Why do 80% or more of New York fans hate their QBs even though they're not that bad?

[D-MONEY87]

Well actually I can understand Giants fans hating Eli, he's just horrible. But why do most Jets fans hate Pennington? He's a proven winner and has a winning record when he starts games. Even Eli has a winning record as the Giants starter and most of those fans hate him too. Is it a New York thing?

[Ghost]

You love starting threads huh ? LOL I'm kidding with ya

The only reason I don't like Pennington being our starter is because we can not win a super bowl with him behind center.

[BP]

It must be a NY thing..

Here is a young man from Connecticut below

[mangenious420]

He's a proven winner and has a winning record when he starts games. ?

Barton my friend, explain to Mr. D - Money what Chadwicks record is against teams with a winning record.. Thank you...

[ECURB]

Barton my friend, explain to Mr. D - Money what Chadwicks record is against teams with a winning record.. Thank you...

Tom Brady was 2-3 against teams over .500 in 2006

Chad Pennington was 1-3 against teams over .500 in 2006

They both lost 3 games to winning teams.

[mangenious420]

Tom Brady was 2-3 against teams over .500 in 2006

Chad Pennington was 1-3 against teams over .500 in 2006.

Brady has 3 rings....

And I meant career ecurb not 2006 (I think you know that lol)

[ECURB]

Brady has 3 rings....

And I meant career ecurb not 2006 (I think you know that lol)

Last year is all that matters, the past is the past... this is what they have done recently

All teams lose games to good teams... its a weak argument

[mangenious420]

All teams lose games to good teams... its a weak argument

How is it a weak arguement? Everytime The Nation gets into it about Penny what do you say? We can win a superbowl with him!!! Am I right? That is what you say.. Now how the hell are we suppose to win a SB with him if he can't beat teams with a winning record???

News Flash : If we ever make it to the super bowl, I have a little funny feeling it'll be against a team over .500

[ECURB]

How is it a weak arguement? Everytime The Nation gets into it about Penny what do you say? We can win a superbowl with him!!! Am I right? That is what you say.. Now how the hell are we suppose to win a SB with him if he can't beat teams with a winning record???

News Flash : If we ever make it to the super bowl, I have a little funny feeling it'll be against a team over .500

I know that, but my point is even Brady loses more games to winning teams that he wins...

[mangenious420]

I know that, but my point is even Brady loses more games to winning teams that he wins...

His win % against teams over .500 is better than Penny's (and I don't even have to look it up)... And when January football comes around I believe he's 9-2 or 10-2 in the playoffs. And i'm sure most of those 9 or 10 wins came against teams with winning records.

[ECURB]

His win % against teams over .500 is better than Penny's (and I don't even have to look it up)... And when January football comes around I believe he's 9-2 or 10-2 in the playoffs. And i'm sure most of those 9 or 10 wins came against teams with winning records.

I am well aware that Tom is better than Chad, just pointing out that most of the time, teams lose to teams with winning records... hence chads bad record against them...

[Jetsfan80]

Last year is all that matters, the past is the past... this is what they have done recently

All teams lose games to good teams... its a weak argument

Well even if you only count 2006, how can you possibly spin Chad's 1-3 record against over .500 teams as a good thing?

[mangenious420]

I am well aware that Tom is better than Chad, just pointing out that most of the time, teams lose to teams with winning records... hence chads bad record against them...

Oh I know, I just felt like argueing. Your the man.

[ECURB]

Well even if you only count 2006, how can you possibly spin Chad's 1-3 record against over .500 teams as a good thing?

Brady was 2-3 .... if our D would have held up Peyton Chad would have been 2-2...

My point is to show that you lose to good teams... it happens...

[The Troll]

Last year is all that matters, the past is the past... this is what they have done recently

All teams lose games to good teams... its a weak argument

All that matters is last year?

Okay then.

Chad Pennington is a QB that threw 17 touchdowns and 16 interceptions. He also gloriously led his teams to not one, but two shutout losses. He also did not break the incredible 200-yard passing barrier in a game for SIX WEEKS in the middle of the season. Over the same time span, Andrew Walter, Andrew ****ING Walter, did it twice.

