No Haynesworth against the G-Men [edit: Pats and Jets fans discuss Sanchez]

[Rob0729]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

You know what's weak? Ad hominem rebuttals.

I do find it rich that since the writer is connected to Boston, his writing is ipso facto disqualified, but when Mark Sanchez's "consultant" says nice things about him... well, his opinion is unimpeachable!

Really, what did you expect him to say? "To be honest, guys, I think he has a ceiling somewhere between Jason Campbell and Joe Flacco"?

What is even richer is Graham worked for the Herald for a really brief time I think in the 90s really early in his career and has spent 8 years with the Buffalo news and several years with the Palm Beach Post. I don't know how that makes him biased.

And what is even richer is that he is quoting stats from Football Outsider which has no Boston connection.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Yes, you downplayed his performance in the playoffs, I gave you stats and facts that suggested otherwise. You decided to breakdown his performance on a series by series basis. That is weak in itself.

I also asked you to pull stats for Brady over a 3 game span, his last 3 playoff games, use a comparable measuring stick, and by comparison, we are talking about a 24 year old QB with two NFL seasons under his belt, and a future HOF QB entering his 13th season, because we both know the comparison isn't even close, you want nothing to do with it, how shameless.

Where do they hatch these things?

Football is a series of series. It's called situational football.

Do you seriously want to debate what would happen if Brady was allowed to start drives on the Jet's 30 yard line? how many points would have been scored playing Indy? What if the Patriots opponents were forced to sign 2 or 3 Dline guys going into the playoffs because of injuries? Pick players equal to Welker's value in 2009 and have them tear their ACL, what happens?

Seriously, you want some sort of recognition or validation that you are not going to get because it's simply not deserved.

Sanchez is marginal and has had some lucky breaks in the playoffs. Ya want to hang your hat, we can all admit it's better to be lucky than good.

 

[JetFan1]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

What does Brady's performance have to do with Sanchez and his inconsistency in both the regular season and playoffs? The two are not related.

Wrong, has nothing to do with Sanchez' regular season performance, and comparing Brady's last 3 post-season games with Sanchez' last 3 post-season games is absolutely fair, for some reason, we have seen the stats on Sanchez' last three games, but nobody has bothered to post Brady's last 3 post-season performances...

Tom Moore's statement means nothing. Do you think he's going to publicly state "Hell, this kid ain't no Manning, that's for sure! Ha!" You tell every young QB they have the potential to be the next Manning, Marino, Brady, Montana, etc. You don't tell them they will never amount to anything or will never complete more than 60% of their passes in their career, etc.

It means a hell of a lot more than Pats fans claiming Sanchez will never be a franchise QB or elite.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Who derailed this thread? It wasn't me, you have an issue, talk to Rob.

To say Sanchez "mostly sucks" is about as competent statement as I can get out of a 3 year old.

And we are now evaluating Sanchez' post-season performance because of missed FG's? That's rich. The endless spinning continues...

Well....let's see there Einstein.

Chargers lose 17-14

A field goal is 3 points.

If a pro bowl kicker misses 3 easy kicks, that means 9 points lost that should have been scored.

9 points means 23-17, Chargers win.

This highlights that Sanchez essentially sucks. Given some monumental breaks, he proves he can perform at the level a very marginal NFL QB level.

Dude, don't come to other sites armed with single digit IQ firepower.

 

[JetFan1]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Where do they hatch these things?

Football is a series of series. It's called situational football.

Do you seriously want to debate what would happen if Brady was allowed to start drives on the Jet's 30 yard line? how many points would have been scored playing Indy? What if the Patriots opponents were forced to sign 2 or 3 Dline guys going into the playoffs because of injuries? Pick players equal to Welker's value in 2009 and have them tear their ACL, what happens?

What the hell are you talking about? So now we are discussing performance based on field position? Pat fan says Sanchez' post-season performance has been overrated. That's a crock considering his numbers and his record. So I offered to have a comparison done between Sanchez and Brady over their last 3 pre-season games, my point is, if you want to nipick and breakdown their performances and label Sanchez inconsistent, and use that as support against Sanchez becoming elite, it's quite dumb, considering Sanches did better and more as a 24 year old 2 year QB when compared to a future HOF'er who has already established himself.

