DRAFT 1.1 QB Matthew Stafford

[belcherboy]

Originally Posted by cruzer1

I've been saying this about Stafford/Sanchez way before the draft. If you can't tell there is a talent difference here, then don't bother.

I agree the potential is much higher for Stafford because of his natural ability, but I'm not so sure I would say "he's not as good as Stafford, and never will be." Sanchez has one distinct advantage over Stafford, experience. Sanchez played a full season, and has 3 playoff games under his belt. He has played some of the best NFL teams, and was able to produce under pressure. We'll see if Stafford can do the same in upcoming years.

People who often talk in absolutes, have a history of bad predictions. I hope you are correct in your prediction of Stafford, but I'm thinking that Sanchez vs. Stafford is a crap shoot right now. Stafford has the advantage of natural abilities, and Sanchez has the experience factor. Both have looked pretty terrible this last year, and I wouldn't label one as better than the other so far.

[cruzer1]

Originally Posted by DaBishop

Is there a particular reason you have to be such a...well, you know...about this?

I know you clearly think your talent evaluation skills are unparalleled and that if a QB was more highly touted out of college then that's the end of the discussion, but facts tend to tell different stories. Your hard-on for his arm strength makes you pretty blind to the evidence that neither player has looked much better than the either this year, until the post-season where Sanchez has clearly shown that at this point he's further along.

Kind of like saying Tim Wakefield is better than Felix Hernandez. Clearly on the better team.

[belcherboy]

Originally Posted by cruzer1

Kind of like saying Tim Wakefield is better than Felix Hernandez. Clearly on the better team.

That doesn't make sense. You are going to compare a 23 year old with a 43 year old?

[GuitarGod19]

Interesting stat, when Mark had to throw 20 or more times in the regular season, their record is 3-7 and they are 6-0 when he throws less than 20 times...

This debate is tiring, those who think Sanchez is superior to Stafford simply can't grasp the concept that football is a TEAM sport and that he has a much better team. He's not better, it's just a fact. They have 5 pro bowlers, 3 of which are on the O-line and he has ever advantage in the world. Idk if he has to play outside or not...that's just a weak argument.

[belcherboy]

Originally Posted by GuitarGod19

Interesting stat, when Mark had to throw 20 or more times in the regular season, their record is 3-7 and they are 6-0 when he throws less than 20 times...

This debate is tiring, those who think Sanchez is superior to Stafford simply can't grasp the concept that football is a TEAM sport and that he has a much better team. He's not better, it's just a fact. They have 5 pro bowlers, 3 of which are on the O-line and he has ever advantage in the world. Idk if he has to play outside or not...that's just a weak argument.

I still think it is debatable. Stafford played in 10 games, Sanchez played in 18 games. I'm still thinking that both were about equal, but it is very difficult to compare with such a difference in games played.

If you throw out their best and worst game, it definitely favors Sanchez. If you don't, it keeps Stafford near Sanchez.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by GuitarGod19

Interesting stat, when Mark had to throw 20 or more times in the regular season, their record is 3-7 and they are 6-0 when he throws less than 20 times...

This debate is tiring, those who think Sanchez is superior to Stafford simply can't grasp the concept that football is a TEAM sport and that he has a much better team. He's not better, it's just a fact. They have 5 pro bowlers, 3 of which are on the O-line and he has ever advantage in the world. Idk if he has to play outside or not...that's just a weak argument.

there is only one person on this board who has said "Sanchez is superior to Stafford" and he's a Jets fan, so I would expect that from him.

The rest of us just think the topic is debateable, and there is no clear cut obvious choice.

In reality, Bishop is taking the opposite side of about 10 of you Stafford guys. It's YOU who are being completely unreasonable.

If you think it's a "fact" that Stafford is better than Sanchez, you need to learn the definition of "fact" and "opinion." It's a very reasonable opinion to think that Stafford is better; however, for anyone who knows football and uses the English language on a regular basis, it's obviously not a "fact."

[GuitarGod19]

Originally Posted by belcherboy

I still think it is debatable. Stafford played in 10 games, Sanchez played in 18 games. I'm still thinking that both were about equal, but it is very difficult to compare with such a difference in games played.

