A Sanchez QB Comparison

[Jetsfan80]

Simms was the definition of a low-impact game manager. When the Giants were winning, Simms was throwing for, maybe, 150-180 ypg. I think we're hoping Sanchez is more than that.

Especially when QB numbers have only been trending upwards since Simms' era.

[Doggin94it]

Especially when QB numbers have only been trending upwards since Simms' era.

Sure, you've got to adjust for differences in eras (Simms' first two years were much worse, on raw numbers and particularly completion percentages, than Sanchez'), but I'm talking about player type/stature relative to peers.

[sirlancemehlot]

just curious....why does he have to be like someone else? He's not Phil or Gannon or garcia or whatever hes just sanchez

[SenorGato]

I disagree. Its fair to say he's an elite quarterback. He's been in the league 6 years, been a starter for 3, and has the numbers, and now the ring, to prove it.

I think you may simply be trying to make Rivers look better here because he's your boy. While that's understandable, I'd say he's in elite company when it comes to whining. That group includes Tom Brady and Jay Cutler.

Yeah, now that he's won a Super Bowl and kicked a$$ for 3 years. He's still got a whole decade+ to whine...same for Ryan, Bradford, and all the other guys who are too young for the refs to show any real favoritism towards.

Rivers whines because he's an elite QB and elite QBs want the call (then the ball a haha haaaaaa). He, like most of the top whiners including Manning, Brady, and Cutler, carries his team and offense on his back, and has done it for longer than 3 years. All have ripped someone on the field at some point for something, and come off probably looking like an a$$hole for it.

We'll see Sanchez whine for calls when he's good enough...hell we've already seen him sulk...it didn't become a major or permanent character flaw.

[jason423]

]

Exactly. I mean hell, if he develops into more than that, I'll certainly take it. But if he "just" turns into a Simms type (and yes, that means significantly increasing his accuracy over the next few years), I'll be very happy with both the player and the pick.

I think because of the media scrutiny now compared to Simms' era he has to do alot more than be Phil Simms. We are in an age where Peyton Manning was criticized to no end for not beating Tom Brady for so many years. Dan Marino never came under that same level of criticism on the few shows that came before the games as well as Inside the NFL.

I think Sanchez has been fine so far. Im happy with him and the kid has been to two championship games in his first two years. But the expectations are huge. We saw it last year when people wanted him benched and were saying we were wasting our window of opportunity with him. Eli was just about run out of New York before winning a Super Bowl. I dont think Sanchez will ever get the leeway Simms got to wait 7 or 8 years to win a SB and be a caretaker of the offense. I think he needs to be more like Troy Aikman in terms of being surrounded by a ton of talent and not putting up the gaudy stats but constantly winning.

[Klecko73isGod]

Yeah, now that he's won a Super Bowl and kicked a$$ for 3 years. He's still got a whole decade+ to whine...same for Ryan, Bradford, and all the other guys who are too young for the refs to show any real favoritism towards.

Rivers whines because he's an elite QB and elite QBs want the call (then the ball a haha haaaaaa). He, like most of the top whiners including Manning, Brady, and Cutler, carries his team and offense on his back, and has done it for longer than 3 years. All have ripped someone on the field at some point for something, and come off probably looking like an a$$hole for it.

We'll see Sanchez whine for calls when he's good enough...hell we've already seen him sulk...it didn't become a major or permanent character flaw.

NO. Rivers whines because he's a little bitch.

[SenorGato]

^^ You whine cause etc.

[#27TheDominator]

Really? Come on now. Bavaro was a hell of a tight end, but outside of him, the Giants had almost nobody catching passes. Over the course of Simms' career, here's who he threw to:

Mark Ingram

Dave Meggett

Ed McCaffery (in his rookie year - probably the best raw talent of all the Giants' receivers during Simms' tenure, which is saying something)

Stephen Baker

Odessa Turner

Lionel Manuel

Phil McConkey

Stacy Robinson

Bobby Johnson

Byron Williams

Ernest Gray

Johhny Perkins

Gary Shirk

Tom Mullady

Mike Friede

Also TE's Howard Cross and Zeke Mowatt, to go with Bavaro

Could you tell me which of those immortals had their talent wasted by Simms?

