[LongTimeJetsFan]

Originally Posted by christian_cat

I love Tim Tebow he's a good quarter back who wasn't given a fair shot by Rex Ryan to play. More important he's a wonderful human being. Everything Tim stands for his faith, his values, and how much he helps everyone around him. Tim Tebow uses the platform God has given him to spread the word of Jesus Christ. He should get to play the position he loves and that's quarterback. The NFL should have some team that will take such a good quarterback for their team.

1) There is no god.
2) Tebow is a terrible QB.
3) NFL teams are in the business of winning, not hiring good guys. I think everyone can agree he's a great guy.

[christian_cat]

1) God is very real, he created all of us
2) He's a good quarterback as he has proven with his high school championships, college championships, and big wins in Denver for the broncos
3) He could help some NFL team win if used properly

[Concerned_Citizen]

Originally Posted by christian_cat

1) God is very real, he created all of us
2) He's a good quarterback as he has proven with his high school championships, college championships, and big wins in Denver for the broncos
3) He could help some NFL team win if used properly

1. Prove it.

2. Tebow is proven to be a good quarterback against highschoolers and on college teams that have 10 of his 11 starters making it to the NFL. In the NFL, he's little more than a guy who got lucky an a few occaisions, but ended up being the punch line to most QB jokes.

3. If used as a running back, yeah he could probably help a team. Just don't let him throw it. That would be the improper way to use him.

Also, being a wonderful human being has nothing to do with being a good QB and has no bearing on whether he should get to play QB in this league.

[christian_cat]

Anyone are we allowed to post a link to an article?

This comes from a sports illustrated article. Don't know if I can post a link.

And, finally, Player F is Tim Tebow. He played for Florida in the SEC and will be far from the No. 1 overall pick in the 2010 draft.

The list tells us many things.

First, it tells us the SEC has dominated the draft in recent years, as you probably already knew. But five guys at the most important position on the field taken No. 1 overall in a 12-year stretch is a remarkable accomplishment, even by the lofty standards of the dominant conference in college football.

Second, it tells us that NFL talent evaluators are out of their freaking minds.

Tebow, as you know, is the biggest question mark in the 2010 draft among the pigskin punditistas. He's the highest rated passer in the history of SEC football. He was easily a better passer than Peyton Manning or Stafford or Couch or any of the guys whose ability to pass was never really questioned by NFL talent analysts.

And yet NFL evaluators, for some reason, aren't sold on Tebow. Couch and Russell are two bona fide NFL busts, even though pro football talent evaluators couldn't usher them into the league fast enough. Yet these same talent evaluators harbor grave doubts about the ability of the greatest and most efficient passer in SEC history to pass the ball at the next level.

Consider, Charley Casserly, the longtime NFL executive turned NFL Network analyst, who was on the air Thursday telling the world that Tebow will go no higher than the fourth round of the draft next month.

Other executives seem obsessed by the trivia over Tebow's mechanics, while overlooking the rather irrefutable fact that he dominated college football like no player in memory and despite the fact that he was, by any objective measure, a much better passer than Couch, Russell, Stafford, and either of the Manning brothers.

Tebow didn't just pass the ball far more effectively than any of these No. 1 overall picks. It pays to remember that, in his spare time, he set the SEC career record for rushing touchdowns. And he won a Heisman Trophy. And two national titles. Other than that, he didn't do much.

The anti-Tebow crowd will argue, weakly, that he was surrounded by greater talent than those other passers. The anti-Tebow crowd, of course, is confused.

Let's look at Peyton Manning. Last we remember, he played with not one, not two, but three receivers taken in the top two rounds of the draft: Joey Kent, Marcus Nash and Peerless Price. His team was so loaded with talent that it won the national title the year after he left.

JaMarcus Russell played with arguably the most talented teams of the past decade. They won national titles in 2003 and 2007 and he watched as 34 of his LSU teammates were grabbed in the NFL draft.

Stafford? Well, Georgia is a prolific pipeline of NFL talent. Stafford was one of three starting offensive players from the 2008 Bulldogs taken in the first 50 picks of the 2009 draft (Knowshon Moreno, Mohamed Massaquoi).

The anti-Tebow crowd could also throw out the old David Klingler argument. You know, "anybody can put up big stats in the college game." But Tebow didn't just put up big stats ... he put up supremely efficient stats. He was more accurate, and produced more big passing plays, and was more likely to put the ball in the end zone, and more likely to keep it out of the hands of opposing defenders, than any of the recent collection of No. 1 passing phenoms to come out of the SEC.

Tebow was, by any measure, a better player, a better quarterback and, yes, a better passer than any of these No. 1 picks.

We understand that college success does not translate to NFL success. The long history of Heisman winners turned NFL busts underscores that argument.

However, in the gamble that is the NFL draft, we'll roll the dice on the proven and unmatched passing talent of Tebow rather than on the sorry track record of pro football talent evaluators

[Clovis]

Originally Posted by LongTimeJetsFan

1) There is no god.
2) Tebow is a terrible QB.
3) NFL teams are in the business of winning, not hiring good guys. I think everyone can agree he's a great guy.

Hmm, this is debatable, as a fan, one would hope so. However, I would change this to , NFL teams are in the business of making money. QB or not, Tebow does bring in the attention and PR to generate business (money).

[JFjets]

Originally Posted by Concerned_Citizen

...and it you are a "suck ass" throwing the ball, Fox isn't going to let you throw it as much. Plain and simple.

It isn't a function of the Fox offense either. you guys have yet to explain why Fox's offense threw it a lot more under Orton.

Plus, a lot more pass plays were called, they just didn't show up on the stat sheet as a pass attempt because he either hung on to the ball too long and got sacked, or tucked it in and ran. sometimes that approach worked and sometimes it didn't.