If you throw out their best and worst game, it definitely favors Sanchez. If you don't, it keeps Stafford near Sanchez.

That's a bad way of judging how good a player is. Games played had nothing to do with it either, injury and teams laying down before the playoffs had something to do with it though. Doesn't help that Stafford's first two games as a pro were against Minnesota and New Orleans.

THIS is what bothers me, it's like people wont even acknowledge that Sanchez having a better team has a direct effect on him having an advantage. The Lions were always down in games and thus had to throw to try and make up the points, they became one dimensional and of course their opponents knew what was coming. They knew we were passing, they could pin their ears back in a pass rush, and drop 7 into coverage...that stacks the chips against ANY QB let alone a rookie. I feel like I'm talking to people that don't understand the foundation of football and game planning...

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by belcherboy

That doesn't make sense. You are going to compare a 23 year old with a 43 year old?

His comparison is Sanchez has no arm and Stafford has a golden gun.

IMO, Sanchez's "lack" of arm strength is overblown. He might not be as strong as Stafford, but he's not Brian Griese. Secondly, arm strength alone does not make one a great QB. If it were, Jay Cutler would have been the best QB in the NFL last year.

[GuitarGod19]

Originally Posted by Buddha

there is only one person on this board who has said "Sanchez is superior to Stafford" and he's a Jets fan, so I would expect that from him.

The rest of us just think the topic is debateable, and there is no clear cut obvious choice.

In reality, Bishop is taking the opposite side of about 10 of you Stafford guys. It's YOU who are being completely unreasonable.

If you think it's a "fact" that Stafford is better than Sanchez, you need to learn the definition of "fact" and "opinion." It's a very reasonable opinion to think that Stafford is better; however, for anyone who knows football and uses the English language on a regular basis, it's obviously not a "fact."

It's my opinion that Stafford has shown that he has the ability to be the best QB we've ever had. It's a fact that Sanchez isn't better than Stafford, there simply hasn't been enough time to make that argument. It's my fandom that makes me want to believe Stafford is better and he's on the other end in the Jets/Sanchez camp...I get that. But to come and say he's better because his team went further is a BS argument and I'm gonna call him out on it every time.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by GuitarGod19

THIS is what bothers me, it's like people wont even acknowledge that Sanchez having a better team has a direct effect on him having an advantage.

Everyone has ackowledged this. It's a matter of how much importance you want to place on it and what you think it means for the future.

Having a more limited role on a better team doesn't mean you are a worse quarterback. Likewise, performing well in that limited role doesn't mean you're a better QB.

Quite frankly, most of us being labeled as "Stafford haters" are being quite reasonable. The extremists are coming from the Stafford fans and one lone Jets fan who is sticking up for his man against an onslaught of Stafford fans.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by GuitarGod19

It's my opinion that Stafford has shown that he has the ability to be the best QB we've ever had.

With all due respect, I think we both know that's not a high bar to reach...

It's a fact that Sanchez isn't better than Stafford, there simply hasn't been enough time to make that argument.

It's obviously not a fact. It's an opinion that may well turn out to be true, but there are plenty of reasons to say that sanchez was better last year, most of which have already been argued on this thread.

But to come and say he's better because his team went further is a BS argument and I'm gonna call him out on it every time.

I think he's said it was more than just that.

[GuitarGod19]

Originally Posted by Buddha

With all due respect, I think we both know that's not a high bar to reach...

It's a conservative, yet optimistic, goal.

It's obviously not a fact. It's an opinion that may well turn out to be true, but there are plenty of reasons to say that sanchez was better last year, most of which have already been argued on this thread.

It's a fact that those "he's better" statements are opinion.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by GuitarGod19

It's a conservative, yet optimistic, goal.

I agree.

It's a fact that those "he's better" statements are opinion.

Yup. From either side.

[cruzer1]

Originally Posted by belcherboy

I agree the potential is much higher for Stafford because of his natural ability, but I'm not so sure I would say "he's not as good as Stafford, and never will be." Sanchez has one distinct advantage over Stafford, experience. Sanchez played a full season, and has 3 playoff games under his belt. He has played some of the best NFL teams, and was able to produce under pressure. We'll see if Stafford can do the same in upcoming years.

People who often talk in absolutes, have a history of bad predictions. I hope you are correct in your prediction of Stafford, but I'm thinking that Sanchez vs. Stafford is a crap shoot right now. Stafford has the advantage of natural abilities, and Sanchez has the experience factor. Both have looked pretty terrible this last year, and I wouldn't label one as better than the other so far.

It's not a prediction, it's a talent assessment; which goes with my Wakefield/Felix comment. Felix has more talent, but Wakefield plays for a better team. He gets more runs, etc.

[Mr. Bigglesworth]

Originally Posted by cruzer1

It's not a prediction, it's a talent assessment; which goes with my Wakefield/Felix comment. Felix has more talent, but Wakefield plays for a better team. He gets more runs, etc.

A) You claimed Sanchez is not better, nor will he ever be better than Stafford, which is debatable on the first point and you have no way of knowing on the second.

Originally Posted by cruzer1

And he's [Sanchez is] not as good as Stafford, and never will be.

B) Even if your point was that Stafford has more talent than Sanchez (something I don't think was clearly stated, but whatever), having more talent doesn't guarantee success, nor does it mean something like an injury or illness couldn't derail Stafford's career.

C) I think the Wakefield / Hernandez analogy is a poor one. The talent differential between Stafford and Sanchez is nowhere near the talent differential between Hernandez and Wakefield, IMHO.

[belcherboy]

Originally Posted by cruzer1

It's not a prediction, it's a talent assessment; which goes with my Wakefield/Felix comment. Felix has more talent, but Wakefield plays for a better team. He gets more runs, etc.

I remember the same thing being said about Jeff George.

Talent is an important part of it, but it doesn't guarantee that "[Sanchez is] not as good as Stafford, and never will be". Sanchez proved he can be a pretty darn good QB in the playoffs this year. It doesn't guarantee future success, but he has won some high pressure games. No doubt his team played a large role, but the guy does deserve some respect. He proved he belongs in the NFL in those playoff games IMO.

You are comparing a guy that is pretty much in the last few years of his pro career to someone that is one of the top pitchers under the age of 25. I don't think the comparison could be any worse.

[GREEAR10]

lol...Sanchez threw for more picks per pass last year in the regular season in a MUCHH more conservative offense. Stafford definitely looked better last year, even with an LOLtastic supporting cast. Imagine if he was working with thebest D and rungame in the league

[belcherboy]

Originally Posted by GREEAR10

lol...Sanchez threw for more picks per pass last year in the regular season in a MUCHH more conservative offense. Stafford definitely looked better last year, even with an LOLtastic supporting cast. Imagine if he was working with thebest D and rungame in the league

Sanchez also played 8 more games than Stafford. 8 MORE NFL games is A LOT on the body.

I disagree that Stafford "definitely" looked better than Sanchez did last year. If Stafford had played 16 games, and kept his per game stats, he probably would have had more INT's than just about any QB in NFL history for one season. He most likely would have had the lowest QB rating for any QB that played an entire season.

Personally, I think the Stafford vs. Sanchez comparisons are in Sanchez favor right now. He's won a few big games, and IMO, his playoff performances proved he belongs in the NFL. It doesn't guarantee future success, but at least he has some real accomplishments. Stafford has all the potential, but really had a terrible season, especially given the fact he only played in 10 games.

If we had a re-do of the draft again, I still take Stafford over Sanchez, but the margin between the two is A LOT smaller in my book. Hopefully they can build a team around Stafford in the next few drafts so he doesn't have to carry as much of the burden of the offense in the future.

[GREEAR10]

he's won a few big games? didn't know throwin 21 times for 100yds qualified as winning the game for your team lol.

[belcherboy]

Originally Posted by GREEAR10

he's won a few big games? didn't know throwin 21 times for 100yds qualified as winning the game for your team lol.

Yeah, that was a bad game. Of course the 139.4 QB rating against Cincy, and the 257 passing yards against Indy could be labeled as big games. At least I would label those two playoff games as big games for a rookie. I mean at least compared to any of Staffords big games.

I can now see why you say Stafford has "definitely" had a better season than Sanchez!