Sorry I'm so late to rejoin the fight, but those guys may have all sucked, but the Giants put a lot of draft picks in over the years and nobody panned out. Either Young couldn't pick WR or Simms didn't do those guys any favors. Ingram was a first. So was Derek Brown. Perkins, Gray and Robinson were 2nds. Baker a 3rd. Sure Simms played forever, but c'mon. Aside from his early career (when he wet himself and went into a shell) he had a dominant OLine, several 1st round RBs and a historically good D. He wasn't special and was on the bench in half the Giants SB runs during his tenure. If the board was around then we'd probably be debating how much he sucked Pennington style. I like Simms. He was good, but HOF for him? From people that think Namath doesn't belong?

[kelticwizard]

In his early years Parcells' idea of an offense was putting the biggest guys anyone ever saw on the front line, getting a back tough enough to carry the ball all game long and a QB who could throw a nice 15 yard pass occasionally.

He only loosened up slightly after he left the Giants.

Also, Earnest Gray and Johnny Perkins kept dropping the damn ball, even when it was right in their hands. It was painful to watch.

[Bergen Jet]

Everybody talks about the Giants having no passing game and Simms averaging 150 yards per game when they were winning. Wasn't he throwing for between 3500 to 4000+ yards throughout the mid to late 80s?

[Bergen Jet]

Everybody talks about the Giants having no passing game and Simms averaging 150 yards per game when they were winning. Wasn't he throwing for between 3500 to 4000+ yards throughout the mid to late 80s?

When he retired in 1993 I believe that he was even in the top 10 all-time in passing yards. Simms' biggest problem was that he was in the same era as Montana, Elway, Marino, Kelly and was immediately followed by the Aikmans and Favres of the world. He is also associated with one of the greatest Defenses in history and gets no credit because of that. During that stretch in the mid 80s Simms was in the top 8 in passing yards 4 out of 5 seasons and threw for 4000 yards once. You guys make it seem like he was putting up Pennington numbers (post two shoulder injuries). He also had no WRs (he had one he'll of a TE in Bavaro).

Borderline HOF and somebody I would love Sanchez evolving into (though I think Sanchez' ceiling is even higher).

[slats]

When he retired in 1993 I believe that he was even in the top 10 all-time in passing yards. Simms' biggest problem was that he was in the same era as Montana, Elway, Marino, Kelly and was immediately followed by the Aikmans and Favres of the world. He is also associated with one of the greatest Defenses in history and gets no credit because of that. During that stretch in the mid 80s Simms was in the top 8 in passing yards 4 out of 5 seasons and threw for 4000 yards once. You guys make it seem like he was putting up Pennington numbers (post two shoulder injuries). He also had no WRs (he had one he'll of a TE in Bavaro).

Borderline HOF and somebody I would love Sanchez evolving into (though I think Sanchez' ceiling is even higher).

I just looked up Simms' stats, too, and I think my recollection of him was better than he was.

He strung some nice seasons together where he was averaging in the high 7's in ypa, but he's still a career 55% passer with a decent TD ratio of 4.3 and a fair int ratio of 3.4.

Mark needs to improve his completion percentage, and when he does he'll improve his pedestrian 6.6 ypa. He also needs to throw more TD's. The thing that stands out to me is that Simms was 25 in his rookie season, and Sanchez will turn 25 in November of this year. Simms didn't throw for 3000 yards until he turned 30 (when he had his lone 4000 yard season), Sanchez did that last year. He's off to a pretty good start. I hope he's better than Simms.

[#27TheDominator]

I wouldn't have much problem if Sanchez ended up like Simms. Stylistically I don't see it at all, but that isn't the point.

As for Simms greatness, besides the D and running game there is the fact that Hostetler stepped in for him and won the super bowl. That is not exactly Young taking over for Montana and Bergen, top 8 is not HOF worthy.

[Bergen Jet]

I wouldn't have much problem if Sanchez ended up like Simms. Stylistically I don't see it at all, but that isn't the point.