But to say Tebow didn't throw simply because Fox is too damn conservative just isn't true. he had Orton throwing 30+ times a game. Almost had that many calls for tebow to throw in Miami and against Detroit too before they realized it simply wasn't going to work. So they did more run options and that did enough to win some games because it threw teams for a loop. Once the other teams caught on, it was back to the puntfest I've been hammering on ever since.

So, since Orton ALSO threw less under Fox's Offensive system than he did in 2010, does that mean that Orton was also "suck ass" at throwing the ball? I mean, personally, I think Orton threw a pretty ball, but he had issues with INT's and just wasn't clutch at all, no leadership.

And yeah, there's that mythical "once teams caught on" theory again. When, exactly, did this happen? New England had absolutely no answer for the Broncos Defensively in the 1st half of their first game in 2011. Is that because Belichik just didn't have enough film yet on Tebow by then? Seriously? And what about Pittsburgh, they didn't have enough film, either? Get real.

I was the one that admitted the scoring would be lower. But you also completely missed the point behind it. They ran the ball a lot more because they simply didn't believe in Tebow as a passer.

It doesn't matter if they ran the ball more because all of their game balls were square. The point you are missing and still have yet to seriously address is that Tebow's Offense, with more creative play-calling and a lot more passing, in his 2010 starts, scored almost a touchdown more per game than in his 2011 starts. If Fox wanted to ignore this, that is on him. If Fox wanted to run up the gut like a broken record, and have 3 runs in a row a ridiculously high number of times, and seldom allow Tebow to throw to his backs or tight ends like other QB's get to do, that is on him.

he was a horror show in practice, and he was dog butt bad throwing the ball when trying to run a more conventional offense against Miami and Detroit. They had to do somethign else because it wasn't working running the same offense that they ran with Orton. the knock on Orton was that he was good at moving the ball, he just couldn't punch it in for 7. Enter Tebow, and trips to scoring territory became much less frequent.

So, I guess that explains why the Broncos under Tebow in 2010 scored 4.5 more points per game than the Broncos under Orton in 2010.....??? Right?

You keep asking why he got less points in 2011 than in 2010. Not sure why you think you have a case there. They played 3 non-playoff teams that year and obviously checked out for the season. Houston had one of the worst passing defenses EVER. Oakland was Oakland, and San Diego clearly wasn't the same team that had owned the Broncos for the few years prior. Nothing special there. 2010 is just too small a sample size. I really think you are making more there than there actually is. the interim coach Studesville wasn't exactly thrilled with the idea of letting Tebow throw either. He was still at about 47% after then too. The Tebow offense simply caught a few teams at the right time after they checked out and none had any real idea on just how much he was going to run the ball until it was too late.

So, you're ready to purge the NFL record books of all statistics derived from any game that involved a non-playoff team in the last 3 games of the regular season?

That's what I thought.

You also conveniently sidestep the fact that San Diego and Oakland had the #1 and #2 passing defenses in the league that year.

Also, Tebow averaged more passing yards per game in his first 3 NFL starts than a lot of QB's did, including Russell Wilson, Colin Kaepernick and new Super Bowl winner Joe Flacco, to name a few. So, acting like his Offensive success in his 2010 starts was all because of his running ability is just pure balderdash.

Sorry, I'm just not buying that Fox's conservative nature is the reason Tebow's numbers are down, or why they ran a more run heavy offense. HE THREW THE BALL WITH ORTON.

I don't know why you wouldn't, it makes far more sense than any other explanation. Orton also threw the ball less under Fox.

Originally Posted by christian_cat

Anyone are we allowed to post a link to an article?

This comes from a sports illustrated article. Don't know if I can post a link.

And, finally, Player F is Tim Tebow. He played for Florida in the SEC and will be far from the No. 1 overall pick in the 2010 draft.

You're wasting your time, the Tebow haters discount anything that Tebow did in college that was good, even while praising other young NFL QB's who come into the draft with college accomplishments that were far inferior to Tebow's.

Originally Posted by LongTimeJetsFan

1) There is no god.

You're pretty sure about that, huh?

3) NFL teams are in the business of winning, not hiring good guys. I think everyone can agree he's a great guy.

Oh, the irony of this Tebow double standard comment is much too delicious to let pass, considering that Tebow has a better Win % than probably about half of the starting QB's in the NFL right now.

[Concerned_Citizen]

Originally Posted by JFjets

And yeah, there's that mythical "once teams caught on" theory again. When, exactly, did this happen? New England had absolutely no answer for the Broncos Defensively in the 1st half of their first game in 2011. Is that because Belichik just didn't have enough film yet on Tebow by then? Seriously? And what about Pittsburgh, they didn't have enough film, either? Get real.

it isn't mythical. Most teams had it figured out. Theyy'd take away his running by running containment schemes rather than blitzing, and dared him to beat them with his arm. The last 3 games was a pretty good indication.

Not sure what you were watching in that first Pats game. Got a couple of lucky strikes, then McGahee ran for a really long gain. After that, it was pretty much all Pats the rest of the way. The Bronco offense was FAR from having the Patriots left with "no answer." As for Pittsburgh, Tebow got in a couple of lucky strikes in there, but D. Thomas was the one stealing the show on that one. Not Tebow. Sheesh, you'd think the way people talk that he caught his own pass, which was fairly routine for most QBs over the middle, and then ran it in all by himself.

It doesn't matter if they ran the ball more because all of their game balls were square. The point you are missing and still have yet to seriously address is that Tebow's Offense, with more creative play-calling and a lot more passing, in his 2010 starts, scored almost a touchdown more per game than in his 2011 starts. If Fox wanted to ignore this, that is on him. If Fox wanted to run up the gut like a broken record, and have 3 runs in a row a ridiculously high number of times, and seldom allow Tebow to throw to his backs or tight ends like other QB's get to do, that is on him.

