both QBs sucked, both QBs didn't have many chances. Geno had a few and missed wide open guys. we need help around the QB more than anything else. This has been apparent for years now but we keep taking Dee Milliners and Kyle Wilsons in the 1st rd instead of going after offensive skill players.
Sanchez would most definitely have been better. Would he have been good enough to think he was the answer? No way with this cast of characters.
You're misremembering how bad Sanchez looked at the end of last year with the sorry accumulation of talent around him and the ongoing issues on the OL. To refresh your memory: 12/2 vs Arizona: 10 of 21 for 97 yards and 3 picks. Greg McElroy came in and scored a TD for a win. 12/9 vs Jacksonville: 12 of 19 for 111 yards. 12/17 vs Tennessee: 13 of 28 for 131 yards, a TD and 4 picks, lost a fumble as well. (the Mangold snap into his ankles at the end). 12/24: BENCHED 12/30 vs Buffalo: 17/35 for 205 yards and an Int. 2 fumbles, lost 1. This was a 4 year vet not a raw rookie or a UDFA getting his first playing time.
Just quoting this for emphasis, Sanchez was every bit as bad as Geno towards the end of last year, he completely went off the rails, he was awful.
had less talent around him had Tony Sparano running the O but other than that everything was exactly the same:rofl: I wonder if you guys even watch games?
It was funny watching Simms come in yesterday. I have been saying that the Jets should have been playing him for a few weeks now, but in the meantime the situation has gotten worse. After the awful performance by the O in the first half, you just had to know that the D would cave eventually. It's been a pattern, and worse so yesterday in giving up 125 yards rushing to Miami, which is not a running powerhouse. So I almost would have preferred if they left Smith in there. Even so, like everyone else who knows football and is a Jet fan I had seen more than enough of Smith to last at least the rest of this season. Who really thought he was going to play better than he did? Other than perhaps Rex, but I will get back to him. Imo Simms looked about what I expected - far better than Smith in terms of pocket presence, quickness and being into the game. I blame the fumble on Powell, and the int was on fourth and 18 with the game already over. Meanwhile he threw balls with authority, which is more than i can say for Smith. Back to Rex - the thing we can only speculate about is who is the one who has been deciding to play Smith the last few weeks? If Smith starts the Raiders game, we will have our answer - Idzik.
At the end of the day scheme can only take you so far. This team is devoid at talent at every position on offense. We'd still stink if Sanchez were playing.
No we didn't, we were worse last year and had TONY SPARANO running things and yet the O STILL wasn't as inept as it is now.
Both teams were horrible. Arguing between the difference between this years team and last years is meaningless. They both stunk.
I disagree, this whole situation is weird because Geno at his best is better than what I've seen out of Sanchez at his best. But Geno at his worst is much worse than Sanchez at his worst.
It doesn't matter if he deserves a start (Tim was no. 2 last year but they chose Greg). But if Garrard is ready to go he's my choice. But if not go with Matt who does deserve a chance. Last on the list to play this week: Geno.
No matter how you cut it, draft a qb. David Carr or Bortles should be front runners No chance Bridgewater falls out of the top 2-3
The Jets could get a prospect in the 4th round and enough talent before that to give whoever is at QB a fighting chance next year. You put Derek Carr or Zach Mettenberger out there with the kind of talent the Jets have had in 2012 and 2013 and you're going to have a basket case by the time the season is over. You put Johnny Manziel out there and he'll be in a body cast before things play out.
except that isn't true, Geno had ONE very good game against a terrible defense. mark had better games in the playoffs. I am not giving up on Geno but my leash will be much shorter than mark b/c he hasn't shown me half of what mark showed me.
