Other teams optimism

[Biggs]

44 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Yes, the Jets havent made the playoffs because of Sanchez.  And youre just going to keep arguing arent you.  

The Jets have sucked for 60 years.   We've had about 6 seasons since the inception of the team where we got good QB play.  We've been a legitimate SB contender 6 times since 1960.

One of the biggest reasons is we not only drafted bad QB's we wasted lots of draft capital to draft most of them.   Sanchez and Darnold did set this team back.  They both sucked and Sanchez busted out of the league.

Making the argument that the Jets drafting another second tier QB when we had a historically crappy team even by Jets standard and you want to call me argumenative.

I think we need Zach to be great to break the cycle of suck.  If you want to make the argument that Zach doesn't have to be great for the Jets to break the cycle of suck make the argument.  I think you're arugment is wrong and calling me arumentative is okay, I'm argumentative.  Acting like you're not is nonsense.  

 

[jgb]

1 minute ago, Biggs said:

The Jets have sucked for 60 years.   We've had about 6 seasons since the inception of the team where we got good QB play.  We've been a legitimate SB contender 6 times since 1960.

One of the biggest reasons is we not only drafted bad QB's we wasted lots of draft capital to draft most of them.   Sanchez and Darnold did set this team back.  They both sucked and Sanchez busted out of the league.

Making the argument that the Jets drafting another second tier QB when we had a historically crappy team even by Jets standard and you want to call me argumenative.

I think we need Zach to be great to break the cycle of suck.  If you want to make the argument that Zach doesn't have to be great for the Jets to break the cycle of suck make the argument.  I think you're arugment is wrong and calling me arumentative is okay, I'm argumentative.  Acting like you're not is nonsense.  

 

If Wilson fails, time to try the vet route. FQBs are more mobile (contract-wise) then ever before. If you can't bake it, buy it.

[Biggs]

10 hours ago, jgb said:

I'd also add moving on from Darnold is an addition by subtraction. Sure Wilson could completely wipe out but it's a smart risk to try to improve over the worst-rated starter in the league.

It's a smart risk to move on from failure.  If the risk doesn't pan out the organization is set back further.  We could have a failed QB and more good players by trading out of the pick.  That's one of many reasons that the risk has to work out.  

[Biggs]

3 minutes ago, jgb said:

If Wilson fails, time to try the vet route. FQBs are more mobile (contract-wise) then ever before. If you can't bake it, buy it.

You can.  The Cardinals and Raiders went to SB with a vet.  TB went to a SB with a vet.  Plenty of teams have done it.  

If you look at those teams most of them were loaded.  If you wanted to go that route Darnold should have been traded earlier and the No. 2 should have been traded.  You really need to maximize the rookie talent and wage scale to afford an aging vet for 2 years to make a run more than once.  

You can't use your prime draft capital on rookie QB's and try to win with a vet.  It's a very big lift.  Philadelphia was able to do it becuase their vet wasn't really a high priced mercenary brought into start.  He was a backup on backup money.

[jgb]

2 minutes ago, Biggs said:

It's a smart risk to move on from failure.  If the risk doesn't pan out the organization is set back further.  We could have a failed QB and more good players by trading out of the pick.  That's one of many reasons that the risk has to work out.  

Yep trading down would've been the move if we got Stafford -- for example -- need the straw to stir the drink in this league. This is why bad QBs is a whirlpool of death. You gotta keep burning high picks to try and try again that could go toward shoring up other parts of the team.

[jgb]

2 minutes ago, Biggs said:

You can.  The Cardinals and Raiders went to SB with a vet.  TB went to a SB with a vet.  Plenty of teams have done it.  

If you look at those teams most of them were loaded.  If you wanted to go that route Darnold should have been traded earlier and the No. 2 should have been traded.  You really need to maximize the rookie talent and wage scale to afford an aging vet for 2 years to make a run more than once.  

You can't use your prime draft capital on rookie QB's and try to win with a vet.  It's a very big lift.  Philadelphia was able to do it becuase their vet wasn't really a high priced mercenary brought into start.  He was a backup on backup money.

Yep we were writing basically the same thought at the same time.

[Jet Nut]

2 hours ago, Biggs said:

The Jets have sucked for 60 years.   We've had about 6 seasons since the inception of the team where we got good QB play.  We've been a legitimate SB contender 6 times since 1960.