Seriously, you want some sort of recognition or validation that you are not going to get because it's simply not deserved.

Sanchez is marginal and has had some lucky breaks in the playoffs. Ya want to hang your hat, we can all admit it's better to be lucky than good.

Not looking for any recognition or validation, just noting and proving how the comments of Rob are simply BS and conjecture based on agenda and bias.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

So now you want to discredit Tom Moore, who has worked in the NFL for 37 years, but want to give credence to some clown in the Boston media who hasn't played a football or worked in the sport a down of his life.

How pathetic are you?

I am not discrediting Tom Moore. I am saying that no coach is going to say anything negative about their franchise QB's potential. What a coach says in public about a player needs to be taken with a grain of salt. If what coaches say is true, Vernon Gholston would have had double digit sacks in 2009 and 2010 the way Ryan talked him up.

I never gave credit a member of the Boston media because Tim Graham is not part of the Boston media. I think he was part of the Boston Media for a brief stint in the late 90s. Yes, he did work for the Boston Herald, but not for over a decade. Why do you choose to ignore that. He works for ESPN and the Buffalo News.

Here is Graham's bio from ESPN:

Graham joined ESPN.com in 2008 after covering the Miami Dolphins for the Palm Beach Post. He previously spent eight years at the Buffalo News, where he was an award-winning NHL and boxing writer. The Baldwin-Wallace College grad also has worked for the Las Vegas Sun and Boston Herald.

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/37552/nfl-blogger-tim-graham

I can't remember him, but I don't even think he covered the Patriots when he was here. He was here so briefly that I don't even remember him.

 

[JetFan1]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Well....let's see there Einstein.

Chargers lose 17-14

A field goal is 3 points.

If a pro bowl kicker misses 3 easy kicks, that means 9 points lost that should have been scored.

9 points means 23-17, Chargers win.

This highlights that Sanchez essentially sucks. Given some monumental breaks, he proves he can perform at the level a very marginal NFL QB level.

Dude, don't come to other sites armed with single digit IQ firepower.

Hey Einstein, I said his last 3 post-season games, the Charger game was two years ago, Sanchez' 2nd post-season game, in his rookie year.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Hey Einstein, I said his last 3 post-season games, the Charger game was two years ago, Sanchez' 2nd post-season game, in his rookie year.

Based on his last three playoff games, he can win as long as you give him very short fields and don't put him in a situation where he has to perform at accomplished NFL QB levels.

As I have said, he has proven he is atleast a marginal NFL talent, because he has produced results that is expected from marginal NFL QB's.

 

[JetFan1]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

I am not discrediting Tom Moore. I am saying that no coach is going to say anything negative about their franchise QB's potential. What a coach says in public about a player needs to be taken with a grain of salt. If what coaches say is true, Vernon Gholston would have had double digit sacks in 2009 and 2010 the way Ryan talked him up.

I never gave credit a member of the Boston media because Tim Graham is not part of the Boston media. I think he was part of the Boston Media for a brief stint in the late 90s. Yes, he did work for the Boston Herald, but not for over a decade. Why do you choose to ignore that. He works for ESPN and the Buffalo News.

Here is Graham's bio from ESPN:



Chat: Chat with Tim Graham - SportsNation - ESPN

I can't remember him, but I don't even think he covered the Patriots when he was here. He was here so briefly that I don't even remember him.

Ok great, so he's also a member of the Buffalo media... The point is, he used to work in Boston and has a Boston background.

There are also Boston journalists that YOU have discredited because YOU claim they have agendas... So why doesn't that apply here in your desperation to spin the Sanchez topic, for which you've already been taken to task?

Why haven't you provided the 3 game post-season performance numbers for Brady? Why are the last 3 post-season games not a creditable measuring stick? Why do you analyze and spin Sanchez' post season performance based on individual series' or drives of a 24 yr old QB only completing his second year, and then claim that he doesn't have elite potential, and then when taken to task to compare his performances to Brady, a 35 year old future HOF'er, you walk away with your tail between your legs?

 

[JetFan1]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Based on his last three playoff games, he can win as long as you give him very short fields and don't put him in a situation where he has to perform at accomplished NFL QB levels.

And the game you highlight was NOT one of his last three playoff games.

