Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23

Thread: If Sanchez came out this year, is he #1?

  1. #1
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,759
    Post Thanks / Like

    If Sanchez came out this year, is he #1?

    would he be rated ahead of bradford if he played 1 more year at USC, had a year similar to what he did the year before and didn't get seriously injured?

  2. #2
    Rookie
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    500
    Post Thanks / Like
    If Bradford still got injured, definitely. Even if Bradford didn't get injured, I'd say there was a pretty good shot of him going 1. The biggest knock that Sanchez had on him coming out was that he only had 16 college starts and people were scared of his experience. If he had similar, or better, production this year at SC, they might have made a National Title run and people wouldn't be scared of his experience anymore. He would also be more appealing to teams because of the pro-style offense he played at SC compared to Bradford's spread offense. We got a a steal getting him at 5 last year (and giving up what we gave up to get to 5).

  3. #3
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    22,105
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by WeeZiTe View Post
    If Bradford still got injured, definitely. Even if Bradford didn't get injured, I'd say there was a pretty good shot of him going 1. The biggest knock that Sanchez had on him coming out was that he only had 16 college starts and people were scared of his experience. If he had similar, or better, production this year at SC, they might have made a National Title run and people wouldn't be scared of his experience anymore. He would also be more appealing to teams because of the pro-style offense he played at SC compared to Bradford's spread offense. We got a a steal getting him at 5 last year (and giving up what we gave up to get to 5).
    +1

    Regardless of whether Bradford was healthy or injured, Sanchez would be the consensus No. 1 QB assuming he had a good year at SC.

    Ironic that the Rams had a shot at taking Sanchez last year and are compounding that mistake by taking the lesser QB this year for more money.

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,759
    Post Thanks / Like
    what qbs in the past decade have been successful in the nfl who played in the spread offense in college?

  5. #5
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    Definitely he would be the first QB taken.

  6. #6
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,485
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by augustiniak View Post
    what qbs in the past decade have been successful in the nfl who played in the spread offense in college?
    Probably about the same as the # who only have 16 college starts and come out after their Jr. seasons...

    I think Bradford will be a good pro... perhaps better than Sanchez, but Sanchez would be the #1 pick had he stayed for another year in college, no doubt.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    9,157
    Post Thanks / Like
    Probably. Sh*t, he should have been picked #1 over Stafford in last year's draft.

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,280
    Post Thanks / Like
    Pretty much without a doubt.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    if we asked this question in week 8 of last year it would have been "was Sanchez a reach at #5?"

    he had a great playoffs so now we are all excited but his regular season was inconlusive or mediocre at best.

    sanchez would not be #1 because his big knock was lack of experience. if teams could watch 16 games he started in college plus the 19 games he started last year, yes he'd be #1. But it was a journey to get there.

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    22,105
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Green Jets & Ham View Post
    Definitely Sanchez would have been drafted ahead of Clausen.

    If Bradford didn't get hurt he probably gets the nod based on size, but if he hurt his arm as he did it would have been a much closer call with a slight edge to Bradford if he was throwing the ball free and easy in workouts as he has been.
    Sanchez does have bigger hands than Bradford though (10" vs. 9 1/2 ").

  11. #11
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,202
    Post Thanks / Like
    This isn't based on his rookie season though, this is based on if he went back to college and most likely tore it up for the Trojans.

    People didn't feel like it was a reach for Sanchez at #5, a lot of people felt it was a steal because he would of been the first pick this year.

    I said this before we got Sanchez that I thought he was a better pro prospect than Bradford.

  12. #12
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,759
    Post Thanks / Like
    so basically there are no qbs in recent years who played in the spread offense in college who have successfully made the transition to the nfl and have taken a team to the playoffs?

  13. #13
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,836
    Post Thanks / Like
    Easily. He came from a pro style offense and has a lot more natural ability and feel for the game than Bradford, who more or less is robotic. Throw in the fact that now you are comparing two junior QBs where one is coming of two throwing shoulder injuries and comes from a super simplistic two read spread offense.

    Then again, Alex Smith went ahead of Aaron Rodgers because he is taller despite Rodgers being way better in basically every viable way to compare them as prospects in 2005.

  14. #14
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    8,650
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bitonti View Post
    if we asked this question in week 8 of last year it would have been "was Sanchez a reach at #5?"

    he had a great playoffs so now we are all excited but his regular season was inconlusive or mediocre at best.

    sanchez would not be #1 because his big knock was lack of experience. if teams could watch 16 games he started in college plus the 19 games he started last year, yes he'd be #1. But it was a journey to get there.
    name one credible person that was claiming sanchez to be a reach last year. i'm pretty sure every logical jets fan was giving him the "he's a rookie" pass, which is a fair pass. now, there were a few that wanted clemens to take the reigns, but that's about as bad as it got.

  15. #15
    All League
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,359
    Post Thanks / Like
    After how he playeg in his first three games calling a reach in week five would have been asinine.

  16. #16
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    7,078
    Post Thanks / Like
    If he had a healthy, productive year, I don't think it is even an argument about his status as the #1.

    And that's why I loved the pick last year.

    Bradford is a great prospect, but he has serious durability concerns.

  17. #17
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    2,424
    Post Thanks / Like
    All i no is that i love the fact we have Sanchez... the guy is a competitor battled back from a long rough patch during the season and had a solid playoffs and is a film rat.... this is the first offseason in a long time where we no 100% who will be our starting QB... i also appreciate that he loves being on the jets

  18. #18
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,045
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bitonti View Post
    if we asked this question in week 8 of last year it would have been "was Sanchez a reach at #5?"

    he had a great playoffs so now we are all excited but his regular season was inconlusive or mediocre at best.

    sanchez would not be #1 because his big knock was lack of experience. if teams could watch 16 games he started in college plus the 19 games he started last year, yes he'd be #1. But it was a journey to get there.


    I disagree, Sanchez had 3 maybe 4 terrible outings and the rest of the games he played brilliantly. The INT's were all condensed in those games but the rest of his season was pretty flawless.

  19. #19
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    16,476
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by bitonti View Post
    if we asked this question in week 8 of last year it would have been "was Sanchez a reach at #5?"

    he had a great playoffs so now we are all excited but his regular season was inconlusive or mediocre at best.

    sanchez would not be #1 because his big knock was lack of experience. if teams could watch 16 games he started in college plus the 19 games he started last year, yes he'd be #1. But it was a journey to get there.
    People keep bringing up Sanchez' inexperience, but if he stayed for his senior season, he plays another year of college ball, and maybe USC wins the championship

    If that's the case, he has two years under his belt as a starter, and a championship, and we already know his physical skills is better than any QB in this draft.

  20. #20
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,155
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by augustiniak View Post
    what qbs in the past decade have been successful in the nfl who played in the spread offense in college?
    The current Super Bowl MVP, for starters.

    Bradford would likely still have been the top pick. He's bigger than Sanchez, has a better arm, and is the more accurate thrower at all levels (though Sanchez can match him between the hash marks). While I much prefer Sanchez, his game is much more comparable to Jimmy Clausen's than Bradford's, and Clausen is viewed as a distinctly inferior prospect despite starting for three years.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us