No, the coaching staff was scared shitless of letting Tebow throw the ball. 47% is just dogbutt bad. That means fore than half of your attempts are going to be a wasted play. You boast on and on about his lack of throwing interceptions, and that is neat and all. But he didn't complete passes either. Low completions and low interceptions means.... HE THREW IT IN THE DIRT. His throwing was so god awful that his throws were uncatchable for receivers and defenders alike. 2010 was simply too small a sample size.

it wasn't that Studesville was more creative, it was that teams had checked out, weren't stacking the box all day, and really didn't know much about Tebow at the time. Check out his passing and running production as the season went on, you'll see a decline pretty much across the board. Why? because teams figured him out. his passing never caught up with the rest of his game as many of his backers thought would happen by that point. Suddenly, winning games on some miracle and a defense busting their assess all day wasn't sustainable.

So, you're ready to purge the NFL record books of all statistics derived from any game that involved a non-playoff team in the last 3 games of the regular season?

No, I just don't buy into the crap that the playcalling and creativity or the lack therof in 2011 was behind it all. teams simple found out what the critics knew all along. Tebow can't throw worth a shit.

You also conveniently sidestep the fact that San Diego and Oakland had the #1 and #2 passing defenses in the league that year.

I didn't sidestep it. The best defense in the league has an off day now and then, and I already explained that not only had they checked out for the season, Tim Tebow's game was a bit of a surprise for them. Unfortunately for him, surprises don't stay surprises for a whole career. You can only hide invcompetence for so long.

Also, Tebow averaged more passing yards per game in his first 3 NFL starts than a lot of QB's did, including Tom Brady, Russell Wilson, Colin Kaepernick and new Super Bowl winner Joe Flacco, to name a few. So, acting like his Offensive success in his 2010 starts was all because of his running ability is just pure balderdash.

Part of that was Brandon Lloyd, who had caught almost half of Tebow's passing production. That same guy wanted nothing to do with Tebow and wanted out.

I don't know why you wouldn't, it makes far more sense than any other explanation. Orton also threw the ball less under Fox.

He had less pass attempts because less drives were being sustained thanks to his interception ratio going up. Look at his whole career, he was never that bad until that season. But you are high on crack if you think the Broncos ran the ball anywhere near as much as with Tebow. In fact, the Broncos were near the bottom of the league in rushing up until Orton was pulled. Fancy that, the running game gets better with a running back, and another running back taking snaps out of position masquerading as a QB.

[JFjets]

Originally Posted by Concerned_Citizen

You keep asking why he got less points in 2011 than in 2010. Not sure why you think you have a case there. They played 3 non-playoff teams that year and obviously checked out for the season. Houston had one of the worst passing defenses EVER. Oakland was Oakland, and San Diego clearly wasn't the same team that had owned the Broncos for the few years prior. Nothing special there. 2010 is just too small a sample size. I really think you are making more there than there actually is. the interim coach Studesville wasn't exactly thrilled with the idea of letting Tebow throw either. He was still at about 47% after then too. The Tebow offense simply caught a few teams at the right time after they checked out and none had any real idea on just how much he was going to run the ball until it was too late.

Oh yeah, one more thing. Under this explanation, the games Tebow had against Kansas City and Buffalo in late 2011 don't count. Right??? Non-playoff teams, late in the season, nothing to play for, so any statistics from those games should just be purged from the NFL record books. Right??? So can I assume that you will be abiding by this new rule you have set for the league and never say anything negative again about Tebow's 2011 performances late in the season against the Chiefs and the Bills?

[JFjets]

Not sure what you were watching in that first Pats game. Got a couple of lucky strikes, then McGahee ran for a really long gain. After that, it was pretty much all Pats the rest of the way. The Bronco offense was FAR from having the Patriots left with "no answer." As for Pittsburgh, Tebow got in a couple of lucky strikes in there, but D. Thomas was the one stealing the show on that one. Not Tebow. Sheesh, you'd think the way people talk that he caught his own pass, which was fairly routine for most QBs over the middle, and then ran it in all by himself.

173 rushing yards in the first half. The Patriots didn't allow that many rushing yards in an entire game in any of their other 18 games in 2011. In fact, they only allowed a single entire game with more than 173 rushing yards in each of the 2010 and 2009 seasons. Yeah, I'd say they had no answer for the Broncos Offense in the 1st half. And McGahee had the 3rd longest rushing play in the game, behind Lance Ball and Tim Tebow.

Pittsburgh? Tebow set multiple records in that game. DT was a big help and didn't get as much credit as he should, but if it was up to you Tebow wouldn't get nearly as much credit as he should, so I don't know what you're complaining about?

No, the coaching staff was scared shitless of letting Tebow throw the ball.

The reason doesn't matter. They saw how he did in late 2010, if they wanted to change up the game plan and go hyper conservative with it, that's on them.

47% is just dogbutt bad.

Can you please point me to the threads where you used the same descriptive adjectives to describe the 5 games in 2012 that Andrew Luck had a completion % in that neighborhood or lower? 'preciate that.

it wasn't that Studesville was more creative, it was that teams had checked out, weren't stacking the box all day, and really didn't know much about Tebow at the time.

By the way, undermining your argument is the fact that the Broncos were ALSO a non-playoff team with "nothing to play for" at the end of 2010. Huh. Just imagine how much they might have scored if they hadn't just been doggin' it out there, eh?

