Sanchez sucks.

[Matt39]

For Week 7 Mark Sanchez had an adjusted completion % of 80%.

Sanchez's fault.

[jetsjetsjetss]

?

[Matt39]

?

10-14 on passes traveling over 10 yards is awesome.

Yeah the Pats secondary is soft, but Sanchez was far from the problem yesterday. It was a team loss with some crappy coaching decisions down the stretch. They played scared.

[JustInFudge]

Because he wasnt throwing the ball. Unless you want to blame Sanchez for his handoffs there. Give me a break.

On that bootleg, it looked like he could have thrown Reuland open to the back of the endzone. It was 1 on 1 coverage, he had a small step on him. A ball to the back of the end zone could have created a play, or at least an opportunity.

I'm just wondering if the Bootleg was called so if he didnt have anything, he could just run, stay in bounds and force them to take a timeout.

[bbatelli]

Fine. Forget the #5 pick.

Is 4-3-1 acceptable for the 7th highest paid QB in the league?

The highest paid in the last 7 is 2-5.

[Matt39]

On that bootleg, it looked like he could have thrown Reuland open to the back of the endzone. It was 1 on 1 coverage, he had a small step on him. A ball to the back of the end zone could have created a play, or at least an opportunity.

I'm just wondering if the Bootleg was called so if he didnt have anything, he could just run, stay in bounds and force them to take a timeout.

They were trying to run clock. Obviously him taking the sack sucked, but Folk made it moot anyways. The real issue there was no running a real play when Sanchez had been pretty much throwing the ball at will.

[HessStation]

This is where you and the pocket protector posse lose me. I don't give a sh*te how many yards the QB puts up. Just win.

Just win what Ahab? Who was better, Warren Moon or Trent Dilfer?

To help you out, Moon won more games, Dilfer won more Super Bowls.

[jetsjetsjetss]

10-14 on passes traveling over 10 yards is awesome.

Yeah the Pats secondary is soft, but Sanchez was far from the problem yesterday. It was a team loss with some crappy coaching decisions down the stretch. They played scared.

see this is what i dont understand sanchez apologists do. Yes he had a pretty good game statistics wise. But he was bassically mediocre screwing up as much as he helped.

far from the problem rly? rly lol?

Everyone didnt play great but when you have a fumble to lose an interception on wide open people and your the QB it does rest squarly on sanchez. He is the face of our franchise and the QB most important position on the field.

[Matt39]

see this is what i dont understand sanchez apologists do. Yes he had a pretty good game statistics wise. But he was bassically mediocre screwing up as much as he helped.

far from the problem rly? rly lol?

Everyone didnt play great but when you have a fumble to lose an interception on wide open people and your the QB it does rest squarly on sanchez. He is the face of our franchise and the QB most important position on the field.

Im not a Sanchez apologist by any stretch. I just happen to recognize football is a team sport and this QB vs 11 players talking point that has developed is absurd. Especially when the guy was 16-20 in the second half on the road and was successfully completing passes down the field.

The defense was given the lead, Rex went conservative with a 3 man rush and they got burned. Then they do the same thing in OT. Pats get the lead, crowd on their side, Brandon Moore gets blown up and thats all she wrote.

[Pac]

Your entire argument is metaphysical you complete dingbat.

My arguments are based on what he's actually done.

You're the one that would rather deal with hypotheticals which don't take into account how another QB would deal with the NY media and it's baboon-like fan base.

[bbatelli]

my mistake i did forget about it just looked at the stats u put out.

but still if he was this great player who wins us games dont u think hed be the one to march down the field and score a TD or atleast a FG in overtime. But predictably he was due for a screw up that game fumble it lose.

He would have had a better shot for a TD if the ball wasn't dropped by Hill. Or a pass play called at 3rd and 1.

[Pac]

Just win what Ahab? Who was better, Warren Moon or Trent Dilfer?

To help you out, Moon won more games, Dilfer won more Super Bowls.

The better question is whose fans were happier? Ravens or KC/Oilers?

[jetsjetsjetss]

Im not a Sanchez apologist by any stretch. I just happen to recognize football is a team sport and this QB vs 11 players talking point that has developed is absurd. Especially when the guy was 16-20 in the second half on the road and was successfully completing passes down the field.