One of the biggest reasons is we not only drafted bad QB's we wasted lots of draft capital to draft most of them.   Sanchez and Darnold did set this team back.  They both sucked and Sanchez busted out of the league.

Making the argument that the Jets drafting another second tier QB when we had a historically crappy team even by Jets standard and you want to call me argumenative.

I think we need Zach to be great to break the cycle of suck.  If you want to make the argument that Zach doesn't have to be great for the Jets to break the cycle of suck make the argument.  I think you're arugment is wrong and calling me arumentative is okay, I'm argumentative.  Acting like you're not is nonsense.  

 

And nothing you keep spinning to has anything to do with a failed QB costing a team 10 years.

Most QBs bust.  Its not the 1900's you dont have the backbreaking financial commitment before the days of slotted picks.  As I said, Jets, AZ, Rams, Eagles all have moved on shortly after a drafted QB busted.  Not one of the teams is in a different place from any other team in need of a FQB 

 

[Biggs]

14 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

And nothing you keep spinning to has anything to do with a failed QB costing a team 10 years.

Most QBs bust.  Its not the 1900's you dont have the backbreaking financial commitment before the days of slotted picks.  As I said, Jets, AZ, Rams, Eagles all have moved on shortly after a drafted QB busted.  Not one of the teams is in a different place from any other team in need of a FQB 

 

The Rams had 13 years where they didn't sniff the playoffs before getting solid QB play from Goff.  

The Eagles won a SB when they got elite play from Wentz who was MVP.   the Eagles didn't get out of the wild card round between McNab and Wentz.  There head coach who took them to the SB is gone becuase Wentz had a bad year.

You're wrong.  

[Jet Nut]

2 hours ago, Biggs said:

The Rams had 13 years where they didn't sniff the playoffs before getting solid QB play from Goff.  

The Eagles won a SB when they got elite play from Wentz who was MVP.   the Eagles didn't get out of the wild card round between McNab and Wentz.  There head coach who took them to the SB is gone becuase Wentz had a bad year.

You're wrong.  

I’m wrong?

Prove to me that drafting a QB and if he fails you’re dead for 10 years.

You can’t  but you wo t back off and you’ll argue this to death.  

[Biggs]

1 hour ago, Jet Nut said:

I’m wrong?

Prove to me that drafting a QB and if he fails you’re dead for 10 years.

You can’t  but you wo t back off and you’ll argue this to death.  

You're the one who chimed in to refute me.  You have yet to make a cogent argument but continue to be argumenative because you can't help yourself.   You've giving examples that are wrong.  

There are 3 teams that recently gave up on their high first round QB's.   The Cardinals, the Jets who both are on their 3rd HC in under 4 years and the Washington Football team who replaced both their HC and GM after drafting Haskins. 

I don't have to prove anything.  If you're willing to except mediocre play from Zach and the Jets being bad for another 10 years it's a tribute to your being a fan even though the team stinks.  I've been a fan for almost 60 years.  I don't like that we have drafted bad QB's over and over but I'm still a fan.  I'm hopeful that Zach is going to be great but I also know if he isn't the GM and HC are as good as dead men walking.  

[Jet Nut]

3 hours ago, Biggs said:

You're the one who chimed in to refute me.  You have yet to make a cogent argument but continue to be argumenative because you can't help yourself.   You've giving examples that are wrong.  

There are 3 teams that recently gave up on their high first round QB's.   The Cardinals, the Jets who both are on their 3rd HC in under 4 years and the Washington Football team who replaced both their HC and GM after drafting Haskins. 

I don't have to prove anything.  If you're willing to except mediocre play from Zach and the Jets being bad for another 10 years it's a tribute to your being a fan even though the team stinks.  I've been a fan for almost 60 years.  I don't like that we have drafted bad QB's over and over but I'm still a fan.  I'm hopeful that Zach is going to be great but I also know if he isn't the GM and HC are as good as dead men walking.  

And I successfully refuted the ridiculous idea that missing on a QB would cost a team 10years.  
Now you bringing more ridiculousness like accept poor play from Zach.  

i have no idea why that’s part of an argument where I simply said you CAN move on as others, including us have.  You know like to many others here, you can say fair point and move on.  Especially when you’re wrong

[Mogglez]

6 hours ago, Biggs said:

The Rams had 13 years where they didn't sniff the playoffs before getting solid QB play from Goff. 

You're wrong.  

