throwing a lot of passes trying to come back in unwinnable games.

I used the comparative term better (or best) "passer" instead of better "QB" a couple of times if you read my post for real.

And it's splitting hairs unless you're arguing for mobile QB's whose rushing yards and TD's are dismissed as though they never happened. Clearly the point of the system was to rate who's the best QB. Even if it doesn't rate them in absolute sequential order, generally people at the top are theoretically supposed to be better - or more "efficient" - than people at the bottom. It is meant to provide a non-anecdotal means for comparing QBs. And it does so pretty poorly in many ways.

[#27TheDominator]

Disappointing to see this thread go only 10 pages. The Henne > Sanchez thread is laughing at you!

Wes Welker is rolling over in his grave...no wait!

[Bleedin Green]

Sanchez never won a National Championship. He won the Rose Bowl. Romo has one playoff win.

I get that playoff wins matter, but you know who else has playoff wins, Chad Pennington. Sick of hearing this as a Sanchez defense.

That's just a moronic comparison. Pennington had a 2-4 playoff record in an 11 year career, including losing his last 3 in horrific fashion. Sanchez has a 4-2 record in 2 years.

[#27TheDominator]

That's just a moronic comparison. Pennington had a 2-4 playoff record in an 11 year career, including losing his last 3 in horrific fashion. Sanchez has a 4-2 record in 2 years.

So you admit that at one point Pennington was 2-1?

[Integrity28]

Sanchez never won a National Championship. He won the Rose Bowl. Romo has one playoff win.

I get that playoff wins matter, but you know who else has playoff wins, Chad Pennington. Sick of hearing this as a Sanchez defense.

Ah, right the Rose Bowl.

The point of bringing up that and the playoff wins is that Sanchez, unlike Romo, doesn't shrink in big games. Its a valid point to make about the kid, he's played some of his best football on big stages - whereas Romo melts down in similar situations. Going back to the original point, which was I do NOT agree that Sanchez and Romo are anything alike apart from banging hot chicks while acting pretty gay, and playing QB...

[Integrity28]

That's just a moronic comparison. Pennington had a 2-4 playoff record in an 11 year career, including losing his last 3 in horrific fashion. Sanchez has a 4-2 record in 2 years.

... and I'd add that the 2 losses were AFCC games, and the outcome of both can mostly be boiled down to Rex not stopping Manning and Rothlisturder. Other things obviously affected the outcome, but the D was the main culprit in both games.

[Klecko73isGod]

I used the comparative term better (or best) "passer" instead of better "QB" a couple of times if you read my post for real.

And it's splitting hairs unless you're arguing for mobile QB's whose rushing yards and TD's are dismissed as though they never happened. Clearly the point of the system was to rate who's the best QB. Even if it doesn't rate them in absolute sequential order, generally people at the top are theoretically supposed to be better - or more "efficient" - than people at the bottom. It is meant to provide a non-anecdotal means for comparing QBs. And it does so pretty poorly in many ways.

I don't disagree that the old system wasn't useful for rating overall performance. I just don't see this new system as any kind of real improvement.

[Latinlawyer]

Let's clear up something...when you get hit on your BLIND SIDE....you will probably fumble. You are not expecting the hit, you have no idea its coming towards you and the sudden shock of the hit usually frees that ball up. How did SANCHEZ FVCK that up? Did he not use enough stick'em? COme on now. He fumbled on a BLIND SIDE STRIP SACK....it happens. It was not his fault. Someone did not pick up the rusher. It happens. The INT could be his fault for not picking up the underneath coverage (the same guy picked off Manning twice last year in Colts v. Dal game)....but the fumble was not his fault.

LL

[Irish Jet]

He has not improved upon last year. He still waits too long before pulling the trigger. He takes way too long to go through his projections because of these stare-downs he does. It takes him twice as long as it should to realize someone is covered (or open). He still has some obvious accuracy issues. Hell, he often still misses half the field. Players are wide open and he never looks their way because he's too focus on his first (or sometimes his second) read. He doesn't ever take a quick survey of the field before locking in on one receiver. IMO he should consider getting a dark visor like Vick to help conceal who he's staring at.

You don't think this is a slight knee jerk reaction at all?

I mean, we're one game into the season. From the first game last season you would have thought he'd actually regressed from his first year, which wasn't the case. Coming off of a lockout and with the new WR's coming in especially, I think you have to give him time before drawing conclusions on his current progress.

[Sperm Edwards]

Let's clear up something...when you get hit on your BLIND SIDE....you will probably fumble. You are not expecting the hit, you have no idea its coming towards you and the sudden shock of the hit usually frees that ball up. How did SANCHEZ FVCK that up? Did he not use enough stick'em? COme on now. He fumbled on a BLIND SIDE STRIP SACK....it happens. It was not his fault. Someone did not pick up the rusher. It happens. The INT could be his fault for not picking up the underneath coverage (the same guy picked off Manning twice last year in Colts v. Dal game)....but the fumble was not his fault.

