McD Posted January 18, 2011 Author Posted January 18, 2011 Generally speaking, a defensive line and a defensive secondary are supposed to work as two complementary components of a defensive machine. The defensive line is supposed to provide pass pressure/hits and sacks as quickly as possible, while the defensive backs provide coverage for a long time to keep the QB from finding an open man. If it usually takes 5 seconds before a receiver gets open, and if the pass rush usually arrives after 3.5 seconds, the other team's quarterback will have few or no good options. The way the Jets' defense played against the Patriots was a textbook illustration of how that's supposed to work. An ideal offense is basically the mirror image of the defense described above. The offensive line should be very good to give the quarterback a lot of time to throw. The receiving corps should be very good so that guys can get open quickly, or even catch the ball when they're covered. There's one other thing as well: the quarterback should be elite, and should maximize the opportunities his OL and receiving corps create for him. In the Patriots/Jets game, the Patriots seemed to lack all three components of that kind of elite offense. The Patriots' OL was dominated by the Jets' DL. The Patriots' receiving corps was dominated by the Jets' DBs. Even Tom Brady, elite quarterback though he is, didn't look anything remotely like an elite QB against the Jets. As for the idea of the Bills using an early pick on a DB: the problem there is twofold. One is that over the last decade, there have been three times when the Bills' DB with the best combination of youth and proven accomplishment has been allowed to leave in free agency in the prime of his career. (Winfield, Clements, and Greer, with Whitner having one foot out the door.) Using a first round pick on a DB would be an exercise in futility if the plan is to let him go first contract and out. The second potential objection is that if you have a Darrell Revis as one of your DBs and a bunch of mediocre DBs everywhere else, the QB will simply ignore whichever receiver is being covered by your Revis. If your goal is to add (for example) 1.5 seconds to the amount of time the other team's receivers stay covered, you're going to need to do a lot more than draft just one guy. The strategy of drafting a slew of DBs to increase average coverage duration is difficult to pursue for a team like the Bills because there are so many holes across the board. Conversely, if the other team normally has 5 seconds to throw, and you want to reduce that to 3.5 seconds, the addition of just one elite defensive lineman--such as a Bruce Smith--will go a very long way toward achieving that. Correct! I'll say it, Sanchez sucks. Sure, he made a few nice plays against Patsies, but he also made a lot of bad ones. He's not carrying the Jets, the Jets are carrying Sanchez. If he played for Buffalo we'd be running him out of town on the next bus. People complain about Fitz low completion percentage. What's Sanchez'? And this is with the benefit of a great defense and a great offensive line and darn good run game and an all star receiving corps. If the Jets had a good QB they'd probably go all the way this year. Sanchez is holding them back. If he didn't have that monster D that held one of the most prolific offenses in 2011 down to 21 points they would have lost. No way Sanchez wins in a shoot out or if his team can't survive multiple drive ending horrendous throws. Lol... BUT the apologists on here will say HE was the savior IF the Jets win the SB. They will say "SEE McD, you HAVE to have a 1st round QB to win"! Lol... OK then...
Alphadawg7 Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 I could care less. HE DID NOTHING to get his team there. He HURT his team more than he helped them in his rookie year. You could put Trent Edwards back there the last 2 years and they wouldve made the playoffs. Playing for the number 1 defense and number 2 ranked run team last year and the number 3 ranked defense and the number 3 or 4 ranked rushing attack got them here. I love how you fail to mention that he had a whopping 183 yds and 0 TDs and 1 INT in his first playoff game against the LOWLY colts defense this year. Give me a fckin break. A QB with a 63.0 QB rating doesn't account for being a franchise QB in my book. But to people like YOU, I guess those are GREAT numbers. This guy is nothing but an average QB that plays for a superb defensive team. I wouldn't even rank him in the top 20 QB's in the NFL. If it wasnt for this defense and running game, he wouldn't even be in the playoffs. Kinda like Trent Dilfer and Rex Grossman making it to the playoffs with a solid defense and solid running game. This kid is nowhere near an elite QB nor is he even a good QB. Average is where I would put him. Last year he had a whopping 63 QB rating, with 12 TD passes and 20 INTs. For a top 5 draft pick? This guy should be putting up WAY better numbers than that. Josh Freeman 3451 yds, 25 TDs 6 INT, 61% completion percentage, 95.9 rating. Mark Sanchez 3291 yds, 17 TD, 13 INT, 54.8 completion percentage, 75.3 rating. One is seen as the "Sanchize" and the other is overlooked because his team didn't make the playoffs. Sanchez couldn't hold Freeman's jock strap. Did nothing to get them there? What about those game winning drives he put together to win multiple games this year? Guess those didnt matter either huh? LMAO...you bring up QB rating, and then I show you his playoff rating as a rookie and this year and you want to disregard it as if it didnt happen and even go so far as to claim he did "nothing" to get them there when he in fact won multiple games for them this year on game winning drives... Your blind rage isnt capable of having a logical discussion
R. Rich Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 Your blind rage isnt capable of having a logical discussion Is anyone's?
