A few general points about them:
Fitzpick - got his a little over a quarter into the season when the Bills started with a solid record. Fitz's play was up and down during the start of the season, however the stat sheet looked solid on him still up to that point. Most were not that impressed with his overall play and felt his inconsistency was the main reason it was too early to commit the large contract. He had never had a winning season, never led a team to the playoffs, had been woefully inaccurate the majority of his career, and tend to turn the ball over. The positives is that I believe the Bills were like 5-2 at the time and he was playing better (although IMO not that much better) than his previous season.
Sanchize - Got his before the start of last season. His numbers looked ok, but he turned the ball over a lot, often struggled with consistency, and was known to make a lot of bad decisions. It was also high debateable if he was even improving much and some felt like he had plateaued, which at his level was not a good thing. The good was that he did help lead the Jets to two AFC championship games and played better in the playoffs those years than he did in the regular season. However, if he was a couple years removed from that and hadn't been able to do much more since then.
So who made the worse deal...Nix or Tannenbaum? Both contracts were a mistake looking back at it, both contracts are currently negatively affecting the respective teams (although the Jets are in a way way worse situation and the Bills are not too bad off cap wise).
Remember, this isnt about who is the better QB...
Interesting tid bit...these two are ranked one and two for most INT's over the last 2 years in the NFL.
Edited by Alphadawg7, 13 February 2013 - 11:00 PM.