Actually I'm pretty sure it would be 17Million in dead money if they cut him. But dead money doesn't mean he'll start if they have a different viable option next year, it just means he'll be on the roster. That said I don't think they'll have a viable option unless they draft a QB in the second or third and he really stands out in training camp and pre-season games.
The Bills game was against a Bills Defense that didn't have a clue and a Bills offense that wasn't taking care of the ball. Recievers were left uncovered through blown assignments, etc.
So you're suggesting we'll keep him on the bench and still give him that 8 million or whatever he's guaranteed? That makes even less sense. Yeah, let's start somebody who's clearly worse than Sanchez, while Sanchez is making starter money. The only other option is bringing somebody else in, then you have 2 people getting starting QB money and we won't be able to afford weapons for them. You could draft a QB and HOPE he emerges in time to make a difference, but that's just as much a gamble as keeping Mark, no actually its less of a gamble because Sanchez has gotten it done with better weapons. The only viable option for Sanchez is to keep him as starter one more year and then evaluate from there. Besides this draft class is weak for QBs. It's not like there's a guy even close to Luck or RGIII out there.
Right, because last year Sanchez and the Jets stunk in the Red Zone, right ??? And it's not like Sanchez ever played well in a hostile environment in a playoff game, right ??? Maybe if he had good players he would have been able to accomplish those things in the past, right ?? Oh yeah..............
To me, Sanchez is no where near as Good as I, and many other sanchez fans think he is. But he is nowhere near as bad as many of you think he is. I think he falls somewhere in the middle. Which means, (quite obvious) that without the right supporting cast..he can't succeed. Braylon and Cotchery weren't fitzgerald and megatron, but Sanchez had great chemistry with them. In my honest opinion, I never liked the Holmes signing. Braylon seemed to pump mark's ego a bit. I remember when he signed he said he wanted to be to Mark what Marvin Harrison was to Peyton. Holmes was and never will be a WR that will coddle a QB.
Elite Qbs make their surrounding cast better. They still can't elevate their defense or special teams to Super Bowl levels though. It's no surprise the elite QBs teams consistently make the playoffs, it's also no surprise when playing tougher competition these elite QBs need big plays outside of their offense. But I digress. If you know your QB isn't elite, why remove the talent around him? Never made sense. No but the lack of viable draft options, free agent options (currently), and lack of maneuverability because of lack of cap space/multitude of holes he might default into the starter role. Oh and the lack of cutting or trading him.
Fire the GM, Rex, and staff. Let Tebow start and make Sanchez the punt protector on special teams. Retool through the draft and we will win.
Kris Jenkins is a monster a couple games per year but should we bring him back? Of course not. He can't be relied on not to get hurt and that means he won't play or won't play at full ability for most games. The difference between Sanchez and Jenkins is one is a monster who has suffered from debilitating injuries and the other is wildly inconsistent. The result is fundamentally the same. As a previous poster said: you get a good game say, 20% of the time and crap/nothing the rest of the time. It doesn't matter how good you are for that 20% unless it happens to fall on the Super Bowl.
Yeah ... thank god we had him last year or we never could have blown those last three games to finish 8-8. Remember how he played like a champion and ... oh. And we needed the 29th ranked QB in the league to accomplish good things in 2009 and 2010, because there's probably no chance that any of the 28 guys ahead of him could have pulled it off. He's a catalyst ...a special player ...not one of those guys who's just along for ... oh. Well at least he's playing great this year ... Especially in the Red Zone. It's not like he turns the ball ... damn. Don't be fooled by every meaningful statistic by which quarterback play is measured. And don't be fooled by the opinions of every analyst and opposing player. You can't measure Sanchez that way. Sure his tangibles are a disaster, but he makes up for it with all the intangibles he brings to the offense. I'm sure we'll be just fine with him going forward. All we need to do is surround him with enough talent to minimize his impact on the game ... And that's really the goal with the #5 pick in the draft, isn't it? Try to make him as invisible as possible and hope he basically stays out of the way and lets everyone else get the job done. Is that REALLY what you want from your franchise QB? I don't think that's what any Jet fan was hoping for when we drafted this guy. He's been a bitter disappointment, and he's shown barely any improvement from day 1 ... and I really don't see how you can call it any other way. I had high hopes for Sanchez, just like we all did. I've seen enough to know we can do better than this.
