Sanchez's problems are correctable.

[#27TheDominator]

Oh I agree that Schotty is the problem. From other things I have noticed about Sanchez, he plays well in an up tempo offense, he throws well when he is moving out of the pocket; rolling out, and he does throw a very good deep ball.

All three of these things are missing from the current Jets offense. For whatever reason Schotty seems to play to Mark's weaknesses than his strengths. He'll have mark throw a 20 yard deep out to his left, on of the absolute most difficult passes for a right handed QB. I do believe Mark could thrive in an offense similar to New Orleans. However Schotty is too damn stubborn to want to run it.

Actually, I don't think Schotty is the problem. He may not be making the kid a star, but if Sanchez were really good he'd still look good. I think that the team can't play uptempo because they are tying to eat clock. I also don't think the OC decides that he has to throw deep to his left. I think Mark makes that decision. He probably makes that throw because defenses are more likely to leave it open because he has trouble with the throw. I agree Sanchez looks good on the rollout, but I think they use a fair amount of rollouts. I might use more, but it's not like it's something they refuse to use. Everybody wants him fired, but I think if Schotty ran an uptempo offense Rex would get him fired pretty quick for ******* up the D.

Now, back to my original question: WHY do you think Sanchez thrives in an uptempo offense?

[BroadwayJ667]

Actually, I don't think Schotty is the problem. He may not be making the kid a star, but if Sanchez were really good he'd still look good. I think that the team can't play uptempo because they are tying to eat clock. I also don't think the OC decides that he has to throw deep to his left. I think Mark makes that decision. He probably makes that throw because defenses are more likely to leave it open because he has trouble with the throw. I agree Sanchez looks good on the rollout, but I think they use a fair amount of rollouts. I might use more, but it's not like it's something they refuse to use. Everybody wants him fired, but I think if Schotty ran an uptempo offense Rex would get him fired pretty quick for ******* up the D.

Now, back to my original question: WHY do you think Sanchez thrives in an uptempo offense?

enlighten me, because I'm sure my answer won't satisfy you

[#27TheDominator]

enlighten me, because I'm sure my answer won't satisfy you

You have me wrong. It's an honest question. I don;t know the reason. I doubt you KNOW it either, but I'm interested to know your opinion as to why he is better in the uptempo. I gave several potential answers. You hated several. I would expect everybody to hate some. I can see you are talking about him moving around in the pocket and that is something he'd potentially do more of in the uptempo. You could also think he is calling his own plays, but as I said before, I doubt that is the case.

[BroadwayJ667]

You have me wrong. It's an honest question. I don;t know the reason. I doubt you KNOW it either, but I'm interested to know your opinion as to why he is better in the uptempo. I gave several potential answers. You hated several. I would expect everybody to hate some. I can see you are talking about him moving around in the pocket and that is something he'd potentially do more of in the uptempo. You could also think he is calling his own plays, but as I said before, I doubt that is the case.

I don't hate. I've made an effort not to hate, because I believe most people hate too easily. I don't think Rex would have a problem with the Jets running an uptempo if it got the team a lead. His defense would be that much better if he was playing with a lead. I just don't like the design of the offense. I don't think it utilizes the strengths of the offensive players

[Kleckineau]

Thats funny I thought he took the Jets to a 17-6 lead over the Colts as a rookie and hit Braylon down the sidelines for a TD that went a lot more than 20 yards and the Defense totally sh*t the bed from that moment on.

He also brought us back vs the Steelers and when we needed a big defensive stop in the last few minutes the Defense sh*t the bed once again. Sure he had a bad first half but a lot of QB's do .

Sanchez is far from suck. Suck is Painter, Suck is Young, not Sanchez.

Smash, I didnt use the suck word once in my post. I dont think he sucks. I think he is probably better than 40-50% of the starters in the NFL which is just not good enough for his draft position.

You cite Painter and Young but neither would be playing if Vick and Manning hadnt been injured.