As I have said, he has proven he is atleast a marginal NFL talent, because he has produced results that is expected from marginal NFL QB's.

And as I have said, that so called "marginal NFL talent" outperformed your HOF QB the last 3 years really, during the time of the year when the stakes are the highest.

Now I'll wait for the next Pats fan and chime in to claim that now I'm comparing Sanchez and Brady over their careers and I'm suggesting that Sanchez is better than Brady...

 

[Rob0729]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Ok great, so he's also a member of the Buffalo media... The point is, he used to work in Boston and has a Boston background.

There are also Boston journalists that YOU have discredited because YOU claim they have agendas... So why doesn't that apply here in your desperation to spin the Sanchez topic, for which you've already been taken to task?

Why haven't you provided the 3 game post-season performance numbers for Brady? Why are the last 3 post-season games not a creditable measuring stick? Why do you analyze and spin Sanchez' post season performance based on individual series' or drives, a 24 yr old QB only completing his second year, but you don't want to provide the same level of analysis to that of a 35 year old future HOF'er?

He was born and raised in Ohio. Maybe he is anti-Belichick like most Cleveland Brown fans. He worked in Boston for a very short period of time. That doesn't mean he has any allegence to the Patriots or any Boston team. You just want to harp on it because he provided facts that make Sanchez look bad.

I discredited Dan Shaughnessy because he deserves to be discredited and he does have an agenda. But if you want me to give him credit, he says that Belichick is going to unleash a monster defense on the NFL and take vengence on the league.

Bill Belichick's Patriots look loaded ... again - Dan Shaughnessy - SI.com

I didn't provide Brady's stats because it is a red herring and not relevant to the conversation on Sanchez's post game performance. So Brady has sucked the last three playoff games. Does that mean that Sanchez had a great post season career because Brady has sucked?!? I don't want to bring Brady into the conversation because I am discussing Sanchez, not Brady. "Yeah, but what about Brady" is not a valid counter argument to Sanchez being inconsistent in the playoffs. You just want to harp on it because you got nothing to counter.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

A couple of points: it should not need to be stated, but apparently it still needs to be mentioned; the notion that Tim Graham is a Pats homer based on the fact that he wrote for a Boston paper twenty years ago is laughable.

Perhaps that assumption is made based in part on the way the New York Post covers the Jets, but the Boston media is not at all like that when it comes to their sports teams - especially the Patriots, and especially the Boston Herald. This is the same newspaper that employs Ron Borges and John Tomase. Nothing - and I do mean absolutley nothing - could be further from the truth than the conclusion that writing for the Herald automatically makes one a Pats homer.

Second point: yes, deciding that the last three playoff games is some sort of impartial benchmark is indeed cherry picking. The issue is not the performance of the Pats in general or Brady in particular in those three games; it's just that when one decides to make a starting point for determining an assessment a very arbitrary date, then people are going to question the motive and bias.

Third: how the hell did a discussion about Albert Haynesworth turn into a Brady vs Sanchez debate?

 

[Joker]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

nobody is going to do that BECAUSE...we KNOW you think Sanchez is better than Brady...right now...and Sanchez will win more Super Bowls in his career making him an even better Hall of Fame QB...we KNOW because YOU have posted it...not once...but hundreds of times...as Ray Ray 19

We think 4 downs to get 1 yard in a playoff game means the difference between Santhud and Sanchize...right now he's Santhud

 

[Rob0729]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Third: how the hell did a discussion about Albert Haynesworth turn into a Brady vs Sanchez debate?

Sorry, I helped to derail this thread. It is about Haynesworth, not Brady or Sanchez. Back on topic.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

And the game you highlight was NOT one of his last three playoff games.



And as I have said, that so called "marginal NFL talent" outperformed your HOF QB the last 3 years really, during the time of the year when the stakes are the highest.

Now I'll wait for the next Pats fan and chime in to claim that now I'm comparing Sanchez and Brady over their careers and I'm suggesting that Sanchez is better than Brady...

If you watch football, it might dawn on you that QB's don't play against other QB's. They tend to play against the opponent's defense. as such, absent head to head competition, QB's need exact circumstance to gauge performance.