Neither Holmes or Edwards are true number 1 receivers, but they complimented each other. The flight boys each had a specific role, Holmes was the yac guy, Cothcery was the slot guy and Edwards was the deep threat. BTW Holmes have given Mark plenty of praise in the past. So I don't know what you mean by "never coddle a QB" unless you want Holmes to kiss his ass.
Just to add to this, according to football outsiders the Jets have played the second most difficult schedule in the league so far. Their remaining schedule is the most easy schedule of remaining games in the nfl. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2012/week-12-dvoa-ratings
If we beat a bunch of crappy teams, three of which have no QB, it shows we're only a few pieces away? What kind of logic is that?
What he's saying is if we win out (which is obviously a big "if" but not impossible) then we'd be a 9-7 team and we would be without our #1 receiver and #1 defensive player (and player in general). So if we had them for the full season (like we should next season) maybe we would have been more like a 10 or even 11 win team and possibly even competed for the division. Of course any team could say "well, if this happened then..." but, really, we were above average in the unlucky category with our injuries. It's not season ending injuries to our third down back and a nickel safety, it's to the best CB in the game and what would have been Sanchez's number one target which means we have seen a lot of less experienced/capable guys at the position. I would say we probably could have won the games against the Texans and the first Pats game if we had those two guys in. At least one of those two games anyway. Maybe even another one that was a horrible disaster wouldn't have been with the veteran presence of those guys (moreso Revis), like the second Phins game.
The logic is we finish with a WINNING record. People think because we're 4-7 right now that that's as good as we'll get. We know the Jets are missing Revis and Holmes, so finishing with a better record than last year without them both would speak volumes. Think about it. Holmes is our best playmaker on offense, Revis is our best playmaker on defense (and the entire team). These aren't easy injuries to overcome. We were 8-8 last year WITH them, so being 9-7 without them would show that when they come back and we address our linebacker & oline / RB issues we'll be fine going forward.
I don't know about "fine" but definitely would indicate we aren't in as big of a disaster mode as people seem to think. You take the two biggest playmakers on both sides of the ball on any team and they are going to struggle, a team like the Jets that don't have the depth to deal with those types of losses are hit even harder. That is obviously a condemnation of the Jets as well but that's a seperate issue entirely then a "how are we going to look next year" type approach. If we can get to 9-7 or even 8-8 without those two guys and then we get them back next year, hopefully improve at RB and replace some aging LBs then there's no reason to think that we can't be a playoff team next year. Depending on what else happens, obviously. The issue is the goal isn't to just make the playoffs it's to win the Super Bowl and from the offensive side of the ball we're going to need Holmes to play up to the amount he's paid, Hill to step up and be a great vertical threat, a real #1 RB threat, better pass protection and a lot of luck. So, yeah, there is still a lot of work to be done but, generally, I agree that if we can finish the season at or above .500 that wouldn't be a terrible result considering the players we lost so early in the season and that we should have them both back along with hopefully filling some other gaps.
Next year is going to be a roster purge regardless of how we finish. So I'd rather they win out and hopefully make the playoffs. You never know what could happen at that point. Winning 5 in a row would certainly build a lot of confidence that we're severely lacking right now, especially at the QB position (IMO). I doubt all that happens, but as a fan that's what I'd prefer, especially knowing what's on the horizon.
I think I said this before, but the most likely way we go 9-7 is if Sanchez "gets it". Of course I would root for 9-7 because our future looks much brighter.
