All down hill since New England Playoff game.

I defend reality.

 

it was very late this offseason. I gave you the quote from that coach months before he was released saying he'd start for him right now but you ignored that.

 

In an abstract sense of the word, I suppose. After all, what's true in your head is "real" to you.

 

I didn't ignore it, I pointed out, that despite that coach's quote, Mark got ZERO offers to start anywhere.

There's that whole fact vs. speculation thing again. Did you look up that word yet?

 

Hey, you admitted to the bashing that goes on and that he is, at least, mediocre. Junc is on another level with Sanchez. I believe he is his son, if not biological then imaginary.

 

hmmm, didn't have anything to do w/ him being released a month into FA, did it?

 

I am on the reality level. I have never called him great or even said he would be great, I discuss him realistically while most just bash b/c they don't know what they are watching.

I will always defend what I believe is right whether it is a popular opinion or not. I tend to be proven right in the long run.

 

Oh, of course I am bashing him. I've been bashing the guy pretty steadily on this message board since the middle of 2012, at least. I think the argument that he was good is utterly comical. I don't go out of my way to bring him up. I only continue to go after people who pretend that he was somehow a good player that we let get away. Revisionist history bothers me. The big theme on this message board following 2010 was that Mark had to "take the next step" for us to get to where we wanted to go. He was never considered great, or even good, by the vast majority of posters here. Complaints about him were nonstop. He was always looked at as a relative weakness of the team. Heck, we flat out played around him in 2009. And the bottom line is that he never took that next step . . . he imploded. When our running game deteriorated, he deteriorated. And considering the fact that he was a fourth year starter at the time, his 2012 season was an abomination.

 

Oh, is that the name of the level where you get to compare Mark Sanchez to Phillip Rivers???

Hahaha, GTFO.

 

It had to do with him being looked at as a backup quarterback by the all of teams who still needed a starting quarterback when he was released.

 

you may want to actually read my posts.

what teams still needed a starter at that point? every projected starter in the league was already on their team by the time Mark was released. the only opening day starter that wasn't was in Oakland and they got Schaub just before Mark was released. had Mark been released a day earlier he would have been starting in Oakland.

 

When it comes to Mark, it's really painful.

Projected, of course, being the operative word here. If any team really wanted Mark as a potential starter, they could have had him. As I have pointed out several times already, every team in the league knew Mark was going to be available. Him not being available until March 21st (which was OVER a month before the NFL draft and several months before training camp) doesn't change that reality. It's just a lame excuse to try to explain why your hero isn't starting right now.

1) First of all, the trade for Schaub was announced on the exact day that Sanchez was cut (Friday, March 21st). So, let's think about this for a second. They picked up Schaub instead of waiting a few extra days (at the very MOST - would they have even had to wait at all?) to sign Mark. What does that tell you? Logic dictates that the best case scenario (from Mark's perspective) is that they thought schaub was a little better than Mark, considering that A) They traded a draft pick for him, as opposed to just signing Sanchez outright and B) They officially acquired him on the very same day that Mark was made available (Why not just wait a day or two and sign Mark outright??? Or are you suggesting that they were interested in Mark, but hadn't done the due diligence to know if/when Mark would be made available?)

How does any of that logically suggest that Mark was destined to be the starter in Oakland? In point of fact, doesn't it somewhat suggest that Oakland wasn't interested in Sanchez?

2) The bolded is not only baseless speculation (yet again), but worse, is actually somewhat refuted by the facts of what actually did happen. It's actually funny.

 

Oakland wanted Schaub or Sanchez, they had no idea when Mark was going to be cut. it happened that as soon as they announced the trade we cut Mark. I wonder if that was intentional on Idzik's part knowing we would be playing them week 1?

 

Out of curiousity: would you consider this "reality" or "speculation"? No Excuses, junc, which is it?

 

I think the "I wonder" part of the sentence answers that question.

 

Speculative fantasies sure are fun!

 

Was there actually a sourced report about them wanting Sanchez? I don't remember one, but I wasn't really paying attention to Oakland during the off-season.

 

Only one I could find:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ers-top-quarterback-target-mark-sanchez-next/

 

If you think Mark is like Kellen Clemens you should really watch more football.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/1...t-matt-schaub-mark-sanchez-qbs-cut?src=mobile