In your wild need to get validation from a Patriots website, you don't seem to want to admit that....or you are simply too dumb to grasp.

Again, based on the task at hand, your QB produced at a marginal NFL QB level. As long as Cromartie makes 70 yard returns, Chung decides to "go for it" and recovered onside kicks allow for 25 yard drives; marginal is all that's required.

When faced with needing more than marginal (reference AFCCG), he sucks.

End of discussion.

 

[JetFan1]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

I discredited Dan Shaughnessy because he deserves to be discredited and he does have an agenda. But if you want me to give him credit, he says that Belichick is going to unleash a monster defense on the NFL and take vengence on the league.

And you don't have an agenda or bias against the Jets?

I didn't provide Brady's stats because it is a red herring and not relevant to the conversation on Sanchez's post game performance. So Brady has sucked the last three playoff games. Does that mean that Sanchez had a great post season career because Brady has sucked?!? I don't want to bring Brady into the conversation because I am discussing Sanchez, not Brady. "Yeah, but what about Brady" is not a valid counter argument to Sanchez being inconsistent in the playoffs. You just want to harp on it because you got nothing to counter.

Of course, because it doesn't fit your agenda.

Bringing in Brady to the conversation is EXTREMELY relevant. You're insinuating Sanchez is overrated in the playoffs. That has been proven wrong, by bringing in Brady into the argument only further solidifies that.

You also mention that because Sanchez is supposedly "overrated," he does not have the potential to be elite, which is immediately taken to task by comparing Sanchez' performance as a 24 yr old QB after only 2 years in the league, and showing stats of his performance in the post season, has been better, more impressive, and more productive than Brady, over a similar 3 game period, a 35 yr old HOF already established QB.

 

[JetFan1]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

If you watch football, it might dawn on you that QB's don't play against other QB's. They tend to play against the opponent's defense. as such, absent head to head competition, QB's need exact circumstance to gauge performance.

Lose the arrogance, it doesn't help your participation in this thread, you chime in, with guns a blazing, taking the angle that since I'm a Jets fan on a Patriots board I don't know what I'm talking about, enough, it's petty and stupid.

Second, I watch plenty of football, and you're taking my argument completely out of context. No donkey doo, QB's don't compete against one another, I'm simply comparing the performances of our team's QB to refute the argument made by Rob that Sanchez doesn't have elite potential, which is simply nothing more than BS and conjecture, and nothing of substance based on what I have offered in refute, and simply because he wears a Jets uniform, so every argument is spun strictly out of hatred and bias.

In your wild need to get validation from a Patriots website, you don't seem to want to admit that....or you are simply too dumb to grasp.

Again, based on the task at hand, your QB produced at a marginal NFL QB level. As long as Cromartie makes 70 yard returns, Chung decides to "go for it" and recovered onside kicks allow for 25 yard drives; marginal is all that's required.

When faced with needing more than marginal (reference AFCCG), he sucks.

End of discussion.

Again, lose the arrogance the and the personal insults, I haven't insulted anybody here, and have done nothing but talk football. Once again, I didn't come here for validation from anybody. The argument that I'm making is that Sanchez has franchise QB potential, that he's shown a lot in his very young career, has shown plenty of potential and has produced based on his play in the post-season and his 4-1 post-season record. Compare Sanchez against any QB in the league over the course of their first two years, and very few come even close to Sanchez' performance.

None of this means Sanchez will definitely become anything, and I'm not saying he is even there yet, I'm simply saying Sanchez has validated his draft day position, he's justified his position as an up and coming potential franchise QB, and has proven it. Suggesting he doesn't have any such potential or that he sucks, is petty and ignorant!

 

[JetFan1]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

A couple of points: it should not need to be stated, but apparently it still needs to be mentioned; the notion that Tim Graham is a Pats homer based on the fact that he wrote for a Boston paper twenty years ago is laughable.

Equally as laughable is that the same fan that referenced the same journalist, and then a couple of posts later, discredited another journalist, because it either didn't fit his agenda, or puts the Pats in a negative light.

Perhaps that assumption is made based in part on the way the New York Post covers the Jets, but the Boston media is not at all like that when it comes to their sports teams - especially the Patriots, and especially the Boston Herald. This is the same newspaper that employs Ron Borges and John Tomase. Nothing - and I do mean absolutley nothing - could be further from the truth than the conclusion that writing for the Herald automatically makes one a Pats homer.

