I remember Big Ben having a pretty nice rookie season. Come on dude think about what you're writing. Sanchez has potential, buy he was far from the best rookie qb in play off history. That's a no brainer..
Were you a Drew Henson guy then? Obviously you're not fond of Brady... the handle's a pretty good give-away. :smile: But this struck me as really odd coming from a Michigan fan. Brady certainly didn't "hold Michigan back" in the '99 Orange Bowl, and didn't they win something like 20 out of 25 games he started? Brady's always been slow-footed but has excellent pocket presence... I wasn't watching a lot of Michigan games back in the day but maybe that's something that didn't develop until he hit the pros. Just legitimately trying to get a better idea of where you're coming from.
So basically everyone posts these prediction articles by "experts" that say we'll stink. Why don't I see anyone posting the articles that say we win the division, SB win. stuff that's positive?
Sanchez had the best combined rookie QB playoff performance (based on QB rating) in NFL history. That's a fact. Sorry if you don't like it.
He was talking about performance by a rookie in the playoffs, and Roethlisberger was not good at all - 31/54, 407 yards passing in two games, 3 TDs, 5 INTs. Sanchez's performance in the playoffs last year was far better than Roethlisberger's as a rookie.
You might want to rewatch Ben's first playoff games or at least look at the stat lines. He wasn't very impressive. Edit: I see Jeff provided them.
Why is everyone so surprised that Jason freaking Whitlock wrote something terrible? The guy lives to push buttons. That's what his entire sad journalistic career is built around. The only thing surprising about this is that he didn't drop any accusations of racism into it. I thought those were interwoven into everything he touched.
It's not controversial to assert that a quarterback who had a mostly poor rookie season from a program that, even quarterbacks aside, has turned out crappy players for the last decade despite dominating college football. Sanchez was better in the playoffs, and that's encouraging, but it sometimes takes quarterbacks a while to get their footing. It is reasonable to suggest he might hold the Jets back this season. Whitlock's just stating his opinion. It's not out of bounds. He almost singlehandedly cost the Jets 2 or 3 games last season. -X-
In addition, I am sick of quarterbacks getting the lion's share of the credit when their team advances in the playoffs. Sanchez was better in the playoffs, yes, but he threw 4 touchdowns against 2 interceptions in three games. The Jets won not because he was great, but because he wasn't awful. That doesn't excuse that he is a major work in progress suffering from alarming accuracy numbers. When I look at a guy like Eli Manning, who has become an accurate, skilled passer and was once a game manager with a prestigious last name, it gives me hope for Sanchez, but he's the exception to the rule. The guy must learn to take care of the football and make better passes if he's ever going to be a positive for the Jets. Right now the best we can hope for is a non-negative. -X-
^I agree with much of that. I hate this "game manager" bullshit. Starting QBs in the NFL are there to WIN GAMES. They are there for when the team is down by 4 with 3 minutes left to play to drive the team 80 yards for the winning score. If you have a QB in place that you hope "just doesn't lose the game", then you need a new QB. Hopefully, Sanchez will develop into the former, but many of you seem to be calling him the latter. I hope not.
I don't know what he is, but I'm not going to rush to his defense because it's entirely possible he could be just another mediocre "game manager." The irrelevant part of Whitlock's post is "The Jets will stink." The Jets were within 30 minutes of the playoffs last year when Sanchez was AWFUL. If he comes out and posts a 1:1 TD to INT ratio, which is mediocre, and the defense and running game repeats, this team will be a Super Bowl favorite. But there is something to his larger point about USC players. To ignore that and dismiss him is silly. -X-
It's clear that Whitlock doesn't do much research when writing these articles. If he said Sanchez and Leinart didn't face too much adversity that might have been sort of accurate. But he lumped Palmer into that too. Palmer was in the pre-Carroll, Paul Hackett era, where they were average at best, going 6-6, 5-7 etc, until Carroll came in and Palmer won the Heisman and NC in 2002. This guy is just a shitty sportswriter who says non-sense to get a big response, as stated in several other posts.
I have not been a fan of offensive players coming out of USC into the NFL for a while now. This was one of the reasons I was indeed, quite skeptical of the Sanchez pick. Carson Palmer is one of the exceptions, but more than the knee injury I think it's his arm injury that has held him back. There are always exceptions, but I've never been crazy about CA QB's playing in the northeast as well, as much as I tend to dislike running QB's like Vick, J Russel, V Young. Losman was a bust. There are a lot of offensive players from USC that never lived up to their college careers in the NFL. Lienart, L White, R Bush. I hate to say... maybe McKnight too, but he was only a 4th rounder. For some reason USC seems to produce better defensive players that do well in the NFL. So, I also have some anti-USC-CA bias too. Sanchez, unlike some of these guys showed that he can play in the NFL in he playoffs last year agianst some good teams. But, Brady Quinn is a bust too, so I'm not saying it's just a CA thing at all, but the bust ratio does seem higher to me.
The bust rate in the NFL is pretty high in general, it's just most noticeable when QBs bust for obvious reasons.
Terrible article. However, people put too much into Sanchez being great. If he is average, the Jets are 12-4. If he is slightly above average the Jets are the #1 seed, if he is great, the Jets will NEVER lose.
