If that's all it takes to convince you that he "outplayed" those guys, then go for it. I wonder though, how Sanchez would have done if he had to play against the Jets defense like Brady, Manning and Palmer. Palmer only had one NFL WR and one hand in that game. Brady had no running game and a pedestrian group of WRs. How would Sanchez do vs competent/good stop units if he had to play with no running game and a crappy WR corps? I think anyone who watched the Fins this year can answer that one.
As it has always been, you just have to pass more efficiently than your opponents. You can win the odd game here and there on the strength of some other facet of the game, but over the long haul, you win by passing more efficiently than your opponents. That means you can win with a Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson, but you better have a good enough pass defense that makes your opposing QBs something less than Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson. You can win with a poor defense if you have a Peyton Manning on your side and the net outcome is that the opposing QBs are less than Peyton Manning.
The Jets defense is average at best. I don't care what the stats say. I watched them play every game of the season. Palmer's team went 10-6 during the year and had a great rushing attack. Benson went for 169 yards in that playoff game. Brady, his lack of a running game, and pedestrian WR's went 14-2, including a complete pasting of the Jets during the regular season. I am not saying Sanchez is as good as Brady. He's not even in the same stratospere. But he outplayed him in the playoff game. I understand the Sanchez hate. If he does well, it's because he has an all world team around him (by the way, where did NE's rushing rank end up compared to NY's?). And when he does bad, it's because he sucks. I get it.
The key is not the overall defense, it's the pass defense. The Jet's pass defense was ranked 6th overall by passer rating and tied for 5th in YPA.
We could have also drafted Alex Smith instead of Ronnie Brown and still wouldn't have made the playoffs
And as someone who watched them play week in and week out, I can say their pass defense was very suspect.
I think fans are sometimes too close to see how their team compares to the rest of the league (both good and bad).
The ol' saying is true then. "You can lead a horse to water..." Anyhow, BB, you're one of the few cool Jets fans I've ever met. Let's just agree to disagree....about most everything.
1. NE - Monday night game - Brady tears them a new a-hole. 2. Houston - gave up a ton of points through the air in the 4th quarter, almost losing the game. 3. Browns - let Colt McCoy drive the field and tie the game with time running out. 4. Miami - Henne passed for over 300. NY lets Miami drive down inside the 10 with time running out. 5. Lions - Stafford passes with ease. 6. Vikings - Farve lights them up in the second half. 7. Bears - Culter posts a QBR of 104 and throws for 215 on 13 completions. All I know is that watched a team that gave up big completion after big completion, and had little to no pass rush.
Man GTFOH, there's no "hate" for Sanchez. I give credit where its due, period. You can watch as many Jet games as you want, but until you "see" the game, until you know what it is you're watching, you'll continue to be confused. The Jets' D is average at best? LOL. They completely took Brady apart, and they held Manning in check also. B/c they finally stopped being macho and played softer coverages instead of trying to force the issue like they did in the 45-3 game and the AFCCG game last year. The Jets' pass rush is bad, one of the worst, but the rush defense and the secondary are top of the line, and they carry Sanchez way more often than he carries them.
So please post your analysis of the 2010 Jets defense. You think it was top notch? Trade Maimi's defense for it? Just curious.
Since we're hiding behind selective memory now, How'd they do vs Aaron Rodgers? 2nd half of Week 2 vs Brady? 2nd game vs Henne? Both games vs Buffalo? The Ravens in Week 1? Anyone can make some half assed list, gotta do better than around here .
Rex's scheme confused Brady - they didn't beat him with talent. And if holding Manning in check means 18/26 225 1/0 108.7 QBR, then I guess they did.
GB and MIA were played in miserable waether conditions. Week 2 vs NE, Moss was a huge distraction in the 2nd half. Buffalo sucks. Ravens passing offense is nothing to write home about. NY's passing defense was not as good as it was rated.
My analysis is that they were ranked 6th in the league and good enough to get to the AFCCG. Do you need more? As for trading them for Miami's 14th ranked defense? Last season I would have.
They smacked Brady around like a little school girl. Anytime you hold Manning to less than 300 yards and only 1 TD you've kept him in check.
Ah, I see the problem. You think that, by promoting the importance of the quarterback, it means that the other players on the team and their importance becomes diminished. Not true at all. A quarterback can’t do anything without adequate offensive line blocking, needs competent receivers to throw to, benefits a good running game, and has his life made easier by a reliable defense. The issue is, you can have all of that—the defense, the rushing game, the receivers, the blocking—and without quality quarterback play, none of it matters. Look at the Bengals: above-average defense, above-average rushing game, solid but not spectacular offensive line, well-stocked group of receivers… but Carson Palmer plays poorly in key spots, and the Bengals go 4-12. By saying the QB is by far and away the most important thing to have, it doesn’t exclude or diminish the need for quality players at other positions. It’s just that you’re never going to win anything if your quarterback is bad, no matter how good your defense is, or no matter the talent you have at running back. Have the Miami Dolphins taught us nothing? We’ve had the rushing game in Ricky Williams, the defense headlined by Jason Taylor and Zach Thomas, but the quarterback position was manned by a rotating group of clowns, and so the Dolphins went nowhere year in and year out. We of all fanbases should be most crucially aware of the importance of the quarterback. Instead we’re up to our old tricks, saying the QB position is overrated and if we just had Mark Ingram or Von Miller or Patrick Willis, we’d be good. Sorry, but no. Get the quarterback first. Then worry about the other positions.
That isn't enough information to draw a conclusion. You would also need to know how good the rest of the league was against the pass. When you add in that information, you find that only eight teams were able to keep their opponent's pass rating below 80 and the Jets were one of them. I agree that the Jets pass rush was sub par, but they also blitzed better than most and had a better secondary than most (especially when Leonhard was healthy). The outcome of that is they were better than most of the league against the pass.
I agree the scheme played a big role, I said as much. Rex played more coverage and less man/blitz looks, the Pats werent able to figure it out in time. I credit the defense for having a good plan and executing it. Having Revis and Cromartie allows a tremendous amount of flexibility in terms of doubling TEs and slot Wrs, the guys Brady made a killing throwing to all year. Having a front that can contain the run with only 1 or 2 DL on the field was huge also. I don't think you're giving your team enough credit. The Jets have a damn good staff on both sides of the ball, good talent as well. Its no accident that they have done well, but's not b/c of the QB. He's still more a liability than an asset at this point, IMO.
i think its a trade-off of sorts .... the more dominant the D is, the 'less franchise' the QB needs to be. Don't get me wrong, the general odds of winning with a Dilfer or Johnson are long .... but don't necessarily have to have a 'franchise QB' to get the job done .....
The thread was meant for some good discussion about QB's in general, and there have been many good points on both sides made. As the question mark in the title suggests, I had no set opinion either way. Most of the posts have provided food for thought, which is a good thing. I'm wondering if D's have caught up with the "pass happy" league we've seen in recent history. Although our QB situation is implied to a degree, in no way do I want to see another Henne thread take over.
If you look at all 45 Super Bowls and concentrate on their defense you will find only 3 instances where a non-dominating defense won the Super Bowl. (And one of those defense shut down the 18-0 patriots offense so they seem to be better than they played during the regular season) However, there are many examples of average to below average QB's winning one.