Jets Need a Consistent, Stable Receiving Core in Order to Have a Successful Passing Game

[Bugg]

First off Im not solely talking about Sanchez. He gets one more year here IMO and if he doesnt improve he goes. No QB will every play well here if we continue with a rotating WR core.

Flynn doesnt refute my point. It makes it easier for a QB to step in when all the wrs know exactly where the are going and he knows exactly where they will be.

I guess in your opinion Flynn is the next Brady, because if he was such a superior talent he wouldnt have been drafted in the 7th round.

Brad Smith and Jericho cotchery are not good WRS so I would not expect Sanchez to play any better if they were still on the team.

But your whole arguement is that mit's better for WRs to be with a team longer than shorter, that there is in fact a value to such continuity. May be, but not moreso than a QB being good.. Whether a WR or QB is on the field for week 17 or every game matters way less than if he is talented. Which is the whole point about Flynn. Which you ahve missed completely this whole thread.

[Sperm Edwards]

Panthers have 32 year-old Steve Smith, who's been there for years, and that's it in terms of "continuity" among the receivers. Everyone else is new, including the rookie QB throwing to them who started fewer games than Sanchez in college and had no training camp due to the lockout.

And they have a 4000-yard passing attack. The Jets just have a bad QB.

I thought I'd heard all the made-up girls' rules for making Mark Sanchez arguments. This one is new. That success in the passing game about how long the WR's have been on the same team even if the QB is totally new to the team. Go tell the Arizona Cardinals that they were just as good with Matt Leinart as they were with Kurt Warner because the receivers were the same and had been together for the same amount of time.

Explain the Saints passing game improving so dramatically from 2005 to 2006:

Joe Horn = 7th year + same age as Plaxico

Devery Henderson = 3rd year with NO but didn't play as a rookie

Ernie Conwell = 3rd year (and missed most of the season)

Jamal Jones = 2nd year with the Saints

Marques Colston = rookie WR who played TE in college -- 1st year with the Saints

Terrance Copper = 1st year with the Saints

Mark Campbell = 1st year with the Saints

Lance Moore = rookie -- 1st year with the Saints

And none of the tenure with the team really matters anyway because there was a 100% new offense installed so it was new to everyone.

The difference was that Drew Brees is/was awesome and Aaron Brooks was garbage.

I can appreciate fans falling over themselves to absolve Sanchez out of a desire that he or could be is something he's not and never will be, but this is the biggest reach of a made-up excuse yet (though points should be given for originality).

[Jetsfan80]

I can appreciate fans falling over themselves to absolve Sanchez out of a desire that he or could be is something he's not and never will be, but this is the biggest reach of a made-up excuse yet (though points should be given for originality).

I'm pretty sure I've seen this argument floated before but never with this much vigor.

[MTJ06]

But your whole arguement is that mit's better for WRs to be with a team longer than shorter, that there is in fact a value to such continuity. May be, but not moreso than a QB being good.. Whether a WR or QB is on the field for week 17 or every game matters way less than if he is talented. Which is the whole point about Flynn. Which you ahve missed completely this whole thread.

You are missing the whole point

I never said its more important than a QB being good, but it helps him to be good. Obviously they need each other.

Do you think Rogers or Brees would put up the same numbers that they do if they were the Jets QB for the past few years?

[Bugg]

You are missing the whole point

I never said its more important than a QB being good, but it helps him to be good. Obviously they need each other.

Do you think Rogers or Brees would put up the same numbers that they do if they were the Jets QB for the past few years?

Good/helping him be good; a false choice.

Yes-Rodgers and Brees would make this team way freaking better. And if you put Sanchez on the Saints or the Packers they would be hardpressed to win 9 games. Which is how the Colts went from Super Bowl contenders with Manning to complete poop without him.

Again, politely, you are wrong. Sanchez is the problem. It was the same thing with Pennington at the end-if only he had a great running game, a great OL, a great TE, great WRs with continuity, he would be all world. Or may be he simply sucks.

[MTJ06]

Panthers have 32 year-old Steve Smith, who's been there for years, and that's it in terms of "continuity" among the receivers. Everyone else is new, including the rookie QB throwing to them who started fewer games than Sanchez in college and had no training camp due to the lockout.

And they have a 4000-yard passing attack. The Jets just have a bad QB.

