Great Post. I think Tebow will definitely help the Jets in the red zone and situationally. No matter what happens it is going to be a very entertaining ride this year. Who would have thought Tebow would choose the New York Jets.
The Jets chose Tebow. Rex and Sparano love the Wildcat, and they think Tebow can run a very effective version of it. It fits what Rex wants in an offense in terms of running the ball a lot. It fits what Sparano wants because he's done it before. Will it work? Who knows. I think we need one more receiver that can get open deep. A guy like Braylon would be perfect. Even if he's not 100%, he's still big and can get open from time to time. We need another guy in case Schilens gets hurt. Braylon and Schilens could battle for the job, whoever is healthier/better wins it. I wonder how Holmes handles this offense. That will be the biggest issue for us, I do not trust Santonio to shut his mouth and fit in. We want him to get along with Sanchez, well, now we bring in someone to compete with Sanchez and give him less credibility to try to keep Holmes in line. If we run a full-time Tebow offense running the ball as much as we would, it would be even worse.
I think Tebow and Holmes could be hooking up on some big plays this year out of the Jesuscat. I remember Holmes making a lot of big plays as a Steeler after Rapelessberger extended the play and Holmes got lost in the secondary. Tebow can do similar things in the pocket.
I understand that the Jets chose Tebow, but according to reports he had a choice between Jacksonville and the Jets and he chose the Jets. I love that...and I think it says a lot about him.
Bottom line, he lead his team to the divisional round of the playoffs and none of those other teams you listed stood a chance. And none of those teams got out of their quarterbacks what the Broncos got out of Tebow. A lot of that has to do with Tebow's efficiency. That was the biggest difference between Denver and those teams. They may be similar in point production, but not in efficiency. Which happens to be more important. And I am not discrediting the rest of the team, but they were honestly very average and below. They were a bad football team, who just went through a coaching change. They were a bad team with Kyle Orton. I am crediting Tebow a lot because in his case, he really did have a lot to do with their offense becoming efficient. He certainly had a whole lot to do with them becoming the #1 rushing team. He also had a lot to do with why defenses like Pittsburgh got baited by his running ability. His leadership and ability to make big plays under pressure and late in the games had a lot to do with those wins. They were not efficient with Kyle Orton. The dude turned over the ball. They were not clutch in the 4th quarter with Orton. They were 1-4 with Orton. And the truth is an average or below average conventional offense like the Broncos were not going to get anywhere with a mediocre quarterback like Orton. The NFL is littered with those types of teams. An unconventional quarterback, and unconventional offense gave them a chance and was able to get a lot of that group of players. And it also doesn't take a genius to figure out when you turn over the ball a lot, you're going to have higher scoring games like a lot of other NFL teams. A lot of that is out of necessity. When you run, run, run, run have lots of 3 and outs, and you protect the ball you're going to have shorter games as well as lower scoring games. But just for the record, there's no rule in the NFL that you have to be a high scoring offense or that that's the only way to go. That may be the popular thing to do, and it may be fun to watch, but at the end of the day, the franchise with the most Super Bowl wins, are the Pittsburgh Steelers, and they don't care for a high scoring offense either. And it worked for them a few years ago just as well as it did in the 1900's. So until that stops being effective I don't expect coaches like Fox and conservative offenses to go away. And I continue to expect high octane offenses getting upset by those types of teams.
Did I really just read that a majority of Tebow's throws were tight spirals? That's more than half, right?
More tables from stats.com: Timmy|Comp|ATTs|Comp%|Y/ATT Sideline Throws|63|167|38|5.7 Everywhere Else|63|104|61|7.4 Sanchez|Comp|ATTs|Comp%|Y/ATT Sideline Throws|98|207|47|5.2 Everywhere Else|210|336|63|7.1 A little different than Vandy's numbers, but his table has Tebow with 136 completions.
Well yeah, you're obviously unable to decipher moving piles of trash from written ones, as per your belief Tebow is the next Joe Montana.
In this whole paragraph, I still don't see the defense mentioned once. One of the reasons they were able to ride an offense like this to success compared to the other low scoring teams is because they had a good defense and solid special teams. It isn't wrong to point to this out, and it doesn't take away from Tebow. No QB would win a Super Bowl without solid defense and special teams, but to even credit them once while touting Tebow's efficiency is misleading. There is a reason a low octane offense can win games, because the defense isn't giving up a lot of points. I think all of Denver's losses came when opponenents scored 20+ points? When in close games, the type of offense Tebow runs is very successful. He puts his defense in good positions and keeps them rested with the run game. He is dangerous to hit a big play with his arm, and in a close game that is all you need. When the defense struggled, is when the Broncos as a whole struggled.
stats.com is a figment of your imagination. It is nothing but made up junk by people who don't know shit.
Actually, those are from CNNSI, via STATs. They even break down underthrows, overthrows, thrown wide, throwaways, spikes, etc. in their passing splits.
These things do not support that idea that Tebow is an accurate passer and so they are clearly nothing but junk.
I feel like Junc makes good arguments because he chooses valid arguments to make. Like Brady vs Manning is very valid and he has his points. Tebow vs every QB in the nfl is not a valid argument. Then again, I haven't been around long so I might be off
Wait a second...Denver's defense was: 23rd in the league in yards 26th in the league in points 24th in the league in efficiency(yards per point) 26th in the league in special teams defensive field starting position Where are you getting that Denver had some amazing defense that is deserving of credit? And if you're going to sit here and tell me Denver had good special teams last year, I am convinced you didn't watch any of their games. I also don't see what defense has to do with Tebow's efficiency and ability to score touchdowns and protect the football. And for the record, Denver's losses under Tebow came when they lost the turnover battle. Tebow's 4 losses in the regular season: Detroit -3 turnover margin Patriots -3 turnover margin Bills -4 turnover margin Kansas City - 1 turnover margin That's why they lost. Same reason most NFL teams lose football games. And that's also why their opponents outscored them by 20+ points. That's what happens when you are -3 or -4. