OT Pete Carroll Wrong About Sanchez
Now that Mark Sanchez has been named the starter for the NY Jets, I wonder if Pete Carroll is ready to admit Sanchez really is ready for the NFL.
Methinks Mr. Carroll was more worried about his QB this year (as well he should be) rather than Mark Sanchez.
August 26th, 2009 at 10:31 AM ^
I don't know enough about Kellen Clemens, but could it be that his competition was just that low? I don't doubt that Sanchez can at least compete at the NFL level, but is he just so good that he's named the starter, or was his competition that weak?
How many teams would he really be listed as a starter on?
August 26th, 2009 at 10:32 AM ^
The Monday Night game? Sanchez looked pretty bad against Baltimore's 1s. He got pick-sixed once and laid another shoulda-been pick six in Ray Lewis' bread basket. Ray was thinking about doing the electric worm in the end zone and forgot the ball.
August 26th, 2009 at 10:39 AM ^
The Ravens D is solid.
August 26th, 2009 at 10:48 AM ^
proved that he can't play against a pro D yet. sanchez would have been better off staying in school one more year.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:12 AM ^
Was he ready? Probably not considering he only had one full year as a starter at USC.
However, I can't blame the guy for seeing the opportunity to be one of the higher rated QBs coming out and taking the money that comes along with being a first round draft pick. If he is smart with his money, he just set himself and his kids up for life. If he would have stayed in college yes, he would have had another year of seasoning. But he would have also risked getting hurt and possibly being drafted lower (I like McCoy and Bradford better than Sanchez).
August 26th, 2009 at 11:47 AM ^
or more, go back in time and see how many QB's that left school early have done well in the NFL. i don't know the exact numbers but i know its not good.
personaly i don't think any of the last 4 U$C QB's are all that good (palmer has been alright in the NFL) they just have been products of really really good teams around them.
August 26th, 2009 at 10:35 AM ^
He hasn't even played in an NFL game yet.
Obviously if he was as fast as Denard, we could just know immediately, but hows about we have this conversation in 2010?
August 26th, 2009 at 10:38 AM ^
Carroll always knew he was NFL-ready. It was obvious from last year's performance. I assume that was part of his propaganda to try and keep the kid around for another year because, as reports have told, USC's QB situation is shaky. Carroll felt slighted and acted kind of childish, spewing out, basically, anti-Sanchez remarks after he announced he was leaving.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:43 AM ^
Or he said it because he coached the kid for 3 years and knew more about his skills than anyone else, and he didn't think he was quite ready to play in the NFL yet.
College football fans are fucking retards.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:48 AM ^
+ 1 for being realistic.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:54 AM ^
Obviously, the NFL scouts (at least in NY) saw something PC did not see. NFL teams are not in the habit of using a first round (#5 pick overall) to select players that are not ready to play in the NFL.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:58 AM ^
have a bad habit of doing it.... andre ware comes to mind... oh wait you said NFL teams, the lions are far from that.
August 26th, 2009 at 12:28 PM ^
Yes they do it all the time. NFL scouts are obsessed more about raw numbers in terms of height/weight/length than actually being NFL ready.
August 26th, 2009 at 10:39 AM ^
And not necessarily mutually exclusive:
(1) Like the OP, I share his thought that PC was probably more annoyed at the prospect of losing Sanchez than he was worried about Sanchez,
(2) FA - Clemens isn't great, but still, he is a 2nd round pick with 3 years of pro experience - beating him out (or beating anyone out at the NFL level) speaks well of Sanchez, but
(3) Agree BB - until Sanchez starts, say, 8 games in the league, too soon to talk about this.
Selfishly, I wish Sanchez had stayed to ring up 40+ at the Shoe... I'm a bit worried OSU's going to find itself with a "signature" win depending on how the QB play at USC shakes out and what magic TP can work on the USC D (hoping, of course, that the first answer is "great QB play" and the second is "none, no magic.")
August 26th, 2009 at 10:50 AM ^
This is vaguely like diclemeg saying "I TOLD YOU SO ABOUT DENARD" right now. Whether Carroll's opinion was correct or not depends on how Sanchez peforms this year. In other words: Jury is out.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:04 AM ^
It's almost exactly like diclemeg's claim. Granted, there has been a couple of appearances on TV, but to say that about Sanchez is way too soon.