Check out his passing and running production as the season went on, you'll see a decline pretty much across the board. Why? because teams figured him out. his passing never caught up with the rest of his game as many of his backers thought would happen by that point. Suddenly, winning games on some miracle and a defense busting their assess all day wasn't sustainable.

That's not even close to accurate. His passing and rushing yards were up and down throughout his entire 13 starts in 2011. He posted low passing and rushing yard totals in games early in the season and high passing and rushing yard totals in games late in the season.

No, I just don't buy into the crap that the playcalling and creativity or the lack therof in 2011 was behind it all. teams simple found out what the critics knew all along. Tebow can't throw worth a shit.

Steelers. No matter how hard you try, you can't make it go away.

Part of that was Brandon Lloyd, who had caught almost half of Tebow's passing production.

40% does not="almost half"

He had less pass attempts because less drives were being sustained thanks to his interception ratio going up.

That's all the genius explanation you could come up with??? He averaged 35.5 pass attempts in his first 2 complete starts in 2011. How many pass attempts did he average in his last 2 complete starts in 2011? 35.5. Identical.

Look at his whole career, he was never that bad until that season. But you are high on crack if you think the Broncos ran the ball anywhere near as much as with Tebow. In fact, the Broncos were near the bottom of the league in rushing up until Orton was pulled. Fancy that, the running game gets better with a running back, and another running back taking snaps out of position masquerading as a QB.

Funny, but I don't recall saying that. Why would they run the ball as much with a QB who was as mobile as Lady Liberty and had no experience running the ball? No, what I actually said was that Orton also passed less in Fox's Offense than he did the previous year.

Interesting that McGahee was averaging 3.75 yds./rush over Orton's first 4 starts of 2011 and 6.09 yds./rush over Tebow's first 4 starts of 2011. Probably just coincidence, huh?

[Concerned_Citizen]

Originally Posted by JFjets

Pittsburgh? Tebow set multiple records in that game. DT was a big help and didn't get as much credit as he should, but if it was up to you Tebow wouldn't get nearly as much credit as he should, so I don't know what you're complaining about?

Don't care about records for getting a couple of lucky long shots in. He only completed 10 passes. Still wasn't blown away by his performance in that game. It was his best game by far, but he'd set the bar pretty low up to that point. It surfaced again a week later. How well would you say his performance was in THAT game. I understand the defense was horrid too, but tell me how Tebow did in that game?

The reason doesn't matter. They saw how he did in late 2010, if they wanted to change up the game plan and go hyper conservative with it, that's on them.

Those last 3 games were little more than exhibitions. Congrats to Tebow for looking half way decent in those games, but I still don't see how the decline was due to lack of creativity from the coaches. McCoy was still calling the plays in 2011 just as he was in those games. They had tebow throwing it a lot more in his first 2 starts in 2011, but abandoned it when it was clear Tebow couldn't do it very well.

What is so hard for you to understand about that one?

Can you please point me to the threads where you used the same descriptive adjectives to describe the 5 games in 2012 that Andrew Luck had a completion % in that neighborhood or lower? 'preciate that.

Who gives a shit about Luck?

By the way, undermining your argument is the fact that the Broncos were ALSO a non-playoff team with "nothing to play for" at the end of 2010. Huh. Just imagine how much they might have scored if they hadn't just been doggin' it out there, eh?

As I said, exhibitions. Timmy looked better out there because he was the only one really giving it his all. When the next season came and teams still had something to play for, it was a different story and he had a harder time.

That's not even close to accurate. His passing and rushing yards were up and down throughout his entire 13 starts in 2011. He posted low passing and rushing yard totals in games early in the season and high passing and rushing yard totals in games late in the season.

He was still able to break off a few good runs, but he wasn't racking up anywhere near the yardage he was getting since he first took over the offense.

Steelers. No matter how hard you try, you can't make it go away.

Not trying to. Just telling you how it was and not letting tebowners get away with over exaggerating his importance in that game. you'd think he won it all by himself.

I don't get why you guys give him all the credit in the world for making a throw that is fairly routine over the middle for most QBs. Thomas was the one that scorched the secondary. Tebow just managed to finally get the ball in the right place IN FRONT of the receiver, which was something he really struggled to do all year. go back and watch all the games before that and count how many times receivers had to make a catch for the ball thrown BEHIND them or at their SHOELACES, which made them have to break stride, and severely limited yards after the catch.

40% does not="almost half"

Close enough. Point is, Lloyd was a large chunk of Tebow's success (such as it was) passing.

That's all the genius explanation you could come up with??? He averaged 35.5 pass attempts in his first 2 complete starts in 2011. How many pass attempts did he average in his last 2 complete starts in 2011? 35.5. Identical.

Well then, why did you say Fox got more conservative and threw less due to Fox's conservative playcalling?

"So, since Orton ALSO threw less under Fox's Offensive system than he did in 2010"

Simply put, Fox was much more willing to throw with Orton than Tebow. Why? Because he could actually hit the ocean with a rock. Orton had other problems though and that was why he lost his job. When Tebow threw it, it either went straight into the dirt or the tenth row. That's really not going to inspire a lot of confidence from a coaching staff to keep tossing it. This is why they went more run heavy. More than half his pass attempts were a waste. DEAD LAST in the league. But you would have kept throwing it?

Funny, but I don't recall saying that. Why would they run the ball as much with a QB who was as mobile as Lady Liberty and had no experience running the ball? No, what I actually said was that Orton also passed less in Fox's Offense than he did the previous year.

...and yet, his completion percentage was still the same. he got a few more pass attempts in those games, but not by much. Looking at Miami and Detroit, he did get a lot more attempts in those games. But for 9 of those calls, he tucked it in and ran, so they showed up in the stat sheets as a rushing attempt. Take those 9 runs away, even if I gave the benefit of the doubt and said 5 of them were called runs, it would still put him at about 30+ called pass attempts. ...and that ain't even counting the numerous times he was sacked before he could register an attempt.

