Tanny on Sanchez

[rmeyer52]

"We thought we had a young player who loved football, who had won four road playoff games, and although he didn't have a perfect year in 2011 we thought he was doing this," Tannenbaum said, angling his arm to suggest an upward plane. "Based on how he played in 2012, that contract doesn't look very good. "The interesting thing about Mark is, he comes in and is one of only five quarterbacks to win 30 or more games in his first three years. And then he plays worse. It really doesn't make sense."

From todays WSJ

[Franko097]

Originally Posted by rmeyer52

"We thought we had a young player who loved football, who had won four road playoff games, and although he didn't have a perfect year in 2011 we thought he was doing this," Tannenbaum said, angling his arm to suggest an upward plane. "Based on how he played in 2012, that contract doesn't look very good. "The interesting thing about Mark is, he comes in and is one of only five quarterbacks to win 30 or more games in his first three years. And then he plays worse. It really doesn't make sense."

From todays WSJ

It makes a ton of sense if you actually evaluate the film and just the numbers he gave that are devoid of all nuance.

But what's done is done.

[SAR I]

Originally Posted by rmeyer52

"The interesting thing about Mark is, he comes in and is one of only five quarterbacks to win 30 or more games in his first three years. And then he plays worse. It really doesn't make sense."

From todays WSJ

Oh, it makes sense, Mike.

That's what happens when you hire a defensive coordinator run-amok and dump every offensive playmaker you ever had and replace them with cheap imitations so you can take your money and throw it on the other side of the gridiron. Your two safeties can ball, but they're one-season-carpetbaggers and didn't score 14 points per game.

SAR I

[Beerfish]

Originally Posted by Franko097

It makes a ton of sense if you actually evaluate the film and just the numbers he gave that are devoid of all nuance.

But what's done is done.

Agreed. Other than a few games he had not looked great from day one. The real chinks in the armor showed the year before last when they decided to open up the passing game for him and he failed.

[56mehl56]

Originally Posted by Beerfish

Agreed. Other than a few games he had not looked great from day one. The real chinks in the armor showed the year before last when they decided to open up the passing game for him and he failed.

The real chinks in the armour showed up when Mangold got injured and Sanchez got the living crap beat out of him.

[Dimitri_0515]

Originally Posted by SAR I

Oh, it makes sense, Mike.

That's what happens when you hire a defensive coordinator run-amok and dump every offensive playmaker you ever had and replace them with cheap imitations so you can take your money and throw it on the other side of the gridiron. Your two safeties can ball, but they're one-season-carpetbaggers and didn't score 14 points per game.

SAR I

Perfectly said

[crasherino]

Originally Posted by rmeyer52

"We thought we had a young player who loved football, who had won four road playoff games, and although he didn't have a perfect year in 2011 we thought he was doing this," Tannenbaum said, angling his arm to suggest an upward plane. "Based on how he played in 2012, that contract doesn't look very good. "The interesting thing about Mark is, he comes in and is one of only five quarterbacks to win 30 or more games in his first three years. And then he plays worse. It really doesn't make sense."

From todays WSJ

If he continued on the upward trajectory and established himself as the Jets QB of the next 5-10 years, it would have been a good deal. Unfortunately, there's a downside that he never considered or at least adequately considered.

And the bottom line was: It didn't NEED to be done. He still had 2 years remaining on his deal. After missing out on Peyton, you got the feeling that Tanny wanted to do SOMETHING, which ended up being a disaster.

[32green]

Originally Posted by rmeyer52

" "The interesting thing about Mark is, he comes in and is one of only five quarterbacks to win 30 or more games in his first three years. And then he plays worse. It really doesn't make sense."

It makes perfect sense when you take the sole focus off of Mark and add in Tanny, Rex and Woodies decision making..... combined with injuries... as other posters have already alluded too.

Tanny's spin tour comes off as pathetic.
-

[chesapeakejet]

Originally Posted by 32green

It makes perfect sense when you take the sole focus off of Mark and add in Tanny, Rex and Woodies decision making..... combined with injuries... as other posters have already alluded too.

