If the team that drafts Sanchez is expecting him to come in and start like Ryan and Flacco did last year they will be horribly disappointed. Sanchez put in that position has bust written all over him: 1) Started for 1 season, less than 20 starts. Not enough big game experience, or experience in general for that matter. 2) Team was loaded with weapons, I call this the Leinart mirage. Most QB's would look like a man playing with boys with that line and playmakers. 3) His combine workout was very average, especially his throws. However, if you sit him for a minimum of 2 years, what I call the Matt Cassel effect than you have a different situation. Sanchez is a bright guy and at that point you will be putting him in a position to excel and hopefully be that franchise QB for the future. Unfortunately, the Jets with no current locked in or experienced QB on the roster are not in a luxury position to draft a QB and let him sit. So, mapping this back to the Jets and our current situation, if you draft Sanchez and start him this year all indications are that he will fail or at the least struggle mightily. Since we have NO locked in starter at QB presently, spending our pick 17 on a QB who will sit is just not an option. The better bet is to role the dice with either Ratliff or Clemens to see what we have, and take another explosive player at 17, could be either side of the ball, just not Sanchez. If we start either Ratliff or Clemens there is a chance we will fail but at the same time there is also a moderate chance one of these guys will be able to do what Ryan wants him to do - not make mistakes and let the RB and Def win the game. Bottom line, drafting Sanchez would be a big mistake. He's not ready to start so why put him out there to fail. We need to evaluate who we have in Ratliff and Clemens.
very smart post. i like the point that we are actually not in a position that we have a veteran QB that is a few years from done and have a couple of years to groom a rookie qb. we actually need a qb to start immediately and by wasting the 17th pick on a gamble at the QB position is too risky. we should just draft a weapon at RB (moreno) and thus take some pressure of whichever QB we decide to go with. the RB position translates a lot easier from college to pro than the QB position so it will be less of a gamble than taking an unknown at QB. drafting moreno will also be cost efficient once we see tjones's production decline. moreno is also a great pass catcher out of the backfield which will benefit the "inexperienced" QB we have back there this season since he will most likely need to check down a lot. (look at how cassell played, he threw it to the RB and TEs a lot more than say peyton manning does) we also need to get a vertical threat to keep the defense honest and not just allow them to put 8 or 9 in the box. unless they know we have a WR that can stretch the field, they wont respect that making it harder to run and less room to pass. hence, my other point is to draft someone like DHB in the 2nd round, or trade back up into the 1st like we did for keller, to impose that deep ball threat and also give us someone who is a home run threat every time he touches the ball (WR reverses or WR screens) both plays we like to run. my main point is that i think its more important to get a good RB than WR at this point due to our offense's philosophy. Also, couple that with the fact that the RB touches the ball more and the time of development is a lot shorter than a WR. We need players at positions that are already set to perform, considering we already have a position that will technically be in the developmental stage, the QB.
Is there really a problem with drafting Sanchez and having him carry a clipboard during the 2009 season? No problem here. I think it is a win-win situation. Clemens and Ratliff fight it out for starter in 2009. Sanchez learns the pro game from the sideline. Unless either Ratliff or Clemens "wow"'s everyone, have them return to do battle for the job in 2010. Similar to how the Cleveland QB situation shook out. Quinn sat 2007 while Anderson had a solid season. Anderson began 2008 but failed. Quinn took over. Nothing wrong with a little competition for the No. 1 QB job.
I agree with the original idea. If we had Favre or Warner/Garcia/whoever, a solid veteran who was starting, then I'd say go ahead and draft for the future, but with an unknown starter, it makes no sense to draft another guy who can't start right away. To me, given our situation, I'd rather go with what we have right now, presumably Ratliff or Clemens (I can't see Ainge beating either of them), then if we're still not satisfied at the end of the season, take someone like McCoy/Tebow/Bradford who will likely be more ready to come in and start immediately if needed. What's the point of taking a project in a weak QB draft, when there's no veteran for him to really learn from, and be an expensive bench-warmer for at least 1-2 years? Instead, we can solidify some of our other holes and deal with it next year
A nice thought, but there is the option of drafting Sanchez and starting whom ever is the best of the three in camp. Just because he is taken in the first does not mean he has to start year one, so unless you think he wins the competition in camp you are free to let him sit the bench. With QB, WR and 34 DE being amongst our biggest needs in the upcomming draft, we should have at least one prospect to look at in each area that has a first round grade.