[jetophile]

Because New Yorkers are never happy...? As to Eli, he just bites. And here's hoping to his continued implosion. Bottoms up (drains glass, slams it on counter)! Ah, smooth.

[ECURB]

All that matters is last year?

Okay then.

Chad Pennington is a QB that threw 17 touchdowns and 16 interceptions. He also gloriously led his teams to not one, but two shutout losses. He also did not break the incredible 200-yard passing barrier in a game for SIX WEEKS in the middle of the season. Over the same time span, Andrew Walter, Andrew ****ING Walter, did it twice.

We won 10 games. I was talking about the importance of looking at wins from the prior year... due to large turnoever on the team and stuff... it would be silly to take into account wins from 3 years ago...

[Jetsfan80]

We won 10 games. I was talking about the importance of looking at wins from the prior year... due to large turnoever on the team and stuff... it would be silly to take into account wins from 3 years ago...

Then why would it make sense to give Pennington the credit for the 10 wins? If so much of that 4-12 season was due to external factors outside of Chad's control, then why does he deserve so much credit for a 17 TD, 16 INT season? You can't have it both ways.

[The Troll]

Then why would it make sense to give Pennington the credit for the 10 wins? If so much of that 4-12 season was due to external factors outside of Chad's control, then why does he deserve so much credit for a 17 TD, 16 INT season? You can't have it both ways.

Because he has heart.

[JetCane]

Chad Pennington is a QB that threw 17 touchdowns and 16 interceptions. He also gloriously led his teams to not one, but two shutout losses. He also did not break the incredible 200-yard passing barrier in a game for SIX WEEKS in the middle of the season. Over the same time span, Andrew Walter, Andrew ****ING Walter, did it twice.

You should put that in a letter to mangini and ask him why he continued to play CP. Seriously.

What do you think he'd say?

[Pragmatic Bus]

because they both suck donky-balls

[#27TheDominator]

Then why would it make sense to give Pennington the credit for the 10 wins? If so much of that 4-12 season was due to external factors outside of Chad's control, then why does he deserve so much credit for a 17 TD, 16 INT season? You can't have it both ways.

External factors caused a 4-12 season? The biggest one was Pennington missing the season. I think you can win a super bowl with Chad, it'll just be a little more difficult. It's not like Brady won that game against the Chargers. He was barely over 50% and had 3 picks and was trying pretty hard to choke the game down the stretch. It takes more than 1 player to win. Brady needed tons of help that day and he's a clutch playoff performer.

[The Troll]

You should put that in a letter to mangini and ask him why he continued to play CP. Seriously.

What do you think he'd say?

What do you want me to do, Cane?

Ever notice that all offseason, I have started nary a thread about Chad. I only respond to threads that either a.)tell me Chad is something that he is not, or b.)call people like myself an idiot for questioning the Great Chad Pennington.

I mean it's one thing if I start a bunch of threads bashing the guy. Defending my viewpoint on him is a whole 'nother animal.

[JetCane]

What do you want me to do, Cane?

Ever notice that all offseason, I have started nary a thread about Chad. I only respond to threads that either a.)tell me Chad is something that he is not, or b.)call people like myself an idiot for questioning the Great Chad Pennington.

I mean it's one thing if I start a bunch of threads bashing the guy. Defending my viewpoint on him is a whole 'nother animal.

Dude, I just asked you a question, why so defensive?

You made a good point, but it's something I'm sure Mangini has considered as well.

And you know I have never called you an idiot, whether I agree with you or not.

[green_blood]

I hope none of these new Clemens followers were Bolliwoods. If Chad wasnt such a paper mache doll, he would have a ring by now. obviously now he will never deliver a super bowl, but clemens will. All hail King Kellen I! I still believe that Pennington is still the best QB on the roster and the one most prepared for his job. p.s.-dont forget about brad smith and stacey tutt! j/k

[Xcel2NuFX]

Last year is all that matters, the past is the past... this is what they have done recently

All teams lose games to good teams... its a weak argument

Last year is all that matters? so forget about Tom Brady last year pennington had a 25% win percentage against teams with winning records doesn't that kinda suck?