[DaBishop]

Originally Posted by cruzer1

Kind of like saying Tim Wakefield is better than Felix Hernandez. Clearly on the better team.

a ludicrous comparison as the only person that has ever gone on record(other than our resident homer Cruzer1) as saying Sanchez has poor arm strength is Todd McShay. Just about every other scouting report lists him with above-average arm strength. You must be really looking forward to the day that the Lions trade for Jamarcus Russell.

Originally Posted by GuitarGod19

That's a bad way of judging how good a player is. Games played had nothing to do with it either, injury and teams laying down before the playoffs had something to do with it though. Doesn't help that Stafford's first two games as a pro were against Minnesota and New Orleans.

Why not? Every rookie tends to hit a rookie wall where the grind of a full NFL season starts taking it's toll on players not used to it. Sanchez clearly hit it as his second half performance took a real hit after week 8 (right around the time a college season would be winding down. Stafford never had to go through that. One thing I keep hearing from some of you is how had he been able to play the whole season he'd only get better and his stats would look just like Peyton Mannings rookie season. No mention of the fact that his final two games his completion percentage was 45% while he threw 2 TD's and 6 INT's. I'm not sure that's showing that remarkable improvement you're talking about. Every QB's first lesson is to take care of the ball. The fact that Stafford was exceedingly careless with the ball game after game, showing a complete lack of learning any lessons, makes me baffled that you folks continue to make the argument that had he played more this argument would be weighted even further towards your camp.

Originally Posted by GuitarGod19

It's my opinion that Stafford has shown that he has the ability to be the best QB we've ever had. It's a fact that Sanchez isn't better than Stafford, there simply hasn't been enough time to make that argument. It's my fandom that makes me want to believe Stafford is better and he's on the other end in the Jets/Sanchez camp...I get that. But to come and say he's better because his team went further is a BS argument and I'm gonna call him out on it every time.

I am not going to re-iterate all my points on why I'm quite happy the Jets got Sanchez over Stafford. However, the only point in fact that I've never made is that Sanchez is better because the Jets have won more games. I have however pointed towards how he's improved as the season has gone on, had far more turnover free performances, and most recently shown a penchant for playing his best on the biggest stages.

Originally Posted by GREEAR10

lol...Sanchez threw for more picks per pass last year in the regular season in a MUCHH more conservative offense. Stafford definitely looked better last year, even with an LOLtastic supporting cast. Imagine if he was working with thebest D and rungame in the league

For such a conservative offense, his YPA are far higher then Staffords and if you include the playoffs it gets even worse.

Sanchez has the intangibles that Stafford just doesn't. He's more accurate, more of a winner and less turnover prone. Stafford has a stronger arm and looks like he'll be able to dominate the absolute worst D's in the league to pad his stats though, so you got that going for you.

[GREEAR10]

He has the intangibles that Stafford doesn't....wtf????????? Did you not listen to Stafford on MIC'd up during the Browns game. The dude has it all.

lmaooooooooooooo @ less turnover prone. Yet again bro, he had more picks per pass attempts in a more conservative offense.

[DaBishop]

Originally Posted by GREEAR10

He has the intangibles that Stafford doesn't....wtf????????? Did you not listen to Stafford on MIC'd up during the Browns game. The dude has it all.

Yes, that was nice...unfortunately there's more to the word intangibles then a good MIC'd up moment.

Originally Posted by GREEAR10

lmaooooooooooooo @ less turnover prone. Yet again bro, he had more picks per pass attempts in a more conservative offense.

Stafford had 2 games without a turnover(20%), Sanchez had 7(46%). Stafford was 6 for 40 for passes thrown over 20 yards, Sanchez was 9-31. Sanchez is less turnover prone, and a more accurate down field passer.

The one fact that so many of you blindly homerific fans fall to see is that if you take away that Cleveland game, Stafford could have had one of the worst seasons any QB has ever had.

[Johnny Mac]

Originally Posted by DaBishop

Stafford had 2 games without a turnover(20%), Sanchez had 7(46%). Stafford was 6 for 40 for passes thrown over 20 yards, Sanchez was 9-31. Sanchez is less turnover prone, and a more accurate down field passer.
.

