Question for SAR

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by GreenWave

That this play resulted in an interception is ****ing embarrassing.

But hey, Joe Montana would have thrown a pick too, right SAR? I mean, what else could have been done with that ferocious pressure and no receivers open on the play?

Mark Sanchez 2012 is damaged goods. He's punch-drunk from hundreds of ferocious hits, he's got no receivers with any talent, there's no running game to keep LB's honest, his OC and his defense keeps him out of rhythm.

Between during the 2009 and 2010 seasons with the right personnel around him, Mark Sanchez was the successful quarterback of a team that won 16 of 20 games. He can be that guy again if we decide to abandon this stupid Rex Ryan ground & pound nonsense and try to establish a legitimate passing attack. That is, if he's not already so broken by what we've done to him that he's got it left in him.

SAR I

[Charlie Brown]

Originally Posted by dmitexxi

The colts have a much better front office than we do. The drafted luck, but then drafted offense to put him in a place to succeed.

Only Jets fans and their FO somehow think that you can do the opposite to what the Colts did and somehow win games!!!

It is as if the FO were a bad episode of Sienfeld where they emulate George and do the exact opposite of what you are supposed to do and expect to win!!!!

[sdJETSetter]

Originally Posted by SAR I

Mark Sanchez 2012 is damaged goods. He's punch-drunk from hundreds of ferocious hits, he's got no receivers with any talent, there's no running game to keep LB's honest, his OC and his defense keeps him out of rhythm.

Between during the 2009 and 2010 seasons with the right personnel around him, Mark Sanchez was the successful quarterback of a team that won 16 of 20 games. He can be that guy again if we decide to abandon this stupid Rex Ryan ground & pound nonsense and try to establish a legitimate passing attack. That is, if he's not already so broken by what we've done to him that he's got it left in him.

SAR I

LOL!

Its hard to tell when youre serious or not. I get i tho.

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by LockeJET

No he wouldn't!

Montana was smart and accurate. Montana wouldn't get ball after ball tipped at the line. Montana wouldn't make wide open wr's dive for ball. Montana wouldn't put balls where the WR can't turn it up and run after the catch.....

We never saw Joe Montana playing on a lousy offense now, did we.

But we sure as hell saw Steve Young playing on a lousy offense in Tampa Bay. How'd he turn out in San Fransisco? How'd he turn out after being the biggest QB bust in NFL history once on a team with a legitimate set of weapons, a good running game, and a strong offensive coordinator?

SAR I

[Green Bandit]

I love how SAR uses EVERY excuse in the book to defend Sanchez, pointing to everyone else but Sanchez himself. BUT if you use any sort of excuse for Rex and the defense it's blasphemy.

Maybe just maybe, the defense got us into the playoffs the first 2 years under Rex and not Sanchez.

[SlickBri481]

Originally Posted by Green Bandit

I love how SAR uses EVERY excuse in the book to defend Sanchez, pointing to everyone else but Sanchez himself. BUT if you use any sort of excuse for Rex and the defense it's blasphemy.

Maybe just maybe, the defense got us into the playoffs the first 2 years under Rex and not Sanchez.

You mean the #1 ranked D in 2009 and #3 ranked D in 2010 were a bigger factor in us going to the playoffs than a QB who had 29 TDs v. 33 INTs over that span and a 72 passer rating? Blasphemy!

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by Green Bandit

I love how SAR uses EVERY excuse in the book to defend Sanchez, pointing to everyone else but Sanchez himself. BUT if you use any sort of excuse for Rex and the defense it's blasphemy.

Maybe just maybe, the defense got us into the playoffs the first 2 years under Rex and not Sanchez.

Hold on, hold on.....I like this, I like where you're going:

The Jets have a span when they win 16 of 20 games and it's because the defense was fantastic, the quarterback didn't matter.

The Jets have a span where they win 3 of 9 games and it's because the quarterback suddenly matters, the defense somehow doesn't.

I love Jets Insider. Can't buy this kind of gold if it were a PSL.

SAR I

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by SlickBri481

You mean the #1 ranked D in 2009 and #3 ranked D in 2010 were a bigger factor in us going to the playoffs than a QB who had 29 TDs v. 33 INTs over that span and a 72 passer rating? Blasphemy!