It was changed by the start of the Raider game because that approach simply wasn't working. The run approach actually worked well enough to win several of those games during the win streak, so I'm not sure why you are complaining about the playcalling. I thought the coaching staff did pretty well under the circumstances. They could have stuck with the Miami game plan and watched him fail, but chose to play to his strengths instead.

Interesting that McGahee was averaging 3.75 yds./rush over Orton's first 4 starts of 2011 and 6.09 yds./rush over Tebow's first 4 starts of 2011. Probably just coincidence, huh?

That is something I DID give Tebow credit for. He really improved the schematics of the running game. When defenses had to worry about the run option, it opened up a lot on the ground. Too bad it didn't make up for the lack of passing in a passing league though. Even finishing #1 in rushing still put them at about 25th overall in offense. yes, the passing game was THAT bad. Not because of lack of turning Tebow loose, but because he was severely limited as it was in that department.

This would have been a DYNAMITE scheme to run if only Tebow could throw the ball. Just think how dangerous he would have been with a threat on the ground he provided, not only with his own legs, but with the RB as well. Add that to even a semi competent passing scheme to keep defenses honest... man, Tebow would be the most dangerous player in the league. The offense would be almost unstoppable and they'd be racking up 40 points per game.

Unfortunately he really can't pass that well, so instead of racking up 40 points with long sustained drives, we ended up leading the league in three and outs, low scoring, and really short drives while trying to win puntfests in low scoring defensive games.

nothing more worthless than a QB who can't throw worth a shit. Really, that is his ONLY real problem. Reading defense goes a long way for that. all the intangibles in the world won't make up for that.

What good are intangibles without tangibles?

[JFjets]

Don't care about records for getting a couple of lucky long shots in. He only completed 10 passes. Still wasn't blown away by his performance in that game. It was his best game by far, but he'd set the bar pretty low up to that point. It surfaced again a week later. How well would you say his performance was in THAT game. I understand the defense was horrid too, but tell me how Tebow did in that game?

Of course you don't, because it's Tebow we're talking about. Any other young QB, you'd care. I don't necessarily think it was his best overall game of the year, but it certainly is the one he got the most attention for because of it being a play-off game and against the #1 Defense in the league.

As far as the game against the Patriots the next week, as soon as you give me a list of all the QB's who never had a sub-par game in their first 16 NFL starts, then I'll concede the point.

Those last 3 games were little more than exhibitions. Congrats to Tebow for looking half way decent in those games, but I still don't see how the decline was due to lack of creativity from the coaches. McCoy was still calling the plays in 2011 just as he was in those games.

So have you written to the league yet informing them that all stats from the last 3 games of the season involving non-playoff teams are hereby to be purged?

I sure am glad this means you won't be talking about the Bills game and the 2nd game against the Chiefs in 2011 anymore.

McCoy was calling plays based on the Offensive philosophy of the head coach at the time. If you believe anything other than that, then....that's ridiculous. That's why Orton was also throwing less passes in 2011 than in 2010.

They had tebow throwing it a lot more in his first 2 starts in 2011, but abandoned it when it was clear Tebow couldn't do it very well.

Tebow had exactly 8 passes in the first half against Miami. In no realm of possibility does that qualify as a lot of passes in a half of NFL play. He had 3 passes in the 3rd quarter of that game. The majority of his passes in that game were in the 4th quarter when they were trying to come back and the coaches had to let him loose.

Against Detroit, he had 13 passes in the first half, which still would not be considered a lot in today's NFL. Probably on the low side of "average". He had 8 passes in the 3rd quarter. Just like against Miami, the majority of his passes were in the 4th quarter when the coaches finally let him loose to try and score some points.

Any other false narratives you want to throw against the wall to see if they'll stick?

Who gives a shit about Luck?

I'm just giving you an opportunity to demonstrate that you do not employ a double standard when it comes to judging Tebow's stats vs. other young NFL QB's. You claim not to use a double standard, but we all know that of course you do, like most Tebow haters. I'm just giving you an opportunity here to chime in with all of the same adjectives about how awful those games were by Luck since he had such a low completion %.

He was still able to break off a few good runs, but he wasn't racking up anywhere near the yardage he was getting since he first took over the offense.

Maybe this escaped your notice, but in some of the games toward the end of the season where he didn't have as many rushing yards, in most of them he also didn't have as many rushing attempts. That might have just a little something to do with it. 6 attempts against KC. 5 attempts against the Pats in the play-offs. 4 attempts against Minnesota.

Not trying to. Just telling you how it was and not letting tebowners get away with over exaggerating his importance in that game. you'd think he won it all by himself.

I'm sure this also escaped your notice, but the reason Tebow got so much attention and credit for his performance in the Steelers game is largely because YOU and all the other haters, both fans and media alike, were under the assumption that if Tebow could chew gum and walk onto the field without tripping over his shoelaces at the same time that he was already having a great day. When he turned in a solid performance, it destroyed expectations. That is largely why he got so much credit for it, not because he made a good pass to DT on the first play of OT. You expected him to fall flat on his face and be relieved by Brady Quinn. When that didn't happen, and Tebow not only had a solid game but led them to the win, that turned everything topsy-turvy because of expectations.

Close enough. Point is, Lloyd was a large chunk of Tebow's success (such as it was) passing.

Wes Welker is a large part of Tom Brady's success as a passer. Aikman/Irvin, the list goes on and on. Tebow is the only one who doesn't get credit for passing yards based on who was catching the ball.

Well then, why did you say Fox got more conservative and threw less due to Fox's conservative playcalling?