Alphadawg7 Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 One was a great catch in the corner by Holmes, another was a good run by Tomlinson and another had Edwards breaking a tackle and carring a defender into the endzone. He is a competent QB, but nothing more than a compliment to the running game. The Jets have the most dominant offensive line since Dallas in the mid 1990's, their running game is as good as St. Louis' passing game was in their superbowl run. LMAO...ok, so if you are going to do this game, then you need to take credit away from about 3/4's of Fitz TD's as well. Geezus, its getting desperate and deep in this thread
McD Posted January 18, 2011 Author Posted January 18, 2011 Did nothing to get them there? What about those game winning drives he put together to win multiple games this year? Guess those didnt matter either huh? What games were these? LMAO...you bring up QB rating, and then I show you his playoff rating as a rookie and this year and you want to disregard it as if it didnt happen and even go so far as to claim he did "nothing" to get them there when he in fact won multiple games for them this year on game winning drives... Again, I'd just like to know what games these were and who they were against...? Your blind rage isnt capable of having a logical discussion See the queries above. I'm not saying he didn't win games, but ask your self this... did his great D not keep him in the position to "win" the game for his team? Did his O-line not do it's job to give him time to throw and open holes for his run game?
Orton's Arm Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 I'd never want to lose, but I did see the silver lining in doing so. I didn't pay $$ on my Sunday Ticket to watch the atrocity on D that I saw. I get it though, you're just one that refuses to see a point. Sorry about that, I can't help you there. Please try to go read the OP and see where II stand on this. Check this out... it's a tad dated (from '07, so add your updated info from there), but it's still not far from the truth of things. "Taking a look at quarterbacks drafted over a 20-year period from 1985-2005, the return on first-round investments is underwhelming. NFL teams drafted 242 quarterbacks overall during that time; of those, 43 were first-round selections. The average career for a first round pick through last year (2006) was 6.5 years and 70.3 games played with a 72.9 passer rating. The average league-wide passer rating was 77.3 during that same timeframe. Only 15 of those first-round quarterbacks (34.8%) have a career passer rating better than that mark. Only four of them have led the league in passer rating; only one of them--Peyton Manning--has done it more than once. Meanwhile, 12 have retired with fewer than 30 game appearances, and 11 have retired after five seasons or less". ?It's said that championships are the true measure of greatness. Among this group, only nine have appeared in Super Bowls, with six wins to show for it. Three of those wins are from the only current Hall of Famer among that group, Troy Aikman. Which means that sixth-round pick Tom Brady has as many Super Bowl victories (3) in the past five years as 42 first-rounders not named Aikman have achieved in the past 20". So again, do the Bills need an elite QB? SURE, of course we do... where is he? Do you see him? I'm not splitting hairs... did you watch us this year?? WE SUCK on D, We have no clue how to stop the run (or is it no talent?), so I'd rather we spend the pick on a more immediate finger in the dike. Fitz, given the amout of time in the pocket as all of the other 4 still in the playoffs, and with a freaking good running game, AND with a Top 10 D would be just fine. I just saw this... you must be a journalism major. Nice way to write something and pass it off as fact. Now THAT is "amazing". I said depending on who's there, there MIGHT not be a player worthy of the #3 pick. Now, that's more along the lines of what we need. Do we need AJ Green? Do we need Patrick Peterson? Like I also said... if, IF there's a QB that they're that high on take him, but load the rest of the draft on D. The text I've bolded is misleading. Whoever wrote it begins looking at quarterbacks drafted in 1985, and looks at the 20 year period from 1985 - 2005 in evaluating his data. The problem there is that for many of those years, there were three Hall of Fame first round quarterbacks drafted in 1983 who were busily skewing the data. If (for example) some QB drafted in the first round in the mid to late '80s failed to lead the league in passer rating because Dan Marino led the league instead, that hardly illustrates the futility of picking a QB in the first round. If the author wanted to examine the period of 1985 - 2005, fine. Except that when a first round QB taken in any year led the league in passer rating or led his team to a championship during that span, it should have been marked down as a success for a first round QB. But even though his methodology is deeply flawed, there is still some truth to a lot of what he'd written. There were a lot of first round QB busts during that period. One contributing factor was that offensive coordinators or front office personnel got it in their heads that they wanted mobile, athletic QBs. They wanted QBs who would create a dual threat, and extend plays by fleeing from pass pressure. As a result, a