What if Mark Sanchez won a Super Bowl?

[rangerous]

3 hours ago, chirorob said:

Most over rated player in the NFL Hall of Fame.

Dolphins best season, Griese missed most of it.   In their 2 SB runs, he played in 5 playoff games, started 4.  He went a combined 31-47 for for 424 yards.   I know it was a different game back then, but he average 80 yards passing per win.  Even in the regular season of those 2 years, he averaged 107 yards per game, with the best O Line in the game and a HOF wide receiver.

why is bart starr in the hof then?  or bradshaw? it helps to be on a winning team when it comes to the hof.  but don't diss griese for doing his job well.  maybe a less stable qb would've thrown those games a way.  and he did take the team to 3 superbowls.  don't forget about the loss to the cowgirls.  and if the wfl didn't come along and poach players like warfield and csonka they might have three peated.

[Jetsfan80]

5 minutes ago, rangerous said:

why is bart starr in the hof then?  or bradshaw? it helps to be on a winning team when it comes to the hof.  but don't diss griese for doing his job well.  maybe a less stable qb would've thrown those games a way.  and he did take the team to 3 superbowls.  don't forget about the loss to the cowgirls.  and if the wfl didn't come along and poach players like warfield and csonka they might have three peated.

Yep.  Statistically, Griese > Bradshaw.  

Griese:  56.2 % completions, 192 TD/172 INT in 151 starts, 77.1 QB Rating, 7.3 Yards/Attempt

Bradshaw:  51.9 % completions, 212 TD/210 INT in 158 starts, 70.9 QB Rating, 7.2 Yards/Attempt

[chirorob]

12 minutes ago, rangerous said:

why is bart starr in the hof then?  or bradshaw? it helps to be on a winning team when it comes to the hof.  but don't diss griese for doing his job well.  maybe a less stable qb would've thrown those games a way.  and he did take the team to 3 superbowls.  don't forget about the loss to the cowgirls.  and if the wfl didn't come along and poach players like warfield and csonka they might have three peated.

Bradshaw won 2 SB MVPS and a league MVP.  Bob's team had it's best season when he missed 9 of 14 games.

Bart Starr also won 2 SB MVPS, and had a pretty good playoff record.

 

 

[Spoot-Face]

5 hours ago, nyjunc said:

It was hard to expect him to get better when the talent kept getting worse. Look at his healthy talent in 2012 and tell me how any QB besides Brady could win with those guys?

So, Sanchez was bad because the talent around him sucked, but the reason this team imploded was because we fired Tannenbaum, and Rex didn't deserve to be fired.

[slats]

6 minutes ago, chirorob said:

Bradshaw won 2 SB MVPS and a league MVP.  Bob's team had it's best season when he missed 9 of 14 games.

Bart Starr also won 2 SB MVPS, and had a pretty good playoff record.

 

 

Not 100% sure, but I think Bart Starr is still the highest rated passer in NFL post-season history, and he did it all back when a 50% comp rate was perfectly acceptable. Dude was on another level in that respect. 

[rangerous]

26 minutes ago, chirorob said:

Bradshaw won 2 SB MVPS and a league MVP.  Bob's team had it's best season when he missed 9 of 14 games.

Bart Starr also won 2 SB MVPS, and had a pretty good playoff record.

 

 

i'm knocking bart starr but he wasn't the most athletic passer or had the best arm of his time.  in fact the guy he replaced had better physical attributes but bart just won.

[EM31]

58 minutes ago, y2k8 said:

A BS argument like "what if Sanchez won a Super  Bowl"?  This is a message board. It's all BS arguments.

I get it.  it is a trap and one I have fallen into myself but every single year you could go back over you own team's draft picks from previous years and compare them to who else was available at that time they picked and who else turned out to have been a better player than the one your team selected.  It is an exercise in futility

[Jetsfan80]

1 hour ago, Spoot-Face said:

So, Sanchez was bad because the talent around him sucked, but the reason this team imploded was because we fired Tannenbaum, and Rex didn't deserve to be fired.

 

It's so simple.  Tannenbaum, Rex, and Sanchez were all good at their jobs.  That's why Tannenbaum and Rex are working for ESPN and Sanchez is unemployed in his prime years.

[Spoot-Face]

37 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

It's so simple.  Tannenbaum, Rex, and Sanchez were all good at their jobs.  That's why Tannenbaum and Rex are working for ESPN and Sanchez is unemployed in his prime years.

I know! It was Westoff's fault! God, he sucked!

[slats]

40 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

It's so simple.  Tannenbaum, Rex, and Sanchez were all good at their jobs.  That's why Tannenbaum and Rex are working for ESPN and Sanchez is unemployed in his prime years.