You said Orton's pass attempts went down further into the season, when they actually averaged exactly the same through all 4 of his complete starts in 2011. My point was that Fox's conservative game plan had Orton throwing less than he did in 2010. And you know it. Obviously, he threw more than Tebow because there was no point in thinking about running plays involving Orton.

Simply put, Fox was much more willing to throw with Orton than Tebow. Why? Because he could actually hit the ocean with a rock. Orton had other problems though and that was why he lost his job. When Tebow threw it, it either went straight into the dirt or the tenth row. That's really not going to inspire a lot of confidence from a coaching staff to keep tossing it. This is why they went more run heavy. More than half his pass attempts were a waste. DEAD LAST in the league. But you would have kept throwing it?

With no evidence that Tebow could pass more, in a more balanced Offense, and have success, I agree that it wouldn't instill confidence, at least in his "practice" abilities. But they had evidence from 2010, even though you want to say it didn't matter because of your new rule to wipe out any stats from the last 3 games of the season involving non-playoff teams. Why even play the games?

...and yet, his completion percentage was still the same. he got a few more pass attempts in those games, but not by much. Looking at Miami and Detroit, he did get a lot more attempts in those games. But for 9 of those calls, he tucked it in and ran, so they showed up in the stat sheets as a rushing attempt. Take those 9 runs away, even if I gave the benefit of the doubt and said 5 of them were called runs, it would still put him at about 30+ called pass attempts. ...and that ain't even counting the numerous times he was sacked before he could register an attempt.

Sorry, but you don't have any clue what was a called pass or a called run with these running QB's. There were so many plays by Kaepernick that I saw this season where no one could tell whether his run was planned or incidental.

Continued in next post....

[JFjets]

It was changed by the start of the Raider game because that approach simply wasn't working. The run approach actually worked well enough to win several of those games during the win streak, so I'm not sure why you are complaining about the playcalling. I thought the coaching staff did pretty well under the circumstances. They could have stuck with the Miami game plan and watched him fail, but chose to play to his strengths instead.

Wrong. AGAIN. Tebow had 17 passes in the first half at Oakland. A few more than that, actually, because a few were negated by penalties. He had a whopping 5 passes in the 2nd half at Oakland, exactly the opposite of the Miami and Detroit games. So, in the games where you say they started out throwing more, they actually didn't....And in the game where you said they started out throwing less, they actually didn't. Anything else you want to get wrong today? Why don't you hand me that shovel, getting kind of hard to see you down in your hole there.

That is something I DID give Tebow credit for. He really improved the schematics of the running game. When defenses had to worry about the run option, it opened up a lot on the ground. Too bad it didn't make up for the lack of passing in a passing league though. Even finishing #1 in rushing still put them at about 25th overall in offense. yes, the passing game was THAT bad. Not because of lack of turning Tebow loose, but because he was severely limited as it was in that department.

Sorry guy, tough sell on that argument, since whenever they did turn him loose and started airing out the ball late in games, it usually led to points, and quickly. And don't bring up the "prevent defense" non-sense, or the "they were only in the hole because he put them there" BS, as those arguments can also be used, if one chooses, for every other QB in NFL history who had more than an average number of 4th quarter comebacks. Including the great John Elway, who people always have said he only had to make so many 4th quarter comebacks because Dan Reeves kept the shackles on him the first 3 quarters until they were behind and needed him to air it out and win the game. Sounds a little familiar to me. Pretty sure Elway himself has said this also, or at least heavily implied such was the case. Was Reeves keeping the shackles on Elway so much because Elway couldn't throw the ball, or because Reeves was just a darn conservative coach?

This would have been a DYNAMITE scheme to run if only Tebow could throw the ball. Just think how dangerous he would have been with a threat on the ground he provided, not only with his own legs, but with the RB as well. Add that to even a semi competent passing scheme to keep defenses honest... man, Tebow would be the most dangerous player in the league. The offense would be almost unstoppable and they'd be racking up 40 points per game.

Seems to me it was pretty darn lethal to a number of teams in 2011, even with Tebow having a less than great completion %. Know why? Because he scored TD's at a very high rate per times he touched the ball, making the most of his opportunities.

What good are intangibles without tangibles?

What good are tangibles without intangibles? Plenty of QB's who've come and gone in the NFL who had beautiful throwing motions or could throw the ball a mile, and little or no success in the NFL.

[Concerned_Citizen]

Originally Posted by JFjets

Of course you don't, because it's Tebow we're talking about. Any other young QB, you'd care. I don't necessarily think it was his best overall game of the year, but it certainly is the one he got the most attention for because of it being a play-off game and against the #1 Defense in the league.

As far as the game against the Patriots the next week, as soon as you give me a list of all the QB's who never had a sub-par game in their first 16 NFL starts, then I'll concede the point.

So you don't know where all those heroics went either?

I didn't take much stock in the record, because overall, his play wasn't really all that special in that game. He was the beneficiary of D.Thomas having a good game and is the biggest reason Tebow got credit for records.

So have you written to the league yet informing them that all stats from the last 3 games of the season involving non-playoff teams are hereby to be purged?

Never suggested anything of the sort and you know it. I'm merely pointing out it means ABSOLUTELY nothing in the point you keep trying to make that Fox was somehow holding Tebow back with conservative playcalling, yet Studesville "had vision" and let him play. He was playing hard against people who checked out. Naturally he's gonna look a bit better. I said nothing about purging records.

Against Detroit, he had 13 passes in the first half, which still would not be considered a lot in today's NFL. Probably on the low side of "average". He had 8 passes in the 3rd quarter. Just like against Miami, the majority of his passes were in the 4th quarter when the coaches finally let him loose to try and score some points.