lot of quarterbacks were chosen in the first round based on their athletic gifts rather than their abilities as pocket passers. Those quarterbacks had an exceptionally high bust rate. That particular fad seems to have died down a little. But not before it produced more than a few first round busts! It's also worth nothing that the period the author examined contained three non-first round quarterbacks who collectively had a significant impact on his data about championships. Joe Montana was drafted in the third round and led the 49ers to two championships during the period he examined. Kurt Warner was an undrafted free agent and led his team to a championship. Tom Brady was a sixth round pick and led his team to multiple championships during the period in question. But stories like that are rare. Tom Brady was drafted back in 2000. Since then, no quarterback acquired in the third round or lower, or as an UDFA, has come remotely close to playing at the Montana/Warner/Brady level. None. Point to any franchise quarterback who joined the NFL in 2001 or later, and I'll show you a guy who was drafted in the first or second round. The only second rounder in the mix will be Drew Brees, taken with the 32nd overall pick.
Bronc24 Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 um...I think recent playoff history shows you need both.
McD Posted January 18, 2011 Author Posted January 18, 2011 Sanchez has had mixed results against the remaining teams in the playoffs. He's played them all, and is 1-2 against them. his only win was a 22-17 win against the 2nd rated Defense of the Pittsburgh Steelers, where he was 19/29 and threw for 170 yds 0 TD's 0 INT's. Pretty "Edwardsesque" if you ask me, and they won with a KO return for a TD and a Safety. That's 9 of the 22 pts. He lost to the 9th Defensive rated Chicago Bears 38-34 (there's your shootout that he couldn't win) going 24/37 and 7 pts there came from an INT (damn, that D is pretty important isn't it?), but he did have a respectable 269 yd 1 TD 1 INT outing. Then there was the game against the 5th rated Defense of the GB Packers, where they got beat 9-0, where he was 16/38 for 256 yds 0TD's and 2 INT's... OUCH! Rodgers wan't much better mind you... throwing for 16/38 170 yds 0TD's and 0 INT's, but to his defense he was playing the 3RD RANKED D! How'd we get to talking about Sanchez anyway???
Maddog69 Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 In what way is he good? Because he plays well in ONE playoff game? Completing only 53% of his passes with a 73 QB rating and turning the ball over just as much as he scores TD's? Give me a break. You can find stats to say whatever you want. How about these 2010 playoffs: 60.7% completion rating, 3TD, 1 INT, 91.7 rating and 2 wins so far. 2009 playoffs: 60.2% completion rating, 4td, 2 INT, 92.7 rating and 3 wins to only 1 loss (AS A ROOKIE) I'd say that is pretty good, unless you just have it in your head to hate the kid. Watch the games. He is still young and learning. He makes mistakes, but he makes some excellent plays when they are needed. I hate the Jets, but I've got nothing but good things to say about Sanchez.
Alphadawg7 Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 See the queries above. I'm not saying he didn't win games, but ask your self this... did his great D not keep him in the position to "win" the game for his team? Did his O-line not do it's job to give him time to throw and open holes for his run game? You are really getting desperate now... I find it interesting how you want to remove any credit for anything Sanchez accomplishes as if its all a product of everyone elses play and has nothing to do with him making reads, seeing the field, executing the throws, etc etc. The "haterade" runs deep in you
Orton's Arm Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 You can find stats to say whatever you want. How about these 2010 playoffs: 60.7% completion rating, 3TD, 1 INT, 91.7 rating and 2 wins so far. 2009 playoffs: 60.2% completion rating, 4td, 2 INT, 92.7 rating and 3 wins to only 1 loss (AS A ROOKIE) I'd say that is pretty good, unless you just have it in your head to hate the kid. Watch the games. He is still young and learning. He makes mistakes, but he makes some excellent plays when they are needed. I hate the Jets, but I've got nothing but good things to say about Sanchez. Just to add to what you've written, some quarterbacks play better in the playoffs than in the regular season. If you look at Terry Bradshaw's stats for the regular season, the idea of inducting him into the Hall of Fame would seem laughable. But his postseason stats were dramatically better. During the '70s, the Steelers' defense--not Terry Bradshaw--got that team into the playoffs in the first place. But once they were in, Bradshaw would initiate his usual postseason improvement. His very good play in the postseason was one of several reasons why the Steelers won those Super Bowls. While Sanchez can't really be compared to Bradshaw in most respects, they seem similar in one way. Both QBs are associated with much better postseason stats than regular season stats. Sanchez had a good game against the Patriots. Had he turned in a (for him) standard-issue regular season performance, his team would have lost. You could say the same about a lot of the postseason games in which Bradshaw led his team to victory.