As much as its nice to twist stats to suit your own agenda you can't forget about the fact that 2-3 is a better win percentage than 1-3 regardless. If Brady was 5-3 and pennington 1-3 you would still problably try to argue they both lost 3 games so their the same?

[MTJ06]

I am well aware that Tom is better than Chad, just pointing out that most of the time, teams lose to teams with winning records... hence chads bad record against them...

so if 2 teams with winning records play most of the time they both lose.

and most people say that there is parity in the NFL..........

[JetCane]

so if 2 teams with winning records play most of the time they both lose.

and most people say that there is parity in the NFL..........

The schedule makers try to create parity, but there are fewer "good" teams in the league. I think his point is illustrated by the fact that out of 32 teams, only 8 had double digit wins last year, and only 12 ended up with records over .500.

Statistically, the good teams beat the not so good teams- but they do knock off each other. That's what makes matchups between teams with winning records so appealing. So the Pats record against winning teams wasnt as good as it was against sub-.500 teams. Same with the Jets. It is logical.

Where i differ from ecurb is that he attributes the wins to CP, and others attribute the losses to CP. I look at it as the entire team not being good enough yet to beat elite teams, not just the QB.

And I doubt that throwing Clemens in there prematurely would have proved anything. Chances are he wouldnt have done as well against the not so good teams. You may say that the jets cant win the SB with CP, but really they wouldnt have even sniffed the playoffs with Clemens or Ramsey playing last year.

Mangini has said he will play the players that give the team the best chance to win each week- that is the step that must be taken before you think about which players can take you to the SB. If you cant beat the teams on your schedule in the regular season, you have no chance to get to the dance.

[angry jets fan]

The Physical Limitations of Chad hurt our running game.

Our passing game is mostly limited to 10 yards beyond the line of scrimmage and between the hashes. How does that open up the running game when opposing defenses don't have to worry about big portions of the field. Also, he is not mobile. He locks on his primary receiver. His supposed great accuracy was very suspect last season.

[MTJ06]

just pointing out that most of the time, teams lose to teams with winning records...

The schedule makers try to create parity, but there are fewer "good" teams in the league. I think his point is illustrated by the fact that out of 32 teams, only 8 had double digit wins last year, and only 12 ended up with records over .500.

Statistically, the good teams beat the not so good teams- but they do knock off each other. That's what makes matchups between teams with winning records so appealing. So the Pats record against winning teams wasnt as good as it was against sub-.500 teams. Same with the Jets. It is logical.

Actually Jetcane what you posted contradicts ecurb. If it was true as he stated that "most of the time teams lose to teams with winning records" there would be a greater disparity in teams records than your post indicates, and many more teams would have better records and higher winning percentages. Instead of the 32 teams in the NFL almost half, 15, have records in the 7-9 to 9-7 range therefore indicating parity (21 of the 32 NFL teams won between 6 to 10 games). Teams with winning records lose many of their games 9-7(win 56%), 10-6(win 62.5 %), 11-5(win 68.8%) so to say that just pointing out that most of the time, teams lose to teams with winning records... would be inaccurate.

[JetCane]

just pointing out that most of the time, teams lose to teams with winning records...

Actually Jetcane what you posted contradicts ecurb. If it was true as he stated that "most of the time teams lose to teams with winning records" there would be a greater disparity in teams records than your post indicates, and many more teams would have better records and higher winning percentages. Instead of the 32 teams in the NFL almost half, 15, have records in the 7-9 to 9-7 range therefore indicating parity (21 of the 32 NFL teams won between 6 to 10 games). Teams with winning records lose many of their games 9-7(win 56%), 10-6(win 62.5 %), 11-5(win 68.8%) so to say that just pointing out that most of the time, teams lose to teams with winning records... would be inaccurate.

I hear you, MT. I am not saying I am on all fours with ecurb- far from it- but i understand his point that teams are going to have a better record against lesser teams.