Then you know nothing about the NY media, because their are plenty of ignorant and agenda drive journalists that cover the team that present their daily work strictly with an angle to put the Jets in a negative light, or spin doom and gloom.

Second point: yes, deciding that the last three playoff games is some sort of impartial benchmark is indeed cherry picking. The issue is not the performance of the Pats in general or Brady in particular in those three games; it's just that when one decides to make a starting point for determining an assessment a very arbitrary date, then people are going to question the motive and bias.

Just as cherry picking and lame that Sanchez' performance over the last 3 post-season games, when dissecting his play at a series level to support some bogus claim he is overrated, is equally as biased. I simply offered to provide the same analysis of your future HOF QB, but so far, nobody wants to do it.

Third: how the hell did a discussion about Albert Haynesworth turn into a Brady vs Sanchez debate?

Fair question, I initially chimed in this thread commenting about Haynesworth, it has since morphed into a "Pats fans ganging up on the outside Jet fan and his QB sucks" discussion.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

And you don't have an agenda or bias against the Jets?

Ummm..... What does this have to do with anything. What does this have to Tim Graham's supposive bias? You are just as biased or more so against the Pats as I am towards the Jets.

Of course, because it doesn't fit your agenda.

Bringing in Brady to the conversation is EXTREMELY relevant. You're insinuating Sanchez is overrated in the playoffs. That has been proven wrong, by bringing in Brady into the argument only further solidifies that.

You also mention that because Sanchez is supposedly "overrated," he does not have the potential to be elite, which is immediately taken to task by comparing Sanchez' performance as a 24 yr old QB after only 2 years in the league, and showing stats of his performance in the post season, has been better, more impressive, and more productive than Brady, over a similar 3 game period, a 35 yr old HOF already established QB.

Let's for the sake of argument say Brady sucked his last three playoff games so I don't have to get the numbers. Most of the media and public have said as much. Now exactly how does that change whether Sanchez has been inconsistent in the playoffs. Comparing Sanchez's last post season's performances vs. Brady's last three post season performances says nothing to how good Sanchez's performances were other than they were better than Brady's. Let's compare Sanchez's last three post season games vs. Aaron Rodgers' last three. It is just as relevant.

The greatest thing about you is that you cotinue to "prove me wrong" without actually proving me wrong. Losing arguments and claiming you proved me wrong doesn't actually qualify as proving me wrong.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Lose the arrogance, it doesn't help your participation in this thread, you chime in, with guns a blazing, taking the angle that since I'm a Jets fan on a Patriots board I don't know what I'm talking about, enough, it's petty and stupid.

Second, I watch plenty of football, and you're taking my argument completely out of context. No donkey doo, QB's don't compete against one another, I'm simply comparing the performances of our team's QB to refute the argument made by Rob that Sanchez doesn't have elite potential, which is simply nothing more than BS and conjecture, and nothing of substance based on what I have offered in refute, and simply because he wears a Jets uniform, so every argument is spun strictly out of hatred and bias.



Again, lose the arrogance the and the personal insults, I haven't insulted anybody here, and have done nothing but talk football. Once again, I didn't come here for validation from anybody. The argument that I'm making is that Sanchez has franchise QB potential, that he's shown a lot in his very young career, has shown plenty of potential and has produced based on his play in the post-season and his 4-1 post-season record. Compare Sanchez against any QB in the league over the course of their first two years, and very few come even close to Sanchez' performance.

None of this means Sanchez will definitely become anything, and I'm not saying he is even there yet, I'm simply saying Sanchez has validated his draft day position, he's justified his position as an up and coming potential franchise QB, and has proven it. Suggesting he doesn't have any such potential or that he sucks, is petty and ignorant!

I take the angle that you don't know what you are talking about because you don't know what you are talking about. Being a Jets fans adds the convience of realizing why it's true.

Being on Patriots board means little because your status applies on any board.

Again, based on the fact that a borderline NFL QB would be 4-2 in the playoffs if he played with the Jets in 2009/10; we can safely conclude Sanchez it atleast a borderline NFL QB.

Feel the reality, Sport.