But games I saw Stafford was throwing downfield to a double covered Calvin Johnson because the secondary did not bite the play fake because they could stop the Lions run without bringing guys up. Sanchez was throwing to open guys down the field because the secondary was playing up against the run (see Braylon TD in playoffs)

[cruzer1]

Originally Posted by Johnny Mac

But games I saw Stafford was throwing downfield to a double covered Calvin Johnson because the secondary did not bite the play fake because the could stop the Lions run without bringing guys up. Sanchez was throwing to open guys down the field because the secondary was playing up against the run (see Braylon TD in playoffs)

We're blind, we're not supposed to see the facts.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by Johnny Mac

But games I saw Stafford was throwing downfield to a double covered Calvin Johnson because the secondary did not bite the play fake because they could stop the Lions run without bringing guys up. Sanchez was throwing to open guys down the field because the secondary was playing up against the run (see Braylon TD in playoffs)

I think there is a lot of speculation in your post more than actual facts. First, I assume you didn't watch all the Jets games (or even a few of them). Second, even if you did, none of us can see downfield on television, none of us have the coach's tapes, and none of us can watch everything that is going on during the play to make an educated statement as to what Stafford did as to what sanchez did. Maybe Sanchez looked downfield, saw that the man was covered, and instead went short with the ball instead of just throwing it up for grabs? I doubt any of us dissected enough tape to TRULY be able to say.

And, as has been pointed out by many around here, johnson was much better than any receiver than Edwards or any other receiver the Jets had, doesn't that play into it? And the same folks who are saying how the Lions couldn't run the ball are saying that Jeff Backus deserved pro bowl votes this year. which is it? Either Stafford had such a horrible year because he had a horrible team around him, or he just wasn't very good with the talent around him that they had.

Saying Stafford didn't play all that well last year is no crime. You can admit it and still be a Lions fan.

[belcherboy]

Originally Posted by Johnny Mac

But games I saw Stafford was throwing downfield to a double covered Calvin Johnson because the secondary did not bite the play fake because they could stop the Lions run without bringing guys up. Sanchez was throwing to open guys down the field because the secondary was playing up against the run (see Braylon TD in playoffs)

This is why I say that anyone who says "one is better than the other" is just blindly wanting to believe it. Sanchez played quite a few good teams and had VERY few bad teams on their schedule. Stafford didn't play very many good teams (due to only playing 10 games), but played A LOT of teams with bad records.

Here are the teams with .500 or better records that Sanchez faced:
New Orleans (13-3....Super Bowl team)
Indianapolis (14-2....Super Bowl team)
NE (10-6...playoff team) (twice)
Cincy (10-6....playoff team)
Houston (9-7)
Atlanta (9-7)
Tennessee (8-8...although they were down when they played)
Carolina (8-8)

Losing records that Sanchez played:
Miami (7-9) (twice)
Jacksonville (7-9)
Buffalo (6-10) (twice)
Oakland (5-11)

Playoff games:
Cincy
San Diego
Indy

Now, why is ANYONE too critical of Sanchez after playing that schedule? 18 games, and 12 against teams that were .500 or better. 8 games against playoff teams.


Stafford's games against teams .500 or better:
New Orleans (13-3....Super Bowl team)
Minnesota (12-4...playoff team) (twice)
Cincy (10-6....playoff team)
Green Bay (11-5)
Pittsburgh (9-7)

Teams with losing records:
St. Louis (1-15)
Washington (4-12)
Seattle (5-11)
Cleveland (5-11)

I understand the "better team" argument, but it's not like Sanchez was playing against bad teams. Nearly 70% of Sanchez's games were played against teams with 8 wins or more. 45% of his games were played against playoff teams. Sanchez played ONE game against a team with 5 or less wins. If you go down to 7 wins, it is VERY lopsided in the quality of competition comparison between the two QB's.

In contrast Stafford played 60% of his games against teams with 9 wins or more, and the other 40% were played against teams with 5 or less wins. Stafford played 4 games against teams with 5 or less wins.

Having said that, your team makes a big difference, but I would argue the quality of your competition makes a big difference too. Sanchez had a MUCH tougher road than Stafford (especially given the fact that Stafford played 8 fewer games this year than Sanchez)....fortunately for Sanchez, he had a better team to go down that road with.