If Rex convinced the only real member of “Mangini’s team,” Brett Favre, to return for another season, Rex wins the super Bowl as a rookie head coach. Tanny would be flashing that jewelry, too. 

[pdxgreen]

No idea.  I don't even know what happened to Brad Johnson.

[freestater]

9 hours ago, nyjunc said:

The most meaningless play in the history of sports.

You're right. That whole game was an embarrassment. 

[JohnnyLV]

Mark Sanchez is the poster child for why the Cowboys should not pay Prescott.

It drives me nuts when people compare QBs and dont consider the team situation they are in. 

Darnold on those teams and we may just win a SB. Heck if Eric Smith could tackle Rapelisburger we might have won one with Mark

 

[funaz]

Sanchez is already the 2nd most successful qb in jet history if he won the superbowl he would have gotten a bigger leash.

He definitely gets into the ring of honor, arguably should be now with 4 playoff wins. It's more than half of the wins we have in our franchise

As far as the longer leash probably not by much. I mean, Tannenbaum gave him the big contract extension. The plan was to keep him long term. He just never developed or took the next step. The team was at its best when they were minimizing what they were asking him to do, simplifying the offense, and running the ball. He just wasn't good.
That said, I think your question kind of depends on how we won the Super Bowl.
If we beat Drew Brees or Aaron Rodgers 16-6 I don't think Mark Sanchez is Super Bowl MVP or remembered as some conquering hero. I don't think it changes the narrative on him much. He'd be viewed like Brad Johnson or Trent Dilfer.... And Rex would have been the one with the longer leash.
But if he balled out and had the best game of his career? Outdueling Brees or Rodgers in a 38-35 type game? I think that would shape the narrative around him big time -- even if it was just a Nick Foles type perception, the one run would certainly be viewed differently by Jets fans and likely the national media. He'd be known for more than the Butt Fumble that's for sure.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using JetNation.com mobile app

[Ben]

14 hours ago, NYDreamer said:

His first 2 years with this team, Tannenbaum built a solid team with an offensive line, running game, and brought in veteran WR's to help Mark out.  It was smart, the way you help a young QB out.  There was a lot of excitement with Mark including the first pass he threw to Clowney down the sideline in preseason from our end zone.  After that we drafted defense defense defense and stopped providing the necessary tools for Mark to succeed.  We learned he is not the player that makes those better around him but that the team makes him look better which is fine.  Tannebaum failed to follow up on that philosophy.  

If he won a super bowl for the Jets lets face it, his face would be on the Mount Rushmore of Jets QB's and not remembered for his face imprinted on the buttocks of Brandon Moore.

Mt Rushmore of Jets QBs?

Namath, OBrien, Pennington, Testaverde 

One can argue Fitzpatrick since he has all the single season passing records.

[GaryM]

13 hours ago, nyjunc said:

Always the fault of others.

Why isn't the rest of the league lining up to hire Eric for their front office?

Rex did fine in Buffalo with the healthy talent he had, if he coached us in 2015 we easily make the playoffs.

In 7 full seasons Rex only had 2 losing seasons, mangini in 5 had 3. In the 5 seasons post Rex the Jets have had 4.

Rex won with the previous regimes players, when he got involved in choosing the players, mostly defense, he went downhill. He got Tannenbaum fired, and hid away without comment. He was nothing but a loud mouth buffoon, who was kept here 2 years too long.

[SAR I]

6 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

It's so simple.  Tannenbaum, Rex, and Sanchez were all good at their jobs.  That's why Tannenbaum and Rex are working for ESPN and Sanchez is unemployed in his prime years.

The difference was that Ryan and Tannenbaum were seasoned professionals in 2010 and Sanchez was just a kid.

Mark was owed a consistent set of receivers, some high draft picks, and a great offensive coordinator.  And Ryan and Tannenbaum made damned sure he never got them.  Every nickel and every effort was spent on defense to protect Ryan's reputation and guarantee him his second job.  The offense was run like a flea market.

SAR I

[johnnyjet]

Tim Tebow wouldn’t have had the successful NFL career he had.   

[nyjunc]

17 hours ago, slats said:

Post me an article about how they only brought in Sanchez as vet insurance. I’ll wait. I can find a bunch about how he was the presumptive starter and how Siemian beating him out was considered a shock. About how he went from #1 to off the team in a matter of weeks. Know why? Because that’s the way it went down  

But yeah, he was doing great in Denver. That’s why he landed another job immediately. 

Dude, give this nonsense a rest already. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/kdvr.com/sports/denver-broncos/reports-broncos-trade-for-eagles-quarterback-mark-sanchez/amp/

 

See screenshot at bottom of this post.

