Rounding Up Reaction to Mark Sanchez, Tim Tebow and Jets' QB Carousel
The New York Jets' quarterback carousel continued to spin leading up to a Week 14 meeting with the Jacksonville Jaguars.
Tebow returned from a rib injury to the No. 2 spot on the depth chart, awaiting another poor performance from the constantly underwhelming Sanchez. While Tebow did not actually get that chance, the Twitter-verse still had plenty of opinions to share on the controversy.
Let's look over some of the highlights:
Jets play selection: 34 runs vs. only 17 passes. Doesn't matter who's playing QB with a gameplan like that. NYJ leads 17-3.— BuzzFeed Sports (@BuzzFeedSports) December 9, 2012
Chad Henne should be the starting QB of the Jets.He seems to be very comfortable finding the wide open Jets jersey.— JetNation.com (@JetNation) December 9, 2012
Woody's Barnum and Bailey Circus is 6-7. Hiding their own QB and 1 starting receiver like a magic trick...Don't ask. #jets— todd jason (@TheJetReport) December 9, 2012
Kobe Bryant irked his 30,000 point mark might be over-shadowed by Mark Sanchez's 30,000th turnover— Fake SportsCenter (@FakeSportsCentr) December 9, 2012
GIF: Three things happen every Sunday: the sun rises, the sun sets, and Mark Sanchez fumbles. twitpic.com/bkkgaq— BuzzFeed Sports (@BuzzFeedSports) December 9, 2012
Eventually the conversation shifted to a comparison between the Jets' quarterback situation and that of the Washington Redskins:
I bet the Jets would trade both QB's for Kirk Cousins— Rudolph Valentino (@Agu_Vendetta) December 9, 2012
#DidYouKnow 1+1 doesn't always = 2. Example: In Washington, RGIII + Kirk Cousins = 2 QBs. In New York, Mark Sanchez + Tim Tebow = 0 QBs.— Tony Przybylek (@TonyPrzybylek) December 9, 2012
Both of the Redskins rookie QB's are better than anything the #Jets have.— Peyton's Head (@PeytonsHead) December 9, 2012
Sanchez finished the game with 12 completions for 111 yards, zero touchdowns and zero interceptions. The Jets play the Tennessee Titans on Monday Night Football next week.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?