Reminder:

In 2009 the 9-7 Jets would have been 7-9 if the Colts and Bengals hadn't benched their starters. Imagine that. The #1 defense in the NFL with a losing record. Blasphemy.

In 2010 the 11-5 Jets would have been 7-9 again if Mark Sanchez didn't lead them back with 4 miracle wins with seconds left in regulation. The #3 defense in the NFL with a losing record. Blasphemy.

SAR I

[sdJETSetter]

Originally Posted by SAR I

Hold on, hold on.....I like this, I like where you're going:

The Jets have a span when they win 16 of 20 games and it's because the defense was fantastic, the quarterback didn't matter.

The Jets have a span where they win 3 of 9 games and it's because the quarterback suddenly matters, the defense somehow doesn't.

I love Jets Insider. Can't buy this kind of gold if it were a PSL.

SAR I

The Defense gave the Offense 7 points, and a shot at the game on Sun until the pick in the redzone.

Wrong route ran by the WR no doubt?

[Green Bandit]

Originally Posted by SAR I

Hold on, hold on.....I like this, I like where you're going:

The Jets have a span when they win 16 of 20 games and it's because the defense was fantastic, the quarterback didn't matter.

The Jets have a span where they win 3 of 9 games and it's because the quarterback suddenly matters, the defense somehow doesn't.

I love Jets Insider. Can't buy this kind of gold if it were a PSL.

SAR I

Ha lets do keep going.

When a quarterback can't sustain drives, and 3 and outs are a regular occurrence it does matter.

Hmm why is it that the defense missed tackles in the 4th qtr against Seattle? Maybe it was because they were on the field the whole game? Oh I'm sorry, I didn't know you wanted them to have the same stamina as robots.

Mark Sanchez hasn't put a TD drive in 3 of the last 9 nine games. So yes, it does matter.

When the defense scores the only TD of a game, you can't honestly tell me the defense is the bigger problem.

[SlickBri481]

Originally Posted by Green Bandit

When the defense scores the only TD of a game, you can't honestly tell me the defense is the bigger problem.

Whether he can honestly tell you it or whether he can type it on this board are two different things.

[SlickBri481]

Originally Posted by SAR I

Reminder:

In 2009 the 9-7 Jets would have been 7-9 if the Colts and Bengals hadn't benched their starters. Imagine that. The #1 defense in the NFL with a losing record. Blasphemy.

In 2010 the 11-5 Jets would have been 7-9 again if Mark Sanchez didn't lead them back with 4 miracle wins with seconds left in regulation. The #3 defense in the NFL with a losing record. Blasphemy.

SAR I

Bengals played all their starters the next week and we still won by double digits. Starters, reserves, whatever you want to call it, the D you rag on so much held the Bengals to 14 points in 2 weeks.

Miracle wins? Dude those games were against bad teams, the fact that we needed to win in miraculous fashion is a pretty big indictment on Sanchez itself. And yeah, when your QB throws 17 TDs all season and has a passer rating under 80, I don't see how anyone could have been shocked by 7-9 if that is how it turned out. When you get very little at the game's most vital position, it is hard to expect a winning record.

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by sdJETSetter

The Defense gave the Offense 7 points, and a shot at the game on Sun until the pick in the redzone.

Wrong route ran by the WR no doubt?

No doubt about it.

Mark Sanchez gave the defense 3 points and a shot at the win in New England with 90 seconds left until they let Tom Brady march down the field, twice.

Funny, I didn't hear any complaints about Wilkerson, Scott, and Harris on that afternoon. No threads calling for them to be benched, no threads screaming for their backups to play, no threads asking for them to be cut next season.

Weird, right?

SAR I

[SlickBri481]

Originally Posted by SAR I

No doubt about it.

Mark Sanchez gave the defense 3 points and a shot at the win in New England with 90 seconds left until they let Tom Brady march down the field, twice.

Funny, I didn't hear any complaints about Wilkerson, Scott, and Harris on that afternoon. No threads calling for them to be benched, no threads screaming for their backups to play, no threads asking for them to be cut next season.

Weird, right?

SAR I

Tom Brady is a HoF QB. One of the greatest of all-time. What D does he not march down the field against in those spots? The D held the Pats to long FG attempts on both those drives. Against that offense, that could be considered a victory. Bear in mind the Pats great offense scored a whopping 22 points in 4.5 quarters. Want to guess what they've averaged in games against opponents other than the Jets?

If you combined the 3 salaries of the guys you mentioned, it'd still be less than Sanchez. And none of them are bottom 5 in the league at their respective positions.

[PatsFanTX]

Originally Posted by SAR I

Mark Sanchez gave the defense 3 points and a shot at the win in New England with 90 seconds left until they let Tom Brady march down the field, twice.

Seriously SAR, Sanchez gave the Jets a 3 point lead?

After the fumble, Tebow was in on 1st down. 2nd down Sanchez handed the ball off to McNight and then he was sacked on 3rd down.



1st down at NE18 2:01 Tim Tebow rush up the middle for 2 yards to the NE16. Tackled by Brandon Spikes and Chandler Jones.

2nd down at NE16 1:56 Joe McKnight rush to the right for 1 yard to the NE15. Tackled by Vince Wilfork.

1:51 New England TIMEOUT.

3rd down at NE15 1:51 Mark Sanchez sacked at NE25 for a loss of 10 yards by Dont'a Hightower.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/play...gland-patriots

[Joe W. Namath]

Enough. This is becoming like the chad witch trials. Lock this thread. we get it. SAR wants to rebuild around sanchez so in 2016 he can maybe be a decent qb.

The rest of us in reality realize the guy is awful and after this year, he will never take a meaningful snap for us again.

Thread over. Nothing more to see here.

[SAR I]

Green Bandit Ha lets do keep going.

Cool, Bandit. Let's do that.

When a quarterback can't sustain drives, and 3 and outs are a regular occurrence it does matter.

When receivers can't get open, the OL can't pass protect, the backup QB puts us in 3rd and longs, and the RB can't gain yards consistently, 3 and outs are a regular occurrence.

Hmm why is it that the defense missed tackles in the 4th qtr against Seattle? Maybe it was because they were on the field the whole game? Oh I'm sorry, I didn't know you wanted them to have the same stamina as robots.

Ah, so a 2 week bye- and 1 week of pure vacation time- wasn't enough to keep the D from getting gassed on a cool day in Seattle after playing only 8 games of a 16 game season? The 5 minutes of minus TOP was the straw that broke the defense's back?

Mark Sanchez hasn't put a TD drive in 3 of the last 9 nine games. So yes, it does matter.

So the defense is allowed to use the "I'm tired, on the field too long, I'm gassed" excuse but the QB who has been under siege from a porous OL and is asked to do wind-sprints to the sidelines every few plays to let the backup come in isn't?

When the defense scores the only TD of a game, you can't honestly tell me the defense is the bigger problem.

The defense allowed 28 points after a 2 week bye and 1 week of pure vacation time. Two of the scores weren't on drives but quick-strike bombs. It was a pathetic showing. Far worse than our QB's performance which is saying a lot.

SAR I

[petejet]

Originally Posted by Joe W. Namath

Enough. This is becoming like the chad witch trials. Lock this thread. we get it. SAR wants to rebuild around sanchez so in 2016 he can maybe be a decent qb.

The rest of us in reality realize the guy is awful and after this year, he will never take a meaningful snap for us again.

Thread over. Nothing more to see here.

Sanchez is only as good as the team around him. If you were in reality you would realize that Sanchez will be the starter again next year. The cap hit for releasing him is too prohibitive. And no one is going to trade for that contract. Even if they bring someone into camp to challenge him its going to be a journeyman on the cheap. Chances are Sanchez wins that battle. Bottom line - the Jets are not paying Sanchez all of that $ to be a backup. That is reality.

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by PatsFanTX

Seriously SAR, Sanchez gave the Jets a 3 point lead?

Mark Sanchez led three drives in the 4th quarter against the Patriots eating up 10 of the 15 minutes and producing a TD and two field goals. Ate up clock, rested the defense:

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/drivec...meId=321021017

SAR I

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by SlickBri481

Tom Brady is a HoF QB. One of the greatest of all-time. What D does he not march down the field against in those spots?

Ah, more Jets Insider logic. Let me commit this one to memory:

1. It's not okay if Mark Sanchez doesn't play like Tom Brady.

2. It's okay if the Defense loses games because of the play of Tom Brady.

This is good stuff. Keep it coming.

SAR I