Tanny's spin tour comes off as pathetic.
-

You think Tanny's gonna take all the blame? He wants another gig, so spin, spin, spin.

[Joe W. Namath]

We thought we had a young player who loved football

This tells me that Tanny and the Jets organization believes that Mark Sanchez does not love and is not putting his best foot forward. No?

[crasherino]

Originally Posted by Joe W. Namath

This tells me that Tanny and the Jets organization believes that Mark Sanchez does not love and is not putting his best foot forward. No?

Uhh, your reading comprehension is terrible. That was part of a larger sentence.

we thought he was doing this," Tannenbaum said, angling his arm to suggest an upward plane

What it tells me is that the Jets were, to some extent, taken in by his supposed "love of football". Him being a gym rat, "loving" football, and generally being a nice kid blinded them, to some extent.

While its important to have a guy "eat, breathe, love" football, that's just step one in evaluating the guy. He could love football and have a chronic inability to decipher the defense. The love of football doesn't automatically mean that the game slows down for him, unfortunately.

I'd rather have an ahole who can find a receiver whilst being blitzed, then a nice kid who panics.

[SlickBri481]

What Tanny doesn't realize and what makes him a massive fool is that the QB does not singlehandedly win a football game. His only defense of Sanchez is to cite team statistics: wins. Pathetic. Thank god this loser was canned.

God forbid we had a GM who thought "outside the box" and evaluated the QB's individual performance rather than the team result. I mean, talk about revolutionary, to analyze the QB by actually looking only at the way the QB played. I guess Tanny's analysis of Sanchez went something like this: SCOREBOARD

[chirorob]

Originally Posted by crasherino

Uhh, your reading comprehension is terrible. That was part of a larger sentence.



What it tells me is that the Jets were, to some extent, taken in by his supposed "love of football". Him being a gym rat, "loving" football, and generally being a nice kid blinded them, to some extent.

While its important to have a guy "eat, breathe, love" football, that's just step one in evaluating the guy. He could love football and have a chronic inability to decipher the defense. The love of football doesn't automatically mean that the game slows down for him, unfortunately.

I'd rather have an ahole who can find a receiver whilst being blitzed, then a nice kid who panics.

Your QB has to be a bit of an A-Hole. He should be that take charge, shut up and listen guy. You think Peyton and Brady are fun to practice with? Hell no. Listen to Boomer and Marino now, or Sims. They all still have that chip on their shoulder. And they were all good leaders.

Dan Fouts did it the best. He wore a hat in practice that said MFIC.

Mother F***** In Charge No one doubted who ran that offense, and in the huddle, no one doubted who was in charge. You shouldn't need a guard to tell a WR to shut up. The great QB's would have done that 6 weeks earlier.

[crasherino]

Originally Posted by chirorob

Your QB has to be a bit of an A-Hole. He should be that take charge, shut up and listen guy. You think Peyton and Brady are fun to practice with? Hell no. Listen to Boomer and Marino now, or Sims. They all still have that chip on their shoulder. And they were all good leaders.

Dan Fouts did it the best. He wore a hat in practice that said MFIC.

Mother F***** In Charge No one doubted who ran that offense, and in the huddle, no one doubted who was in charge. You shouldn't need a guard to tell a WR to shut up. The great QB's would have done that 6 weeks earlier.

I remember watching some NFL show where Jake Plummer (a relatively ordinary QB), got a tiny bit of lip from one of his lineman and he told him to STFU and he was quieted within two seconds. He put an end to it, right quick. And then two plays later, when the guy made a nice block, he went over to him, gave him a head butt and a butt slap, shouted a word of encouragement, and everything moved along.

You could be a nice guy if you're the QB.....I guess. But first and foremost, you need to be in charge, no questions asked. If you don't think you're in charge, sure as **** no one else will.

[SlickBri481]

Originally Posted by rmeyer52

"And then he plays worse. It really doesn't make sense."