1B4IDie Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 I'd never want to lose, but I did see the silver lining in doing so. I didn't pay $$ on my Sunday Ticket to watch the atrocity on D that I saw. I get it though, you're just one that refuses to see a point. Sorry about that, I can't help you there. Please try to go read the OP and see where II stand on this. Check this out... it's a tad dated (from '07, so add your updated info from there), but it's still not far from the truth of things. "Taking a look at quarterbacks drafted over a 20-year period from 1985-2005, the return on first-round investments is underwhelming. NFL teams drafted 242 quarterbacks overall during that time; of those, 43 were first-round selections. The average career for a first round pick through last year (2006) was 6.5 years and 70.3 games played with a 72.9 passer rating. The average league-wide passer rating was 77.3 during that same timeframe. Only 15 of those first-round quarterbacks (34.8%) have a career passer rating better than that mark. Only four of them have led the league in passer rating; only one of them--Peyton Manning--has done it more than once. Meanwhile, 12 have retired with fewer than 30 game appearances, and 11 have retired after five seasons or less". ?It's said that championships are the true measure of greatness. Among this group, only nine have appeared in Super Bowls, with six wins to show for it. Three of those wins are from the only current Hall of Famer among that group, Troy Aikman. Which means that sixth-round pick Tom Brady has as many Super Bowl victories (3) in the past five years as 42 first-rounders not named Aikman have achieved in the past 20". So again, do the Bills need an elite QB? SURE, of course we do... where is he? Do you see him? I'm not splitting hairs... did you watch us this year?? WE SUCK on D, We have no clue how to stop the run (or is it no talent?), so I'd rather we spend the pick on a more immediate finger in the dike. Fitz, given the amout of time in the pocket as all of the other 4 still in the playoffs, and with a freaking good running game, AND with a Top 10 D would be just fine. I just saw this... you must be a journalism major. Nice way to write something and pass it off as fact. Now THAT is "amazing". I said depending on who's there, there MIGHT not be a player worthy of the #3 pick. Now, that's more along the lines of what we need. Do we need AJ Green? Do we need Patrick Peterson? Like I also said... if, IF there's a QB that they're that high on take him, but load the rest of the draft on D. The Funny thing is that since 2005 every Super Bowl winning QB has been picked in the first 32 picks. I get it though, you're just one that refuses to see that the NFL changes over time. Sorry about that, I can't help you there.
McD Posted January 18, 2011 Author Posted January 18, 2011 You can find stats to say whatever you want. How about these 2010 playoffs: 60.7% completion rating, 3TD, 1 INT, 91.7 rating and 2 wins so far. 2009 playoffs: 60.2% completion rating, 4td, 2 INT, 92.7 rating and 3 wins to only 1 loss (AS A ROOKIE) I'd say that is pretty good, unless you just have it in your head to hate the kid. Watch the games. He is still young and learning. He makes mistakes, but he makes some excellent plays when they are needed. I hate the Jets, but I've got nothing but good things to say about Sanchez. Not to get nit picky (and I think Sanchez is a solid QB), but this again helps prove my point (at least for '10, didn't look up '09 playoffs), he played pretty well against two avg to weak defenses. While Manning and Brady fell to a VASTLY superior D. This , even as an isolated scenario, shows a weaker QB with a better D can and does beat the supposed "franchise QB's with much weaker D's. The Funny thing is that since 2005 every Super Bowl winning QB has been picked in the first 32 picks. I get it though, you're just one that refuses to see that the NFL changes over time. Sorry about that, I can't help you there. Again... tell me where I said **** about first round anything. there are a TON of first round QB busts. Way to come out of hiding... throwing a weak jab then running back to the bushes, lol... you're too much. You are really getting desperate now... I find it interesting how you want to remove any credit for anything Sanchez accomplishes as if its all a product of everyone elses play and has nothing to do with him making reads, seeing the field, executing the throws, etc etc. The "haterade" runs deep in you Lol... I NEVER said I hated Sanchez.. go find that nugget and bring it back to me. I state the facts, and that facts are Sanchez is a solid QB, BUT his D is more of a reason than his play for the Jets success. Keep up the putting words in my mouth though, it's awesome!! How many players do we get to take at #3? Hopefully 7!