Why not cite better players like Schaub Moore Romo Fitz Dalton etc who wer drafted much later than this guy and are clearly better passers?

Furthermore, you point out his pass to Braylon in Indy, a nice play indeed but cmon man that was how long ago? How many times a year does he make a play like that? Top QBS can make that play multiple times in one game

Does he struck any fear in any defensive coordinators this year?

Does anyone actually game plan for this guy?

You cite Pitt game?? Where was he the 1st half? And the 2nd half "comeback" was against a bend dont break eat up the clock prevent defense.

Im just sick and tired of watching him lock on one reciever, throw poorly thrown slant plays and ints for pick 6s.

Question, why was Shonn Green playing QB in the redzone last week when the Jets had the opp to close out the game?

[Bx Jet Fan]

I was watching one of the talking head shows and they said Mark has the 3rd lowest Comp% in the second half of all QBs in the league. (52.6% If I remember correctly) I was really surprised by this stat considering our slow starts and Marks "clutch" reputation. Do we really not make any adjustments at the half? I'm trying to come up with reasons for this and I'm struggling. Is it really Schotty? If that stat is correct it means Mark is over 60% in the first half. An 8% Comp% between halves seems pretty large. Anyone have any ideas on why this is?

[JustInFudge]

The fact that something isn't susceptible to precise measurement doesn't make it a matter of opinion. Maybe Rodgers is playing better than any quarterback ever has before. Maybe he isn't. But there's a right answer. Bro.

Enlighten me. Dawg

[Aten]

Enlighten me. Dawg

Picture a string of Christmas lights a hundred feet long that you are viewing from a hundred feet away. Each light represents some sample of quarterback performance along a continuum, left end being the worst, right end being the best. So if they were to flash the one for Sanchez 2011 and then the one from Rodgers 2011 you'll be able to clearly observe that the latter is to the right of the former. But if they flash the one for Rodgers and then the one from Brady 2007, they're both going to seem to be in the same place. That doesn't mean that their relative position is actually subject to debate. One is further right than the other. That's how a string works. That's how better works. It's just that such ultimately pointless distinctions are somewhat beyond our ability to perceive and measure and define.

[CTM]

should've used penis size when viewed from 100 yards away, would've resonated better with jiffy

[Aten]

should've used penis size when viewed from 100 yards away, would've resonated better with jiffy

Rodgers 2011:Brady 2007::hatred for wife:hatred for kids

[T0mShane]

Picture a string of Christmas lights a hundred feet long that you are viewing from a hundred feet away. Each light represents some sample of quarterback performance along a continuum, left end being the worst, right end being the best. So if they were to flash the one for Sanchez 2011 and then the one from Rodgers 2011 you'll be able to clearly observe that the latter is to the right of the former. But if they flash the one for Rodgers and then the one from Brady 2007, they're both going to seem to be in the same place. That doesn't mean that their relative position is actually subject to debate. One is further right than the other. That's how a string works. That's how better works. It's just that such ultimately pointless distinctions are somewhat beyond our ability to perceive and measure and define.

[Smashmouth]

Smash, I didnt use the suck word once in my post. I dont think he sucks. I think he is probably better than 40-50% of the starters in the NFL which is just not good enough for his draft position.

You cite Painter and Young but neither would be playing if Vick and Manning hadnt been injured.

Why not cite better players like Schaub Moore Romo Fitz Dalton etc who wer drafted much later than this guy and are clearly better passers?

Furthermore, you point out his pass to Braylon in Indy, a nice play indeed but cmon man that was how long ago? How many times a year does he make a play like that? Top QBS can make that play multiple times in one game

Does he struck any fear in any defensive coordinators this year?

Does anyone actually game plan for this guy?

You cite Pitt game?? Where was he the 1st half? And the 2nd half "comeback" was against a bend dont break eat up the clock prevent defense.