The defense was given the lead, Rex went conservative with a 3 man rush and they got burned. Then they do the same thing in OT. Pats get the lead, crowd on their side, Brandon Moore gets blown up and thats all she wrote.

the defense gave up like 20 points in regulation didnt they? How is that so bad. Reasoning like that gets arguments no where.

You could say the defense gave sanchez an opportunity to win the game in OT by holding one of the best offenses in the league to 3 points. It didnt happen

[HessStation]

My arguments are based on what he's actually done.

You're the one that would rather deal with hypotheticals which don't take into account how another QB would deal with the NY media and it's baboon-like fan base.

Based on your metrics, you just called Vinny Testeverde a Top 25 QB of ALL TIME.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_wins_by_a_starting_quarterback_(NFL)

[Matt39]

You could say the defense gave sanchez an opportunity to win the game in OT by holding one of the best offenses in the league to 3 points. It didnt happen

Oh christ come on

[jetsjetsjetss]

Oh christ come on

what? Were we not in position to win the game with a touchdown?

this is how i feel like when sanchez people say he puts us in position to win

[JohnnyHector]

Salary Cap Wizard.

[RutgersJetFan]

I can always tell how slow your day at work is because it's in direct proportion to the creativity of your gifs.

[JohnnyHector]

I can always tell how slow your day at work is because it's in direct proportion to the creativity of your gifs.

This was a 5-minute job, as is evidenced by the meh execution. It's the message that matters.

[Pac]

This was a 5-minute job, as is evidenced by the meh execution. It's the message that matters.

there's one of the founding fathers...

so Sanchez yesterday... Bad, horrible, or worst ever?

[Bleedin Green]

10-14 on passes traveling over 10 yards is awesome.

Yeah the Pats secondary is soft, but Sanchez was far from the problem yesterday. It was a team loss with some crappy coaching decisions down the stretch. They played scared.

See this is type of mindset which is the problem. Nobody is saying that Sanchez is the only reason the Jets lost the game, far from it, but rather the debate is to what degree he truly is to blame. There has been plenty of criticism of other areas of the team (defense, special teams, Hill, etc), amongst even Sanchez's biggest critics. Meanwhile, you have posts like these that are trying to completely absolve him of all blame, which is utterly ridiculous.

While he may have had some other good plays throughout the game, you can't dismiss the reality that he played a major hand in three game-changing turnovers: a horrendous INT on what should have been an unbelievably easy TD, a botched hand-off that gave the Pats 2 points and the ball and a fumble that ended the game. While some may try to argue the degree of blame he had in the latter two (nobody can dare argue the INT wasn't 100% on him), he certainly cannot be completely absolved of them either. Nobody is saying things like the kick return TD and other various plays throughout the game didn't all play their part in the outcome, but things like that also aren't regular weekly occurrences and aren't the fault of the same one particular player (not to mention, at the league's most important position).

[JohnnyHector]

there's one of the founding fathers...

so Sanchez yesterday... Bad, horrible, or worst ever?

Varying degrees of less than "good" are kind of meaningless at this point, no?

I watched the game last night skipping from play-to-play on the DVR, so I didn't get to see much in the way of replays... despite his final numbers that get you excited, he was still woefully inaccurate, even on completions. Is it too much to ask to hit a guy in stride or throw it where a guy doesn't have to contort to catch the ball and come down in bounds when he's wide open on the sideline?

He's a lost cause, at least for this franchise.

[Matt39]

See this is type of mindset which is the problem. Nobody is saying that Sanchez is the only reason the Jets lost the game, far from it, but rather the debate is to what degree he truly is to blame. There has been plenty of criticism of other areas of the team (defense, special teams, Hill, etc), amongst even Sanchez's biggest critics. Meanwhile, you have posts like these that are trying to completely absolve him of all blame, which is utterly ridiculous.

While he may have had some other good plays throughout the game, you can't dismiss the reality that he played a major hand in three game-changing turnovers: a horrendous INT on what should have been an unbelievably easy TD, a botched hand-off that gave the Pats 2 points and the ball and a fumble that ended the game. While some may try to argue the degree of blame he had in the latter two (nobody can dare argue the INT wasn't 100% on him), he certainly cannot be completely absolved of them either. Nobody is saying things like the kick return TD and other various plays throughout the game didn't all play their part in the outcome, but things like that also aren't regular weekly occurrences and aren't the fault of the same one particular player (not to mention, at the league's most important position).

