Potential landing spots for Sanchez

Discuss your favorite team: the Atlanta Falcons. As well as all NFL and pro football-related topics, including fantasy football.

Moderators: Capologist, dirtybirdnw, thescout

User avatar
ridethemattrain
All-Pro
All-Pro
Posts: 711
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:54 pm
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Contact:

Potential landing spots for Sanchez

Postby ridethemattrain » Mon Mar 24, 2014 10:28 am

please. no.

March, 24, 2014
9:26 AM ET

By Tom Carpenter | ESPN.com

Now that the New York Jets have officially released QB Mark Sanchez, he can sign with any team he chooses. Despite his ups and downs as a starting quarterback, Sanchez should draw a fair amount of interest; not as a starter, but as someone who has the potential to be a quality backup.

Here are six teams that could use a player of that description: • St. Louis Rams: This is the most logical landing spot. To begin with, coach Jeff Fisher told USAToday.com that he is interested in Sanchez. "I'd say that there is interest. I can't say how much. But there certainly would be interest," Fisher said Sunday. "I don't have a backup with experience on the roster right now." Furthermore, Sanchez had his best years when current Rams OC Brian Schottenheimer was the Jets OC. Plus, starter Sam Bradford is recovering from reconstructive knee surgery.

• Buffalo Bills: This could be a particularly intriguing spot for Sanchez, because there remain questions about whether EJ Manuel is the long-term answer at quarterback there. Plus, Manuel missed six games due to injury as a rookie, so there are health concerns with their starter. Sanchez may also like the idea of staying in the AFC East to have a shot at competing with the Jets a couple of times a year.

• Chicago Bears: Starting QB Jay Cutler is prone to injury and they need a replacement for Josh McCown, who bolted for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers as a free agent. There is a connection here, too, because current Bears QBs coach Matt Cavanaugh was in the same position with the Jets for the first four seasons of Sanchez's NFL career.

• Cleveland Browns: After missing out on Matt Schaub, the buzz is that they will turn to Rex Grossman, but they could consider Sanchez to pair with Brian Hoyer while they bring a rookie up to speed. Although they were on opposite sides of the field, Sanchez was with the Jets when Browns coach Mike Pettine was their defensive coordinator.

• Arizona Cardinals: Carson Palmer is 34 years old and is backed up be the likes of Drew Stanton and Ryan Lindley. Sanchez may not have the ideal arm strength for coach Bruce Arians deep-ball system, but the Cards could be intrigued by having a veteran like Sanchez backing up Palmer.

• Seattle Seahawks: This seems like a long shot, since they re-upped backup Tarvaris Jackson, who seems like a better fit as a Russell Wilson understudy, but maybe Sanchez's USC coach, Pete Carroll, would find a way to make it work.

• Pure backup roles: If the jobs that might give him a good shot at starting soon don't pan out and he would be willing to accept a job as a genuine backup, the San Francisco 49ers, Kansas City Chiefs, Philadelphia Eagles, Baltimore Ravens, Atlanta Falcons, Green Bay Packers and Detroit Lions are among the teams that may see Sanchez as an upgrade over their current reserve quarterbacks.
Brian Westbrook taking a knee cost me the Fantasy Football championship!!

RobertAP
Superstar
Superstar
Posts: 4502
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 1:15 pm

Re: Potential landing spots for Sanchez

Postby RobertAP » Mon Mar 24, 2014 11:16 am

Yeah, if we brought him in, his nickname would be Dirty Sanchez, (Dirty birds) and we can't have that.

User avatar
fun gus
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
Posts: 5301
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:32 am

Re: Potential landing spots for Sanchez

Postby fun gus » Mon Mar 24, 2014 12:59 pm

just as an aside, what do you think the reasons for his failure as a starter stem from? Strictly a lack of talent issue, or confidence? Or: do you think things might have turned out differently if they didn't start him his rookie season, and had him 'sit' like back in the day? :?:

Or, just sh*tty luck all along?
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"

User avatar
ridethemattrain
All-Pro
All-Pro
Posts: 711
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 6:54 pm
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Contact:

Re: Potential landing spots for Sanchez

Postby ridethemattrain » Mon Mar 24, 2014 9:57 pm

Well Pete Carroll said Sanchez needed another year of college before he left...

FWIW, I think he came in, had a good run, and the team as a whole got overconfident. After the wheels fell off, it exposed how bad that team (and coaching) really was. I don't think it would have mattered. He always seemed average, at best, to me. He had a good supporting cast in college, and a decent one his first couple years. As a difference maker, he just doesn't seem to have the "it" factor.

He looks to be headed to Philly. So Jets get Vick, and Eagles get Sanchez. Jets - 1 Eagles - 0
Brian Westbrook taking a knee cost me the Fantasy Football championship!!

User avatar
Pudge
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Posts: 26396
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 1:03 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Potential landing spots for Sanchez

Postby Pudge » Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:03 am

Accuracy and decision making have consistently been problems for Sanchez in the pros.
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.

User avatar
fun gus
Draught Guru
Draught Guru
Posts: 5301
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:32 am

Re: Potential landing spots for Sanchez

Postby fun gus » Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:08 am

Pudge wrote:Accuracy and decision making have consistently been problems for Sanchez in the pros.



do you think if he had sat a year it would have made a difference?
"what if there were no hypothetical situations?"

AngryJohnny51
Superstar
Superstar
Posts: 3334
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:31 pm

Re: Potential landing spots for Sanchez

Postby AngryJohnny51 » Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:49 am

I'm of the opinion that Sanchez just isn't that good. Talent wise or between the ears.

User avatar
Yulin
All-Pro
All-Pro
Posts: 510
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 5:07 pm

Re: Potential landing spots for Sanchez

Postby Yulin » Tue Mar 25, 2014 2:47 pm

fun gus wrote:
Pudge wrote:Accuracy and decision making have consistently been problems for Sanchez in the pros.



do you think if he had sat a year it would have made a difference?


Yes, I do. How much of a difference is a bigger question. My answer would be it would have made a difference, but not enough to make him a good starting QB.
~Yulin

User avatar
Pudge
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Posts: 26396
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 1:03 pm
Location: North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Potential landing spots for Sanchez

Postby Pudge » Thu Mar 27, 2014 3:45 am

fun gus wrote:
Pudge wrote:Accuracy and decision making have consistently been problems for Sanchez in the pros.



do you think if he had sat a year it would have made a difference?

Absolutely. Would it have meant his career path would've gone along the same lines as Matt Ryan's? No.

But remember being a rookie quarterback is hard. Yes, more guys have success in recent history but I believe that's because coaches do a better job managing guys.

Think over the last decade where we've seen rookie QBs do well. Roethlisberger, Flacco, Wilson played in run-first offenses with very strong defenses. Ryan, Newton, Griffin, Bradford played on run-first teams that took pressure off them to facilitate offense (although that isn't completely case with Cam) Luck is the lone guy that played well and had a s***ty supporting cast. And remember people said he threw too many picks and had something like a 54% completion rate, so people weren't crowning him by any means.

Point is, playing the position is harder than perceived. Coupled that with being a rookie, still adjusting to the speed of the defenses and info you gotta process in a much shorter amount of time, brand new system/scheme likely with concepts you're seeing for the first time, plus dealing with the pressure of being the guy, and off-field stuff like re-settling your family...teams are really setting up these guys to fail.

The guys that really excel are rarer than guys think. And giving a guy a year to get more comfortable with all the above things, and not be learning a brand new system on the fly HAS TO BE beneficial. Hell, six weeks would suffice (see Glennon, Mike)

Will that make him good? No, but it will certainly make him better.
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Return to “The Huddle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest