Jump to content

Cavanaugh on Sanchez


jbone

Recommended Posts

Ha! The article was definitely not written in that light. All he did was essentially tell you things he's working on with Mark, mostly from a mental perspective, where I think we all agree is the biggest problem. The kid is a baby and still is developing just like any other Qb going into his 4th season. And despite his success from a winning perspective, he clearly has a lot of things he needs to improve on, especially being consistent with his decision making.

Whatever, its a stupid thing to debate. You see it one way, I see it the other.

I think Mark has a great season. Just a gut instinct.

No, you are interpreting this with the level of depth usually reserved for Klacko or Smash... It's clearly a negative article...

I've said 1000 times, I think Sanchez has a good season, because of Tebow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 171
  • Created
  • Last Reply

No, you are interpreting this with the level of depth usually reserved for Klacko or Smash... It's clearly a negative article...

I've said 1000 times, I think Sanchez has a good season, because of Tebow

No, its not clearly a negative article which is why you have this thread split about 50/50 on how they interpreted it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

If Sanchez can Dilfer his way to a Lombardi Trophy, it'll be a good deal. It's up to Sanchez and Sparano to get him there. He's obviously got a ways to go.

Sanchez dilfering his way into a Lombardi is made more difficult by his cap figure

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See i think a guy who was below average by every available metric who isn't working to improve because the team has played slighty above .500 ball is most certainly lazy..

THe fact that he's claiming he's going to get better now cause he now realizes he wasn't that good tells me he's very lazy indeed

There's lazy and there's complacent. I think Sanchez has been complacent, not lazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Jets might have a Super Bowl victory in years one and two under Rex with a good game manager. I am with you on that one.

I would love to know the back story with Cavanaugh, they definitely seemed to want to let him go...then they didn't. Guess they couldn't convince themselves they had an upgrade lined up.

So it's Sanchez's fault that Austin Collie and Pierre Garcon were open constantly in the AFCC game that we lost to Peyton? Sanchez fault that Shonn Greene left the game after being the heart and soul of the offense for that entire playoff run? The reason we couldn't keep up with the Colts in this game is because they ONLY used Sanchez as a game manager, when the time came for him to play catch-up, he couldn't. So if he couldn't throw to keep pace with Peyton, how does that translate to him needing to be a game manager for us to win? Makes no sense.

I suppose we are blaming Sanchez for letting Mendenhall run all over can't wait's face vs. Pittsburgh too? Sanchez was 20/33 for 233 yards and 2 TDs. That is game manager stats, actually maybe a bit better... and we lost, not because of Sanchez. We lost because Mendenhall ran the ball 27 times.

Sorry Max, I think your assertion that a game manager gets us past those 2 AFCC games is unrealistic revisionist history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you say potato

There is a difference between the two. Some have suggested that Sanchez was physically lazy. I don't think that's the case and I don't believe there's been any real evidence of that.

I think his, to use Cavanaugh's term, "success" early on (which was really the team's success if you want to be accurate) made him think he was on the right track so he kept working on the same things. But as I've said a million times: practice doesn't make perfect; perfect practice makes perfect. If you keep practicing the wrong things you'll only get good at doing the wrong things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a difference between the two. Some have suggested that Sanchez was physically lazy. I don't think that's the case and I don't believe there's been any real evidence of that.

I think his, to use Cavanaugh's term, "success" early on (which was really the team's success if you want to be accurate) made him think he was on the right track so he kept working on the same things. But as I've said a million times: practice doesn't make perfect; perfect practice makes perfect. If you keep practicing the wrong things you'll only get good at doing the wrong things.

'm not saying physically lazy.. i'm saying lazy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanchez dilfering his way into a Lombardi is made more difficult by his cap figure

Not a fair complaint if you don't have any other options to offer. They took a shot at a potential franchise QB, and paid him like one. The only real difference between Sanchez and every other QB drafted in the top five is that they redid Mark's contract to lower his cap number - but that gets complained about, too.

I can bitch about Tannenbaum, too, but I prefer to be able to offer up reasonable alternatives to the mistakes I perceive him making. For instance, they could've stood pat in that draft and taken Josh Freeman, and gotten a better QB for less money and picks/players traded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Troy Aikman was a #1 overall who made a sh*tload of money stinking up Dallas is first few years in the league. Then went onto a career where he never threw for more than 3500 yards in any season.