I thought I'd heard all the made-up girls' rules for making Mark Sanchez arguments. This one is new. That success in the passing game about how long the WR's have been on the same team even if the QB is totally new to the team. Go tell the Arizona Cardinals that they were just as good with Matt Leinart as they were with Kurt Warner because the receivers were the same and had been together for the same amount of time.

Explain the Saints passing game improving so dramatically from 2005 to 2006:

Joe Horn = 7th year + same age as Plaxico

Devery Henderson = 3rd year with NO but didn't play as a rookie

Ernie Conwell = 3rd year (and missed most of the season)

Jamal Jones = 2nd year with the Saints

Marques Colston = rookie WR who played TE in college -- 1st year with the Saints

Terrance Copper = 1st year with the Saints

Mark Campbell = 1st year with the Saints

Lance Moore = rookie -- 1st year with the Saints

And none of the tenure with the team really matters anyway because there was a 100% new offense installed so it was new to everyone.

The difference was that Drew Brees is/was awesome and Aaron Brooks was garbage.

I can appreciate fans falling over themselves to absolve Sanchez out of a desire that he or could be is something he's not and never will be, but this is the biggest reach of a made-up excuse yet (though points should be given for originality).

The two bolded parts of your post tell me you havent read much of what Ive written. I will repeat myself again, I dont care who the QB is I dont see the Jets having a successful passing offense if we continue to turn over the WRS every year.

[Jetsfan80]

The two bolded parts of your post tell me you havent read much of what Ive written. I will repeat myself again, I dont care who the QB is I dont see the Jets having a successful passing offense if we continue to turn over the WRS every year.

And WE'RE SAYING that no one cares how often the WR's change, we will never have a successful pass offense with a sh*tty QB. Clearly you disagree, and no amount of factual information will convince you otherwise.

[MTJ06]

And WE'RE SAYING that no one cares how often the WR's change, we will never have a successful pass offense with a sh*tty QB. Clearly you disagree, and no amount of factual information will convince you otherwise.

Maybe if you gave me any...

[Jetsfan80]

Maybe if you gave me any...

Clearly you didn't read sperm's post either. Not to mention, YOU were the one who made the (incorrect) claim, the burden of proof is on YOU. QB performance >>>>>>>>> WR continuity when it comes to an offense's success. I'd be fascinated to know how having Braylon Edwards and Jerricho Cotchery would have helped Sanchez magically turn in a great season.

[Sperm Edwards]

The two bolded parts of your post tell me you havent read much of what Ive written. I will repeat myself again, I dont care who the QB is I dont see the Jets having a successful passing offense if we continue to turn over the WRS every year.

I read that you stated continuity among the WR's, even if they weren't playing and only had a playbook.

Describe the continuity from the 2005 Saints to the 2006 Saints that resulted in the NFL's #1 passing attack in '06.

It's about the players and the schemes they play in. But first and foremost it's the players. Good schemes can make players appear better than they are & vice versa.

A lousy QB will generally trump all of it though.

[Sperm Edwards]

I'm pretty sure I've seen this argument floated before but never with this much vigor.

Well he is a cutie. Except for those f***ing moles. How much money does he have and he hasn't gotten those laser'd off yet? Ruins it for me.

[MTJ06]

Clearly you didn't read sperm's post either. Not to mention, YOU were the one who made the (incorrect) claim, the burden of proof is on YOU. QB performance >>>>>>>>> WR continuity when it comes to an offense's success. I'd be fascinated to know how having Braylon Edwards and Jerricho Cotchery would have helped Sanchez magically turn in a great season.

Incorrect in your opinion. I have proved my point the better passing offenses in the NFL have a stable receiving cores.

[RyanBe_Tweetin]

You're dancing around the obvious. The Jets need a QB. If they have a known good QB, and then he underperforms because of the OL or the receivers or the offensive coaches/schemes, then you could make that argument.

Until Mark Sanchez is capable of the simplest of tasks, like hitting a receiver where the receiver expects the ball to be from 6 yards away with greater than 95% accuracy, he is officially and will continue to be the #1 problem with the passing game. No amount of cohesiveness among the receivers will change that and no brilliant gameplans or schemes will change that.

It is obvious to the whole country. The only difference is the rest of the country has no particular desire that Mark Sanchez become a

good QB for the Jets.

Couldn't agree more. Sanchez is inaccurate from 5 yards out, 18 ints and 10 fumbles, and always seems to throw the ball behind the reciever he never leads them and allows catch and run type plays. Were stuck with this guy for another couple of years no matter how bad he plays. Gholston was with us for around 5 years before we admitted we made a mistake and cut him.