Probably because the 1st round QB selection before him was Sam Bradford, who got a gargantuan contract before the rookie wage scale.  The Rams are an absolutely horrible example for your point.

3 hours ago, Biggs said:

You're the one who chimed in to refute me.  You have yet to make a cogent argument but continue to be argumenative because you can't help yourself.   You've giving examples that are wrong.  

There are 3 teams that recently gave up on their high first round QB's.   The Cardinals, the Jets who both are on their 3rd HC in under 4 years and the Washington Football team who replaced both their HC and GM after drafting Haskins. 

I don't have to prove anything.  If you're willing to except mediocre play from Zach and the Jets being bad for another 10 years it's a tribute to your being a fan even though the team stinks.  I've been a fan for almost 60 years.  I don't like that we have drafted bad QB's over and over but I'm still a fan.  I'm hopeful that Zach is going to be great but I also know if he isn't the GM and HC are as good as dead men walking.  

The Cardinals, before Murray, were 4 years removed from an NFC Championship berth with Carson Palmer. They had one hiccup with Rosen, and now they are contenders in, arguably, the hardest division in football.  Rosen cost them 1 season.  1.

Washington replaced Haskins after 1 1/4 years and made the playoffs last year.

Missing on Sanchez really only cost us 2 years (2011 & 2012). Geno got us to a respectable 8-8 in 2013.

Missing on Geno only cost us 1 year (2014).  Fitzpatrick led one of the best Jets offenses to 10-6 in 2015.  Historical anomalies kept that 10 win team out of the playoffs.

If Zach fails, that one single misstep doesn’t have to set us back 10 years.  That is a ridiculous statement.

 

[Biggs]

15 hours ago, Jet Nut said:

And I successfully refuted the ridiculous idea that missing on a QB would cost a team 10years.  
Now you bringing more ridiculousness like accept poor play from Zach.  

i have no idea why that’s part of an argument where I simply said you CAN move on as others, including us have.  You know like to many others here, you can say fair point and move on.  Especially when you’re wrong

The Jets have never moved on.  They fail, the fire the GM and coaches.  Rinse, repeat.  We haven’t gotten to a SB since Namath.  We have gone through QB who have failed, leading to coaches and GMs being fired.  
 

For a couple of years we had arguably one of the top 3 coaching staffs in NFL history.  They made one run with a veteran QB and failed.  We have drafted 5 first round QBs since.  We are on our 7th HC in roughly 22 years.  
 

We can’t move on from Zach if we’re going to break the cycle of suck.  

[Biggs]

15 hours ago, Mogglez said:

Fitzpatrick led one of the best Jets offenses to 10-6 in 2015.  Historical anomalies kept that 10 win team out of the playoffs.

 

 

The historical anomoly was Fitzpatrick throwing 31 TD passes.  The historical mean was Fitzpatrick throwing 3 picks in the last game against a mediocre Buffalo team when we needed a win to get into the playoffs.  

[Jet Nut]

1 hour ago, Biggs said:

The Jets have never moved on.  They fail, the fire the GM and coaches.  Rinse, repeat.  We haven’t gotten to a SB since Namath.  We have gone through QB who have failed, leading to coaches and GMs being fired.  
 

For a couple of years we had arguably one of the top 3 coaching staffs in NFL history.  They made one run with a veteran QB and failed.  We have drafted 5 first round QBs since.  We are on our 7th HC in roughly 22 years.  
 

We can’t move on from Zach if we’re going to break the cycle of suck.  

Wrong though.

Tanny hired Sanchez, he was retained. 

We can and will move on if Wilson fails.  More importantly, there's not reason that should push the franchise back 10 years.

[Biggs]

38 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Wrong though.

Tanny hired Sanchez, he was retained. 

We can and will move on if Wilson fails.  More importantly, there's not reason that should push the franchise back 10 years.

Tannenbaum was fired before Rex.  He's extension of Sanchez had a lot to do with it.  

[Biggs]

17 hours ago, Mogglez said:

Washington replaced Haskins after 1 1/4 years and made the playoffs last year.

 

Another anomaly.  The 2nd time in NFL history that a team with a lossing record made the playoffs.   You also can't ignore the fact that the entire division got awful QB play last year including Washington.   Not one team in the division got decent QB play.  

FYI 16 NFL teams with 10 wins didn't make the playoffs.  11 wins is an annomaly only happening once.

[chirorob]

23 hours ago, Biggs said:

The Rams had 13 years where they didn't sniff the playoffs before getting solid QB play from Goff.  

