The quarterbacks

I knew and said all along that Sanchez is slow as a slug. I would be just shocked if he is still the starting QB by the end of the year.

Scott,

Isn't that a bit subjective? The QB position in our offense is not one in which the Q needs to be able to outrun DBs all day...

Give us something of a little more essence...for instance how fast the DBs, WRs or RBs ran...thx

BWilson4SC - the QB's 40 time really isn't all that critical.

On Matt Leinart's 2006 NFL Draft bio, his 40 time is listed as 4.91 - slower than any of our boys listed above.

As long as Sanchez can avoid trying to do too much, he should be fine. The running game and defense should be good enough to keep the pressure off of Mark and allow him to take what the defense gives him.

Ah idiocy at it's finest.

Mark's slow as a slug but he's only .14 seconds slower than Mustain. Some people are so stupid...

.14 seconds on a 40 yard dash is considered to not only be quite significant, but also above a standard deviation.

Translated to a 100 yard dash, that's .35 seconds, which is a very, very large margin. For example, in a 100 meter competition, the difference between first and last (eighth) place is usually only about .12 seconds. That would be the equivalent of .04 seconds on a 40.

So if you don't know what you are talking about, please be quiet.

.14 seconds is a VERY large margin in the 40 yard dash and beyond a standard deviation.

Unless they decide to set up flat our N/W running plays for the quarterback, I don't see how this matters much. At most, all they'll need to worry about is having the ability to scramble enough during a broken play to avoid losing yardage.
Even the 3-cone shuttle drill would be more telling than a 40 time.

I'm almost positive Booty had a faster 40 time than Sanchez. And watching Booty run was like watching molasses flow down a tree. The 3 games Sanchez played he looked a million x faster than Booty.

And I think Booty was clocked as one of the fastest QBs in the last draft.

Unless you are in a Florida/Texas/WV type offense, I think the 40 time is a bit overrated.

I have always thought the 40 yard dash for football was not the best tool to evaluate football speed. The game is mainly played in a 5-yard area except for the passing plays. I would rather know how quick my quarterback is. I would work on his 'first-step' speed (as they say in basketball), in order to avoid the rush.

How about a spread option package for Corp? They'd never do it because of the learning curve, but it would fun to see a little option every now and then. At least put in a QB draw.

I think Scott is referring to the play where Joe McKnight throws back to the quarterback. In that case, the quarterback might have to outrun his towel.

Talk about a useless stat and information. Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart didn't break 4.86, how'd their careers at SC go? By the way Carson's draft 40 time is listed at 4.93, Leinart listed a 5 flat and for comparison, Vince Young ran a 4.58

Further adding to the uselessness of this stat (other than as an avenue to bash Sanchez), top QB draft pick Matt Ryan ran a 4.88. 5th Round pick Josh Johnson from USD ran a 4.55, taken 23 spots after JDB and his 4.82.

QBs and 40 times don't mean much.

The QB is usually running top speed only once the pass play breaks down (e.g., heading up field or from one sideline toward the other). Avoiding a sack is not just based on his 40-yd dash time; a well-timed head-fake, hip-shake, or ball-fake can avoid a would-be tackler, and give the QB a split second to get rid of the ball. Moreover, a 40-yd dash time does not account for how well the QB can throw while on the run. It is an interesting, but meaningless stat, for the QB. To me, Sanchez was much better at avoiding a sack that JDB, and that had nothing to do with speed.

Fight On and support your Trojan QB!

If Sanchez is going to keep running around the field like a headless chicken while holding the ball out like a loaf of bread, as he did last year, his slow speed will not only result in numerous sacks but also many turnovers.

Each year he has been timed, he has always been the slowest QB on the roster. Even Booty was faster last year, despite the incorrect belief among some that Sanchez is mobile. He is not mobile. Too slow and poor mechanics, along with holding on to the ball too long to try to make the play himself and get the glory, result in his being a turnover machine.