[MTJ06]

I read that you stated continuity among the WR's, even if they weren't playing and only had a playbook.

Describe the continuity from the 2005 Saints to the 2006 Saints that resulted in the NFL's #1 passing attack in '06.

It's about the players and the schemes they play in. But first and foremost it's the players. Good schemes can make players appear better than they are & vice versa.

A lousy QB will generally trump all of it though.

I listed all the wrs by team. If I didnt list everybody you would have posted "why didnt you list Cruz he has been there for 2 years".

I will have to look up the Saints from those years to see what happened, but is any thoery 100% true. Did I say every team in the history of football, no.

I agree that its about players and schemes. Its great when a QB and receiver have enough comfort with each other that they can change a play or route just by giving each other a look. That doesnt happen when you keep changing your receivers every year.

[Sperm Edwards]

You're putting the cart before the horse. Those "stable" receiving units would suck with bad QBs leading them. A good QB can have a bunch of new receivers and mount a dangerous passing attack.

Last year Brady was great and their passing game deadly. Branch had never played with any of the current receivers before. Welker and Edelman weren't usually on the field together before that, and their two TE's were both rookies. There was just about ZERO stability from the prior season. One of Brady's best seasons, which is saying something.

They also replaced their top-2 WR's in 2007 with total newcomers and added a new geriatric TE we drafted back in Bill Clinton's first term. They didn't retain their #1 WR, #2 WR, or #1 TE from 2006. Brady threw for 4800 yards and 50 TD's that season.

Colts passing game was #1 in the NFL last year in yards. The receiving corps is the same as last year and now their passing game is bottom-5.

Different QB, same receivers with the same amount of time together -- actually 1 more year of receiver "stability" together than in 2010.

I also brought up when Brees came to New Orleans. Their passing attack isn't deadly today because they've been together for 5 years. It was deadly 5 years ago when they were all newcomers learning a new playbook.

It's the QB. The WRs and TEs can all live together in the same house 12 months a year and do nothing but talk about football with each other every waking hour. And there will still be a drastic drop in production when you put a stiff in there behind center. Everyone knows it.

[jason423]

The thing is most teams hold onto WRs when they have a QB in place. Most of those teams held onto WRs because they saw them have great chemistry with a star QB. The Jets comparables are teams like the Ravens who are constantly moving parts in and out, Falcons who have a rookie, Lions whose second target has been there all of 2 years, etc....That is not to say continuity is bad, but good QBs makes blah WRs look pretty good.

[Sperm Edwards]

The thing is most teams hold onto WRs when they have a QB in place. Most of those teams held onto WRs because they saw them have great chemistry with a star QB. The Jets comparables are teams like the Ravens who are constantly moving parts in and out, Falcons who have a rookie, Lions whose second target has been there all of 2 years, etc....That is not to say continuity is bad, but good QBs makes blah WRs look pretty good.

Of course. If the passing game is really working, they don't tinker with it and tend to bring back as many of the same players as they had the prior year.

If the team's HC & FO feels that needs improvement, they tinker. Sometimes they tinker wisely, sometimes not. But tinkering - or even completely overhauling - is not in and of itself an absolute bad thing. Often it works out quite well, as I outlined.

[jason423]

Of course. If the passing game is really working, they don't tinker with it and tend to bring back as many of the same players as they had the prior year.

If the team's HC & FO feels that needs improvement, they tinker. Sometimes they tinker wisely, sometimes not. But tinkering - or even completely overhauling - is not in and of itself an absolute bad thing. Often it works out quite well, as I outlined.

100% agreed, I think it goes back to the idea that you dont build from the outside in on either side of the ball. You keep going for that great QB and when you get him just do whatever makes him happy. Brady and Manning have played with a revolving cast for some time. Brady has had Moss, Welker, Branch, Gaffney, a bazillion tight ends, and some bad draft picks. Peyton had Wayne, Harrison, and Clark but also added Gonzalez, Garcon, and Collie. They continue to be great.

[#27TheDominator]

The thing is most teams hold onto WRs when they have a QB in place. Most of those teams held onto WRs because they saw them have great chemistry with a star QB. The Jets comparables are teams like the Ravens who are constantly moving parts in and out, Falcons who have a rookie, Lions whose second target has been there all of 2 years, etc....That is not to say continuity is bad, but good QBs makes blah WRs look pretty good.