Alphadawg7 Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 The Funny thing is that since 2005 every Super Bowl winning QB has been picked in the first 32 picks. I get it though, you're just one that refuses to see that the NFL changes over time. Sorry about that, I can't help you there. EXACTLY!!! Lets go one further...lets look at the top 20 QB's in the NFL this year and where they were picked: Brady - Sixth Rivers - First Rodgers - First Vick - First (#1 overall) Big Ben - First Freeman - First Flacco - First Cassel - Seventh Schaub - Third Manning - First (#1 overall) So 70% of them were taken in the first round...including 3 top 5 (2 #1 overall) Now lets look at which QB's were in the playoffs... Rodgers - First Cutler - First Manning - First (#1 overall) Hasselbeck - Sixth Big Ben - First Brees - Second (first pick in the 2nd) Sanchez - First Flacco - First Brady - Sixth Vick - First (#1 overall) Ryan - First (#1 overall) Cassel - Seventh Thats 9 QB's taken in the first 33 picks or 75% of the quarterbacks in the playoffs. That includes 3 #1 overalls, and 4 in the top 5 picks. So based on todays NFL, the top QB's and the playoff QB's are populated by a large margin of early drafted QB's.
1B4IDie Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 (edited) Again... tell me where I said **** about first round anything. there are a TON of first round QB busts. Way to come out of hiding... throwing a weak jab then running back to the bushes, lol... you're too much. This whole thread is a vat of weak sauce and denial. I just ignored your arbitrary self denial infused "Franchise" Tag. Cutler, Sanchez, Rodgers, and Roethlisberger are all franchise QBs whether you accept it or not. Are any of those franchises in line to draft a QB any time soon? The answer is no. Debate settled. They all are franchise QBs. Only Franchise QBs are left in the playoffs. Edited January 18, 2011 by Why So Serious?
McD Posted January 18, 2011 Author Posted January 18, 2011 EXACTLY!!! Lets go one further...lets look at the top 20 QB's in the NFL this year and where they were picked: Brady - Sixth Rivers - First Rodgers - First Vick - First (#1 overall) Big Ben - First Freeman - First Flacco - First Cassel - Seventh Schaub - Third Manning - First (#1 overall) So 70% of them were taken in the first round...including 3 top 5 (2 #1 overall) Now lets look at which QB's were in the playoffs... Rodgers - First Cutler - First Manning - First (#1 overall) Hasselbeck - Sixth Big Ben - First Brees - Second (first pick in the 2nd) Sanchez - First Flacco - First Brady - Sixth Vick - First (#1 overall) Ryan - First (#1 overall) Cassel - Seventh Thats 9 QB's taken in the first 33 picks or 75% of the quarterbacks in the playoffs. That includes 3 #1 overalls, and 4 in the top 5 picks. So based on todays NFL, the top QB's and the playoff QB's are populated by a large margin of early drafted QB's. So again, I ask WHERE I said **** about a first round QB?? Now go do your homework and tell me how many BUSTS there have been at QB? If Luck was there, I'd say take him, but he's not. Sorry... Newton, nor Mallett are worth the #3. And I suppose none of the teams that are in have great Defenses? Hmmm... seems to be my point huh? And I bet NONE of the teams still alive have players on D that were taken in the first round. You're right... we should just try UDFA players or "reaches" for our trenches. So far the playoff teams like the Jets have only GASHED us for 250+ yds a game this year on the ground. You all aren't stupid. You wont win ANYTHING with a crappy run D. This whole thread is a vat of weak sauce and denial. I just ignored your arbitrary self denial infused "Franchise" Tag. Cutler, Sanchez, Rodgers, and Roethlisberger are all franchise QBs whether you accept it or not. Are any of those franchises in line to draft a QB any time soon? The answer is no. Debate settled. They all are franchise QBs. Only Franchise QBs are left in the playoffs. Cutler has stats equal to Fitz, so does Sanchez, but YOU are the one arbitrily using the "franchise" tag. See, you think that because a guy was drafted in the first round and has potential IS a franchise QB... so... where's Ryan Leaf these days? Jamarcus Russell? Oh... yeah.... And, really all you did was point out the top 4 of 9 defenses that are still playing. See I provide stats to back what I say. You don't/can't. Of your remaining "franchise QB's" Rodgers was ranked 3rd (good job!), Roethlisraper ranked #5 (way to go!), Cutler ranked #16... ummm "franchise"? And then Sanchez ranked 27th... !@#$ing OUCH!! Evidently you can have the middle of the pack and damn near last rated QB on your team and STILL be deep into the playoffs... GRANTED you have a Top ranked D... Thank you, I'll be here all week. Go check the QB stats... Fitz is better, or at least equivilent to both Sanchez AND Cutler. So.... according to your logic Fitz IS our franchise QB. And if that's the case, why draft a QB at all??