As for Simms greatness, besides the D and running game there is the fact that Hostetler stepped in for him and won the super bowl. That is not exactly Young taking over for Montana and Bergen, top 8 is not HOF worthy.

He finished as high as 3rd and was very high on the all-time yard list when he retired. Borderline HOF IMO but probably deserves to be on the outside looking in. Some people here act like this is Glen Foley we are talking about.

[#27TheDominator]

He finished as high as 3rd and was very high on the all-time yard list when he retired. Borderline HOF IMO but probably deserves to be on the outside looking in. Some people here act like this is Glen Foley we are talking about.

That's really the problem with these arguments. IMO he doesn't belong in the Hall and is borderline discussion worthy. That's no insult, I probably think less guys should get in than do. I am not saying that there is any shame in being compared to him and I'd be very happy if Sanchez has a similar career. I end up in the same hole with Curtis Martin. I always end up taking the con side in those discussions. I think Martin is a bona fide first ballot guy, I just don't see him as in the disussion of GOAT. Later I'll have some Curtis fan fighting me as if I am saying he worse than Kevan Barlow or I'll end up disputing points of somebody that agrees with me 100%.

[jason423]

He finished as high as 3rd and was very high on the all-time yard list when he retired. Borderline HOF IMO but probably deserves to be on the outside looking in. Some people here act like this is Glen Foley we are talking about.

No I dont think its that. I think its more of a lower level Montana as the GOAT debate. Simms benefitted from a great system around him. How much is what people debate. I think the question around him is something like would a guy like Jim Everett have done as well had he been on those Giants teams? Statsistically the difference between those two is probably nil. The only real separation is that Simms won a SB and played a big role for most of the season with the team that won a 2nd. I dont think either even belongs in the discussion. I would never hear the name Phil Simms and think HOF. The 88/89 seasons also hurt him. They missed out on the playoffs in 1988 and then had the disaster against the Rams in 1989.

[JoeWillie]

Isn't it interesting how evaluating some players career statistics long after he is done playing can elevate his status among fans, while in some cases, for players that actually deserve praise, it can hurt them.

Simms is a good example of a player who gets much more credit 20 years after his career is done, mostly because he played on good teams and won a championship. Marino is obvioulsy an example of the opposite, a player whose stock went down after he was done playing, despite a superior career than most. Of course, he never won the big one, and that knocks him down the list of greatness, fair or not.

Tarkenton is another player who career has gotten more highly regarded years after he was done playing.

I liked Simms. He was tough and he was the perfect guy for the style that Parcells and the Giants played. But at no point in his career, not even in a single season, was he ever one of the 3 best QB's in the league. He may have cracked the top 10 in a couple of seasons. In my opinion, to even be considered for HOF, you have to have been considered in the "Top 3" at your position for an extended period during your career.

Statistics are overrated for a variety of reasons, and going back and looking at them to evaluate a players career many years later is kind of silly. Were Vinny Testaverde, Ken Anderson, or Randall Cunningham worthy of HOF discussion? Of course not. They were good players who played in the league a long time and compiled statistics. When you go back to the record books, they're careers look much better than they really were. But the fact is, none of those guys were among the 5 best of their time, ever.

Simms threw for more yards than Namath, and when you go back and compare statistics, it looks like they were comparable players, but anybody who saw Namath play in his era knows he was arguably the best at his position for about a 5 or 6 year stretch, which has alot to do with him being in the Hall.

To me, Simms was the 80's version of Bob Griese. I watched Griese his entire career, and never thought he was in the Top 5 QB's at any time he played. Hell, his team even went undefeated without him for a good portion of the season. But he played on a popular winning team in the 70's who won a few Super Bowls, which elevates him in the eyes of some.

All sports are guilty of it.

I'm not a Yankee fan, but I would argue that Don Mattingly belongs in the Hall because for about a 5 year stretch, he was not only the best player at his position, he was arguably the best overall player in baseball. Unfortunately, his career was cut short by a back injury. Yet Kirby Puckett has essentially the same numbers over a longer career, played on a few championship teams and is in the Hall of Fame.