It's cart before the horse, but isn't it just that when a team has a good passing attack it tends to hold on to the WRs? How many truly good players get moved every season? The Giants had a good passing attack and still moved Shockey, Boss and went for Nicks and Manningham. Everybody is always trying to get better.

[jason423]

It's cart before the horse, but isn't it just that when a team has a good passing attack it tends to hold on to the WRs? How many truly good players get moved every season? The Giants had a good passing attack and still moved Shockey, Boss and went for Nicks and Manningham. Everybody is always trying to get better.

I think they moved Shockey because of the mouth and Boss because very few TEs are worth the money. But yeah in general they dont upset a good thing for the QB. Im sure if Eli said dont move Shockey he would still be there.

[Sperm Edwards]

I think they moved Shockey because of the mouth and Boss because very few TEs are worth the money. But yeah in general they dont upset a good thing for the QB. Im sure if Eli said dont move Shockey he would still be there.

Just as I'm sure Sanchez said he needs Holmes and make it happen no matter what.

No way the FO makes major FA moves of this caliber without consulting the QB.

[Sperm Edwards]

Couldn't agree more. Sanchez is inaccurate from 5 yards out, 18 ints and 10 fumbles, and always seems to throw the ball behind the reciever he never leads them and allows catch and run type plays. Were stuck with this guy for another couple of years no matter how bad he plays. Gholston was with us for around 5 years before we admitted we made a mistake and cut him.

I wouldn't say Sanchez never leads his receivers. He does sometimes, but he throws behind them and ahead of them (if not overthrowing or underthrowing by a few yards or more) far more often than he leads them properly, so a logical conclusion is that a good deal of times - if not the majority of time - he leads them properly it's by dumb luck.

Sanchez has just finished his 3rd season. We cut Gholston after 3 seasons. I doubt we cut Sanchez but I can't believe the team will not go into 2012 without some serious competition for the job that Sanchez never earned in the first place except by virtue of his draft position & salary.

[hoping4ASuperBowl]

I wouldn't say Sanchez never leads his receivers. He does sometimes, but he throws behind them and ahead of them (if not overthrowing or underthrowing by a few yards or more) far more often than he leads them properly, so a logical conclusion is that a good deal of times - if not the majority of time - he leads them properly it's by dumb luck.

Sanchez has just finished his 3rd season. We cut Gholston after 3 seasons. I doubt we cut Sanchez but I can't believe the team will not go into 2012 without some serious competition for the job that Sanchez never earned in the first place except by virtue of his draft position & salary.

Considering the amount of scrutiny Rex, Tanny, and the rest of the FO will get for this year, I don't think its possible we head into next season without another QB who will give Sanchez serious competition. The FO are gonna have a lot of time to look over everything, but there is no way we go into next season with Sanchez, McElroy, and Brunell.

[Smashmouth]

Incorrect in your opinion. I have proved my point the better passing offenses in the NFL have a stable receiving cores.

I have fought this fight about our skill players for years ..... most here will always blame the QB so you are fighting a useless battle. This team has skill players I personally would rank in the bottom 3rd of the league and an offensive line that had way to many issues. All this and 6 years of an inept Offensive Coordinator, but hey, lets blame it all on the QB. The QB this coaching staff has all but ruined. If a change is made and the Jets do the right thing and get a real OC and some good young skill players and a few decent O-Lineman maybe Sanchez can be salvaged Im hoping he can. Thing is I dont expect much from Tanny because the guy has no freakin clue how to fix this mess. The Jets have not had a clue since Parcells left the organization. Mangini had a good plan on how to build but he was not a very good head coach.

[Sperm Edwards]

Considering the amount of scrutiny Rex, Tanny, and the rest of the FO will get for this year, I don't think its possible we head into next season without another QB who will give Sanchez serious competition. The FO are gonna have a lot of time to look over everything, but there is no way we go into next season with Sanchez, McElroy, and Brunell.

Well we know Brunell is going, as it's been well-publicized this is his last year. But it can't be Sanchez, McElroy, O'Connell or Sanchez, McElroy/O'Connell, and some 5th-7th rounder.

I do think they realize, no matter what kind of happy face Rex painted on it yesterday, that they must draft a QB in the first few rounds or bring in a serious veteran QB who could legitimately beat out Sanchez over the summer and be our QB for the entire season. Absent adding someone like that, and instead going with an Orlovsky-type, they are effectively just handing the job to Sanchez for a 4th straight season.

He hasn't earned another off-season of unserious competition. Not by a long shot.