How often does a USC quarterback run forty yards in a game? The freakin running backs, during JDB's two years as a starter, seldom did it. Sanchez seems to have enough quickness, and mobility, to be a outstanding QB. I don't attend practices, but I assume Coach Carroll and his assistants do.

Check where Casey Dick is among SEC QB's for you MM pundits:
http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=411838
I have a question for the "pseudo" QB gurus on this thread: Who's the HC or QB guru at Mission Viejo HS(Diablos)? Mr. Bob Johnson. Hasn't he coached several NFL QB's? YES. How can Sánchez have bad mechanics, etc? The last time I checked Mark came from MV HS. Wasn't Mark the top HS QB in 2005? Don't you people get tired of BS garbage? If so few of you dislike him that much say it and get it over with. The QB criticism here doesn't hold urine...

So what happened to Bob Johnson's own son as a QB in the NFL? Wasn't he an abject failure? Some people (well, maybe just one person...) are so stupid.

Wasn't Sanchez's TD/INT ratio as a THIRD YEAR player at SC last year worse than Mustain's as a true freshmen? Weren't two of Sanchez's games against Arizona and Notre Dame, considered to be among the two worst teams in the country? Wasn't the 2007 ND team considered to be the worst college football team in a generation, even losing to Navy for the first time in 46 years? Wasn't the Arizona win attributed to Joe McKnight and the running game, not Sanchez?

Another thing - even Carroll and Sarkisian said that Sanchez had bad mechanics. Read the comments from last season where they said how he held the ball, locked down on the receivers, released the ball, etc. were all very poor mistakes on his part and referred to as "bonehead" moves by Sarkisian.

Do some research before going into the lion's den with people who actually know what they're talking about.

Trojan in Redondo,

What do you plan to do if Mark Sanchez comes out in the Fall of '08, starts, and then goes on to have a stellar season? I'm just curious.

Will you come back into this "lion's den" -- laughable phrase, that, used in reference to this site -- and admit you were wrong?

Guys like you have gone so far out on a limb in their condemnation of Sanchez -- from everything to his ethics, his throwing mechanics, to what toothpaste he uses -- its gonna be fascinating if the kid puts you in a position where you have to eat your words.

Of course, guys with ten times the football knowledge you've demonstrated here believe in Sanchez's potential. And predict he'll be a winner.

Will you come back here, if a positive season unfolds, and admit you were wrong? Because I have no doubt, if Sanchez stumbles, you'll be among the first hurling insults and slander.

uscmike said:

"To me, Sanchez was much better at avoiding a sack than JDB, and that had nothing to do with speed."

Indeed, uscmike, to anyone with two unbiased eyes in their head, this was obvious. In fact, since we're throwing around Pete Carroll's commentary about his quarterbacks, today, how about this one?

"We're more mobile than we were at quarterback before," Carroll said. "All three quarterbacks can take off and run."

Pete Carroll -- Daily Trojan, 3/31/08

There was really nothing in Trojan in Redondo's post that could be disputed. Fairly objective analysis of the situation with none of thegoodfight's usual emotional meltdown involved. Maybe you can share with the rest of us how you go to a tailgate with some people who have never heard certain information about the football team, thus it can't be true. Could you remind us again how many degrees you've earned? We may have forgotten that.

Anyhow, even if Sanchez has a good season (and I have no idea if he will or not), I don't think anyone will ever "eat their words" regarding his ethics. Let's be perfectly honest about that. I don't think any Trojan believes his off numerous off the field incidents have been anything but extremely embarrassing to the university. Remember when he was banned from talking to the media in 2006 when he got caught lying to the LA Times about videotaped evidence against himself. So let's leave Sanchez's ethics out of this; no one could ever defend him on that.

I find it amusing that good fight (is that you, Stallings?) keeps coming back for more even though he keeps getting humiliated by everyone here, time and time again. He gets put in his place each time, inevitably starts hurling profanities at everyone when he shown up, cries like a little girl, then reminds everyone about he is a graduate of USC. The public degradation of this individual is both amusing and cringe-inducing.

