OSheaman posted:

Mel Mudkiper posted:

I notice you ignored the 4 TOs

Toaster Beef posted:

the interceptions come because he's forcing the ball in ways he'd never be forcing it if things were looking even remotely competitive

cucka posted:

So it's his fault he's not 7 feet tall?

I mean, yeah, after that, he shoulda fell on the ball, but when the long snapper decides to pull a Favre and aim one for the upper deck, what are you gonna do?

FuriousxGeorge posted:

The game was a rout by the end of the first quarter through no fault of his own. You put him in a shootout mode against Aaron Rodgers and it's not gonna be a great result. Maybe focus more of your attention on Bradley Fletcher who didn't even look like he belongs in the NFL? The front seven that couldn't get close to Rodgers? On the special teams that gave up a punt return even with a gunner in perfect position to make the stop? The receivers who dropped balls that hit them on the hand? The line that gave Sanchez zero chance on some of those sacks? It was a an all-phases disaster, Sanchez was not gonna save it and Foles wouldn't have either.

Febreeze posted:

Lets just agree that crowning Sanchez after one good game against a poo poo team was as dumb as crowning Kirk Cousins after one good game against a poo poo team.

The Packers were very likely to beat the Eagles and Sanchez was the backup for a reason. He might be okay as of yet.

nrr posted:

Breaking news, eagles use time machine to start Matt Barkley against the packers earlier today and win 54-53!

Bort Bortles posted:

40-39 would be more believable (because Barkley would not have contributed 14 points directly to the other team).

Lasagna Pilot posted:

The Eagles should totally fire Chip Kelly for that performance

Retail Slave posted:

I missed a large part of the game. Who was worse... Cutler last week or Sanchez this week?

Fenrir posted:

poo poo, he'd have given the Packers at least 20. So, 59-20?

Badfinger posted:

I would have Appreciated if the officials had thrown any flags for the times that Mark Sanchez was hit helmet to helmet before the game was horrendously out of reach.

Otherwise, typical day in the office for ol' Mark.

Bip Roberts posted:

It's too bad Sanchez is on such a garbage team yet again.

quote:

One week, Mark Sanchez is the punchline to an old joke. The next, he's the toast of Philadelphia, the guy everybody knew should have started the season opener instead of that detestable, washed-up Nick Foles (Pro Bowl participant last year, left the field with the lead in the fourth quarter of a playoff game, 5-2 as a full-game starter this year).

Now, Sanchez has been reSanchezified into the silly barrel. Drew Stanton is the hero now. Or maybe it's Ryan Mallett. Or Shaun Hill. Until next week.

It's dizzying. It's nauseating. It's ridiculous. The bipolar way we talk about quarterbacks—all-time smash this week, all-time trash next week—is getting worse. It's not a fun, pulpy soap opera anymore; it's attention-deficit theater. Trying to have a real discussion about the journeyman quarterbacks who are going to shape this year's playoff race is like trying to have an intelligent conversation at a rave.

Sanchez was terrible in a 53-20 Eagles loss to the Packers. He overthrew open receivers, tossed a pair of interceptions (one into Julius Peppers' belly) and lost two fumbles, comically flailing as he chased one aborted snap like he was trying to pick up a 20-dollar bill on a fishing line.

"Mark Sanchez looked terrible" is not a sentence that I expected to write in the opening of an NFL roundup in 2014; it's like writing, "The ocean looks wet." But Sanchez had a pretty good game (two touchdowns, a modest 54.1 percent completion rate) against the Panthers on Monday night and a pretty good game (two touchdowns, two interceptions) in a relief win against the Texans the week prior.

"Pretty good" is not a recognized category of quarterback performance anymore, so Sanchez's two wins instantly propelled him back into the national spotlight.

Hangover Headquarters is located in the Philadelphia area, so I expected a little Sanchez is so awesome over-exuberance from the local fans, who love adding to the city's Donovick Cunningjawshoying quarterback scrap heap. But I had several conversations with everyone from my fellow basketball dads to the hosts of talk radio shows from other cities last week that went something like this:

So, Mike, what is Mark Sanchez bringing to the Eagles offense that Nick Foles couldn't?

Well, Sanchez has a non-broken collarbone. That's a considerable advantage over Foles right now. He had also gone nearly two weeks without a two-interception game. But given a defensive touchdown, a special teams touchdown, two defensive turnovers to set up short drives and an opponent like the Panthers that surrounds its quarterback with Lilliputians, Foles probably could have squeezed out a win.

A trouncing at the hands of the Packers placed Sanchez right back in butt-fumble territory. A win over the Titans next week will place him in a brief holding pattern before a Thanksgiving game in Dallas, which will either make him Philadelphia's greatest hero since Dave Schultz or lead to a public draw-and-quartering on Broad Street.

Is this trip really necessary? Sanchez is a backup quarterback like any other: good enough to lead his team past a bad opponent, not good enough to lead them to victory on the road against a much better opponent.

He has done nothing surprising since taking over for Foles, yet we made the Eagles story (good team with some obvious flaws), the Packers story (great team, great quarterback, great home-field advantage) and the Panthers story (Cam Newton and a bunch of Revolutionary War re-enactors) into yet another silly quarterback rise-and-fall tale.

OSheaman posted:

Chilichimp posted:

Look at the score in that gif, look at the quarter. Falling on that ball dials up 3rd and 18, down 13 to 46 with 10 minutes left in the game against an opponent that is just sacking you all day. Trying to pick-up the ball and throw it away or make a pass was absolutely the correct decision, as it was the only hope the team had. Every possession mattered at that point.

The ball being picked up and returned for a TD didn't change anything that hadn't already been stated in the three previous quarters.

Monkeycheese posted:

not being able to handle a slightly off target shotgun snap is totally on the QB regardless of game situation