All fair points. But Junc, if this team brings in any starting NFL quarterback halfway decent, I'm going to want to see that guy get a chance to play. I just can't risk having to watch Mark miss open receivers and committ game-changing turnovers anymore. I just can't. I just don't believe in him anymore. Sorry. Clearly, if Mark outplays his competition in training camp/pre-season, he should be named the starter. But here's the thing, I honestly don't think that can happen. I sincerely believe that Sanchez is mentally broken and that he's done here. He needs a fresh start just as badly as the Jets need one. I believe the best thing FOR SANCHEZ is to sit for a year or two behind a starter on another team, and somewhere down the road, hopefully get another shot. That is precisely why I would take the cap hit and cut bait with him now, instead of bringing him back for an inevitable let down.
30 combined TDs (rushing/throwing) he had 32 in 2011. Under 15 combined turnovers must complete over 60% of his passes.
Junc, just fyi QB stats were around a LONG time before fantasy stats ever showed up. They have always been the gauge of a QB and they still reflect the ability of the QB. Although the most important stats aren't related to fantasy leagues at all. Most important stats. Completion percentage. Yards per attempt. TD per attempt. Intercepts per Attempt, Yards per attempt rushing (if it's a running QB in question) and of course Fumbles, regardless of how many were lost (fumble recovery on which team recovers is pretty much just blind luck of who the ball bounces to, though sometimes idiot players try to pick it up and run rather than cover it up)> The stat that is over rated on QB's is team wins. No QB can win the game alone, there are QB's that can carry a team but no QB wins a game alone. However, there are QB's that can lose you games almost single handedly (see the Cardinals all this year). Sanchez falls in to the latter category frequently with his sloppy ball handling, poor field decisions, and inaccurate passing.
they have been around forvere, long before fantasy football and it holds true in those days too. Stats tell part of the story. Do you want a QB that has great #s but can't come through when you need him most? a Romo, Rivers type? I prefer a guy w/ mediocre #s(pre 2012 sanchez) who can play in big spots.
But it would be best if Sanchez could put up good numbers and play in big spots? Because without the good numbers, he hurts our chances of every reaching the big spots. That's the problem. His play needs to let us get into the big spots so we don't have to build a top 5 O and top 5 D to complement. If we are building that for Sanchez, we might as well sign alex smith since he has shown better play on that type of team recently.
Poor reading and overall bad response by you The question is in the OP, what type of stats will it take for Sanchez to remain as QB past next season Drew Brees was chosen because he was a similar QB, both physically and in terms of a lackluster performance in his first three years. Brees 2004 numbers were a precursor of things to come and I would think if Sanchez put up those type of numbers and was 11-4 as a starter, it would go a long way toward bolstering his future as a Jet. As for being satisfied with a WC loss, first, I don't see how you could take my post as meaning that a WC loss would be acceptable. However, just to address your comment: If Sanchez put up Brees 2004 numbers and played well in a WC game but lost, he would almost certainly be back as Jets QB. I agree there would be a number of people who would call for him to be traded, especially if a stud QB could be drafted, But I would expect him to be back if he played like this. If he played well but put up Todd/mud bowl like numbers in the play-offs, I could see that there would be a lot of calls to get rid of him. Are you saying that the only way he stays is if the Jets win SB, even if he is only no better than, say, 2010 performance? Because the number of QBs who played well enough to win SB, but were cast aside shortly is high.
that would be the perfect situation, that was my expectation heading into 2011. Those expectatiosn have changed and for 2013 I'd love to see him play 2010 like. you didn't say you'd like Brees' career, you said his #s from 2004 so everything I wrote is valid. Most fans want great fantasy #s, I want to win.
Sanchez played big in one, One game, how many times has he played small and cost the team wins and nearly the playoffs in both 2009 and 2010. Here's the truth, take it any way you want to but in the last 20 years only 1 team has made the superbowl with a statistically equal QB as Sanchez, the 2006 Bears with Rex Grossman, they lost. Give me the statistical QB any day of the week, and year in and year out that team given equal personel will go further than a team led by a player of Sanchez's calibur. AS far as coming up big? If your opinion of a QB coming up big is never throwing for 300 yards in a big game, where your 3 TD pass game came in a game where you threw under 200 yards and the running game and defense set up the scores....yeah then he came up big. Fact is his whole big deal comes off of one playoff game against the Patriots. 194 yards, 3 TD's (kudos on the TD's). 58 of Sanchez's yards came off a short pass that Cotchery took for 58 yards. Now to be fair, Sanchez did have 3 nice passes in that game. But it was Sancehz's career game. But, even his pass deep pass to Edwards required a great catch by Edwards as the ball was somewhat off target and actually was a lucky catch by Edwards grasping the ball to his helmet, but it counts....Translation, Sanchez has come up "big" in one game in the post season. And even then then it's the defense that stiffled Brady and the Patriots that made it all possible. 14 points, if I recall, came off of Patriot turnovers, if you include the muffed fake punt. So that's your "big" game....a game basicially won by the defense and field position? really?