Every time you try and compare him to Aikman I almost fall out of my chair. Haven't seen a reach like that in a while. Lol

Aikman really began to show improvement during his 3rd year (Mark regressed in several areas, as admitted by himself and his coaches, so they were going in 2 different directions at identical periods in their careers) and began his string of 6 straight Prob Bowls. He also completed 65% of his passes in his 3rd year, what was Mark. 56%? Aikman was also right outside the top 5 for QBR after his third season, in his 4th year he was top 3. Mark has enormous strides to take if he wishes to have the same trend line as Aikman. Not realistic to assume such progression, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every time you try and compare him to Aikman I almost fall out of my chair. Haven't seen a reach like that in a while. Lol

Aikman really began to show improvement during his 3rd year (Mark regressed in several areas, as admitted by himself and his coaches, so they were going in 2 different directions at identical periods in their careers) and began his string of 6 straight Prob Bowls. He also completed 65% of his passes in his 3rd year, what was Mark. 56%? Aikman was also right outside the top 5 for QBR after his third season, in his 4th year he was top 3. Mark has enormous strides to take if he wishes to have the same trend line as Aikman. Not realistic to assume such progression, IMO.

And Mark Will never ever have anything close to the talent that surrounded Troy Aikman. Not trying to take anything away from Troy here but that team he played for steam rolled and bullied other teams on offense Troy was not asked to light up the score board because not only did they have a tremendous offense they also had the top rated Defense. Makes it a bit easier when you play behind one of the greatest O-Lines in histroy with HOF players at nearly every position. The Jets have one perrenial Pro Bowler possible HOF on the offense and thats Nick Mangold. We have not had a CONSISTENT pro bowl caliber player on this offense in the past 12 years other than Cutis Martin.

Sanchez Haters will make the point "Sanchez needs pro bowl players around him to be good" and they say it with 100 % sarcasm .

The Jets FINALLY went out and got the weapon at WR they should have drafted when they first Drafted Sanchez you know like most teams who draft young franchise QB's do. But the Jets course of action was to Sign Locker room cancers, Drunk Drivers, Gun toating jail birds, and 38 year old washed up locker room cancers. What a plan. Oh and I forgot the QB killing OC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every time you try and compare him to Aikman I almost fall out of my chair. Haven't seen a reach like that in a while. Lol

Aikman really began to show improvement during his 3rd year (Mark regressed in several areas, as admitted by himself and his coaches, so they were going in 2 different directions at identical periods in their careers) and began his string of 6 straight Prob Bowls. He also completed 65% of his passes in his 3rd year, what was Mark. 56%? Aikman was also right outside the top 5 for QBR after his third season, in his 4th year he was top 3. Mark has enormous strides to take if he wishes to have the same trend line as Aikman. Not realistic to assume such progression, IMO.

I'm not in love with Sanchez by any stretch, but the comparisons to Aikman aren't really fall out of your chair worthy. You can talk about Mark regressing in his third year, but his comp %, TDs, and QBR were all up despite a spotty OL, and a poor WR situation. Sanchez threw for more yards last year than Aikman ever did in his career. The big difference between the two players is that Aikman had Michael Irvin for virtually his entire career, and Irvin broke out in Aikman's third year. Aikman also had a second year Emmit Smith tearing it up behind him. The Jets, quite simply, have never provided Sanchez with weapons like that.

I'm not saying that Sanchez will be Aikman, as much as I'm saying that Aikman was never more than a game manager and that that was good enough for three Super Bowl titles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a fair complaint if you don't have any other options to offer. They took a shot at a potential franchise QB, and paid him like one. The only real difference between Sanchez and every other QB drafted in the top five is that they redid Mark's contract to lower his cap number - but that gets complained about, too.

I can bitch about Tannenbaum, too, but I prefer to be able to offer up reasonable alternatives to the mistakes I perceive him making. For instance, they could've stood pat in that draft and taken Josh Freeman, and gotten a better QB for less money and picks/players traded.

