in that case the jets should never draft any USC prospects. thanks for making it so clear to all of us.
Smart Thread - THANK YOU I'd like Sanchez at 17 if I were Indy. Or any team that I know Sanchez is going to study behind a guy for 2 years and learn. We don't have that situation. If we drafted Sanchez the media and some of the people on this board would be clamoring to start him. And if history teaches us anything the JETS would. Also consider the fact that Schotty might get a shot at a Head Coach spot in 2010. Do you want to bring in a guy, teach him a system, and then have to get him up to speed in a new system his second year? That's bad planning. In ALL scenarios. Sticking with the three we've got is the smartest thing we could do. If none of them pans out then we'll have to scrub them all, bring in a vet QB who plays our OC's system and draft our guy in 2010. Sorry guys - this year is all about the LINES. Get back ups who can rotate in on both sides of the ball. Play Aggressive D, and Ball Control O.
The Jets have only started two rookies at QB in franchise history, that being Joe Namath and Richard Todd. With Clemens and Ratliff in camp I doubt that Sanchez would start the season as the starter, however if he did it would be because he was burning up camp and looked like the best choice. If the Jets have a choice next year between 3 bad options for the year the odds overwhelmingly favor them starting Clemens over Sanchez or Ratliff. So we should not draft a good QB prospect if he's out there because our OC might leave after the year? Really? I don't see how having Schotty be a veto on getting a franchise QB next year can possibly be seen as positive (or likely). There are many scenarios in which we are better off sticking with the 3 young QB's we have. Passing on a potential franchise QB to do so is not one of them.
Br4dw4y5ux, you are assuming I think Sanchez is a Franchise QB... HE IS NOT. He is a POTENTIAL Diamond in a giant rough, who if he works hard behind a good QB and a good QB coach, could be a blue chip kind of guy. He's untested at this point and not worth in any way shape or form worth a first round pick unless we have NO NEEDs and can afford a vanity pick. IF HE WAS a Franchise QB, then absolutely, all your arguments against my post would be valid. If you want a project QB take the kid out of Rutgers in the 5th or 6th round
Sanchez is not untested. He just went through the rigors of a full season as the QB of a team expected to dominate and he came through and they did. He then dominated Penn State in the Rose Bowl on a day when USC's rushing attack was poor and without the benefit of the usual collection of great USC receivers. He had one weapon available in Damian Robinson and he turned that into a 400 yard passing day with 4 TD's and no picks. You know how often that kind of result happens to a Penn State defense? Try never. You know why Pete Carroll is bitching and moaning about Sanchez leaving? Because he knows he just lost the best QB he has had since Palmer and he knows he might even be better than Palmer. And he knows that he has nobody on the bench to replace him right now because Aaron Corp was a redshirt freshman last year. If Carroll had just shrugged when Sanchez left it would have spoken volumes about where his value really was. the fact that Carroll got so upset is a clear indicator that he thinks Sanchez is extremely talented. He was hoping he could drive Sanchez back to USC by making the comments he did and driving down Sanchez value in the draft. All he really did was give us a chance to draft him in the mid first round, which is what we should do if he is there. It would be stupid not too and it would be insane to let him drop to Miami behind us. God forbid we all live through Marino part II...
What about all the people.. ie: EVERYONE... at the combine saying that he essentially stunk it up? Off day or not, thats not what franchise QBs do. Marino never sucked ass at the combine....
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft09/columns/story?id=3926452 Clayton said he did fine. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...on-curry-or-mark-sanchez-debate-is-over-in-kc Charles Penn, no problem. http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/29351581/ Russ Lande... MSNBC says he did ok. Sanchez actually threw at the combine, unlike Stafford. I think it's premature to suggest he hurt his stock with his overall performance there. The reviews have been mixed but many observers think he did just fine.
The Jets win never be winners until they get a franchise QB. They need to take Sanchez if he is there at 17.
Sanchez also did all the workouts, including the ones that QBs don't normally do. This was seen as him separating himself from any "USC pretty boy QB" label that anyone could put on him... he wants to show he's a gamer and he's tough. Good for him, that adds points in my book.