Well, I certainly do know football and have to agree the statements about Sanchez's poor mechanics are 100% valid. Both Pete and Sark have said that publicly and privately. Even if Sanchez is still the starter at the end of fall camp, which he may or may not be, no one knows, for the first time since Pete became coach, there is talk that the same QB may not be the starter by the end of the season.

Sanchez was named the starter for the spring, period. He was named the starter for the spring game because he had a better knowledge of the playbook. The starter status end the day fall camp begins. Again, he may still be the starter at the end of fall camp, or he may not. Even if he is, he may not be the starter at the end of the year.

Time will tell.

thanks, carldennis:

You're not *the* Carl Dennis, are you? I mean, the winner of the Pulitzer Prize?

Only thing I'm aware I've been dong here is attempting to give the kid a fair shake, amidst a sea of @ssholes. Of which you seem to be a prime example.

Whoops, there I go with my profanity. But if the shoe fits, right?

If this has in any way led to my "public humiliation," so be it. This after, all is an internet message board. Sticks and stones, right?

University of Sigma Chi,

Last count, it was three. It probably will stay that way.

What, exactly, was particularly emotional about my post? Again, just attempting to be a counter-voice against the Sanchez hate that's so prevalent on this board.

How many times is it necessary to kick the kid?

When multiple guys make preposterous comments about Sanchez's mobility, he deserves a defense. It's as simple as that. Mechanics, I'll admit, are a more slippery and subjective question.

Pete Carroll has been on record saying that Mark Sanchez never beat JDB in terms of *mastery of the playbook*. Just recently, he was quoted in the L.A. Times, saying that Sanchez was given his chance, and could never surpass Booty's comfort in the system. Thus, he never usurped him as the starter.

In my opinion, in the aftermath of the Oregon game last season, Sark's negative comments about Sanchez in the press were a cheap shot. And were so much covering of his own @ss. I think Sark's playcalling was as guilty as anything else for the loss.

Bottom line, if Mark Sanchez's mechanics were and are so dreadful, why did PC and Sark name him even the temporary -- as some here insist -- starter? Why didn't they sit him down? Or bring him into their offices and say: "listen, kid you're just not cutting it. You should consider transferring down to a Division II-A school."

So to me, it's an absolutely fair question. No emotion involved. If Sanchez does start, and has a strong season, will the usual suspects around here come back and say they were wrong?

As for my comment that I consider it an utter joke that Trojan in Redondo referred to this site as a "lion's den"? I'll stand by that.

In fact, it's a knitting circle, composed substantially of hand-wringing, whining adults. The notion that some clown here has the nerve to call *me* a girl is so silly it doesn't merit a response.

I'll say this: if Sanchez starts, and is a failure this season, I'll be the first to come back here and say all the doubters were right. And never come back again. Believe me, it'll be my sincere pleasure to follow through on the latter.

I'm with thegoodfighter on his last comment.
Thank you

To answer the question if his "mechanics were and are so dreadful, why did PC and Sark name him even the temporary -- as some here insist -- starter? Why didn't they sit him down? Or bring him into their offices and say: "listen, kid you're just not cutting it. You should consider transferring down to a Division II-A school."

Well, as PC said, "IF there were a game this Saturday, he would start."

But there was no game that Saturday, only a scrimmage. That was a fair statement by PC and he emphasized how it was based on the knowledge of the playbook. No reason for him to transfer because of a depth issue currently at QB. Remember how last season before Booty was hurt that Sark and PC kept saying there "really is no other option" at QB if Booty went down?

Sanchez's mechanics: heavily criticized by USC's own coaches. His poor release has been blamed for his lack of accuracy. So, too, has the way he holds the ball after the snap.

Sanchez's ethics: I don't think even his own family can defend them. That's one aspect of his life where he has simply managed to dig too deep of a hole for himself to get out of.