August 26th, 2009 at 2:19 PM ^
Isn't that what Chitown said? The fact that there have been a couple of appearances against other competition is likely why the word "vaguely" was used as opposed to "exactly". That fact seems to make the word "vaguely" more appropriate IME.
August 26th, 2009 at 10:55 AM ^
Many teams will name their 1st round draft pick QB the starter right away to help with publicity because he's the new "face of the franchise"
August 26th, 2009 at 10:59 AM ^
Have you seen any of the work done at Football Outsiders which projects NFL performance for drafted quarterbacks, and the predictive value that the number of college starts has on future NFL success?
Pete Carroll's comments had very little to do with whether Sanchez would be named the starter for his NFL team as a rookie, rather it was aimed at what decision would ultimately help Sanchez succeed most as an NFL quarterback.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:02 AM ^
Still to soon to tell how good he will be as a pro. That bieng said after the deadline passed to withdrawl his name from the draft, carrol said that he was NFL ready and that he only made those comments to try and persuade mark to return for his senior year.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:20 AM ^
doesn't mean that he's not ready for NFL. It is for Sanchez's benefit to stay for his senior year to get more experience. QB position is different than most position because QB requires experience. Of course, there are always exception to the rule like Matt Cassell but that's not normal.
I don't think that Carroll is worried about the QB situation with Corp and Barkley and Mustain at QB.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:35 AM ^
only said that because he knew what was coming back at QB if sanchez left. had sanchez stayed USC would be the best team in college football (IMO).
August 26th, 2009 at 11:53 AM ^
only said that because he knew what was coming back at QB if sanchez left.
2 consensus #1 recruits and a 4-star with 2 years in the system?
August 26th, 2009 at 12:17 PM ^
Sanchez would have been a senior and was the #5 player drafted. He may have been #1 in the 2010 draft.
That's far better than Corp, Mustain, and Barkley.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:38 AM ^
Actually, I did not state that, since Sanchez was named the starter, he would be a successful NFL QB. That would be a completely ridiculous statement!
I stated that this was a clear indication (proof?) that he is "ready to play" in the NFL.
Other points indicating he was ready to leave USC:
1) Obviously the NFL scouts (at least in NY) thought he was ready because he was drafted higher than most expected (PC said Sanchez would go in the 2nd round).
2) NY knew that with this high a draft, Sanchez would get a mega contract (PC said leaving early would cost Sanchez 10-20 million).
Obviously, only time will tell if he is successful.
August 26th, 2009 at 12:01 PM ^
I stated that this was a clear indication (proof?) that he is "ready to play" in the NFL.
A guy naming him starter is not indication of this. Him showing, on the field, that he is ready to play is an indication of this.
Other points indicating he was ready to leave USC:
1) Obviously the NFL scouts (at least in NY) thought he was ready because he was drafted higher than most expected (PC said Sanchez would go in the 2nd round).
So, you think that Carroll's opinion is wrong and the Scout's are right - despite there being no evidence at this point to back up either claim? If you're ready to claim Carroll was wrong, don't you need to allow for the fact that the scouts may be wrong?
2) NY knew that with this high a draft, Sanchez would get a mega contract (PC said leaving early would cost Sanchez 10-20 million).
I have no idea what the draft looks like next year, but:
Matt Stafford, the first pick, got $41.7 million in guaranteed money, and $72 million for six years.
Mark Sanchez for 28 million guaranteed, and $44.5 million for 5 years.
Is it reasonable to think that Sanchez, leading one of the 2 best teams in football, would improve his draft position? I think so. I can't think of a guy in next year's class with better pro prospects (Tebow, McCoy and Bradford have weaker arms) - he very well could have been the first QB taken.
So, based on those salary number above, is it reasonable to conclude that Sanchez cost himself money? I say yes.
August 26th, 2009 at 11:44 AM ^
I don't think we will ever know whether Carroll was right or wrong since we will never see the counterfactual (Sanchez staying another year in USC) and can never compare the outcome of the counterfactual vs. what we are seeing now.