Is Freeman really better? I think he's much worse. He was awful last year, significantly worse than Sanchez - with one more turnover (27 to Sanchez's 26, including throwing four more interceptions than Sanchez) and significantly fewer scores (16 passing TDs and 4 rushing to Sanchez's 26 passing and 6 rushing.) Freeman benefited from playing an historically easy schedule in 2010, only playing four games against opponents with winning records.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Freeman really better? I think he's much worse. He was awful last year, significantly worse than Sanchez - with one more turnover (27 to Sanchez's 26, including throwing four more interceptions than Sanchez) and significantly fewer scores (16 passing TDs and 4 rushing to Sanchez's 26 passing and 6 rushing.) Freeman benefited from playing an historically easy schedule in 2010, only playing four games against opponents with winning records.

Are you reading my posts in this thread? Lol!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not in love with Sanchez by any stretch, but the comparisons to Aikman aren't really fall out of your chair worthy. You can talk about Mark regressing in his third year, but his comp %, TDs, and QBR were all up despite a spotty OL, and a poor WR situation. Sanchez threw for more yards last year than Aikman ever did in his career. The big difference between the two players is that Aikman had Michael Irvin for virtually his entire career, and Irvin broke out in Aikman's third year. Aikman also had a second year Emmit Smith tearing it up behind him. The Jets, quite simply, have never provided Sanchez with weapons like that.

I'm not saying that Sanchez will be Aikman, as much as I'm saying that Aikman was never more than a game manager and that that was good enough for three Super Bowl titles.

Aikman had Irvin his entire career as Irvin was Tom Landry's last 1st round pick and Aikman was Jimmy Johnson's first 1st rounder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not in love with Sanchez by any stretch, but the comparisons to Aikman aren't really fall out of your chair worthy. You can talk about Mark regressing in his third year, but his comp %, TDs, and QBR were all up despite a spotty OL, and a poor WR situation. Sanchez threw for more yards last year than Aikman ever did in his career. The big difference between the two players is that Aikman had Michael Irvin for virtually his entire career, and Irvin broke out in Aikman's third year. Aikman also had a second year Emmit Smith tearing it up behind him. The Jets, quite simply, have never provided Sanchez with weapons like that.

I'm not saying that Sanchez will be Aikman, as much as I'm saying that Aikman was never more than a game manager and that that was good for three Super Bowl titles.

I think this argument is (unfortunately) bunk. Rules were way different in the early 90's. It was easier to win with the defense/running game strategy. I think Sanchez could eventually turn into a competent game manager but it's really, really hard to win a championship with that type of player at the most important position on the field. And if we wanted to just get a game manager, what was the point of trading up to the fifth overall pick and handing him 70 mil?

And to make things worse he hasn't actually proved he can consistently manage a game. He's more likely to have a meltdown and hand the ball over than he is to not mess things up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a fair complaint if you don't have any other options to offer. They took a shot at a potential franchise QB, and paid him like one. The only real difference between Sanchez and every other QB drafted in the top five is that they redid Mark's contract to lower his cap number - but that gets complained about, too.

I can bitch about Tannenbaum, too, but I prefer to be able to offer up reasonable alternatives to the mistakes I perceive him making. For instance, they could've stood pat in that draft and taken Josh Freeman, and gotten a better QB for less money and picks/players traded.

I was responding to your quote below. That a game manager is all you want with a defensive orientated style. In effect, you are criticizing Tanny for making a mistake, just without being explicit about it. If all you want is a game manager. you don't move up to 5 and ink him to a 60M dollar deal to do it. It's not in alignment.

Further, I could present alternatives, you could tell me why they really weren't feasible for what ever reason and neither of us will gain ground in the discussion.. Don't see the point in heading down that path. Rather, I'm trying to say that getting a "game manager" at 5 and paying him what we've paid him is a gross misuse of resources. Utilizing the teams resources as wisely as possible is a good way to remain competitive over the long haul. (See the Stoolers, who don't often over pay aging players, or draft early enough to get killed under the old rookie wage system) I think both those points are obvious, if Sanchez works out as a game manager, it wasn't a "good" move for the Jets in these terms.