The handoff Matt Slauson got absolutely trucked and blew up the play. Safety. 2 points. Jets defense gets a stop on the next drive anyways.

The Hill throw, as atrocious as it was, wasnt a devastating turnover. The Pats get the ball at their own 20. Good teams that throw a lot turn the ball over...it happens. We're overreacting on the devastation of the turnover because of how awful the actual throw was.

As for the Ninkovich sack, most QB's lose the ball there. Brandon Moore did a piss poor job in such a critical spot. You cant get beat like that.

[#27TheDominator]

Varying degrees of less than "good" are kind of meaningless at this point, no?

I watched the game last night skipping from play-to-play on the DVR, so I didn't get to see much in the way of replays... despite his final numbers that get you excited, he was still woefully inaccurate, even on completions. Is it too much to ask to hit a guy in stride or throw it where a guy doesn't have to contort to catch the ball and come down in bounds when he's wide open on the sideline?

He's a lost cause, at least for this franchise.

I didn't feel he was quite that bad. Strange thing is that he was worse on completions - overthrow dragged Keller out of bounds, Kerley being cost yac. He had at least one ball that really sailed to HIll in addition to the INT. He fit some balls into very tight windows. A bunch of those were thrown to Keller. On the TD to Keller I wasn't even sure that he didn't mean to hit Kerley (I think it was Kerley) short of the end zone. A couple of the deep outs to Kerley were extremely well thrown. The Pats secondary may suck, but he threw some balls that would have been completed on anybody.

[Pac]

Varying degrees of less than "good" are kind of meaningless at this point, no?

I watched the game last night skipping from play-to-play on the DVR, so I didn't get to see much in the way of replays... despite his final numbers that get you excited, he was still woefully inaccurate, even on completions. Is it too much to ask to hit a guy in stride or throw it where a guy doesn't have to contort to catch the ball and come down in bounds when he's wide open on the sideline?

He's a lost cause, at least for this franchise.

If you're reduced to cherry picking a couple "problem completions" from your film session than things are indeed looking up.

[RutgersJetFan]

This was a 5-minute job, as is evidenced by the meh execution. It's the message that matters.

For the next draft, might I suggest a picture of Napoleon the pig with a speech balloon saying "Football is a game where a quarterback plays 11 other men, and nobody else on the field matters."

[SMC]

what? Were we not in position to win the game with a touchdown?

this is how i feel like when sanchez people say he puts us in position to win

The Jets were in a position to win the game. Three point lead, 1:30 left, and Rex's D on the field to close it out.

The D didn't put the Jets in position to win at end of the game. They gave up over 100 yds on back-to-back drives in regulation and OT.

[JohnnyHector]

I didn't feel he was quite that bad. Strange thing is that he was worse on completions - overthrow dragged Keller out of bounds, Kerley being cost yac. He had at least one ball that really sailed to HIll in addition to the INT. He fit some balls into very tight windows. A bunch of those were thrown to Keller. On the TD to Keller I wasn't even sure that he didn't mean to hit Kerley (I think it was Kerley) short of the end zone. A couple of the deep outs to Kerley were extremely well thrown. The Pats secondary may suck, but he threw some balls that would have been completed on anybody.

Yeah, didn't mean to state that he was inaccurate on every throw, but to note that completion percentage isn't the be-all, end-all when you're consistently missing out on YAC because of poor placement.

[Bleedin Green]

The handoff Matt Slauson got absolutely trucked and blew up the play. Safety. 2 points. Jets defense gets a stop on the next drive anyways.

The Hill throw, as atrocious as it was, wasnt a devastating turnover. The Pats get the ball at their own 20. Good teams that throw a lot turn the ball over...it happens. We're overreacting on the devastation of the turnover because of how awful the actual throw was.

As for the Ninkovich sack, most QB's lose the ball there. Brandon Moore did a piss poor job in such a critical spot. You cant get beat like that.

Well like I said, those other two you can share some blame around, so I won't argue with you there, but Sanchez obviously played his part as well, regardless if he had some help. The INT is more than just what a bad throw it was (although that alone would be reason enough). That play should have been a touchdown. There is absolutely no excuse for it not being one and that play alone is reason enough to say what he did yesterday does not qualify as a good performance.