Im just sick and tired of watching him lock on one reciever, throw poorly thrown slant plays and ints for pick 6s.

Question, why was Shonn Green playing QB in the redzone last week when the Jets had the opp to close out the game?

Kleck I didnt mean to direct the suck comment at you and when talking about suck i simply pointed out what I percieve suck to be . Now that thats out of the way....

In My post it clearly states that Sanchez had a bad first half vs Pittsburgh but when he did get the hot hand and was bringing us back into the game the Defense really did not get the important stop . I fully understand Sanchez was part to blame for being down 24-0 but a lot of QB's have bad halves in playoff games or regular season games as well. Something changes for the Jets in the second half and honestly none of us can really put our finger on why Sanchez wakes up in the second half or the 4th quarter but thats been the trend. You would think by now Slopenheimer whould have figured that out and incorporated it into the first half of games. maybe try some no huddle Mixed in. Im not saying hurry up Im saying NO HUDDLE there is a difference and you can run the ball in No huddle so we can still pound away. Just a suggestion.

When you mention Shonn Greene playing QB in the Red Zone thats just a complete IDIOTIC call by Shottenheimer Greene is not known for his hands which makes the call doubley stupid. Weather it worked or not its just ignorant if you ask me.

Back to the playoffs Sanchez gave us more in the playoffs his rookie year and last year than any of us expected and the strength of the team "the Defense" did not come through. When players like Elway had "the Drive" and Montana had "the Catch" thier defenses got stops at the end to make that possible. You need championship play on both sides of the ball to win SB's but when you have a rookie or 2nd year QB you expect the defense to step up. Getting a stop on Pittsburgh on 3rd and 7 (I think thats what it was) to give our offense the ball back was not too much to ask of the defense since so many playoff caliber defenses get those type of stops and holding a 17-6 lead Is really not too much to ask of our defense. So in the way we call Sanchez clutch we can call our Defense Chokers its almost like they are the opposite of Sanchez. Where is the Clutch from this defense ? They are like the superstar QB who cant win the big one.

Also the Steelers were not playing a bend dont break defense aganist us they were right up in our face. The Steelers dont play prevent. If They were playing bend dont break why Did our drive in the 4th quarter take like 7 minutes off the clock ? We had to fight our way down the field. What bothered me about that drive other than the fact Shotty sh*t the bed by the goal line with stupid calls what bothered me was that we were down by 2 TD's and were not in the hurry up we were losing 15 to 20 seconds on each play by huddling up and burned up a lot of the 4th quarter while I sat there Screaming why were we not in no huddle down 2 TD;s with 10 min to play in the AFCCG. WTF this is not rocket science.

Our team failed In every aspect in both Championship games Offense, Defense and especially coaching and what drives me nuts is on Jet Nation that always = bad QB.

[Vicious89x]

Mark Sanchez = bottom 3rd of starting QB's. The end.

[JustInFudge]

Picture a string of Christmas lights a hundred feet long that you are viewing from a hundred feet away. Each light represents some sample of quarterback performance along a continuum, left end being the worst, right end being the best. So if they were to flash the one for Sanchez 2011 and then the one from Rodgers 2011 you'll be able to clearly observe that the latter is to the right of the former. But if they flash the one for Rodgers and then the one from Brady 2007, they're both going to seem to be in the same place. That doesn't mean that their relative position is actually subject to debate. One is further right than the other. That's how a string works. That's how better works. It's just that such ultimately pointless distinctions are somewhat beyond our ability to perceive and measure and define.

Ya dont say? So is Rodgers bulb the one at the end of the string?

[Smashmouth]

Mark Sanchez = bottom 3rd of starting QB's. The end.

