09-04-2016, 12:13 PM
I thought the same thing yesterday, Nately. While I do think Bradford is better, is he really THAT much better?
I know one thing. I can say without looking up the stats that Bradford has protected the football a lot better than Sanchize. With the Vikings looking for someone to manage games and protect the football, I'd say Bradford is clearly the better choice. Sanchez for free sure sounds enticing though after they gave up so much for Bradford.
Man, I bet the Vikings boards are blowing up on that subject right now.
EDIT: INT percentages over last 2 years (with career % in parenthesis)
Bradford- 2.27 (2.27)
Sanchez- 3.75
For anyone who doesn't know, anything under 2.5 means you don't throw many picks. Anything over 3 or 3.5 means you chuck them on a regular. Sanchez probably would've held down the starting gig in Philly if not for turnovers. He was certainly efficient enough running the offense.
I know one thing. I can say without looking up the stats that Bradford has protected the football a lot better than Sanchize. With the Vikings looking for someone to manage games and protect the football, I'd say Bradford is clearly the better choice. Sanchez for free sure sounds enticing though after they gave up so much for Bradford.
Man, I bet the Vikings boards are blowing up on that subject right now.
EDIT: INT percentages over last 2 years (with career % in parenthesis)
Bradford- 2.27 (2.27)
Sanchez- 3.75
For anyone who doesn't know, anything under 2.5 means you don't throw many picks. Anything over 3 or 3.5 means you chuck them on a regular. Sanchez probably would've held down the starting gig in Philly if not for turnovers. He was certainly efficient enough running the offense.
The training, nutrition, medicine, fitness, playbooks and rules evolve. The athlete does not.
