View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently September 23rd, 2014, 4:34 pm



Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
 Jets name Sanchez starter 
Author Message
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9454
Location: Dallas
Post Jets name Sanchez starter
the outrage, everyone knows rookie QBs must sit and learn - especially an underclassman like Sanchez who only started as QB for one season...

Well, it must have been his last preseason game. Oh wait, he was 3-8 and threw a pick that was returned for a TD.

Well, it must be his team has nothing to play for. Oh wait, they are the Jets not the Lions coming off an 0-16 season.

Comments welcome!

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


August 26th, 2009, 1:24 pm
Profile WWW
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post 
I think it is a good situation for Sanchez to start right away, not so much for Stafford IMO.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


August 26th, 2009, 1:28 pm
Profile
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3129
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post 
The idea that starting a rookie in a bad situation will ruin them is ridiculous in my opinion. As I've said many times on here, if a QB has the right stuff, he's going to be good. Hell, Peyton Manning set the record for most INTs by a rookie, and last time I checked he turned out ok. Aikman only won 1 game his first season. Yes there are many examples of rookies starting and never doing well, but that is because they just didn't have what it takes to win. Harrington wasn't broken by the Lions. He was never going to be a good QB. That's the reality. Whether or not Sanchez or Stafford succeeds will have absolutely nothing to with whether they get knocked around in year 1.

I'm not saying that either should definitely start. They should only start if their coaches feel they are ready to take over. If they do, they'll be fine. If not, sit them and let them learn. But what the situation is shouldn't matter. The readiness and abilities of the player is what matters.

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


August 26th, 2009, 2:34 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post 
Ruin, no, maim yes...

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


August 26th, 2009, 2:42 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9864
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
Many of the rookies who started right away, that had the right stuff, only started because the team they were playing on truly had no experienced QB worth squat. Sanchez starting in NY is only because Kellen Clemens is his "competition" for the spot. I have a strong feeling that if the Jets still had Favre, or Pennington, or even Culpepper, Sanchez would have to wait.

That said, the Lions have said they will play whoever gives them the best chance to win. So far, like it or not, that is Culpepper. He's been more consistent, and hasn't made the mistakes that Stafford has.

Many have stated that the Lions should play Stafford right away, because they have no hope of going to the playoffs. That has nothing to do with it. In order to attract free agents, in order to show their agents that the team is improving, it has to show in the win-loss column. And let's face it folks, we need to start attracting better free agents to get this team better in the next year or two.

Let Daunte start, and if he fails to do well and win a game, then bring Stafford in during the bye week. If Stafford is allowed to start now, that whole thing of "the best players will play" statement will mean nothing. Because to this point, Stafford is NOT the best player at that position.


August 26th, 2009, 4:24 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post 
Bingo m2k, I agree.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


August 26th, 2009, 4:30 pm
Profile
Rookie Player of the Year

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 9:03 am
Posts: 2301
Post 
I think the Jets might be making the same mistake as the Lions if they start Stafford. The mistake is the timing based on the schedule more than anything. They both have schedules that look to be toughest for those first five or six games. If you have the veterans start those games and they look good no loss and if they don't perform then the rookies come in with a lot less pressure of the veteran lurking on the bench. If the rookie starts those first handful of games against tough competition you could be looking at all those idiot fans calling for their heads and the heads of the coaches and FO personnel.


August 26th, 2009, 5:49 pm
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)
User avatar

Joined: October 30th, 2004, 12:30 pm
Posts: 2205
Location: Austin, TX
Post 
I also agree with m2K.

_________________
Image

NEVER GIVE UP!


August 26th, 2009, 10:01 pm
Profile
Red Shirt Freshman

Joined: February 28th, 2007, 10:37 pm
Posts: 505
Location: Corona, CA
Post 
Best part about being a starting QB in the NFL?

http://www.prefixmag.com/forum/sports/8906/


April 15th, 2010, 4:08 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post 
Lol... Ben Roth 2.0 Why doesn't anyone LEARN anything from other peopls mistakes?

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


April 15th, 2010, 6:45 pm
Profile
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3129
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post 
steensn wrote:
Lol... Ben Roth 2.0 Why doesn't anyone LEARN anything from other peopls mistakes?

Hanging out with a bunch of women is a LOT different than sexually assaulting one of them. That's not a fair comparison at all, especially considering that we now know the statement the woman gave in the Roethlisberger case.

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


April 15th, 2010, 9:44 pm
Profile
NFL Team Captain
User avatar

Joined: October 15th, 2005, 6:07 pm
Posts: 1589
Location: Watching Football
Post 
Touchdown Jesus wrote:
steensn wrote:
Lol... Ben Roth 2.0 Why doesn't anyone LEARN anything from other peopls mistakes?

Hanging out with a bunch of women is a LOT different than sexually assaulting one of them. That's not a fair comparison at all, especially considering that we now know the statement the woman gave in the Roethlisberger case.


That was a pretty compelling statement if it's true? Quite honestly I'm surprised they did not bring charges on Ben, of course that is one side of the story and the truth is probably some where in the middle of both of their stories. Still I was shocked.

_________________
Lions Fan since King Kong was a Spider Monkey!


April 16th, 2010, 7:06 am
Profile
Post 
TNLionsFanatic wrote:
Touchdown Jesus wrote:
steensn wrote:
Lol... Ben Roth 2.0 Why doesn't anyone LEARN anything from other peopls mistakes?

Hanging out with a bunch of women is a LOT different than sexually assaulting one of them. That's not a fair comparison at all, especially considering that we now know the statement the woman gave in the Roethlisberger case.


That was a pretty compelling statement if it's true? Quite honestly I'm surprised they did not bring charges on Ben, of course that is one side of the story and the truth is probably some where in the middle of both of their stories. Still I was shocked.


The ONLY reason that Ben wasn't charged was because the girl that he allegedly assaulted was too drunk to remember clearly what happened, and there wasn't any shred of evidence to back up her story.

It's a shame, because it sounds like what he did was wrong, and it sounds like he's done this and gotten away with it before... To me he seems like a predator that knows the law, knows how to get away with it, and he keeps doing it. I hope someone gives him what he deserves in the end.


April 16th, 2010, 1:51 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 13 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.