Sensible opinion, I'd think. Backup NT and RB are both an area of need. On the other hand, having a good OL usually means RBs can do better. See how Tomlinson fared once his line stopped blocking for him. During Marty's heyday at SD, the OL would push the pile up to 3 yards at the snap from time to time. All you needed to do as an RB was to find extra yard or two after the initial push - and there you have it. 5 yard/carry. Once the line deteriorated under Norv's reign (by design or neglect or whatever) Tomlinson suffered almost directly. RB cannot flourish without OL, and any half a decent RB can look like a pro-bowler if the OL and FB do their job well. On the other hand, Backup NT is almost a certain need right now - Jets D performance plummets starkly once Jenkins is out. That issue must be addressed immediately. Hence the reasoning.
If you think Sanchez is a franchise QB and you don't think you have a franchise QB on your roster and he drops to you, you draft him or move up for him. If you don't think he's a franchise QB, or you think you already have one on your roster you pass. It's really not that complicated. What we think of Sanchez' abilities are irrelevant. The Jets will give him a private workout, evaluate him, and based on the above make the proper decision.
I disagree with the OP to some extent. Yeah, the limited experience Sanchez' had at USC is what makes it risky, but seriously this could be a chance to draft the 2nd best QB in this year's Draft. Unless you want the Jets to have a disaster season and go 4-12 again and/or worst, we really won't get a chance to draft an undisputed #1 QB that will go in the top 5. I see no problem drafting a QB with the 17th and letting him sit and learn. IMO, this hardly makes the "case" why we shouldn't draft a QB who most people would want to at least sit and learn for 1 year before becoming a starter. That's my bottom line. Ryan might have been the one QB last year who probably knew he was going to start from day 1, but definitely not Flacco.
Keep building the defense. Sanchez is an extremely risky pick and wouldn't help the team this year anyway. This year is all about the running game, defense and special teams. You just have to be optimistic that Clemens, Ratliff or even Ainge can develop into a solid starter.
i agree that Sanchez is a risky pick. i'd rather go for a receiver. the receiver at that pick should be solid.
Don't under estimate Sanchez. Yeah, he only started for 1 year but he's been improving through out the year. He has the smart, a physical tool and workethic to be successful in NFL. Besides, he's been running pro style offense at USC as well. Having said that, the rest of this year's QBs do not excite me, not even Stafford. Next year's crop will be a great one.
I agree with the Leinart mirage comment. USC's QB next year will have the same stats as Sanchez, same won-loss record or better. It will prolly be Mitch Mustain at QB and he will prolly go pro after one year since he's had to sit so long due to transferring schools. So is every Trojan QB going to be a first rounder for the rest of the Pete Carrol era? Sanchez, then Mustain, then Corp, and so on? Why wasn't Booty a first rounder?
Yes, every STARTING QB that plays for Pete Carroll at USC will more than likely be a first rounder. Would you like to know why? As much as I hate Carroll, he brings in the best players year in and year out. Sanchez* and Mustain** were two of the best rated high school quarterbacks. Aaron Corp is a special athlete, but he may get passed over by someone more talented -- a lot like Matt Cassel. 2009 QB commit Matt Barkley is supposedly the best QB Carroll has ever had at USC. * Sanchez was the #1 overall pro-style QB in 2005. ** Mustain was the #2 overall pro-style QB in 2006 -- behind Matthew Stafford. Oh, give me a break. This is so wrong...whether it's Mustain, Corp, or the freshman Barkley, whoever goes out there for the Trojans will be so inexperienced. You can't predict how many games they will win or lose. Why do think Carroll was upset when Sanchez declared for the draft? USC's chances of going undefeated season may have gone down the drain. Of course all of the USC QBs are going to have similar stats -- they play in the same offense. It's a pro-style scheme, so you can't label any of them as a system QB. My point is, every QB that STARTS for the Trojans will be incredibly talented, probably the best in the nation. Carroll has done a hell of a job going out and getting these big time recruits.
why do that when the QB Class of 2010 is incredibly talented. McCoy would be my pick at QB for our team, in the instance that Clemens or Ratliff are unable to produce.