What I don't seem to understand is how it's expected that every other player around Sanchez must play perfectly at all times and if they don't, he's considered blameless. A blocker is not allowed to ever dare be beat because if he does, Sanchez is free to fumble to his hearts content or a WR is never allowed to drop a single pass, otherwise not another play by Sanchez for the rest of the game can count against him. Meanwhile, I find it curious how the same logic doesn't ever seem to apply in the other direction. Sanchez can throw passes behind a receiver, over their heads or straight to a defender when he has a wide open receiver, and yet he deserves no blame for the on-field struggles those players have to deal with because of that. In the end, the main difference is that Sanchez plays the most important position, he makes the most mistakes and yet, many still try to give him the least amount of blame. There isn't nearly as much time spent talking about Hill's drop or the special teams return TD for one very simple reason: nobody is arguing against the fact that those were terrible plays. Yet somehow, no matter how bad the play, there are always those who feel the need to come running to Sanchez's rescue every time and THAT is why it is what becomes such a great focus.

[Jetsfan80]

Ah yes, when all else fails, moonwalk into the metaphysical and hope for the best. Well played.

OK, this was good.

[JohnnyHector]

If you're reduced to cherry picking a couple "problem completions" from your film session than things are indeed looking up.

There were more than the plays I mentioned, but I chose not to waste any additional effort debating Sanchez with you, as I'd have more success proselytizing in Kandahar.

[Matt39]

Well like I said, those other two you can share some blame around, so I won't argue with you there, but Sanchez obviously played his part as well, regardless if he had some help. The INT is more than just what a bad throw it was (although that alone would be reason enough). That play should have been a touchdown. There is absolutely no excuse for it not being one and that play alone is reason enough to say what he did yesterday does not qualify as a good performance.

What I don't seem to understand is how it's expected that every other player around Sanchez must play perfectly at all times and if they don't, he's considered blameless. A blocker is not allowed to ever dare be beat because if he does, Sanchez is free to fumble to his hearts content or a WR is never allowed to drop a single pass, otherwise not another play by Sanchez for the rest of the game can count against him. Meanwhile, I find it curious how the same logic doesn't ever seem to apply in the other direction. Sanchez can throw passes behind a receiver, over their heads or straight to a defender when he has a wide open receiver, and yet he deserves no blame for the on-field struggles those players have to deal with because of that. In the end, the main difference is that Sanchez plays the most important position, he makes the most mistakes and yet, many still try to give him the least amount of blame. There isn't nearly as much time spent talking about Hill's drop or the special teams return TD for one very simple reason: nobody is arguing against the fact that those were terrible plays. Yet somehow, no matter how bad the play, there are always those who feel the need to come running to Sanchez's rescue every time and THAT is why it is what becomes such a great focus.

The only reason Im defending Sanchez today is because I feel he should be. This site here is really the only place I've seen blaming this loss on Sanchez. Twitter, the beat guys have all defended his play yesterday. The San Fran game he should have been benched. He's been more bad than good this season. Yesterday, he played well though. Better than the HOF guy on the other side too. Not that it matters though. Pats executed down the stretch, Jets didnt.

He wasnt perfect, but outside of Aaron Rodgers, no one is.

[ZachEY]

Yeah, it is bad. That's why I want to see how it all plays out. If Sanchez has more good games than terrible or even terrible and mediocre combined, that would be a good season, right?

I'm so sure. How many terrible games are you allowed in one season. 9 "good" ones as you call them, 5 terrible and 2 mediocre fits your criteria of a good season. But, I'm not so sure you could call that a "good season".

[#27TheDominator]

Yeah, didn't mean to state that he was inaccurate on every throw, but to note that completion percentage isn't the be-all, end-all when you're consistently missing out on YAC because of poor placement.

Oh, I know. It's just that yesterday, when he was good, he was very good.

[Jetsfan80]

Again people, this thread is about Sanchez sucking. You don't see threads about WR drops (not a problem), pass-blocking (not a problem), the running game (problem), our pass rush (not a problem), our slow LB's (problem) our secondary overall (not a problem) our inability to cover TE's (problem), our ST's (not a problem except one lapse) lasting 60+ pages.

Why? Because there's little validity to them. No one problem we have is bigger than our QB. Not by a longshot. And yesterday did little to silence the Sanchez critics.