March 9, 201214 yr So Manning will be signed within a week. I hope he signs before Free Agency happens. I don't want Miami to be so obsessed with signing him, they miss out on other opportunities.
March 9, 201214 yr Sanchez finished 23rd in the NFL in QB rating last year. 27th the year before. 28th the year before. He's pretty awful. On top of that, other than last season, he's always had a great running game and offensive line with above average weapons around him.
March 9, 201214 yr Yeah, I'm not debating their awfulness. They're both awful quarterbacks. Matt Moore is an average QB. Carson Palmer is an average QB. Josh Freeman. Kyle Orton. Average (just taking into account their past two seasons).
March 9, 201214 yr Sanchez finished 23rd in the NFL in QB rating last year. 27th the year before. 28th the year before. He's pretty awful. So ignore his age and the statistical progress? I'm not going to do that, especially when his bookend tackles were awful and Burress and Holmes sucked and quit.
March 9, 201214 yr Sanchez finished 23rd in the NFL in QB rating last year. 27th the year before. 28th the year before. He's pretty awful. On top of that, other than last season, he's always had a great running game and offensive line with above average weapons around him. So 2/3 seasons is always? Especially when he was 21 and 22 in those season (IIRC)? That's such one-sided analysis.
March 9, 201214 yr And Tom Brady is great. Tim Tebow is great. Aaron Rodgers is great. What you did there... I see it.
March 9, 201214 yr Sanchez finished 23rd in the NFL in QB rating last year. 27th the year before. 28th the year before. He's pretty awful. On top of that, other than last season, he's always had a great running game and offensive line with above average weapons around him. So 2/3 seasons is always? Especially when he was 21 and 22 in those season (IIRC)? That's such one-sided analysis. We're debating what he is right now. Right now, he sucks. Can he turn it around? Sure. But until he does, he sucks. Honestly, I see no reason why we should expect anything else from him. Just my opinion. He's awful.
March 9, 201214 yr Sanchez finished 23rd in the NFL in QB rating last year. 27th the year before. 28th the year before. He's pretty awful. On top of that, other than last season, he's always had a great running game and offensive line with above average weapons around him. So 2/3 seasons is always? Especially when he was 21 and 22 in those season (IIRC)? That's such one-sided analysis. We're debating what he is right now. Right now, he sucks. Can he turn it around? Sure. But until he does, he sucks. Honestly, I see no reason why we should expect anything else from him. Just my opinion. He's awful.
March 9, 201214 yr Yeah, I'm not debating their awfulness. They're both awful quarterbacks. Matt Moore is an average QB. Carson Palmer is an average QB. Josh Freeman. Kyle Orton. Average (just taking into account their past two seasons). Matt Moore is 2 years older than Sanchez. Matt Moor's career QB rating before last season was around 67. And the 2007 and 2009 Carolina Panthers teams won 7 and 9 games respectively, so only the 2010 edition was terrible. Sanchez is younger than Matt Moore when Moore finished his time with Carolina, yet has a much better track record. ANd Moore averaged far fewer pass attempts per game this year, while having a much more effective running game. Obviously other variables go into all that, but that's what the end result stats are.
March 9, 201214 yr Sanchez finished 23rd in the NFL in QB rating last year. 27th the year before. 28th the year before. He's pretty awful. So ignore his age and the statistical progress? I'm not going to do that, especially when his bookend tackles were awful and Burress and Holmes sucked and quit. He progressed all the way to 23rd in the league. You're looking at "progress" in a vacuum. His progress came at a time when the league, as a whole, became easier to pass in. Thus, any progress from his 2nd to 3rd year is likely to be extremely overstated, as you are doing. He has made negligible steps forward in his time in the league, and has been a bottom third NFL quarterback his entire time in the league. Sorry, he's awful, and there's really no reason to believe he'll stop being so.
March 9, 201214 yr Using QBR+ (the same thing as things like ERA+ and OPS+, placing the number on a scale where 100 is average), Sanchez has gone from being 75% of the league's average to 90 to 92. He was barely better in his third season than his second. He barely improved.
March 9, 201214 yr Matt Moore's QB rating was 76 coming to Miami, not 67. 3 points higher than Mark Sanchez's QB rating.
