John Clayton Ranks Sanchez 23rd among QBs - Page 2 - Jets Insider.com Forums

tfine350z · 08-24-2012, 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lageman4ever

Bradford played injured last season - eventually missed 6 games.

He's got the talent - 2010 NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year

Well according to this board he took a step back last year and the Rams should draft a QB next year...could you imagine if Bradford put up those numbers last year in New york?? this board would be nuked..

Mainejet · 08-24-2012, 04:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jxc

He's positioned solidly atop a handful of rookies and second year QBs.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/preview12/sto...callers-part-3

Mark Sanchez, New York Jets

Analysis: If Tim Tebow takes red zone plays away from Sanchez, he'll have more interceptions than touchdown passes. Plus, the Jets don't have a lot of weapons on offense.

Arrow is pointing: down

Pretty accurate. The simple fact is, up until now Sanchez has sucked.

Raider9175 · 08-24-2012, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlickBri481

Some of the guys ranked above him have been considerably worse at various points the last 2 years. Palmer, Freeman, and Bradford were all downright atrocious last season. None of them have ever won a playoff game either.

NO QB could have done any better than C Palmer did last year. Coming into exact situation. This article explains it perfectly. http://www.mercurynews.com/tim-kawak...palmer-was-put

C Palmer with very limited plays , NO Darren Mcfadden , couple of Wr's banged up put Up these numbers. Here his numbers 199 completions in 328 attempts 61% completion percentage( down the field) 2,753 with 8.4 average yard per pass.

Dirtstar · 08-24-2012, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Untouchable

Bradford has played on probably the least talented offense in the league since he was drafted.

People like to b*tch about Sanchez not having much help but our offense is the equivalent of New Orleans compared to St. Louis.

Despite playing behind a total dogsh*t OL, you never see Bradford look gunshy or go into the fetal position as soon as a defender comes within arms length.

false.

patman · 08-24-2012, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tfine350z

Qb's take time to develop....You need pieces around them...not everyone is Tom Brady or Peyton Manning...that is why they call football "the ultimate team sport" I am sure Bradford will be better in time as he gets more talent, but to say he is better then Mark is just stupid...

Just stupid I guess and I think he is better than a few of the guys above him. Bradford is a better qb than Mark, ST Louis is just a very bad team, the roster does not even compare to the jets the last 2 years. He lost his safety blanket last year in Amendola and only had Lloyd for 1/2 a year.

I may like Bradford better than most and hopefully Fisher can surround him with some talent. Look how Mark has regressed as a leader and as a qb as the team got worse around him while Bradford only hopes to have as good of a team around him as the jets were last year.

Sanchez is good enough to win some games, not over the length of a full season like Brady, Manning etc, but 2 or 3 times a year sure. And has done so in the past. But if you rank qbs as who would do better surrounded by the same talent, I like Bradford better.

Dunnie · 08-24-2012, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patman

IMO and better than a few of the guys above him. Bradford is a better qb than Mark, ST Louis is just a very bad team, the roster does not even compare to the jets the last 2 years. He lost his safety blanket last year in Amendola and only had Lloyd for 1/2 a year.

I may like Bradford better than most and hopefully Fisher can surround him with some talent. Look how Mark has regressed as a leader and as a qb as the team got worse around him while Bradford hopes to have as good of a team around him as the jets were last year.

Sanchez is good enough to win some games, not over the length of a full season like Brady, Manning etc, but 2 or 3 times a year sure. And has done so in the past. But if you rank qbs as who would do better surrounded by the same talent, I like Bradford better.

I think Bradford is perfect for Schotty's dink and dunk. He should be a stud this year.

lageman4ever · 08-24-2012, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dunnie

I think Bradford is perfect for Schotty's dink and dunk. He should be a stud this year.

I like Bradford too as well and think he'll have a good bounce-back year this season.

PatsFanTX · 08-24-2012, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10PennyToColes87

Don't really care what the crypt keeper has to say. It's an absolute joke that Bradford, Freeman, and Matt ****ing Cassel, all of whom have a combined ZERO playoff wins, are ranked ahead of Sanchez.

What do playoff wins have to do with the ability to play QB in the NFL?

PMarsico9 · 08-24-2012, 10:49 AM

Fitzpatrick at 22 and I stopped watching it.

I don't think anybody in Buffalo knows how screwed they are.

They paid Fitzpatrick based on the best 6 games of his career, which pace he couldn't continue for the rest of the season, injured or not.

Ranking QB's is pointless. There's haves, could be's, probably nots, and have nots.

Haves:

Giants, Pats, Packers, Saints, Steelers, Lions,

Could be's:

Ravens, Falcons, Denver, Bengals, Panthers

Probably not:

Jets, Seattle, Arizona, Buffalo, Houston, Titans, Chargers, Rams

Have not:

Everybody else.

The past 9 Super Bowls, dating to 2003 have been won by the haves with one in 2007 won by a Colts team that was certainly a have at the time.