[hoping4ASuperBowl]

Well we know Brunell is going, as it's been well-publicized this is his last year. But it can't be Sanchez, McElroy, O'Connell or Sanchez, McElroy/O'Connell, and some 5th-7th rounder.

I do think they realize, no matter what kind of happy face Rex painted on it yesterday, that they must draft a QB in the first few rounds or bring in a serious veteran QB who could legitimately beat out Sanchez over the summer and be our QB for the entire season. Absent adding someone like that, and instead going with an Orlovsky-type, they are effectively just handing the job to Sanchez for a 4th straight season.

He hasn't earned another off-season of unserious competition. Not by a long shot.

Agreed,

[RyanBe_Tweetin]

I wouldn't say Sanchez never leads his receivers. He does sometimes, but he throws behind them and ahead of them (if not overthrowing or underthrowing by a few yards or more) far more often than he leads them properly, so a logical conclusion is that a good deal of times - if not the majority of time - he leads them properly it's by dumb luck.

Sanchez has just finished his 3rd season. We cut Gholston after 3 seasons. I doubt we cut Sanchez but I can't believe the team will not go into 2012 without some serious competition for the job that Sanchez never earned in the first place except by virtue of his draft position & salary.

That's a fair statement and I didn't think gholston had that short of a stay with the jets. But one things for certain, he is a human turnover machine. You can't win a superbowl with a qb who coughs it up as much as Sanchez does. I like what I saw from McElroy this preason. Id like to see what he has to offer. Matt Flynn is available and he just threw for a 480 with 6 tds and a completion percentage over 60%. When will we see Sanchez throw for those numbers? You can put that topic under never gonna happen.

[hoping4ASuperBowl]

That's a fair statement and I didn't think gholston had that short of a stay with the jets. But one things for certain, he is a human turnover machine. You can't win a superbowl with a qb who coughs it up as much as Sanchez does. I like what I saw from McElroy this preason. Id like to see what he has to offer. Matt Flynn is available and he just threw for a 480 with 6 tds and a completion percentage over 60%. When will we see Sanchez throw for those numbers? You can put that topic under never gonna happen.

Ugh. People keep talking about Flynn and the #'s he had but how much of that is really his talent and how much of it is about the talent and coaching around him? Not to mention, they were playing Detroit.

[RyanBe_Tweetin]

Ugh. People keep talking about Flynn and the #'s he had but how much of that is really his talent and how much of it is about the talent and coaching around him? Not to mention, they were playing Detroit.

Flynn did something that Bart Starr, Brett Farve, and Aaron Rodgers have never done. The packers do have a lot of offensive weapons but the jets do too. Do you really believe that Sanchez could put up those numbers ever? He couldn't do it against the worst defense in the league this year and he played them twice. It was just one game though I see where you're coming from.

[hoping4ASuperBowl]

Flynn did something that Bart Starr, Brett Farve, and Aaron Rodgers have never done. The packers do have a lot of offensive weapons but the jets do too. Do you really believe that Sanchez could put up those numbers ever? He couldn't do it against the worst defense in the league this year and he played them twice. It was just one game though I see where you're coming from.

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=280928020

Favre did do that, and with the Jets no less. Our crew then was a lot less talented then what Flynn has over in GB. I just think people in overreacting when looking at Flynn's #'s from one game. I think we have enough talent on this roster to do some great things, I know it's hard to see considering how bad it's looked recently but the talent is there, except at RT. Could Sanchez put up those same kinda #'s that Flynn did? Probably not, but I don't think it's fair to close the book on him without at least bringing in a different OC.

[RyanBe_Tweetin]

I don't know if the talent is there. We can't cover a tight end, we don't stop the run as well as we used, we don't put pressure on the quarterback, we have a no identity on the offensive side of the ball. We have talent but not enough talent to win a championship. Flynn had a good game against the patriots that everyone thought were unbeatable last year. Sure favre had that game and I'll admit I was wrong but you can't deny the fact that Flynn has some talent. You don't throw 6 tds and 480 yards with the talent around you and coaching alone. Kids got some game.

[hoping4ASuperBowl]

I don't know if the talent is there. We can't cover a tight end, we don't stop the run as well as we used, we don't put pressure on the quarterback, we have a no identity on the offensive side of the ball. We have talent but not enough talent to win a championship. Flynn had a good game against the patriots that everyone thought were unbeatable last year. Sure favre had that game and I'll admit I was wrong but you can't deny the fact that Flynn has some talent. You don't throw 6 tds and 480 yards with the talent around you and coaching alone. Kids got some game.

