I have no issue with this. It's meant to find out who the 2nd best QB in the division was. It's still a tough question between Sanchez and Fitz. Henne obviously dropped out, and Moore sucks. The name is stupid, but I don't have an issue with the concept.
Well that was my point, it's all about opportunity. Brady got a great opportunity early on in his career when Bledsoe went down; if Bledsoe had never gotten hurt, it could have taken Brady 7 years (or longer) to break out because he might never have gotten the chance.
Aside from the obvious defense of an ESPN product, I agree. They've kept up with this all season. It's a bit of harmless fun on a little-read subsection of ESPN's NFL coverage.
When I read this thread title, I thought "what does Larry Fitzgerald have to do with Sanchez and Tom Moore??" Then, I remembered that there's a "pro" football team in Buffalo and that Matt Moore exists. Then, I remembered that everything on ESPN is crap. (And that there's NO DOUBT that Sanchez is the second best QB in the division, albeit by a country mile.)
Only guy I can think of like that was Thomas Jones, and I think he was around 28 when he had his first big season.
ESPN wrote: How many QB's throw 40 times a game and are 'consistently successful'? Maybe Brady, Brees and Rogers this season? Would Romo be considered 'consistently successful'?
I think the Jets are a better team than the Bills, but just because we have great corner backs doesn't mean Fitzpatrick is suddenly going to crap his pants. I don't think people have realized there is a true difference in his play from last year. Would I love to pick him off a ton? Yes. Do I think there is a slight possibility? Yes. But I don't think it is probable. Granted they haven't had the same production, but the Eagles CB's are pretty good and they got past them. Fitzpatrick has other options in Fred Jackson, CJ Spiller, and Scott Chandler the TE, who has been particularly productive in the redzone. Also, having Mark Sanchez throwing 40 a game means something is wrong, but it doesn't necessarily mean that for every team. If Mark actually could do it, do you think the Jets wouldn't have him try? There are many QB's who can be productive doing it, but right now ours just isn't one of them.
yep. jackson has been really good whenever he's played. the previous regime was retarded and wasted carries on lynch
Brady is often ranked as the biggest draft steal in the history of the NFL. He is so unusual in that respect that comparisons aren't useful. As far as these rankings go, Fitz, Moore and Sanchez have one thing in common - they start in the AFC East, so in that sense a comparison might be appropriate. In reality it isn't though. The three players have nothing else in common.
Brady just happened to be in the right place at the right time and took advantage of his big break. If Bledsoe didn't get seriously injured in that game, Brady may have never gotten an opportunity. Ever. You can blame the Pats dynasty on the Raiders! :smile: Kurt Warner was an UDFA who was the backup QB in St Louis (to Trent Green?). When that QB went down for the season, Martz inserted Warner, and the rest, as they say, is history. Fitzpatrick had worked himself into Cinci's backup spot in 2008. When Palmer got hurt, he got an opportunity to start and play, but for a very poor team. The Bengals wanted to keep Fitz but he wanted a shot at starting, figured he'd never get that chance behind Palmer, so he signed with the Bills because he figured they had the iffiest starting QB situation. Even in Buffalo, he was considered as simply a backup. Last year, he started the season behind Trent Edwards, who is no longer in the league. Late round/UDFA QBs seldom get real opportunities to prove their worth (ie, be a starter for an extended period in a season). Even then, they may only be considered backup material unless, like Brady/Belichick or Warner/Martz or Fitzpatrick/Gailey, the QB and the HC share compatible traits/philosophies. That's important because unlike other positions, the starting QB gets a lot more attention and coaching throughout the week than the backup. The backup just sits and watches and hopefully "learns by osmosis" so that he's sort of ready if he's needed.
Pesky things, those little things called facts, sg3. It's kinda hard to "lose" when you don't even suit up. Fitzpatrick was injured for the Jets game. Moreover, Fitzpatrick has not had the luxury of playing for good teams in the three seasons that he's had starts prior to this current one. Moreover, he has not had the opportunity of being the #1 QB during training camp until 2011, either. Sanchez, OTOH, has had a great/good defense as well as a solid OL and top running game to make up for his deficiencies. If you want to compare Sanchez to another QB, then compare him to a first rounder who also went to a good team with a great defense, solid OL and top running game. That would be Ben Roethlisberger, skippy: 15-1 as a rookie and Super Bowl winner as a sophomore.
You should have put that sentence first so I would have known you have no clue what you're talking about earlier on. Seriously, have you watched any of the Jets 7 games this year? Everything you said is pretty untrue.
Thank you! Actually, it wasn't so much Lynch as it was a guy called "A Train". McGahee was the starter back then, and this A Train guy was his backup, and then Freddie. It wasn't until both McGahee and A Train were injured that Freddie got his chance. Despite showing he could play, Jauron wouldn't promote Freddie to starter but had recommend drafting Lynch after trading Willis. Dick Jauron had a noticeable prejudice against low draft picks and UDFAs. I blame him for the Bills trading Jason Peters, the Bills Pro Bowl LT who started out as an UDFA TE. If he had spoken up and said, "hey, we can't trade our LT", I don't think that trade would have happened because Jauron had a lot influence on Bills personnel. All of the smurfy defenders he left behind are testament to that! I am sure that he went along with signing Fitzpatrick originally only because he figured no 7th round draft pick could possibly challenge his boy, Trentative! <<barf>>
Wrong. This is AFC East history we're talking here. Mo Lewis #57. Unless you're talking about the Tuck Rule game, but that was in January.
I wasn't counting this year. That's why I only used Sanchez's first two seasons versus Roethlisberger's first two seasons. It's also why I used the three seasons prior to 2011 for Fitzpatrick. I don't think that the Jets this season (2011) are anywhere near as good on D as they were previously, nor has their OL or running game been all that good, either, which means that Sanchez has to step up and carry much more of the load if he's to be considered a good NFL QB. So far, he hasn't shown that. This year's Bills team is the first decent team that Fitzpatrick has played on. It's also the first time he's been the starter from Day 1 in training camp. That's a really, really big deal for a QB because teams give so much time and attention to their starter beginning in TC and going through the season with the backups essentially being afterthoughts. So far, Fitz has stepped up and shown that he's got the "right stuff" to be a good NFL QB.