Nothing wrong with being a game manager. Phil Simms was a game manager, Troy Aikman was a game manager. In the Jets' run first, defense oriented style, a game manager is what you want in a QB. Which is why Sanchez has to watch his back. Tebow can also be molded into a game manager.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Freeman really better? I think he's much worse. He was awful last year, significantly worse than Sanchez - with one more turnover (27 to Sanchez's 26, including throwing four more interceptions than Sanchez) and significantly fewer scores (16 passing TDs and 4 rushing to Sanchez's 26 passing and 6 rushing.) Freeman benefited from playing an historically easy schedule in 2010, only playing four games against opponents with winning records.

Like Punkington in 2008.. agree with that.,..

I'm not convinced that Sanchez can't be better then Stafford either.. I think the dudes a big coddled baby, which frankly sounds a lot like immaturity... Immaturity is something you grow out of, at least a little. I think Tebow provides the necessarily kick in the a$$ to up his game.. i really do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this argument is (unfortunately) bunk. Rules were way different in the early 90's. It was easier to win with the defense/running game strategy. I think Sanchez could eventually turn into a competent game manager but it's really, really hard to win a championship with that type of player at the most important position on the field. And if we wanted to just get a game manager, what was the point of trading up to the fifth overall pick and handing him 70 mil?

And to make things worse he hasn't actually proved he can consistently manage a game. He's more likely to have a meltdown and hand the ball over than he is to not mess things up.

what he said... all of it

Aikmen >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sanchesa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like Punkington in 2008.. agree with that.,..

I'm not convinced that Sanchez can't be better then Stafford either.. I think the dudes a big coddled baby, which frankly sounds a lot like immaturity... Immaturity is something you grow out of, at least a little. I think Tebow provides the necessarily kick in the a$$ to up his game.. i really do

I hope you're right and you know I'm rooting for it to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like Punkington in 2008.. agree with that.,..

I'm not convinced that Sanchez can't be better then Stafford either.. I think the dudes a big coddled baby, which frankly sounds a lot like immaturity... Immaturity is something you grow out of, at least a little. I think Tebow provides the necessarily kick in the a$$ to up his game.. i really do

If Sanchez crawled up into a ball when he was being booed a little bit last year, wait until Tebow steamrolls Jerod Mayo and the whole place goes crazy. What's funny is that Tebow's already guaranteed to get a good amount of snaps, no matter how well Sanchez is doing. I'm sure that will do wonders for his, um, maturity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Sanchez crawled up into a ball when he was being booed a little bit last year, wait until Tebow steamrolls Jerod Mayo and the whole place goes crazy. What's funny is that Tebow's already guaranteed to get a good amount of snaps, no matter how well Sanchez is doing. I'm sure that will do wonders for his, um, maturity.

Well there's the flip side. It's certainly possible that the pressure causes him to cave. Don't think so, but we'll see

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Sanchez crawled up into a ball when he was being booed a little bit last year, wait until Tebow steamrolls Jerod Mayo and the whole place goes crazy. What's funny is that Tebow's already guaranteed to get a good amount of snaps, no matter how well Sanchez is doing. I'm sure that will do wonders for his, um, maturity.

I don't remember that happening. Link?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not convinced that Sanchez can't be better then Stafford either.. I think the dudes a big coddled baby, which frankly sounds a lot like immaturity... Immaturity is something you grow out of, at least a little. I think Tebow provides the necessarily kick in the a$$ to up his game.. i really do

I think it is pretty clear, all things being equal, and both at 100% physical/mental capacity, Stafford is significantly more talented. It's not very close either, especially with the monster numbers Stafford was able to put up last year. I just dont ever see Sanchez being able to do some of the tings Stafford is able to. Like throw for 5,000 yds and 40 TDs in a season with a 63% completion rate. I would be ecstatic if he can get 4000yds and 30TDs while cutting down on the T/Os.

I know, I know......Sanchez doesnt have Calvin Johnson; if he did then he would have identical numbers. Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is pretty clear, all things being equal, and both at 100% physical/mental capacity, Stafford is significantly more talented. It's not very close either, especially with the monster numbers Stafford was able to put up last year. I just dont ever see Sanchez being able to do some of the tings Stafford is able to. Like throw for 5,000 yds and 40 TDs in a season with a 63% completion rate. I would be ecstatic if he can get 4000yds and 30TDs while cutting down on the T/Os.

