clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

The Mark Sanchez Hypocrisy

The term "revisionist history" applies here.

By Rich MacLeod
Eric Hartline-USA TODAY Sports

After the collarbone injury to Nick Foles in Week 9 ended his regular season, the Philadelphia Eagles made the move to start former New York Jets quarterback Mark Sanchez. In a little over a game-and-a-half Sanchez has played fairly well, completing 59.3 percent of his passes for 534 yards, four touchdowns, two interceptions and most importantly, two wins.

I'm happy for Mark Sanchez, I really am. I remember the afternoon—that's right, the NFL Draft used to be on during the day—the Jets made the surprise move to trade up for Sanchez, and I was among the many who was excited and hopeful for the future of this franchise.

Sanchez was the quarterback on two teams that made runs to the AFC Championship Games, and while you'd never say that he led them to that, he certainly elevated his play in the postseason. In the years following we all know the story; interceptions, fumbles—one specific one on the minds of the masses to this day—losses, Tim Tebow, Greg McElroy, less talent around him, and a preseason injury that became his final curtain call in New York. In the end, the Sanchez era didn't work out, and the Jets were once again in search for their franchise quarterback—a search that has yet to be completed.

One thing everyone agreed on after Sanchez's season-ending injury in the 2013 preseason was that the Jets had to move on. When New York released him, there wasn't a soul who disagreed with the decision. If it was ever going to work out for Sanchez, it would have to be somewhere else.

We've now reached a point where after not even two complete games, we've seemed to enter some strange realm where the Jets are the fools in this scenario for letting Sanchez go in the first place.

Entities all over, ESPN for example, are all of a sudden praising Sanchez. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it ESPN who mercilessly mocked Sanchez for the now infamous "buttfumble?" Not only did they actually take the time, money and effort to created their own SportsScience segment on the play, but they ran the play on their Not Top Plays of the Week for 41 consecutive weeks, far longer than any other play they've ever done.

You couldn't escape it. It was everywhere. Personally, I'm surprised it didn't wind up with it's own 30 for 30 documentary.

We're in a strange sort of revisionist history at this point.

"Franchise Quarterback"

------

"Tebow Time?"

------

"Buttfumble"

If Mark Sanchez magically leads the Eagles to a Super Bowl championship, will I be jealous? Of course. That's human nature. That's being a fanatic. But that doesn't mean I won't be rooting for him every step of the way.

In principle, Rich Cimini is right—Mark Sanchez does deserve a second chance. But the reason his comeback story has the chance to be so triumphant in the first place is because of the way he was treated by these people now praising him for the purpose of page clicks and jabbing Jets fans in the process.

Those same people will continue make their tongue-in-cheek comments about Sanchez and the Jets, and nothing can really change that, but they know what they wrote. They may pretend to forget the past, but they don't. They remember the turnovers. They remember the unoriginal jokes. They remember the buttfumble (and won't let you forget it.) They remember calling for Tebow. They remember it all.

So I hope Mark Sanchez keeps winning. And I hope he shoves it in their faces.

More From Gang Green Nation