Sanchez played well in all of his postseason starts. The only bad play he had was the first half at Indy in the '10 WC game. if you think he ahd 1 good game then you really don't know what you are watching. B/c you throw for 300 yds doesn't mean you had a good game, in most cases the QBs that have 300+ yds are usally losing an dhave to throw to catch up. If you include the muffed punt only 7 pts came off TOs at NE, the D only forced 1 TO and we missed a FG after that TO.
Yep missed a FG after Harris returned the pick to what the 15? and Sanchez and the jets proceeded to go BACKWARDS.... And your right they don't have to throw 300 yeards, But to claim that Sanchez came up big when in reality in the 4 wins he never even eclipsed 200 yards, and in one of the games barely broke 100. In other words they were games that were won that ANY average QB in the league could have easily won. to claim Sanchez came up big is just hyperboyle to the extreme. The only times Sanchez eclipsed 200 yards were games they lost in the post season....hint, that means it was the running game and DEFENSE winning the games, not Sanchez...All sanchez had to do to win those games was not crap the bed. Period. I might add, the big game against the Patriots came against the leagues #30 ranked defense against the pass....
it was mark's fault we lost 3 yds on a run on 1st down? then it was his fault LT got tripped up on a screen? who cares how many yards he passed for? he amde plays to WIN games, let the Philip Rivers types throw for 300+ and lose. he badly outplayed Brady in the div rd while Brady threw for 299 and Sanchez 194. This game is not about pass yds, it's about making plays to win games. the #30 pass D ranking for the pats is based on yards, the Pats were 14-2 killing teams that year so teams had to throw to come back so it skews that #. Their D also led the NFL in INTs more than doubling what we had. This is why it's never as simple as looking at rankings or stats sheets.
Brees 2004 stats are hardly fantasy numbers (262 400 65.5 3159 27 7 104.8 11-4 as a starter) key stat is completion percentage (65.5), td/int ratio (27/7) and 11-4 record, all of which points to a winning record and would probably be enough to keep him around (the point of the OP)
if he has medicore #s and we win a playoff game or 2 that would make me happier than if he had Brees '04 #s and we missed the playoffs or lost in the WC rd.
I don't have numbers in mind - but if he's going to be playing QB for the Jets, he needs to show leadership and resilience, two characteristics that have been missing from his game. Personally I don't care how may incomplete passes he throws, as long as he shows up when it counts - that's been the problem with him - you never get the feeling that he can just throw it 60 yards down the field, and bring the team back on his shoulders. Stuff like that is why there are still people wondering whether Vinny wanted to unretire last year - he didn't give a crap if he threw 10 picks, as long as he got another chance to throw a td. Mark goes into a shell, and you get the feeling solely from his body language that he's already defeated... that's what needs to change. So, rather than worry about numbers, it's more of a trust factor - do I trust Mark to be able to put up points with the game on the line? Right now? Not so much.
If he has mediocre numbers and we don't win the SB, even if we won a play-off game, there would be a lot of pressure for the Jets to upgrade the position. And what are mediocre numbers? sub 3000 yds passing? Td/Ints about 50/50? Completion pctg under 60%? Because if he puts up those numbers, we'll be lucky to get into the play-offs and he'll probably be the reason for at least one or two of our losses. If he has a mediocre season and we sneak into the play-offs (like '09) I think he will have to play well, get us at least to the SB (if not win it) and leave us with good reason to be optimistic about improvement, for him to be back in 2014. And if he had a season like Brees '04, and we didn't make the play-offs, would you cut him? Trade him? Because if he plays like Brees '04, it won't be because of him that we don't make the play-offs
how do you know if he has Brees '04 like #s and we miss the playoffs it wouldn't be b/c of him? that's the point of all of this, #s alone don't tell us how good a player is. His #s were mediocre in 2010 but his play overall was really good and he was a huge reason we made the playoffs.
I'm just making an educated guess, that on the whole, based upon almost 50 years of observing football, if Sanchez threw for 3000+ yards had a 65% completion rate and 27/7 td to interception ratio, his play would not be the reason the Jets missed the play-offs. Could he have one or two bad games at crucial spots that kill us? Of course. If that was the case, would people be calling for his head even if he had those numbers? Yes. But generally speaking, assuming he didn't blow a crucial game, if he put up Bress'04 numbers, many would think he turned the corner and would want him back If he played like 2010 and we made the AFCCG again,and lost, I think there would be calls for him to be moved. I could certainly see people saying, "We'll never win the SB with Sanchez."
I would be much more happier if he put up nice numbers and we lost in the WC round because of a fluke or defensive collapse or something like that than we squeaked by with Sanchez still being inconsistent or below average. Him with the good numbers means we might have a QB for years to come. Him with eh numbers means we need to go again and beef up the whole team to hide and protect Mark
Idk about you but id like the playoffs to go through MetLife stadium at some point. That means winning winnabale games during the season.