The Eagles won a SB when they got elite play from Wentz who was MVP.   the Eagles didn't get out of the wild card round between McNab and Wentz.  There head coach who took them to the SB is gone becuase Wentz had a bad year.

You're wrong.  

To be fair, they didn't actually win the SB with Wentz.

[Jet Nut]

23 minutes ago, Biggs said:

Tannenbaum was fired before Rex.  He's extension of Sanchez had a lot to do with it.  

And if you believe Tanny was fired because he drafted Sanchez I have a bridge for sale

[Biggs]

27 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

And if you believe Tanny was fired because he drafted Sanchez I have a bridge for sale

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/14/tannenbaum-looks-back-with-regret-on-sanchezs-contract-turnovers/

“I don’t think I would have signed a quarterback to an extension knowing that he’d have 26 turnovers,” Tannenbaum said. “That might be one of the reasons I’m right sitting here with you guys.”

It’s not surprising that Tannenbaum regrets the Sanchez extension, and Tannenbaum may be right that it’s one of the main reasons he was fired last month. But it’s odd that Tannenbaum would claim he wouldn’t sign a quarterback to an extension after 26 turnovers because Sanchez actually had 26 turnovers in 2011, too. In fact, Sanchez was incredibly consistent on the turnover front from 2011 to 2012: He had exactly 18 interceptions both seasons, and exactly eight lost fumbles both seasons. If 26 turnovers in 2012 make Tannenbaum regret signing Sanchez to an extension, then 26 turnovers in 2011 probably should have made Tannenbaum think twice about signing Sanchez to an extension a year ago.

[Jet Nut]

8 minutes ago, Biggs said:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/14/tannenbaum-looks-back-with-regret-on-sanchezs-contract-turnovers/

“I don’t think I would have signed a quarterback to an extension knowing that he’d have 26 turnovers,” Tannenbaum said. “That might be one of the reasons I’m right sitting here with you guys.”

It’s not surprising that Tannenbaum regrets the Sanchez extension, and Tannenbaum may be right that it’s one of the main reasons he was fired last month. But it’s odd that Tannenbaum would claim he wouldn’t sign a quarterback to an extension after 26 turnovers because Sanchez actually had 26 turnovers in 2011, too. In fact, Sanchez was incredibly consistent on the turnover front from 2011 to 2012: He had exactly 18 interceptions both seasons, and exactly eight lost fumbles both seasons. If 26 turnovers in 2012 make Tannenbaum regret signing Sanchez to an extension, then 26 turnovers in 2011 probably should have made Tannenbaum think twice about signing Sanchez to an extension a year ago.

You keep spinning like a friggen top.  

What does any of this have to do with a drafted QB busting setting a team back 10 years?

What does giving him a second contract have to do with drafting one and moving on quickly during his first deal ala Darnold, Rosen, Haskell etc, etc?  

Youre wrong, if Wilson is a bust theres no reason on earth other than continued bad drafting and deals with sucking for 10 additional years.

The whole idea is wrong and so 1900's

[Defense Wins Championships]

10 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

You keep spinning like a friggen top.  

What does any of this have to do with a drafted QB busting setting a team back 10 years?

What does giving him a second contract have to do with drafting one and moving on quickly during his first deal ala Darnold, Rosen, Haskell etc, etc?  

Youre wrong, if Wilson is a bust theres no reason on earth other than continued bad drafting and deals with sucking for 10 additional years.

The whole idea is wrong and so 1900's

5 years or 10 years it doesn't matter just know that drafting bust 1st round QB sets your Franchise back in a major way. 

[Jet Nut]

8 minutes ago, Defense Wins Championships said:

5 years or 10 years it doesn't matter just know that drafting bust 1st round QB sets your Franchise back in a major way. 

Az, Jets and Wash say two of you are wrong

[Mogglez]

1 hour ago, Biggs said:

Another anomaly.  The 2nd time in NFL history that a team with a lossing record made the playoffs.   You also can't ignore the fact that the entire division got awful QB play last year including Washington.   Not one team in the division got decent QB play.  

FYI 16 NFL teams with 10 wins didn't make the playoffs.  11 wins is an annomaly only happening once.

You can’t just keep taking the examples that disprove the notion that missing on a QB sets your team back 10 years and calling them anomalies.