The point is some Jets fans think Mark will continue to improve as his career goes on while others want to ship him off. Im not saying everyone who does not like the way Sanchez is playing right now is saying that but some certainly are. And if your team is 7-5 with 2 years in a row in the AFCCG how does that equate to bottom thrid ? Does winning not help his standing ? Does clutch play not help ? or are we "just" going on stats alone ? I think If I had top pick a number right now considering ALL of what Sanchez has done I would rank him at about 10th in the NFL and I fully expect more improvement as the years go on. If we get rid of Shotty I think we will see drastic Improvement next year.

[Smashmouth]

Ya dont say? So is Rodgers bulb the one at the end of the string?

Why are you even responding to that slop ?

[Vicious89x]

The point is some Jets fans think Mark will continue to improve as his career goes on while others want to ship him off. Im not saying everyone who does not like the way Sanchez is playing right now is saying that but some certainly are. And if your team is 7-5 with 2 years in a row in the AFCCG how does that equate to bottom thrid ? Does winning not help his standing ? Does clutch play not help ? or are we "just" going on stats alone ? I think If I had top pick a number right now considering ALL of what Sanchez has done I would rank him at about 10th in the NFL and I fully expect more improvement as the years go on. If we get rid of Shotty I think we will see drastic Improvement next year.

Ah. The tebow argument.

[Aten]

Ya dont say? So is Rodgers bulb the one at the end of the string?

Maybe. I'm sure you understand that acknowledging that the string ends with a single identifiable bulb concedes the point. So we've got that going for us. Realizing that an answer exists is certainly the first step toward figuring out what it is. The first thing we would have to do is define terms because 'currently' doesn't really establish a timeframe for reference. Even if you wanted to go for the highest degree of illusory subjectivity and say it's one play, and how can you differentiate between, say, Brady's 99-yard touchdown to Welker vs. Flutie's hail mary vs. the fake spike and so forth? I would look at win probability deltas here, meaning the degree to which the play changed the odds of the quarterback's team winning the game. Then you would want some kind of clock adjustment; you don't want it to be inordinately skewed by the game state because that adds a lot of noise but you also want to retain some of that leverage as a reward for clutchiness and whatnot. Finally of course you need to difference out all of the other factors that led to the success of the play, which obviously is nearly impossible to do in any sort of principled systemic way. Now that I've written this it occurs to me as though I've basically answered it as one would one of those Microsoft-type job interview questions, which in itself I think sort of illuminates the point.

[Vicious89x]

The point is some Jets fans think Mark will continue to improve as his career goes on while others want to ship him off. Im not saying everyone who does not like the way Sanchez is playing right now is saying that but some certainly are. And if your team is 7-5 with 2 years in a row in the AFCCG how does that equate to bottom thrid ? Does winning not help his standing ? Does clutch play not help ? or are we "just" going on stats alone ? I think If I had top pick a number right now considering ALL of what Sanchez has done

I would rank him at about 10th in the NFL and I fully expect more improvement as the years go on. If we get rid of Shotty I think we will see drastic Improvement next year.

[Aten]

Why are you even responding to that slop ?

Pearls before swine.

[CTM]

Maybe. I'm sure you understand that acknowledging that the string ends with a single identifiable bulb concedes the point. So we've got that going for us. Realizing that an answer exists is certainly the first step toward figuring out what it is. The first thing we would have to do is define terms because 'currently' doesn't really establish a timeframe for reference. Even if you wanted to go for the highest degree of illusory subjectivity and say it's one play, and how can you differentiate between, say, Brady's 99-yard touchdown to Welker vs. Flutie's hail mary vs. the fake spike and so forth? I would look at win probability deltas here, meaning the degree to which the play changed the odds of the quarterback's team winning the game. Then you would want some kind of clock adjustment; you don't want it to be inordinately skewed by the game state because that adds a lot of noise but you also want to retain some of that leverage as a reward for clutchiness and whatnot. Finally of course you need to difference out all of the other factors that led to the success of the play, which obviously is nearly impossible to do in any sort of principled systemic way. Now that I've written this it occurs to me as though I've basically answered it as one would one of those Microsoft-type job interview questions, which in itself I think sort of illuminates the point.