Hard to rack up more attempts when you are punting all day. Besides, you keep ignoring the times he tucked it in and ran or got sacked. The stat sheets your are religiously clinging to don't tell you that part, or count them as called pass plays. So it just looks like Fox refused to call pass plays.

I'm just giving you an opportunity to demonstrate that you do not employ a double standard when it comes to judging Tebow's stats vs. other young NFL QB's. You claim not to use a double standard, but we all know that of course you do, like most Tebow haters.

Actually, I'm judging him the same way I would judge any third string caliber passers. you put the ball into the dirt on more than half your attempts (he was the ONLY starting QB that did last year,) then I'm gonna call you a shitty passer.

Guess what? So is the rest of the league.

Maybe this escaped your notice, but in some of the games toward the end of the season where he didn't have as many rushing yards, in most of them he also didn't have as many rushing attempts. That might have just a little something to do with it. 6 attempts against KC. 5 attempts against the Pats in the play-offs. 4 attempts against Minnesota.

that is becuase they quit rushing him so much. he had time to think and find open guys. Should have stuck with containment schemes like Kansas City did in that last drive and he will look like a lost puppy just looking for a hole to run through more than looking for a receiver. He wasn't finding those guys before because he'd panic under stress and try to run it.

Originally Posted by JFjets

Wrong. AGAIN. Tebow had 17 passes in the first half at Oakland. A few more than that, actually, because a few were negated by penalties. He had a whopping 5 passes in the 2nd half at Oakland, exactly the opposite of the Miami and Detroit games. So, in the games where you say they started out throwing more, they actually didn't....And in the game where you said they started out throwing less, they actually didn't. Anything else you want to get wrong today? Why don't you hand me that shovel, getting kind of hard to see you down in your hole there.

My mistake there, but that game did mark when they tried more run option stuff. It worked well enough in that game that they almost ran exclusively in the following game. had only 8 attempts in that one. I'll give you that one though, cuz Kansas City really didn't stop the run until late, so why stop doing it?

Sorry guy, tough sell on that argument, since whenever they did turn him loose and started airing out the ball late in games, it usually led to points, and quickly. And don't bring up the "prevent defense" non-sense, or the "they were only in the hole because he put them there" BS, as those arguments can also be used, if one chooses, for every other QB in NFL history who had more than an average number of 4th quarter comebacks. Including the great John Elway, who people always have said he only had to make so many 4th quarter comebacks because Dan Reeves kept the shackles on him the first 3 quarters until they were behind and needed him to air it out and win the game. Sounds a little familiar to me. Pretty sure Elway himself has said this also, or at least heavily implied such was the case. Was Reeves keeping the shackles on Elway so much because Elway couldn't throw the ball, or because Reeves was just a darn conservative coach?

It isn't BS. If you spend all day punting rather than moving the chains, you are putting too much pressure on the defense to keep you in the game. Denver's defense was merely adequate for many of those offensively challenged teams. But against teams with an offense? That could be classified as rape in all 50 states. ...and Tebow did NOTHING to keep them off the field all day until the defense was finally gassed.

Seems to me it was pretty darn lethal to a number of teams in 2011, even with Tebow having a less than great completion %. Know why? Because he scored TD's at a very high rate per times he touched the ball, making the most of his opportunities.

errrr... you DO realize his point totals for offense was near the bottom of the league, right? He might have made the most of his opportunities when he had them, but he didn't create very many. Trips to the red zone were very few and far in between.

What good are tangibles without intangibles? Plenty of QB's who've come and gone in the NFL who had beautiful throwing motions or could throw the ball a mile, and little or no success in the NFL.

If he were actually able to hit receivers and complete passes, I wouldn't care at all what his throwing motion looked like. But he has trouble doing that. He had been around 47% pretty consistently through his 16 starts.

I gotta look at why. Is it playcalling and receivers? No, the average dropped passes for the Broncos that year was 6.5%, but the league average was 6%. So out of every 200 pass attempts, one more dropped pass happened for Tebow. So THAT wasn't the biggest problem because every QB in the league had that problem to some degree. Playcalling? It wasn't as if there weren't any passes being called. 47% is 47 percent whether he threw 55 times in a game or 11. Yeah, if you are consistently missing passes, it BETTER go longer when you do, or you will likely be punting in three.

He might have been one of the best rated QBs in the 4th quarter, but that just means he was playing from behind almost every week. Tom Brady offense was usually running out the clock, and this didn't register much of a QB rating during those times on average. Same for most of the others. But when you guys pull that stat out, maybe you should do some research on his QB rating in the first 3 quarters. It was pretty bad toward the end of the season when it was shown during one game. his completion percentage was in the 30s, and his QB rating was 40 ish. The 4th quarters actually brought those numbers UP to 47% and somewhat respectable QB rating.

So calling him a 47% passer through most of hte game is actually generous. He's down there with JaMarcus Russell if not for the 4th quarters.

Point is, he struggles hard when it comes to throwing passes. Since that is what QBs are supposed to do....

[JFjets]

So you don't know where all those heroics went either?

I didn't take much stock in the record, because overall, his play wasn't really all that special in that game. He was the beneficiary of D.Thomas having a good game and is the biggest reason Tebow got credit for records.

Tebow played very solidly in the Pittsburgh game, but I'm not sure it was his best game of the season, overall, just the one that got the most attention. DT wasn't the reason Tebow had a good game and got credit for records. You could just as easily say that Tebow was responsible for DT having a good game by getting him the ball in good spots where he could get yards after catch. QB records always get credited to the QB, always been that way and always will be that way. Tebow had other excellent, on-target throws in that game, and he moved the ball well with his legs also.