LL

Blitz came from Sanchez's right, not from his blind side.

[Vicious89x]

Blitz came from Sanchez's right, not from his blind side.

Efficient posting. BRADY-ESQUE.

[Sperm Edwards]

Efficient posting. BRADY-ESQUE.

Not as good as Romo, though, who apparently is more efficient than Brady.

[Sperm Edwards]

You don't think this is a slight knee jerk reaction at all?

I mean, we're one game into the season. From the first game last season you would have thought he'd actually regressed from his first year, which wasn't the case. Coming off of a lockout and with the new WR's coming in especially, I think you have to give him time before drawing conclusions on his current progress.

How can anyone draw the opposite conclusion based on yesterday? Yet in comparison, that point of view is treated as though it is already proven fact.

It is my desire that he has improved greatly. I do not want him to be the same and I do not want him to be worse, because we have Sanchez and absolutely nothing else behind him. I get far less pleasure out of winning an argument for the sake of doing so than I do watching the Jets win football games so there is no secret desire to see him do all he can to turn the ball over 4x just to prove a stupid point. But so far he is making the same mistakes he always made, and this is in one of his more prolific career passing games.

[Irish Jet]

How can anyone draw the opposite conclusion based on yesterday? Yet in comparison, that point of view is treated as though it is already proven fact.

It is my desire that he has improved greatly. I do not want him to be the same and I do not want him to be worse, because we have Sanchez and absolutely nothing else behind him. I get far less pleasure out of winning an argument for the sake of doing so than I do watching the Jets win football games so there is no secret desire to see him do all he can to turn the ball over 4x just to prove a stupid point. But so far he is making the same mistakes he always made, and this is in one of his more prolific career passing games.

I'm not drawing any conclusions on yesterday, it's too small a sample size, which is my point. It may be he had a bad game by the standards his standards this season, which is what we can hope for - As you know guys like Big Ben, Rivers, Eli had yesterday. Don't make it out to be more than it is, the fact that some of his problems seem to still be there is concerning, I'll give you that, but they're not beyond repair, nor is it beyond the realms of possibility that he may correct these issues throughout the season. It's simply to early to be generalizing his current ability.

[Sperm Edwards]

I'm not drawing any conclusions on yesterday, it's too small a sample size, which is my point. It may be he had a bad game by the standards his standards this season, which is what we can hope for - As you know guys like Big Ben, Rivers, Eli had yesterday. Don't make it out to be more than it is, the fact that some of his problems seem to still be there is concerning, I'll give you that, but they're not beyond repair, nor is it beyond the realms of possibility that he may correct these issues throughout the season. It's simply to early to be generalizing his current ability.

Did I say anything to the contrary?

[Bleedin Green]

So you admit that at one point Pennington was 2-1?

For 6 whole days.

[JustInFudge]

Its relevent because he has raised his level of play in the postseason, unlike Joe Flacco who, despite winning as many road playoff games as Sanchez, only has one good postseason performance.

In other words, Baltimore has won postseason games in spite of Flacco while Sanchez has been a part of the reason the Jets have won postseason games. This isn't exactly rocket science but I guess when your brain is clogged by malted hops and bong resin it can be hard to figure basic things out.

That hurts. Its mean and uncalled for. We're just having a conversation.

So what you're saying is Flacco's wins dont count? Gotcha.

That's just a moronic comparison. Pennington had a 2-4 playoff record in an 11 year career, including losing his last 3 in horrific fashion. Sanchez has a 4-2 record in 2 years.

Who compared the two? I was simply using it to show how its not universal that because said player has x amount of playoff wins that he gets an extra notch on the scale. I think we all agree, Pennington sucks, but hey...he raised his level of play vs. the Colts and the Chargers and got a couple of road playoff wins, so he must be good. You can technically say it, and thats scary that the same thing is being said about Sanchez. I say that, but I do agree they are totally opposite.

Ah, right the Rose Bowl.

The point of bringing up that and the playoff wins is that Sanchez, unlike Romo, doesn't shrink in big games. Its a valid point to make about the kid, he's played some of his best football on big stages - whereas Romo melts down in similar situations. Going back to the original point, which was I do NOT agree that Sanchez and Romo are anything alike apart from banging hot chicks while acting pretty gay, and playing QB...

Agreed.

Listen, I'm just playing devils advocate. I think we all know I dont think Sanchez is very good, but I do like him a lot as a player.

All I'm saying is, there's bunch of caveats developing when we analyze Sanchez. He's not very good...but look at what he does in the playoffs and how he steps up in the playoffs or what he does in the big moment, etc.

And I do think its kind of an oxymoron to say that someone who's a "big game player" has lost back to back AFCG's.

[JetsFanInDenver]

Based on all the threads over here i am guessing i saw a completely different game. The game i watched the JETS actually won!

I wonder what this place would have looked like if Sanchez had done the Romo and lost a winnable game.