I know, I know......Sanchez doesnt have Calvin Johnson; if he did then he would have identical numbers. Lol

Sanchez has talent, we've alll seen him play excellent. He's not consistent. and to me, that boils down to work ethic and preparation. I've made this equation before, but to me it's like a great piano player, it they were to attempt a new piece of music, and not prepare properly, it won't be anywhere near as consistent as it could be

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this argument is (unfortunately) bunk. Rules were way different in the early 90's. It was easier to win with the defense/running game strategy. I think Sanchez could eventually turn into a competent game manager but it's really, really hard to win a championship with that type of player at the most important position on the field. And if we wanted to just get a game manager, what was the point of trading up to the fifth overall pick and handing him 70 mil?

And to make things worse he hasn't actually proved he can consistently manage a game. He's more likely to have a meltdown and hand the ball over than he is to not mess things up.

The rules weren't much different in the 90's than they are today. You can still win in this league with ball control and defense.

Of course the Jets were hoping for more with Sanchez, and they may still get it. I'm sure the Cowboys were hoping for more from Aikman when they took him #1 overall. As for the contract, more than $30M of the $40 million extension is salaries in 2014, 15, & 16. If he doesn't perform in the next two years, he won't see that money.

And again, Sanchez hasn't exactly had the luxury or Irvin, Emmitt, and that Cowboys' OL so far in his career, nor was Aikman asked to run the Schottenheimer/Dostoevsky offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And again, Sanchez hasn't exactly had the luxury or Irvin, Emmitt, and that Cowboys' OL so far in his career, nor was Aikman asked to run the Schottenheimer/Dostoevsky offense.

Can't argue with you on your point regarding Smith and Irvin. They were great players. But, Mark had the benefit of having one of the best OLs in football his first 2 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“There were turnovers that were not his fault that were credited to him,” Cavanaugh said. “But there were enough that playing that position he needs to cut some of those down. Most of them came from just poor decision-making.

Gee, how many times have I posted on this site - If you need someone to blame for the POOR decisions - IT HAS TO BE BRIAN SHOTTENHEIMER...

God do I feel exonerated! :character0069:

Lets all hope he can repair the problems that have prevailed over this Offense since Brett Favre!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1.) I don't understand why Cavanaugh was retained in the first place.

2.) Nothing wrong with being a game manager. Phil Simms was a game manager, Troy Aikman was a game manager. In the Jets' run first, defense oriented style, a game manager is what you want in a QB. Which is why Sanchez has to watch his back. Tebow can also be molded into a game manager.

Me too, and I hereby officially refuse to recognize Cavanaugh as a legitimate Jets' coach. There was no good reason to keep him, therefore he is dismissed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it's Sanchez's fault that Austin Collie and Pierre Garcon were open constantly in the AFCC game that we lost to Peyton? Sanchez fault that Shonn Greene left the game after being the heart and soul of the offense for that entire playoff run? The reason we couldn't keep up with the Colts in this game is because they ONLY used Sanchez as a game manager, when the time came for him to play catch-up, he couldn't. So if he couldn't throw to keep pace with Peyton, how does that translate to him needing to be a game manager for us to win? Makes no sense.

I suppose we are blaming Sanchez for letting Mendenhall run all over can't wait's face vs. Pittsburgh too? Sanchez was 20/33 for 233 yards and 2 TDs. That is game manager stats, actually maybe a bit better... and we lost, not because of Sanchez. We lost because Mendenhall ran the ball 27 times.

Sorry Max, I think your assertion that a game manager gets us past those 2 AFCC games is unrealistic revisionist history.

I don't know, but I think your QB has to be one of the best players on your team. Alex Smith wasn't and it was not his fault they lost. But it might have been his fault that they did not win. If he could have played a teensy bit better......That is how I feel about Sanchez. The jets sound like they want a breakeven QB. If they get that, they are not going anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember reading a few months back the Jets brought in and interviewed no less than 4 alternative QB coach candidates who all chose to accept positions elsewhere. It seemed clear right after the season they wanted to release Cavanaugh, but they couldn't get anyone who was an upgrade, in their eyes. I'll try and find the source I am referring to, it's been a couple months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...