You also can’t keep moving the goal posts on what you deem successful.  You just complained that I chose Washington because, even though to they made the playoffs, you don’t think they had good QB play.  Ok?  So the Jets didn’t make the playoffs but had great QB play.  The point is neither team was hindered by missing on their QB selections.

[Mogglez]

2 hours ago, Biggs said:

The historical anomoly was Fitzpatrick throwing 31 TD passes.  The historical mean was Fitzpatrick throwing 3 picks in the last game against a mediocre Buffalo team when we needed a win to get into the playoffs.  

Again; stop moving the goalposts.  The facts are this:  Fitzpatrick had a historical season by this franchises standards and won 10 games after replacing a QB we drafted only 2 years prior.  Missing on that QB didn’t send us into a mythical 10 year spiral.

[Defense Wins Championships]

22 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

Az, Jets and Wash say two of you are wrong

What are you talking about?

We haven't made the playoffs in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020 and all because both Sanchez and Darnold BUSTED. 

Jets having the #1 Defense and #1 run game doesn't change the fact Sanchez immediately began to bust 2011 and beyond (I can post his embarrassing QB stats if you like). 

And Washington is a crap example they're going on 10-11 years without a single Playoff win since busting on RG3 and last year went 7-9 ?

And why are you mentioning Arizona? A.) Murray isn't a bust and B.) They haven't made the playoffs or had a winning season since 2015. 

Jets. 

Lions. 

Bengals. 

Browns. 

Bills. 

Are just a couple of examples throughout the previous 20 years of what drafting 1st round busts does to a Franchise and how far we get set back. 

Mark Sanchez would still be our QB if not for busting out and we wouldn't own the NFLs longest playoff drought if not for both Sanchez and Darnold stinking.

[Biggs]

12 minutes ago, Mogglez said:

Again; stop moving the goalposts.  The facts are this:  Fitzpatrick had a historical season by this franchises standards and won 10 games after replacing a QB we drafted only 2 years prior.  Missing on that QB didn’t send us into a mythical 10 year spiral.

We haven't made the playoffs in 10 years.  We have had 3 GM's and 4 HC.  The goal posts haven't been moved.  Fitzpatrick was a failed bandaid for a failed draft pick we traded up for and gave up lots of draft capital for who busted.

 

[Defense Wins Championships]

5 minutes ago, Biggs said:

We haven't made the playoffs in 10 years.  We have had 3 GM's and 4 HC.  The goal posts haven't been moved.  Fitzpatrick was a failed bandaid for a failed draft pick we traded up for and gave up lots of draft capital for who busted.

 

Exactly. 

Sanchez should still be our QB but unfortunately he busted 2011 and beyond and we've yet to make the playoffs ever since. 

Buffalo before Josh Allen and after Jim Kelly is another example of how far drafting bust QBs sets you back. 

And over the past 20+ years if we were to list all the bust QBs Detroit/Cleveland/Cincinnati have drafted etc this 'conversation" wouldn't be a conversation at all...

Yes. Drafting bust QBs sets your Franchise back 5-10 years and his Washington example was a crap example because Washington hasn't won a playoff game ever since RG3 got hurt and then busted out and just had another (7-9) below .500 losing season just last year and now have Ryan Fitzpatrick as their starting QB a 17 year QB with 0 playoff games because Haskins is a 15th overall BUST ?

[Biggs]

47 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

You keep spinning like a friggen top.  

What does any of this have to do with a drafted QB busting setting a team back 10 years?

What does giving him a second contract have to do with drafting one and moving on quickly during his first deal ala Darnold, Rosen, Haskell etc, etc?  

Youre wrong, if Wilson is a bust theres no reason on earth other than continued bad drafting and deals with sucking for 10 additional years.

The whole idea is wrong and so 1900's

You're taking everything I say as literal.  You have excepted the possability of Zach not being great and the Jets can recover.  We have never recovered from bad QB's we have drafted.  Each time the team was cleansed of management and personal.  Each time we have failed to reach another SB.

Face it, you're invested in mediocrity.  Zach needs to be great.  Anything less is a dissaster for this team.  

You've focussed on my hyperbole of 10 years.  I'm focussed on your acceptance of crappy football and bad QB play.  

[Mogglez]

20 minutes ago, Biggs said:

We haven't made the playoffs in 10 years.  We have had 3 GM's and 4 HC.  The goal posts haven't been moved.  Fitzpatrick was a failed bandaid for a failed draft pick we traded up for and gave up lots of draft capital for who busted.