August 26th, 2009 at 12:31 PM ^
I wouldnt say Carroll is wrong. Sanchez has yet to prove anything. Sure he looked good against#2 defenses but like stafford...when up against 1st team defenses they look below avrage. Granted Baltimore is a top 3 defense but thats not going to be an excuse if and when the Jets have to lay Baltimore, Pittsburgh, NYG, or Philly D.
By the way is it me or are the best defenses located on the East Coast? Maybe Detroit should move closer to the Atlantic.
August 26th, 2009 at 3:06 PM ^
Only one of those players currently play for the Bears. the Bears D is solid but I wouldnt put it up there as top 5. I would even dare say Green Bay and Minnesota have better D. Either way the top 5 defenses are all East Coast teams. They play D and love to run the ball...my favorite kind of football!
August 26th, 2009 at 1:13 PM ^
Reminds me of the dolts who used to post "Who Wants Les Miles NOW?" threads on Scout when LSU got behind in a game.
Then, LSU would rally and win most of 'em, and the OP looked like the dipshit he was for posting that.
Same thing here. Hey dipshit, Sanchez was named the starter probably because the Jets suck at QB. He had a couple good plays, but overall looks real shaky--and it's fucking PRE SEASON. Post bullshit threads like this when he has a successful rookie season.
Or don't, and continue to look like an idiot.
August 26th, 2009 at 2:28 PM ^
I disagree with your stance that it is way too early to tell....but you are a complete ignorant ass.
Also, perhaps you could practice NOT posting your bullshit remarks ANYWHERE....
Or do, and continue to look like an idiot.
August 26th, 2009 at 2:40 PM ^
BUT I am a "complete ignorant ass"? Seems like you don't know what the fuck you are trying to type or say.
And you cannot prove in any way whether I am ignorant. In fact, I'll go so far as to say you are jealous of my looks, brains, and the fact that I am a chick magnet.
August 27th, 2009 at 8:00 AM ^
is the start of the sentence, as it is here. I said in the header that "I am not syaing" and it continues to say "I disagree with you"....In case that is too difficult for you to follow-"I am not saying I disagree with you BUT you are a complete ignorant ass". Stay off the rich stale beer and maybe you would be able to follow.
Also, I don't have to prove you are ignorant, you do a fine job of proving that all on your own. The fact that you fail to realize which definition of ignorant I am referring to proves you fit in both categories rather nicely.
August 26th, 2009 at 2:24 PM ^
Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco too. Because neither one of those guys started because of a shitty QB situation, right?
August 26th, 2009 at 3:04 PM ^
Or Joey Harrington and David Carr? For every Flaco/Ryan theres 5 more David Carr's. I dont understand your point. Just because he's starting doesnt mean he's good. Until the regular season starts and he plays some games against starting defenses can we really say anything about Dirty Sanchez.
August 26th, 2009 at 3:13 PM ^
just because the QB situation is bad doesn't mean we know he isn't ready and got the job by default. We don't know anything.
I just wanted to make sure someone pointed it out to the people arguing against Sanchez on the grounds that Kellen Clemens isn't good.
August 26th, 2009 at 2:46 PM ^
I thought Rich Rodriguez chased Sanchez to the NFL?
August 26th, 2009 at 3:11 PM ^
The first time I glanced at this topic.... I thought it said "Pete Carroll Wang Sandwich"
Just sayin'
August 26th, 2009 at 10:36 PM ^
As a Jets fan who's been following their situation and progress closely, I'll say that:
A) Kellen has not impressed anyone, and has not shown he can learn from his mistakes (poor decisions, not the best leader, fixating on one receiver). I'm not ready to call him a bust, but for a high second round pick he's been a disappointment.
B) Everyone says Sanchez has amazing presence and leadership qualities, a great arm, nice touch, is smart, a really hard worker, and is learning from his mistakes.
Frankly I was bummed that we traded up for him. I really wanted Crabtree if we were gonna trade up, but whew, glad we didn't do that!
After reading the reports on Sanchez I'm glad we picked him and have faith that he'll be a good to great qb for us. Is he NFL ready now? Too early to tell, but he's shown lots of potential.
If only last year's first rounder (Gholston) would show some potential. Damn buckeyes....