By the way, mark was picked up by Dallas after Denver

 

17 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

He never, ever will.  He always has to get the last word.  He's worse than the Ape.  

Pipe down son, adults are trying to discuss football. Go run and hide like you always do.

[nyjunc]

16 hours ago, Spoot-Face said:

So, Sanchez was bad because the talent around him sucked, but the reason this team imploded was because we fired Tannenbaum, and Rex didn't deserve to be fired.

The Jets went for it basically from 08-11, they spent a ton and the bill was due. They were going to have to bite the bullet for a year or 2.  This was widely known but after one down year they fired tannenbaum.  Tannenbaum proved he could surround mark with talent the first 2 years but he needed cap space and picks to do it again. He tried with hill but that didn't work.  Instead he was fired and idzik wanted his QB and the rest is history.

 

Hope this helps so you don't need to post silly gifs showing your lack of knowledge.

[nyjunc]

9 hours ago, GaryM said:

Rex won with the previous regimes players, when he got involved in choosing the players, mostly defense, he went downhill. He got Tannenbaum fired, and hid away without comment. He was nothing but a loud mouth buffoon, who was kept here 2 years too long.

Who cares? Parcells won here with previous regimes players, he won with the Giants with previous regimes players.  Rex got more out of those players than Eric, Eric couldn't even get to the playoffs with a HOF QB with a weak schedule and Brady out for the season.

[nyjunc]

9 hours ago, SAR I said:

The difference was that Ryan and Tannenbaum were seasoned professionals in 2010 and Sanchez was just a kid.

Mark was owed a consistent set of receivers, some high draft picks, and a great offensive coordinator.  And Ryan and Tannenbaum made damned sure he never got them.  Every nickel and every effort was spent on defense to protect Ryan's reputation and guarantee him his second job.  The offense was run like a flea market.

SAR I

They brought in talent the first 2 years and coincidentally they won.  Holmes and braylon were big acquisitions.  After 2010 they let braylon and Cotchery go and Holmes lost his hunger with his new contract. They then brought in malcontents and 3 of his top 5 weapons heading into 2011 were out of the league in 2012.

[nyjunc]

9 hours ago, Ben said:

Mt Rushmore of Jets QBs?

Namath, OBrien, Pennington, Testaverde 

One can argue Fitzpatrick since he has all the single season passing records.

No one can argue Fitz, with the season on the line he didn't show up.  O'Brien also is not on the list having inherited a young, talented team and never winning a playoff game.  The teams leader in playoff wins (by double) belongs ahead of Ken.

[nyjunc]

14 hours ago, slats said:

If Rex convinced the only real member of “Mangini’s team,” Brett Favre, to return for another season, Rex wins the super Bowl as a rookie head coach. Tanny would be flashing that jewelry, too. 

Yes, Brett was such a difference maker in 2008 for us and throwing away his second NFC Championship Game in 3 years with Minnesota means he definitely would have won here with less talent around him.

[SAR I]

10 hours ago, Ben said:

Mt Rushmore of Jets QBs?

Namath, OBrien, Pennington, Testaverde 

One can argue Fitzpatrick since he has all the single season passing records.

LOL. 

O’Brien, Pennington, and Testaverde won 3 playoff games. Combined.  Sanchez won 4.  

The list of Jet quarterbacks is pathetic enough without you eliminating the second-best one we’ve ever had, Eeyore.  

SAR I

[slats]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

 

This is from before the draft. But I'll give it to you. I'm sure their initial feeling was that Sanchez could be a veteran bridge/backup at that time. 

After the draft, they had Sanchez, Siemian, and first round pick Paxton Lynch on the roster. Now I'm not saying that Mark Sanchez was ever their long term plan at the position, but at that point they were certainly moving in the direction of having Sanchez as their starter while Lynch learned from the sidelines. But by the third preseason game, this is where they were: 

"1) What becomes of Mark Sanchez?

It appears his rollercoaster play and knack for turnovers cost the former first-round pick another starting gig. While he was the only quarterback on the roster to make an NFL start, Kubiak went with the younger player he trusted more to take care of the ball.

If Sanchez can't beat out a seventh round pick, second-year player with no experience, he'll likely never get another full-time gig. The Broncos could ask Sanchez to take a pay cut to remain on the roster. Or John Elway could cut him outright to save the money and the conditional draft pick he shipped to Philadelphia for Sanchez."

https://www.nfl.com/news/broncos-name-trevor-siemian-starting-quarterback-0ap3000000691979

And we know what happened. He's a career 56% passer who never lived up to the couple of bright spots he showed in those post-seasons. He was done the year before he was traded to Denver. That was his big last chance, and he completely blew it. Why? Probably because he wasn't ever good. 