I make my discast for the Qb position well known on this board. Although I understand and respect the overall importance of the position...I hate the mainstream cookie cutter nuiances it attracts. W/ that said..every single year around this time hundreds of jet fans whine about how we shouldnt take "place QB name here". It happened w/ Quinn,Cutler,Ryan and Flacco.I believe the reason is b/c Jet fans are petrified of draft day failure. We see it w/ other skill positions w/ prospects like Mcfadden, and even Keller! Hell a year into Brick's career people were proclaiming him a bust...and now it's happening w/ Gholston. I suppose that's to soften the blow if the bust label eventually shines through. Or perhaps it's an entirely different topic involving lack of comprehension for player development and the notion that very few rookie's star and consistently succeed even if their lucky enough to start for 16+ games. But back to the original topic: nothing brings this "fear" notion to the surface more than the year's given top QB prospect. It is true that a QB bust in the first round can set a franchise back financially and talent wise for a good 5 years. W/ that said...what is the main facet that has prevented this franchise from being elite since 68? At assorted times we've had an elite Running game(2000-2004, 82-85), an elite WR corps(86-90,97-00), an elite pass rush( early 80's, 01-04) and a decent secondary( 92-01).Obviously you can debate the specific time frames but I'm sure most can agree at one time or another we've had every major positional/strategic facet in line. Except for one. what's the one thing missing from all of that? Aside from the sporadic flashes of brilliance from KOB,less often w/ Vinny, Boomer and Chad...we havent had a top 5 QB capable of taking over a game and/or a franchise. If you wanna dive even DEEPER into it...the 3 times we've actually SELECTED a QB in the first round..we've had at least decent success. Todd was inconsistent but nonetheless solid, If Cadigan and Haight lived up to their potential and Coslet never arrives KOB might be a HOFER, and say what you will about the Chad but he led us to the playoffs 3 times. Yet every year we hear the same hoopla pleading for the franchise to "go defense" and "sign a mid level veteran". This team is generally solid all around. It has a quality mix of saavy veterans and young talent. And much like the franchise historically..the one missing ingredient is th QB. Short term fixes have NOT gotten us over the top. Now I'm not saying we HAVE to take a QB in round 1. This league has shown you can win w/ solid aggressive defense and a quality running game. But what we DO need to do at # 17 is take the best player available.Build depth, create competition and upgrade the overall talent. This team is in position to do just that.Consequently, if Sanchez or Stafford are there at that spot, I strongly doubt there will be any body rated higher on our big board. And it would obviously fill the team's biggest need.It's a no brainer. Say what you will about Sanchez but the talent is OBVIOUSLY there...his physical tools put Leinart and Booty to shame. Additionally many have stated he has a "Special" leadership quaity about him. If that is true...you take your chances w/ developing his physical tools and allow him to be a field general. It maybe a risk...but after 40 years of failure and one common thorn..what do we have to lose?
Looking at the post-combine press on Sanchez I just realized that this is all a tempest in a teapot. He's really unlikely to slip past 10. The Lions will take Stafford on the 1 most likely. Then you have St Louis on the 2, Seattle on the 4 and San Francisco on the 10 all likely looking at Sanchez as their franchise QB possibility. Bulger is getting old and on the decline, Hasselback is getting old, on the decline, was injured last year and has a new head coach coming in, and Alex Smith just hasn't worked out. You probably have a 90% probability that Sanchez winds up in one of those locations and long gone before the Jets can even get a whiff of him.
it was a joke, guess i should have pointed that out but i figured the lack of any kind of information would be a hint. oh well. i do happen to thoroughly dislike anyone from usc though.
that was a great post!!! and brought up something i havent really thought about. i dont know if he is the one that we need to have but the overall jist of the post is SPOT ON!
I used to think this was ridiculous, but after thinking about it, it's plausible. If Sanchez sits for 3 years like Aaron Rodgers did, Peyton could retire after the 2011 season. He would be 35 (almost 36) which isn't a completely unreasonable age to retire at, especially if he wins another SB with the Colts.
This is going to be Peyton's 12th season this year. 15 is more than a respectable career. And don't think he wasn't watching Favre stretch things out last year and embarrass himself at the end. I think if the Colts win a Super Bowl in the next 3 years Peyton is going to think long and hard about going out on a high note. He's got the HoF locked up and he's never been seriously injured. Fate isn't something to tempt.
3 reasons to let the guys we have compete for the job and not panic about drafting a QB: 1 - Tom Brady 2 - Tony Romo 3 - Kurt Warner Any of those 3 high draft picks ? Hell no! Lets see what we have at QB and if they all fail this year, then lets get back on the QB search next year. I feel comfortable with either Clemens and Ratliff and even think Ainge will be good. I'd rather find big targets then buy new guns.
That's a pretty good analysis of their history. The one I give them some pass on is Browning Nagle. After missing out on Favre, they took the player that no one less than Howard Snellenberger called "the best quarterback I ever coached."! That's high praise considering the guys he coached at Miami. He had had a solid career at Louisville, played in a pro style offense, had a big time coach and staff, and had an absolute CANNON of an arm. That he did not pan out was surprising ( I often thought it was that his work ethic sucked, and thats what did it.) Anyway, you are pretty spot on.
those three you mentioned are an extreme minority. and why shoot at a big target with a six shooter when i'd rather have the laser guided missiles.