From todays WSJ

Did he play worse? I've seen the same Sanchez in all 4 years pretty much. 2010 he cut down the turnovers, although apparently that was in large part to a league high (by a mile) number of dropped INTs by the other team. The fact that Tannenbaum thought Mark's 2012 season was vastly different from his previous seasons shows how insanely clueless he was.

[crasherino]

Originally Posted by SlickBri481

Did he play worse? I've seen the same Sanchez in all 4 years pretty much. 2010 he cut down the turnovers, although apparently that was in large part to a league high (by a mile) number of dropped INTs by the other team. The fact that Tannenbaum thought Mark's 2012 season was vastly different from his previous seasons shows how insanely clueless he was.

There was a lot of hope involved. The team culled certain (positive) aspects of Sanchez and closed their eyes to the rest. Even after the disasterous finish in 2011, they talked as if Sanchez was improving and was their guy. The extension they gave him was almost to convince themselves, and everyone else, that he was indeed the entrenched starter. As if the more they repeat it, the more it becomes true.

The moral of the story: Hope is not a strategy.

[augustiniak]

Originally Posted by crasherino

There was a lot of hope involved. The team culled certain (positive) aspects of Sanchez and closed their eyes to the rest. Even after the disasterous finish in 2011, they talked as if Sanchez was improving and was their guy. The extension they gave him was almost to convince themselves, and everyone else, that he was indeed the entrenched starter. As if the more they repeat it, the more it becomes true.

The moral of the story: Hope is not a strategy.

this. they always thought sanchez would improve and lift those around him, but in the end he was a product of the talent around him. as the line regressed and the skill positions became worse through injury and neglect, sanchez became worse too.

[SlickBri481]

Originally Posted by crasherino

There was a lot of hope involved. The team culled certain (positive) aspects of Sanchez and closed their eyes to the rest. Even after the disasterous finish in 2011, they talked as if Sanchez was improving and was their guy. The extension they gave him was almost to convince themselves, and everyone else, that he was indeed the entrenched starter. As if the more they repeat it, the more it becomes true.

The moral of the story: Hope is not a strategy.

Well said. They culled the positive, ignored all the negatives, and propped Mark's individual performance up based on team success. You can't "extension" a guy into becoming a great player.

[Beerfish]

Originally Posted by 56mehl56

The real chinks in the armour showed up when Mangold got injured and Sanchez got the living crap beat out of him.

You mean when Turner got injured in camp and Tanny and the coach did nothing at all to have a backup plan and we had to pluck a UDFA of some teams psquad and start him 4 days later?

Also, every Qb gets beat downs at one time or other, the good ones rise above it, the bad ones are wrecked (Carr, Harrington etc)

[Scoop24]

Originally Posted by SlickBri481

Did he play worse? I've seen the same Sanchez in all 4 years pretty much. 2010 he cut down the turnovers, although apparently that was in large part to a league high (by a mile) number of dropped INTs by the other team. The fact that Tannenbaum thought Mark's 2012 season was vastly different from his previous seasons shows how insanely clueless he was.

Blinded by the hate I see. Sanchez has never been as bad as he was last year he wasn't even making the routine throws . Which he made fine for 2 1/2 years. last year you could see his confidence was completely shot. and played some of the worst football I ever seen. That's not say he was a star or something before but he did the job. Honestly I still think his best year was his rookie yr regardless of stats . He had decent pocket awareness that year and still had a gun slinger mentality and still scrambled when in trouble . Maybe that was the Brunnell effect or even past coaching of Pete Carroll . After that its been down hill and I think alot of that fall on our coaching staff . The stupid pump fake before every pass. The red -green card stuff . And he wasn't taking no where near the chances downfield anymore. The only pass on 3rd downs after failing with run the 1st 2 downs .. The switching of the receiving core every year .

Now I'm not sure if Sanchez can be salvaged as many players and coaches think. But if he can be I don't think he can Do it here in the NY Market.