I still don't see how Stafford is clearly better, as quite a few have said on here.

[Johnny Mac]

Originally Posted by Buddha

I think there is a lot of speculation in your post more than actual facts. First, I assume you didn't watch all the Jets games (or even a few of them). Second, even if you did, none of us can see downfield on television, none of us have the coach's tapes, and none of us can watch everything that is going on during the play to make an educated statement as to what Stafford did as to what sanchez did. Maybe Sanchez looked downfield, saw that the man was covered, and instead went short with the ball instead of just throwing it up for grabs? I doubt any of us dissected enough tape to TRULY be able to say.

And, as has been pointed out by many around here, johnson was much better than any receiver than Edwards or any other receiver the Jets had, doesn't that play into it? And the same folks who are saying how the Lions couldn't run the ball are saying that Jeff Backus deserved pro bowl votes this year. which is it? Either Stafford had such a horrible year because he had a horrible team around him, or he just wasn't very good with the talent around him that they had.

Saying Stafford didn't play all that well last year is no crime. You can admit it and still be a Lions fan.

I agree, read my posts, I would not call myself a Stafford homer, Im pretty sure in this very thread I said that both he and Sanchez played bad this year, but they were rookies so it was expected. I just dont get the whole Sanchez is better talk, in the games I saw them both play I saw Stafford asked to carry the offense with one solid player around him who was constantly doubled and sometimes tripled and I saw a guy in Sanchez who was asked to hand it off a ton and rely on a great oline and running game and asked to throw it every now and then to guys in single coverage who were open a lot more.

Also CJ >>>> Braylon but Braylon in single coverage > CJ who was basically never less than double covered.

Originally Posted by belcherboy

This is why I say that anyone who says "one is better than the other" is just blindly wanting to believe it.

I completely agree, but lets just say if the draft was re-done today Id still take Stafford over Sanchez, but the next few years should really define them.

[belcherboy]

Originally Posted by Johnny Mac

I completely agree, but lets just say if the draft was re-done today Id still take Stafford over Sanchez, but the next few years should really define them.

I do too, but I think the gap between the two is closer than it was on draft day.

Sanchez was thrown under the bus by his college coach, and I believe his dad. He wasn't expected to do anything this year. The kid proved he belonged, and took the Jets pretty close to a Superbowl. Losing to Indianapolis in a game that he played very good for a rookie QB!

There really is nothing to say that Stafford is clearly better than Sanchez this year, as has been stated by more than a few on here.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by Johnny Mac

I agree, read my posts, I would not call myself a Stafford homer, Im pretty sure in this very thread I said that both he and Sanchez played bad this year, but they were rookies so it was expected. I just dont get the whole Sanchez is better talk, in the games I saw them both play I saw Stafford asked to carry the offense with one solid player around him who was constantly doubled and sometimes tripled and I saw a guy in Sanchez who was asked to hand it off a ton and rely on a great oline and running game and asked to throw it every now and then to guys in single coverage who were open a lot more.

I think you can make a reasonable argument for both of them. There are good arguments for stafford being better and for Sanchez being better.

Again, I would say that simply because Stafford had less talent around him doesn't mean he was better than Sanchez or will be better in the future. Likewise, just because Sanchez won a couple playoff games doesn't mean he will be better.

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by belcherboy

This is why I say that anyone who says "one is better than the other" is just blindly wanting to believe it.

I still don't see how Stafford is clearly better, as quite a few have said on here.

That's because you're a reasonable person.

[itsallgood8989]

I'm a little confused... Why can't we all agree that both QB's have a bright future in the NFL?

[DaBishop]

Originally Posted by Johnny Mac

But games I saw Stafford was throwing downfield to a double covered Calvin Johnson because the secondary did not bite the play fake because they could stop the Lions run without bringing guys up. Sanchez was throwing to open guys down the field because the secondary was playing up against the run (see Braylon TD in playoffs)

Then you don't throw those balls if you can't complete them. That's why he threw so many interceptions because he tried to force the ball to a guy who was double covered most of the time. That's poor decision making. Stafford was 1-24 in the 21-30 yard pass range...that's horrific. If it was because he was throwing into double coverage all the time, well, then I'm not sure how you don't question the decision making.