I'm only talking about offense as far as talent. Ryan can string together a good defense with mostly UDFA's.

But let's stick with what you're saying. Let's say the kids got talent, and he's an UDFA, how likely is it the Jets can actually get this kid when you got teams like the Bills, Browns, Texans, Colts, Jags, Chiefs, Dolphins, Raiders, 49ers, Seahawks, Rams, Bucs, Titans, and Redskins who could all use a supposed upgrade like Flynn at QB?

I wouldn't commit big # to Flynn based of a few games. If he wants to come here for a reasonable contract, fine, but he just priced himself out of our range with the game he had. Someone else will pay him big, like the Redskins.

[StraightCash]

When you look around the league at the better passing offenses you realize that most of them have a receiving core group that has been playing with the team together for years. Even the teams with great qbs also have a stable receiving core that has been with the team for years. I believe the Jets need to put together a similar core group in order to have a successful passing offense, and cannot continue to patch things together on a yearly basis.

For Example:

GB-Donald Driver 13yrs, Greg Jennings 6yrs, James Jones 5yrs, Jordy Nelson 4yrs, J Finley 4yrs

NO- D Henderson 8yrs, L Moore 7yrs, M Colston 6yrs, R Meachem 5yrs, J Graham 2yrs

NE- Branch 6 yrs, Welker 5yrs, Edelman 3yrs, Gronkowski 2 yrs, Hernandez 2yrs

IND Wayne 11 yrs, D Clark 9 yrs, Gonzalez 5 yrs, Garcon 4yrs, Tamme 4 yrs, Collie 3 yrs

SD A Gates 9yrs, M Floyd 8yrs, V Jackson 7 yrs, P Crayton 2 yrs

Pitt H Ward 14 yrs, H Miller 7yrs, M Wallace 3 yrs, A Brown 2 yrs, E Sanders 2yrs

Hou A Johnson 9 yrs, O Daniels 6yrs, J Jones 5yrs, K Walter 5yrs

Dal Witten 9yrs, M Austin 6yrs, K Ogletree 3yrs, D Bryant 2yrs, L Robinson 1 yr

NYG M Manningham 4yrs, H Knicks 3yrs, R Barden 3 yrs, V Cruz 2yrs, J Ballard 2 yrs

DET C Johnson 5yrs, B Pettigrew 3 yrs, N Burleson 2 yrs, T Young 1 yr

NYJ D Keller 4 yrs, S Holmes 2 yrs, P Turner 2yrs, P Burress 1yr, J Kerley 1yr

When looking at our group in comparison to the more successful passing offenses in the NFL is it any surprise that Mark Sanchez is inaccurate, and our passing offense lacks consistency?

Can you do me a favor? Post the passing offense rank for each of the teams listed.

[RyanBe_Tweetin]

I'm only talking about offense as far as talent. Ryan can string together a good defense with mostly UDFA's.

But let's stick with what you're saying. Let's say the kids got talent, and he's an UDFA, how likely is it the Jets can actually get this kid when you got teams like the Bills, Browns, Texans, Colts, Jags, Chiefs, Dolphins, Raiders, 49ers, Seahawks, Rams, Bucs, Titans, and Redskins who could all use a supposed upgrade like Flynn at QB?

I wouldn't commit big # to Flynn based of a few games. If he wants to come here for a reasonable contract, fine, but he just priced himself out of our range with the game he had. Someone else will pay him big, like the Redskins.

I was only saying that Flynn was available and that he's got some skills. I never said it was a good financial decision. I understand there will be a market for him but let's not go overboard. Bills just signed Fitzpatrick to a big contract, texans still have schaub, colts have manning and the opportunity to draft luck, raiders just traded two first rounders for Palmer, smith has played well for the 49ers this year,I feel the rams are commited to Bradford, bucs have Freeman who despite a bad year has shown he has what it takes, titans have hasselbeck and are grooming locker. Realistically they'll be maybe 3 or 4 teams that go after free agents quarterbacks like Flynn. Were not going to go after flynn anyway.

[The Mytee Markjets]

Sanchez is without QUESTION, the absolute WORST QB, IN THE ENTIRE LEAGUE!!!!!! Ill bet that if we had TYLER PALCO, we would have made the playoffs!!!!! BE HONEST!!!!! He needs to go!!! Peyton Manning???