Once again looking at blind #s. sanchez led 4-5 comebacks that year while in the biggest game of the year for Eli he threw FOUR INTs in leading his team to a crushing loss at GB in week 16 but hey he had a better rating! There is a weak link here, you have proven yourself to be that over and over and over again to the point of beyond embarrassment. Our D had 3 mins and 3 TOs to get the O the ball back. That is an eternity, a big time D doesn't allow the clock to be run out on them. How anyone can watch that game and assign more blame to mark Sanchez than the D I have no idea. It's being completely unfair and wrong. I concede valid points, you guys don't post many. I am not going to lie and say I agree w/ the irrational stuff you guys post.
The game would have been different if they used the tuck rule properly. But at least the stupid rule is gone now.
once again junc uses the old idea that nacho led us to wins while other statistical qb's which are better than him, do not. beating a dead horse, junc. it is true that nacho was on both teams, but his contributions to the team success is minimal. you have no argument junc, and its making you look bad. nacho has been way more of a detriment to our team
Switch the QB and the results are the same? Mark was better in 2010? Better than the Mark of 2012, no question. Mark Sanchez 2010 better than 2010 Eli Manning? Player - Comp / Attp. / Pct. / Yards / TDs / Int Rating Sanchez / 278 / 507 / 54.8 / 3,291 / 17 / 13 / 75.3 Manning / 339 / 539 / 62.9 / 4,002 / 25 / 16 / 85.3 The Giants 2010 season was botched by Matt Dodge's last play punt vs. the Eagles (and the Giant's D that game as well), not Eli Manning. Giants should've ended up 11-5 and in the playoffs. I'm no Giant fan--hardly--but some other things to consider about the 2010 season: - the Jets should've lost to Detroit. Hanson (K) got injured, Suh attempted at PAT and missed and that's why the Jets were able to get the game into OT and win 23-20. Otherwise that's probably a 21-20 loss. - the OT game against the Browns was a get-out-of-town choke win against a lousy Browns team with an even lousier QB. Holmes took a short curl pattern pass, the DBs gagged on the tackle and the Jets escaped by the skin of their teeth. - while one game was against the Ravens, in the course of 3 games in that 2010 season, the Jets scored a total of 12, count 'em, 12 points. 3 measly points against NE, 9 points vs. the Ravens and a shutout at home to GB who were missing several starters that game as well. The Jet 'D' held Aaron Rogers to 9 points, the Ravens to 10 points and yet managed to lose BOTH games. Outside of a 17-10 loss to the Titans, Eli Manning never put up less than 17 points in 2010. Switch the QBs and I'd haven taken my chances in 2010. Yeah, I know...the above "stats" don't mean anything...whatever. Anyway, as for the eye test, anyone who's seen both play in person repeatedly can see Manning's technique (setup, footwork, etc.) is better and that he throws a prettier, more catchable ball than Mark.
I will ignore the #s, I think 25 INts and 4 in the biggest game of the year tells us all we need to know. It was Matt Dodge's fault? maybe if the Giants didn't go 3 and out on the last possession and call a TO the game goes to OT? That was a team effort, the O shut it down, the D was awful, STs got dominated. They could have ended up 11-5 but didn't, I don't even really count the 10th win b/c it was meaningless after getting thrashed by GB. I see a lot of could have and should haves, we can do that all day. Bradshaws fumble should have been ruled a fumble at SF, if it is they lose in the title game, Sanchez's fumble should have been ruled incomplete, etc... if Hansen is kicking we couldn't have converted a 2 pt conversion? you know we have no chance? we dominated Cle but our K missed 3 kicks, our D blew a late TD lead to send the game to OT who cares? they won 11 games, every team has bad games. Eli was SHUT OUT in a PLAYOFFS game and scored 9 in another. Eli killed his teams chances in 2010, mark did the opposite. mark made plays to win, Eli made plays for the other team. That describes Eli '1 and mark '12 too but in reverse. Smart fans don't just look at #s, there is much more to it, mark was better than Eli in 2010.
I actually think that was a tough luck year for Eli. He had a number of balls go through the hands of receivers for picks. Ten of his interceptions came on dropped or tipped balls by his receivers. To make matters worse, he only had two interceptions dropped by defenders. Sanchez had far and away the most with 15. Even with all of that if Dodge punts the ball out of bounds as instructed, the Giants are probably a playoff team.
You are going to be so disappointed... How did you feel about Tebow? Did you think he was better than Mark in 2011? I'm certainly over simplifying your argument here truthfully, but you seem to be making the same argument his fans did, stats don't matter so long as he wins. Stats often don't tell the whole story, circumstances need to be put into account, but hell when numbers are good in a relative sense (a lot of completions in tandem with a high amount of throws and good amount of resulting scores,etc) they usually point to a good player, and vice versa. wins aren't the only thing that matters in terms of being a good QB, you want a player that puts you in the best chance to do so, and just because they've won in the past doesn't mean they have that ability. If results are all that matters I guess TT was better than mark that year, or am I mis-construing your argument?