March 9, 201214 yr Matt Moore is 2 years older than Sanchez. Matt Moor's career QB rating before last season was around 67. And the 2007 and 2009 Carolina Panthers teams won 7 and 9 games respectively, so only the 2010 edition was terrible. Sanchez is younger than Matt Moore when Moore finished his time with Carolina, yet has a much better track record. ANd Moore averaged far fewer pass attempts per game this year, while having a much more effective running game. Obviously other variables go into all that, but that's what the end result stats are. Wait... so we get to discount stats where the team was good? A much better track record? I'm sorry but despite the small sample size, Matt Moore did in fact post a 98.1 QBR in 7 games (5 starts). I've yet to see Sanchez come any bit close to that. And then this year, again, Moore posted, as a full time starter, posted an 87.1 QBR. Nobody cares that Sanchez is younger. They have the same amount of experience. In fact, Sanchez has more experience. A QB's job isn't just to pass the ball. It's to anchor an offense. Again, nobody cares who had much less pass attempts. They both were starters for the whole season (13 games is enough for a whole season to me...).
March 9, 201214 yr And almost everyone here talking about how much Peyton would have around him in Miami, yet you want to say how Henne did Moore (lulz) with less than Sanchez. That seems incongruous. The way you've worded that is implying that I'm contradicting myself. I deliberately said that "almost everyone" so as to not erroneously include you if that's not your view. But I can see why you would read it that way.
March 9, 201214 yr And almost everyone here talking about how much Peyton would have around him in Miami, yet you want to say how Henne did Moore (lulz) with less than Sanchez. That seems incongruous. The way you've worded that is implying that I'm contradicting myself. I deliberately said that "almost everyone" so as to not erroneously include you if that's not your view. But I can see why you would read it that way. Well I certainly would be one to say that this recent season Sanchez got shat on and it was Henne who in his 3 game stint did nothing with some tools. Peyton would probably have more to work with in Miami next season, but over the past seasons it was role reversal. Of course none of this is fair to say for certain. It's so hard to judge a football team on paper like that in the off-season. Things change every year.
March 9, 201214 yr Sanchez finished 23rd in the NFL in QB rating last year. 27th the year before. 28th the year before. He's pretty awful. So ignore his age and the statistical progress? I'm not going to do that, especially when his bookend tackles were awful and Burress and Holmes sucked and quit. He progressed all the way to 23rd in the league. You're looking at "progress" in a vacuum. His progress came at a time when the league, as a whole, became easier to pass in. Thus, any progress from his 2nd to 3rd year is likely to be extremely overstated, as you are doing. He has made negligible steps forward in his time in the league, and has been a bottom third NFL quarterback his entire time in the league. Sorry, he's awful, and there's really no reason to believe he'll stop being so. The league got easier to pass in, but his rank also improved, so you can't ignore that. Maybe the raw number QB rating improvement is somehow overstated because of changing circumstances, but he still moved up. And he's still one of the younger QBs.
March 9, 201214 yr Using QBR+ (the same thing as things like ERA+ and OPS+, placing the number on a scale where 100 is average), Sanchez has gone from being 75% of the league's average to 90 to 92. He was barely better in his third season than his second. He barely improved. While I'm aware of the stat, I'm not familiar with its intricacies. But does 92% of league average an "awful" quarterback make? It wouldn't seem so on its face.
March 9, 201214 yr Sanchez finished 23rd in the NFL in QB rating last year. 27th the year before. 28th the year before. He's pretty awful. So ignore his age and the statistical progress? I'm not going to do that, especially when his bookend tackles were awful and Burress and Holmes sucked and quit. He progressed all the way to 23rd in the league. You're looking at "progress" in a vacuum. His progress came at a time when the league, as a whole, became easier to pass in. Thus, any progress from his 2nd to 3rd year is likely to be extremely overstated, as you are doing. He has made negligible steps forward in his time in the league, and has been a bottom third NFL quarterback his entire time in the league. Sorry, he's awful, and there's really no reason to believe he'll stop being so. The league got easier to pass in, but his rank also improved, so you can't ignore that. Maybe the raw number QB rating improvement is somehow overstated because of changing circumstances, but he still moved up. And he's still one of the younger QBs. Well, his ranking went up 4 spots. However there were a number of QBs from 2010 who ranked higher than him who did not play. He went from a 90 QBR+ to a 92 QBR+. That's basically not an improvement.