Never suggested anything of the sort and you know it. I'm merely pointing out it means ABSOLUTELY nothing in the point you keep trying to make that Fox was somehow holding Tebow back with conservative playcalling, yet Studesville "had vision" and let him play. He was playing hard against people who checked out. Naturally he's gonna look a bit better. I said nothing about purging records.

If late in the season games against non-playoff teams mean nothing, then the record books should absolutely be purged of those stats, that is the natural conclusion based upon the statement you have made that they flat out don't matter. Peyton Manning put up some pretty gaudy stats against the Chiefs and the Browns late in the 2012 season. Those stats and games mean absolutely nothing, right, not even worthy of an asterisk? Right? You will twist yourself into an endless pretzel in order to avoid giving any kind of credit to Tebow for anything he has done well. Sad.

I never said Studesville "had vision", I said he played a little more balanced Offensive attack. Which he did.

Hard to rack up more attempts when you are punting all day. Besides, you keep ignoring the times he tucked it in and ran or got sacked. The stat sheets your are religiously clinging to don't tell you that part, or count them as called pass plays. So it just looks like Fox refused to call pass plays.

I see. So now that I've called you out on either being ignorant or dishonest (or very likely both), you change the subject. Typical.

Actually, I'm judging him the same way I would judge any third string caliber passers. you put the ball into the dirt on more than half your attempts (he was the ONLY starting QB that did last year,) then I'm gonna call you a shitty passer.

Another clumsy dodge to try and wriggle out of being outed on your Tebow double standard. Try a little harder next time.

By the way, I wasn't aware that every one of Tebow's incomplete passes was "in the dirt"....

I'll be waiting for you to call Luck some colorful adjectives for those 5 games he had in the 40's. Until you do, can't take you seriously on your criticism of Tebow for low completion %.

that is becuase they quit rushing him so much.

Are you trying to set a record for dodging and changing the subject?

My mistake there, but that game did mark when they tried more run option stuff. It worked well enough in that game that they almost ran exclusively in the following game. had only 8 attempts in that one. I'll give you that one though, cuz Kansas City really didn't stop the run until late, so why stop doing it?

You can say that again.

It isn't BS. If you spend all day punting rather than moving the chains, you are putting too much pressure on the defense to keep you in the game. Denver's defense was merely adequate for many of those offensively challenged teams. But against teams with an offense? That could be classified as rape in all 50 states. ...and Tebow did NOTHING to keep them off the field all day until the defense was finally gassed.

If it isn't BS for Tebow, then the same applies to Elway and every other great comeback artist in NFL history. In Elway's rookie year, the Broncos averaged about the same number of points per game as in Tebow's starts in 2011. If all those punts and low-scoring games are so detrimental to a Defense, then why was the Broncos Defense the 9th best in the league that year?

If he were actually able to hit receivers and complete passes, I wouldn't care at all what his throwing motion looked like. But he has trouble doing that. He had been around 47% pretty consistently through his 16 starts.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Back the truck up. Do you mean to honestly tell me that before you saw Tebow throw a single pass after being drafted by the Broncos, you never said anything negative about his throwing motion? Why do I find that hard to believe?

I gotta look at why. Is it playcalling and receivers? No, the average dropped passes for the Broncos that year was 6.5%, but the league average was 6%.

DT dropped 14% of his passes and Decker dropped 17% of his passes in 2011, both good for the 20 worst receivers in the league in that category. I believe only the Browns receivers had a higher % of drops in 2011 than the Broncos.

Playcalling? It wasn't as if there weren't any passes being called. 47% is 47 percent whether he threw 55 times in a game or 11. Yeah, if you are consistently missing passes, it BETTER go longer when you do, or you will likely be punting in three.

You can't seriously be this ignorant. Can you? As I have reminded you on more than one occasion, Elway himself said he wasn't surprised by Tebow's lower than average completion % because such a high % of his throws were downfield, low % throws. You seriously think the fact that he didn't get to throw to his backs or tight ends nearly as much as other QB's had nothing to do with it, either?

Give Brady the exact same passes attempted as Tebow did and I guarantee Brady doesn't come out smelling like a rose. In 2011, Brady had a 44% completion rate on passes of 21-30 yards, 0% completion rate on passes of 31-40 yards, and 17% completion rate on passes more than 40 yards. And here's the kicker. 8% of Brady's pass attempts were 21 yards or greater. 8%.

Considering that Tebow in 2011 had almost three times as high a percentage - 22% - of throws 21 yards or more, I think I'll cut him a little slack on his lower than average completion %.

He might have been one of the best rated QBs in the 4th quarter, but that just means he was playing from behind almost every week.

You mean like Elway did quite a few times throughout his career?

Point is, he struggles hard when it comes to throwing passes. Since that is what QBs are supposed to do....

When given an opportunity to get into a passing rhythm in a system that was more to his strengths, he showed that he could pass very well. And what QB's are "supposed" to do is evolving very, very quickly in the NFL, unless you think that Russell Wilson, Colin Kaepernick, RGIII and Cam Newton aren't going to be racking up any significant rushing stats next year.

By the way, just as an aside, the 2011 Broncos had a 44% 3rd down conversion rate through the first 4 1/2 games, with Orton as starter. If they had maintained that the entire season, it would have been 8th best in the league. That conversion rate was good for a 1-4 record. Just sayin', like I've said a hundred times before, the 3rd down stats are not all you've cracked them up to be.

[Hobbes3259]

Originally Posted by Jetsetter34

Playoff ratings - Flacco's was 114 and Kaepernicks was 107. They talked about it on the NFL network.

They were talking about how they say colin is a run first QB when in fact he had the second highest PASSER RATING in the playoffs behind Flacco.

My point being, YOU STILL HAVE TO PASS to win anything in this league.

So, have you supported the Ground and Pound?