T0mShane is going to wet himself in delight

[CTM]

Why are you even responding to that slop ?

Smash, can you give me a breakdown of your thoughts on Tebow?

[Vicious89x]

T0mShane is going to wet himself in delight

You're referring to his vagina. Right?

[CTM]

You're referring to his vagina. Right?

I don't presume to know what's going on down there, nor do I want..

[ZachEY]

Pearls before swine.

Too funny.

The question I have with your analogy (or explanation) though, is in a string of lights, we can operationalize left and right. We both agree on the terms, and there's really no wiggle room. Even at 100 yards, we know the difference exists. Better QB, I'm not so confident we can determine on a level that low. You've provided a dozen different variables to create an analysis, but your still left with a measure of subjectivity in determining criteria. What am I missing?

[Vicious89x]

Too funny.

The question I have with your analogy (or explanation) though, is in a string of lights, we can operationalize left and right. We both agree on the terms, and there's really no wiggle room. Even at 100 yards, we know the difference exists. Better QB, I'm not so confident we can determine on a level that low. You've provided a dozen different variables to create an analysis, but your still left with a measure of subjectivity in determining criteria. What am I missing?

Poise, clutchness, wins.

[Aten]

Too funny.

The question I have with your analogy (or explanation) though, is in a string of lights, we can operationalize left and right. We both agree on the terms, and there's really no wiggle room. Even at 100 yards, we know the difference exists. Better QB, I'm not so confident we can determine on a level that low. You've provided a dozen different variables to create an analysis, but your still left with a measure of subjectivity in determining criteria. What am I missing?

Better is easy to operationalize. Everything the quarterback does can at least in theory be assigned an expected value expressed in wins. On any level we know the difference exists.

[Kleckineau]

Kleck I didnt mean to direct the suck comment at you and when talking about suck i simply pointed out what I percieve suck to be . Now that thats out of the way....

In My post it clearly states that Sanchez had a bad first half vs Pittsburgh but when he did get the hot hand and was bringing us back into the game the Defense really did not get the important stop . I fully understand Sanchez was part to blame for being down 24-0 but a lot of QB's have bad halves in playoff games or regular season games as well. Something changes for the Jets in the second half and honestly none of us can really put our finger on why Sanchez wakes up in the second half or the 4th quarter but thats been the trend. You would think by now Slopenheimer whould have figured that out and incorporated it into the first half of games. maybe try some no huddle Mixed in. Im not saying hurry up Im saying NO HUDDLE there is a difference and you can run the ball in No huddle so we can still pound away. Just a suggestion.

When you mention Shonn Greene playing QB in the Red Zone thats just a complete IDIOTIC call by Shottenheimer Greene is not known for his hands which makes the call doubley stupid. Weather it worked or not its just ignorant if you ask me.

Back to the playoffs Sanchez gave us more in the playoffs his rookie year and last year than any of us expected and the strength of the team "the Defense" did not come through. When players like Elway had "the Drive" and Montana had "the Catch" thier defenses got stops at the end to make that possible. You need championship play on both sides of the ball to win SB's but when you have a rookie or 2nd year QB you expect the defense to step up. Getting a stop on Pittsburgh on 3rd and 7 (I think thats what it was) to give our offense the ball back was not too much to ask of the defense since so many playoff caliber defenses get those type of stops and holding a 17-6 lead Is really not too much to ask of our defense. So in the way we call Sanchez clutch we can call our Defense Chokers its almost like they are the opposite of Sanchez. Where is the Clutch from this defense ? They are like the superstar QB who cant win the big one.