March 9, 201214 yr Using QBR+ (the same thing as things like ERA+ and OPS+, placing the number on a scale where 100 is average), Sanchez has gone from being 75% of the league's average to 90 to 92. He was barely better in his third season than his second. He barely improved. While I'm aware of the stat, I'm not familiar with its intricacies. But does 92% of league average an "awful" quarterback make? It wouldn't seem so on its face. Given that that 92 was 23rd in the league, yes that's awful. Yes.
March 9, 201214 yr Matt Moore's QB rating was 76 coming to Miami, not 67. 3 points higher than Mark Sanchez's QB rating. I did an eyeball average, so my bad if I'm wrong. And he was older than Sanchez in the seasons where played. Regardless, 3 points isn't a huge difference. But somehow, he's average while Sanchez is awful? That doesn't add up.
March 9, 201214 yr Matt Moore's QB rating was 76 coming to Miami, not 67. 3 points higher than Mark Sanchez's QB rating. I did an eyeball average, so my bad if I'm wrong. And he was older than Sanchez in the seasons where played. Regardless, 3 points isn't a huge difference. But somehow, he's average while Sanchez is awful? That doesn't add up. Because in two seasons, he's actually shown he can play. Sanchez has yet to prove he can play in one season.
March 9, 201214 yr Using QBR+ (the same thing as things like ERA+ and OPS+, placing the number on a scale where 100 is average), Sanchez has gone from being 75% of the league's average to 90 to 92. He was barely better in his third season than his second. He barely improved. While I'm aware of the stat, I'm not familiar with its intricacies. But does 92% of league average an "awful" quarterback make? It wouldn't seem so on its face. Given that that 92 was 23rd in the league, yes that's awful. Yes. Come on. That reasoning is completely circular. You compared it to ERA+ and OPS+, and a 92 would be below-average, even maybe solidly below-average, but not awful. And a marginal improvement when your supporting cast falls off a cliff is probably fairly characterized as an improvement, albeit a smallish one.
March 9, 201214 yr Matt Moore's QB rating was 76 coming to Miami, not 67. 3 points higher than Mark Sanchez's QB rating. I did an eyeball average, so my bad if I'm wrong. And he was older than Sanchez in the seasons where played. Regardless, 3 points isn't a huge difference. But somehow, he's average while Sanchez is awful? That doesn't add up. Because in two seasons, he's actually shown he can play. Sanchez has yet to prove he can play in one season. This is entirely conclusory. And Sanchez has had some big games and very good stretches. I'm not claiming he's anything near excellent. It feels like y'all are creating a straw man that I'm doing so and arguing against that.
March 9, 201214 yr Using QBR+ (the same thing as things like ERA+ and OPS+, placing the number on a scale where 100 is average), Sanchez has gone from being 75% of the league's average to 90 to 92. He was barely better in his third season than his second. He barely improved. While I'm aware of the stat, I'm not familiar with its intricacies. But does 92% of league average an "awful" quarterback make? It wouldn't seem so on its face. Given that that 92 was 23rd in the league, yes that's awful. Yes. Come on. That reasoning is completely circular. You compared it to ERA+ and OPS+, and a 92 would be below-average, even maybe solidly below-average, but not awful. Ricky Nolasco finished with a 92 ERA+ in 2010. He finished 80th out of 103 pitchers who threw at least 150 innings. You wouldn't say being in the bottom 20% is awful? Mark Sanchez finished in the bottom 31% of starting NFL quarterbacks last season in QB rating. If that's not 'awful', it's still really, really bad. If you want to quibble with the word choice, that kind of says it all. By any measure, he has been, at best, a very bad NFL quarterback. He has shown marginal improvement, but hasn't really ever even been average. You're hanging your hat on him being among the bottom third of NFL quarterbacks. That's your improvement. That's awful.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.