New York Jets: Mark Sanchez and Mike Tannenbaum Must Go
In the 2009 NFL Draft, Mark Sanchez was drafted by the New York Jets after Mike Tannenbaum aggressively obtained the fifth overall selection from the Cleveland Browns. Tannenbaum missed with Sanchez, but I give him credit for taking a risk. It wasn't a great year for quarterbacks and Tannenbaum had a plan and executed it.
Let's fast forward to 2011. After 31 starts, Sanchez had posted consecutive annual quarterback ratings of 63.0 and 75.3. While casual fans were jumping on the "Sanchize" bandwagon, students of the game knew the Jets had been to consecutive AFC Championship games in spite of Sanchez.
It was understood that Sanchez would be the starter in 2011, but his leash should have been kept short. Due to pride or ineptness, Tannenbaum backed Sanchez up with Mark Brunell and Kevin O'Connell.
The law of averages came crashing down on the Jets as they finished 8-8 in 2011 and failed to make the playoffs. Sanchez had been exposed. New York was a team with an outstanding defense and a subpar quarterback. Sanchez has the physical tools, but cannot read defenses and makes poor decisions. After three seasons, Tannenbaum had to know what he had. Right?
Then came the epic failure. Sanchez' contract was extended, giving him a guaranteed 2013, and Tannenbaum's fallback for 2012 was Tim Tebow. Tannenbaum is either too proud to admit he made a big mistake or he's an absolute idiot. He should have been fired. You have arguably the worst quarterback in the league, surround him with little talent and you expect to win?
Now after almost four seasons, Sanchez has a career QB rating of 72.9, not counting the latest debacle in Tennessee. This is actually worse than Chad Henne's career rating (75.7). Monday night's game against the Titans epitomized Sanchez' career. The Jets have failed to make the playoffs again, and everyone, except Fireman Ed, knows what needs to happen. Mark Sanchez and Mike Tannenbaum, the NFL is not for you.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?