Also the Steelers were not playing a bend dont break defense aganist us they were right up in our face. The Steelers dont play prevent. If They were playing bend dont break why Did our drive in the 4th quarter take like 7 minutes off the clock ? We had to fight our way down the field. What bothered me about that drive other than the fact Shotty sh*t the bed by the goal line with stupid calls what bothered me was that we were down by 2 TD's and were not in the hurry up we were losing 15 to 20 seconds on each play by huddling up and burned up a lot of the 4th quarter while I sat there Screaming why were we not in no huddle down 2 TD;s with 10 min to play in the AFCCG. WTF this is not rocket science.

Our team failed In every aspect in both Championship games Offense, Defense and especially coaching and what drives me nuts is on Jet Nation that always = bad QB.

We are beating a dead horse here ...........but just a few more swings.

Implying how much better he is than Painter or Young does not make him a good QB.

One really nice long pass to Braylon eons ago does not mean he can stretch a field.I really doubt teams game plan for him except for the db coaches running film on how to jump routes for a pick six .Fact is no teams fear the NYJ passing game so now its way more difficult for the running game.

Shottenheimers offense is so god damn basic any decent NFL QB shold be completing 70%.

Lastly,with the NYJ one play away from sealing the Washington game, Shonn Green goes behind center. What does that say about the CS confidence in this guy?

[JustInFudge]

Maybe. I'm sure you understand that acknowledging that the string ends with a single identifiable bulb concedes the point. So we've got that going for us. Realizing that an answer exists is certainly the first step toward figuring out what it is. The first thing we would have to do is define terms because 'currently' doesn't really establish a timeframe for reference. Even if you wanted to go for the highest degree of illusory subjectivity and say it's one play, and how can you differentiate between, say, Brady's 99-yard touchdown to Welker vs. Flutie's hail mary vs. the fake spike and so forth? I would look at win probability deltas here, meaning the degree to which the play changed the odds of the quarterback's team winning the game. Then you would want some kind of clock adjustment; you don't want it to be inordinately skewed by the game state because that adds a lot of noise but you also want to retain some of that leverage as a reward for clutchiness and whatnot. Finally of course you need to difference out all of the other factors that led to the success of the play, which obviously is nearly impossible to do in any sort of principled systemic way. Now that I've written this it occurs to me as though I've basically answered it as one would one of those Microsoft-type job interview questions, which in itself I think sort of illuminates the point.

The term was not defined therefore I found no reason to pursue the answer with someone that was clueless to the level of play that Rodgers has sustained over the last 3-4 years. He also wasnt willing to play the hypothetical approach that he'd continue this success. In fact, he wanted to dismiss the idea as a reality altogether. The point was pretty obvious to me but sometimes things just arent worth the effort. Ya dig?

[JustInFudge]

Why are you even responding to that slop ?

I ask myself that question every time I respond to you.

T0mShane is going to wet himself in delight

He's already PM'ed like three times showing me shots of his boner from that post. Had to get clarification thats what it actually was. It looked like a raisin.

[Aten]

Ya dig?

I don't know. If what you're saying is that you didn't mean opinion literally in the first place and were basically giving him the Dude 'that's, like, your opinion, man' then yes. If not then no.

[JustInFudge]

I don't know. If what you're saying is that you didn't mean opinion literally in the first place and were basically giving him the Dude 'that's, like, your opinion, man' then yes. If not then no.

Like, totally.

[CTM]

I don't know. If what you're saying is that you didn't mean opinion literally in the first place and were basically giving him the Dude 'that's, like, your opinion, man' then yes. If not then no.

See i think what he was saying is that the difference between Brady 2007 and Rodgers 2011 is well beyond our ability to unequivocally quantify, and all we're left with is opinion, man... And he'd be right, in my opinion

[JustInFudge]

See i think what he was saying is that the difference between Brady 2007 and Rodgers 2011 is well beyond our ability to unequivocally quantify, and all we're left with is opinion, man... And he'd be right, in my opinion

Deep man, deep.

[Integrity28]

Loose bowel movements are correctable too. It doesn't mean you should be happy about having diarrhea though.