Just... stop. For your own sake. You've been proven wrong so many times, by so many people, that it's become embarrassing to watch. But I know you can't see it, so I can't really blame you for being so convinced you're right. How can it be, that virtually everyone here can see (and eventually have found out the hard way) that you debate in similar fashion to religious fanatics? You're soooo convinced that you're right, that when someone tries to prove you wrong, you bend the perimeters of the discussion to fit your point again - and starts challenging people with those new terms. And virtually every time, those new terms are just as inaccurate as the previous ones... and so it goes on... over and over and over... until you're the only one left posting, because people give up on you. As they should. The cute/sad/worrying part, is that when it all becomes silent... because the vast majority just can't be assed listening to your 'preached gospel of football wisdom'... you somehow think you've won...!?! And to make things even worse, there's basically two of you. Only that Hobbes delivers in a more douchy way, often trying to minimize others while sharing his opinion and views. What you both share, is that you're (according to the massive majority of us here, who are nothing more than average fans too, posting opinions on a message board) basically always wrong in your assumptions and logic. Basically everyone here, can be rational and explain their way of why their point is based on logic and reasoning, and if proven wrong - accept that and come to terms with other peoples' ideas. But not you two. You have to "win" the debate. If that means making people go away, rather than make them agree with your points, so be it. Just as an example, just watch poor Hobbes have a go at being 'snappy' and completely missing even the most basic foundation of my point - that the OL sucked in the McElroy game. Again, that is my opinion, and I might very well be wrong. But that's what I think. And somehow, that all of a sudden means, in Hobbes magic world, that the OL therefore sucked equally the same that whole season. A pretty neat example of why this failfest never stops, because the two of you here just keep taking things out of reason, and switch angles until you're the only ones left. Just... stop the crusade. The sooner you realize you are not friends of logic or how to think rationally, the sooner you might get rid of this illness.
Snappy, would be about three feet over your head. The OL sucked in the Arizona game too. I was there. Someone on the accuracy thread posted a clip..watch the interception....thrown bc the qb has a helmet in his chest. The fact that no one else sees Sackelroy as a starter except you Genophile Sanchez haters should tell you something. He is just not physically that talented. The premise, that a two time Afccg, 4 road playoff wins, one of five fastest to 30 wins ever, with only one losing season out of four sucks.... Is the failfest. They brought in Marty, to keep Sanchez. They brought in a cripple to gain some credibility, they hit the lotto, when Smith fell to 39. The only fail here, is thinking Garrard was ever going to see the field, as a starter, or Idzik hung his hat on alottery ticket..... Fcol..I said it when they signed Garrard he wouldnt make it to opening day. And on and after opening day....we will be the two, that were .....RIGHT.
The funny thing about having shitty logic and terrible arguments is that even when you turn out to be "right", you are still wrong, and still an ass clown.
guess Cannizarro is a fanatic too. http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/jets/qb_not_jet_ting_his_due_TUHDxeD4v8xGULKGTjXovM Oh, no its all team oriented...I mean, who does Stafford have...and bradford never had a decemt RB...
So we still can't all agree the offense and defense both let us down in that 2010 AFC championship game? The offense was not on fire in the 2nd half, that is revisionist history. They scored on 2 of their 4 drives, including going 3 and out after an INT and taking up 8 minutes and scoring 0 points from 1st and goal at the 2. On the other hand the defense had two chances with 3 minutes left to ice the game, and both times Big Ben and the Pitt O caught them off guard and got first downs through the air. Also it's funny. In the December game at Pitt and the playoff game, the defense let up 17 points both times and got a safety both times for a net total of 15 points. In the first game a win, the ST picked up 7 points and the offense got 13 points. In the playoff game the ST got 0 points and the offense got 17. The downside, they gave up 7 for a net of 10. The offense and defense put themselves where they needed to play perfect in the 2nd half and they couldn't do that. The 2 egregious second half mistakes that stick out are the 8 minute drive and 1st and goal from the 2 leading to 0 points and the failure to stop the PITT offense with 3 mintues left and 3 timeouts. The first half mistake is the refs calling an incomplete pass a fumble.
So, has Bradford. Freeman, or stafford changed anything Cannizzaro said, or is your quip away of deflecting the fact. Isnt that what you haters do...deflect? There is one simple fact. The F.O. And Coaching staff are committed to Sanchez. Hate it all you want. They could have June 1 designated Sanchez, and signed Kevin Kolb. They didnt. And if you want to make the comical Geno Smith argument, Sheldon Richardson says hello. A team does not pass on its Franchisee QB at 13 for yet another DL pick, and pray their guy falls to 39. Geno, was a lottery hit. Not a Plan. (and Garrard was never a plan to start, I pointed that out from the day he was signed)
If they were committed to Sanchez, they would not have signed two other quarterbacks. It's really a very simple fact that you fail to understand
Garrard, was never a viable option. Smith, was luck, Tell me how thats wrong, or just admit you are indenial.