McD Posted January 18, 2011 Author Posted January 18, 2011 (edited) You can find stats to say whatever you want. How about these 2009 playoffs: 60.2% completion rating, 4td, 2 INT, 92.7 rating and 3 wins to only 1 loss (AS A ROOKIE) I'd say that is pretty good, unless you just have it in your head to hate the kid. Watch the games. He is still young and learning. He makes mistakes, but he makes some excellent plays when they are needed. I hate the Jets, but I've got nothing but good things to say about Sanchez. Ok just checked the stats on the '09 playoffs. Again, all I see is the same. Sanchez beat a decent 6th ranked Cincy D 10-7 and he was solid at 12/15 182 1 TD 0 INT, But again... guess what? The Jets D was #1 last year (keep that in mind the rest of the way please). Then "he" beat a 11th ranked Chargers D 11-7 (barn burners these games!) where he threw for a VERY modest 12/23 100 yds with 1 TD and 1 INT. However the Jets couldn't hang onto a 17-13 halftime lead on the road in Indy and the battle between the two "franchise QB's" was lost by Sanchez. That was his chance to "LEAD" his team as a franchise guy against a weaker D (actually Indy was ranked 8th), but he failed... now, he was a rook and he had no right to go into Indy and expect to win so I dont hold that against him. They lost to a VERY playoff seasoned Indy team with one of the "true" franchise QB's. Here's what I know about Sanchez... he's a decent QB. Nothing more nothing less. He will (unfortunately) get better, but he's not a franchise QB yet, so to label him one now and think "he's" taking the Jets to the promised land is ludicrous. the Jets mgith get there (wouldn't surprise me at all if they do), but guess what's going to get them there??? Yep, their running game and their D. Edited January 18, 2011 by McD
ColdBlueNorth Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 Sanchez missed on as many throws as he hit today. And he would be licking his wounds if his defense didn't punch Brady in the vagina. PTR OK, that is just plain funny. May have to keep that on my signature line for a while... perhaps forwarded to a Patsies fan at work too. Sanchez did throw a beautiful fade in the corner of the end zone, looked almost as sweet as the pass Fitz dropped right in Stevie's hands for the non-win against Pittsburgh. What if Sanchez switched places with Fitz. You have to wonder how well Sanchez would have performed behind the Bills O-line, while the pressure mounted watching Brady and NE march down the field and score on each possession against our pathetic defense?
McD Posted January 18, 2011 Author Posted January 18, 2011 OK, that is just plain funny. May have to keep that on my signature line for a while... perhaps forwarded to a Patsies fan at work too. Sanchez did throw a beautiful fade in the corner of the end zone, looked almost as sweet as the pass Fitz dropped right in Stevie's hands for the non-win against Pittsburgh. What if Sanchez switched places with Fitz. You have to wonder how well Sanchez would have performed behind the Bills O-line, while the pressure mounted watching Brady and NE march down the field and score on each possession against our pathetic defense? Yes... another person that "gets it". I honestly think the Jets have done a good job bringing Sanchez along, but he's not a franchise QB... yet. He has the intangibles, but he's got to put it all together. Of course he has a tremendous supporting (actually he's more supporting than they are but I digress) cast, and that's what makes them as successful as they are...
Recommended Posts