/signed Captain Obvious

TheOne · 08-24-2012, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFanTX

What do playoff wins have to do with the ability to play QB in the NFL?

lol
what?!?!
do you even read what you write anymore?

your QB has single handedly carry your team through playoff games

lageman4ever · 08-24-2012, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFanTX

What do playoff wins have to do with the ability to play QB in the NFL?

a lot - it's the ultimate measure of team leadership

Stats are nice but wins trump all. If Sanchez threw for 50% and we went to the Super Bowl it wouldn't matter.

fidelioion · 08-24-2012, 10:51 AM

Seems about right...

At the top of the bottom 1/3 - one or two positions up maybe but it's tough to argue 23ish...

johnnysd · 08-24-2012, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlickBri481

Yeah I don't get at all how some view Sanchez as the worst starter outside of anyone but rookies, 2nd years, and scrubs. Jaws had Sanchez at 23 too, and he actually does know QBs so I was surprised at that.

I mean, Bradford and Freeman had significantly worse seasons than Sanchez last year and have never even been to the playoffs, yet ranked higher. That's bogus. Guys like Fitzpatrick and Cassel are journeyman that are decent starters, not better than Mark either.

It's really not fair to Sanchez, who has been mostly average the last 2 years, not horrible as some make it seem.

Sanchez gets downplayed for 2 reasons:

1. When he is bad he is spectacularly bad. He has games that completely skew his yearly stats where he gets frazzled and goes completely south

2. He fumbles way too often and we never seem to recover and that also hurts him

QBs that consistently play crappy are viewed better than Sanchez because their bad games are not quite as epicly bad as Sanchez

PatsFanTX · 08-24-2012, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOne

lol
what?!?!
do you even read what you write anymore?

your QB has single handedly carry your team through playoff games

Nah, Brady is nothing more than a system QB.

Dimitri_0515 · 08-24-2012, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreamers

lolololololol

I don't get it

PMarsico9 · 08-24-2012, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFanTX

What do playoff wins have to do with the ability to play QB in the NFL?

Niners, Ravens, and Jets over the past 4 years have displayed how far very good defensive/running teams can get.

I know this will get trolled again, but I find it exceedingly hard to be optimistic about any team without a statistically dominant QB since the ability to outscore people in the regular season translates into titles now that Goodell has made QB's and WR's basically unhittable.

Defenseless indeed. I, for one, welcome our aerial overlords.

And no, no freaking Matt Barclay talk, either. USC QB's fail on the East Coast and USC players are prone to fail......mostly.

Joe W. Namath · 08-24-2012, 10:55 AM

Sanchez has about 3 games left as our qb so who really cares where they rank him.

Its all about getting a franchise qb for next year and if Tanny and Rex will be the guys we trust again to find us one.

PatsFanTX · 08-24-2012, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PMarsico9

Niners, Ravens, and Jets over the past 4 years have displayed how far very good defensive/running teams can get.

I know this will get trolled again, but I find it exceedingly hard to be optimistic about any team without a statistically dominant QB since the ability to outscore people in the regular season translates into titles now that Goodell has made QB's and WR's basically unhittable.

Defenseless indeed. I, for one, welcome our aerial overlords.

And no, no freaking Matt Barclay talk, either. USC QB's fail on the East Coast and USC players are prone to fail......mostly.

USC QB's are about as useful as Penn State RB's in the NFL.

John_0515 · 08-24-2012, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsFanTX

What do playoff wins have to do with the ability to play QB in the NFL?

Really?

PatsFanTX · 08-24-2012, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_0515

Really?

Good teams win playoff games, not QB's.

Your team is a perfect example.

08-24-2012, 10:49 AM	#29
PMarsico9 This pit has no bottom All League Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 2,851	Fitzpatrick at 22 and I stopped watching it. I don't think anybody in Buffalo knows how screwed they are. They paid Fitzpatrick based on the best 6 games of his career, which pace he couldn't continue for the rest of the season, injured or not. Ranking QB's is pointless. There's haves, could be's, probably nots, and have nots. Haves: Giants, Pats, Packers, Saints, Steelers, Lions, Could be's: Ravens, Falcons, Denver, Bengals, Panthers Probably not: Jets, Seattle, Arizona, Buffalo, Houston, Titans, Chargers, Rams Have not: Everybody else. The past 9 Super Bowls, dating to 2003 have been won by the haves with one in 2007 won by a Colts team that was certainly a have at the time. /signed Captain Obvious

08-24-2012, 10:51 AM	#32
fidelioion alright Veteran Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,493	Seems about right... At the top of the bottom 1/3 - one or two positions up maybe but it's tough to argue 23ish...

08-24-2012, 10:55 AM	#37
Joe W. Namath Darrell Bevell for HC in 2014. All Pro Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Boynton Beach, FL Posts: 7,818	Sanchez has about 3 games left as our qb so who really cares where they rank him. Its all about getting a franchise qb for next year and if Tanny and Rex will be the guys we trust again to find us one.