 

You can call Fitzpatrick a failed band aid all you want, it isn’t true.  He had, statistically, the best season a Jets QB has ever had in 2015 and the only anomaly here is that the 2015 Jets didn’t make the playoffs.  Also, he replaced Geno, not Sanchez, who we, for the record, actually gave up peanuts to get (Kenyon Coleman, Abram Elam, Brett Ratliff, and a 2nd).

[Jet Nut]

18 minutes ago, Defense Wins Championships said:

What are you talking about?

We haven't made the playoffs in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020 and all because both Sanchez and Darnold BUSTED. 

Jets having the #1 Defense and #1 run game doesn't change the fact Sanchez immediately began to bust 2011 and beyond (I can post his embarrassing QB stats if you like). 

And Washington is a crap example they're going on 10-11 years without a single Playoff win since busting on RG3 and last year went 7-9 ?

And why are you mentioning Arizona? A.) Murray isn't a bust and B.) They haven't made the playoffs or had a winning season since 2015. 

Jets. 

Lions. 

Bengals. 

Browns. 

Bills. 

Are just a couple of examples throughout the previous 20 years of what drafting 1st round busts does to a Franchise and how far we get set back. 

Mark Sanchez would still be our QB if not for busting out and we wouldn't own the NFLs longest playoff drought if not for both Sanchez and Darnold stinking.

WTF does this have to do with Sanchez, the failed QB who led to those losing seasons?  Was it Sanchez or the Jets inability to draft. 

There are no examples since the slotted draft system where a failed QB pick sent a team into a 10 draught and all the double spaced lines in the world wont change that or the the fact that now two of you are wrong with that take

[Jet Nut]

11 minutes ago, Biggs said:

You're taking everything I say as literal.  You have excepted the possability of Zach not being great and the Jets can recover.  We have never recovered from bad QB's we have drafted.  Each time the team was cleansed of management and personal.  Each time we have failed to reach another SB.

Face it, you're invested in mediocrity.  Zach needs to be great.  Anything less is a dissaster for this team.  

You've focussed on my hyperbole of 10 years.  I'm focussed on your acceptance of crappy football and bad QB play.  

And the failed QBs havent operated in a vacuum.  Put talent like the Browns have around Mayfield and Sanchez probably isnt a failure.  But its because of Sanchez we failed.  

Each time when we replaced a QB?  Sanchez and Darnold are the only two who fit the requirement.  Geno wasnt a top pick.  Hack was just as costly a pick and didnt cost Macc or Bowles their job

We've had a crappy football team for 10 years, not a QB at the head of that time period who cost us 10 years.  But you'll keep blaming Sanchez I guess.

[Defense Wins Championships]

Just now, Mogglez said:

You can call Fitzpatrick a failed band aid all you want.  He had, statistically, the best season a Jets QB has ever had in 2015 and the only anomaly here is that the 2015 Jets didn’t make the playoffs.  Also, he replaced Geno, not Sanchez, who we, actually, gave up peanuts to get (Kenyon Coleman, Abram Elam, Brett Ratliff, and a 2nd)

He tossed 3 4th Q INTs week 17 when it mattered most. 

And Vinny T of 1998 and Chad Pennington of 2002 had much better QB seasons in regards to overall QB statistical production than his 2015 ala QB Ratings of 104.2 (Chad) and 101.6 (Vinny) vs Ryan's 88.0 (2015). ?

And then the next season of 2016? 69.6 ?

He's a career loser who's been in the league for 17 years with 9 different teams and still 0 playoff games. 

[Defense Wins Championships]

2 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

And the failed QBs havent operated in a vacuum.  Put talent like the Browns have around Mayfield and Sanchez probably isnt a failure.  But its because of Sanchez we failed.  

Each time when we replaced a QB?  Sanchez and Darnold are the only two who fit the requirement.  Geno wasnt a top pick.  Hack was just as costly a pick and didnt cost Macc or Bowles their job

We've had a crappy football team for 10 years, not a QB at the head of that time period who cost us 10 years.  But you'll keep blaming Sanchez I guess.

Sanchez failed everywhere he went. Not just the Jets. But everywhere. 

He just wasn't any good. 

[Jet Nut]

Just now, Defense Wins Championships said:

Sanchez failed everywhere he went. Not just the Jets. But everywhere. 

He just wasn't any good. 

And who said anything different?