[nyjunc]

45 minutes ago, slats said:

This is from before the draft. But I'll give it to you. I'm sure their initial feeling was that Sanchez could be a veteran bridge/backup at that time. 

After the draft, they had Sanchez, Siemian, and first round pick Paxton Lynch on the roster. Now I'm not saying that Mark Sanchez was ever their long term plan at the position, but at that point they were certainly moving in the direction of having Sanchez as their starter while Lynch learned from the sidelines. But by the third preseason game, this is where they were: 

"1) What becomes of Mark Sanchez?

It appears his rollercoaster play and knack for turnovers cost the former first-round pick another starting gig. While he was the only quarterback on the roster to make an NFL start, Kubiak went with the younger player he trusted more to take care of the ball.

If Sanchez can't beat out a seventh round pick, second-year player with no experience, he'll likely never get another full-time gig. The Broncos could ask Sanchez to take a pay cut to remain on the roster. Or John Elway could cut him outright to save the money and the conditional draft pick he shipped to Philadelphia for Sanchez."

https://www.nfl.com/news/broncos-name-trevor-siemian-starting-quarterback-0ap3000000691979

And we know what happened. He's a career 56% passer who never lived up to the couple of bright spots he showed in those post-seasons. He was done the year before he was traded to Denver. That was his big last chance, and he completely blew it. Why? Probably because he wasn't ever good. 

Ok?

It's common sense, if he had a real chance he starts week 1. He was the best QB in camp (as he should have been) and if based on that he at least starts the season.  He was there as vet insurance in case the young guys weren't ready.

[slats]

6 minutes ago, nyjunc said:

Ok?

It's common sense, if he had a real chance he starts week 1. He was the best QB in camp (as he should have been) and if based on that he at least starts the season.  He was there as vet insurance in case the young guys weren't ready.

Whatever. 

I'll consider this conversation a productive one, because you at least seem to be acknowledging that Sanchez was done at this point. Which is funny coming from probably his biggest supporter on the site. The best argument you have for me is, no, Sanchez didn't lose the starting job in Denver (he did), but instead that they always had hoped and planned that Trevor Siemian would be better than him. 

[CurtMart]

On 5/21/2020 at 6:42 AM, UntouchableCrew said:

As far as the longer leash probably not by much. I mean, Tannenbaum gave him the big contract extension. The plan was to keep him long term. He just never developed or took the next step. The team was at its best when they were minimizing what they were asking him to do, simplifying the offense, and running the ball. He just wasn't good.

That said, I think your question kind of depends on how we won the Super Bowl.

If we beat Drew Brees or Aaron Rodgers 16-6 I don't think Mark Sanchez is Super Bowl MVP or remembered as some conquering hero. I don't think it changes the narrative on him much. He'd be viewed like Brad Johnson or Trent Dilfer.... And Rex would have been the one with the longer leash.

But if he balled out and had the best game of his career? Outdueling Brees or Rodgers in a 38-35 type game? I think that would shape the narrative around him big time -- even if it was just a Nick Foles type perception, the one run would certainly be viewed differently by Jets fans and likely the national media. He'd be known for more than the Butt Fumble that's for sure.

Our teams, especially offense, got progressively worse after 2010. And so did Sanchez. Aging OL weakened significantly and WRs were Holmes, Hill and Chaz Schillens. Our expectations were Sanchez would make up the difference. Except, he showed he wasn’t capable of lifting a team but could do just enough to win some games if he had the right surrounding cast. Most people had him rated In the top half of not top ten in the league in his third season. That narrative didn’t take long to change. Buttfumble was just the final nail. 

[nyjunc]

1 hour ago, slats said:

Whatever. 

I'll consider this conversation a productive one, because you at least seem to be acknowledging that Sanchez was done at this point. Which is funny coming from probably his biggest supporter on the site. The best argument you have for me is, no, Sanchez didn't lose the starting job in Denver (he did), but instead that they always had hoped and planned that Trevor Siemian would be better than him. 

One thing people get confused about me (actually there are many ?) is about Mark. I never said he was great or that he would be great but he was vital to those runs. If you had the right talent around him you could win with him, we did the first 2-3 years then the talent fell off and so did he.

Sam is much more talented, Sam doesn't need as much talent around him to succeed

[Philc1]

On 5/21/2020 at 11:13 AM, slimjasi said:

Agree. 

The reality was that, when you watched those Jets team play, Sanchez was the obvious weakness of the team. 

Sanchez was that rare player who was actually better in a big pressure situation than a regular season game