[ECURB]

I just hate when people say "Chad cant beat winning teams" as if its all on his shoulders...

Of course the JETS lose their games to winning teams more often than losing teams... thats why the winning teams have winning records...

There were many things that could be upgraded a lot easier than the QB position that would have helped us get to 11-12 wins.

We had a terrible running game, we had a terrible run defense... both of those cause a team to lose more than QB play... Chad was not Stellar but he was better than our running game or run defense..

If we can continue to improve our defense this offseason, improve our Oline and our running game... you would be crazy not to think Chad can do better in 07 than he did in 06'...

When you have a QB that led your team to 10 wins and has room to improve next year (and should with upgrades around him) you really need to stick with him unless someone else (Clemens) shows they can be a SURE upgrade...

Mangini will lose the players if he doesnt shoot for the moon every year, why would "playerX" want to sit around and let Mangini re-build when careers are so short?

A few select people on here seem to think regarless that I want Chad as our QB, sure I like the guy and all he has done for the JETS... but if there is an upgrade I wouldnt be against it... I just would want to know its a sure upgrade... if its not you piss off Chad, and all of the players around him for screwing up.

[124]

At 31 it's time to say Buh-Bye to Chadwick Noodle Arm Pussington and see what we've got in Clemens because it is obvious that CP isn't leading this franchise to a Super Bowl Championship. With that being said that is why I think the switch to Clemens needs to be made. Is the guy? Who knows, it's 50/50. But, I'd rather take chances at QB's who can win us a championship instead of sticking with a courageous lion with a huge heart who in the end still can't get you that ring whether it be injury or his buckling in most big games / playoff games.

[MTJ06]

I just hate when people say "Chad cant beat winning teams" as if its all on his shoulders...

Of course the JETS lose their games to winning teams more often than losing teams... thats why the winning teams have winning records...

There were many things that could be upgraded a lot easier than the QB position that would have helped us get to 11-12 wins.

We had a terrible running game, we had a terrible run defense... both of those cause a team to lose more than QB play... Chad was not Stellar but he was better than our running game or run defense..

If we can continue to improve our defense this offseason, improve our Oline and our running game... you would be crazy not to think Chad can do better in 07 than he did in 06'...

When you have a QB that led your team to 10 wins and has room to improve next year (and should with upgrades around him) you really need to stick with him unless someone else (Clemens) shows they can be a SURE upgrade...

Mangini will lose the players if he doesnt shoot for the moon every year, why would "playerX" want to sit around and let Mangini re-build when careers are so short?

A few select people on here seem to think regarless that I want Chad as our QB, sure I like the guy and all he has done for the JETS... but if there is an upgrade I wouldnt be against it... I just would want to know its a sure upgrade... if its not you piss off Chad, and all of the players around him for screwing up.

So in reading your post the games we lost were due to "We had a terrible running game, we had a terrible run defense... both of those cause a team to lose more than QB play... Chad was not Stellar but he was better than our running game or run defense..

If we can continue to improve our defense this offseason, improve our Oline and our running game you would be crazy not to think Chad can do better in 07 than he did in 06'... "

but when it comes to the games we won "When you have a QB that led your team to 10 wins "

so our losses were due to every aspect of the team other than Chad, but Chad was the only factor that led us to all of our wins? And then you wonder why "people on here seem to think regarless that I want Chad as our QB"

[Arsis]

So in reading your post the games we lost were due to "We had a terrible running game, we had a terrible run defense... both of those cause a team to lose more than QB play... Chad was not Stellar but he was better than our running game or run defense..

If we can continue to improve our defense this offseason, improve our Oline and our running game you would be crazy not to think Chad can do better in 07 than he did in 06'... "

but when it comes to the games we won "When you have a QB that led your team to 10 wins "

so our losses were due to every aspect of the team other than Chad, but Chad was the only factor that led us to all of our wins? And then you wonder why "people on here seem to think regarless that I want Chad as our QB"

if every other aspect of our game sucked and we still won ten games, then obviously he was the only factor. I don't believe this to be true, just saying what follows from what you're saying.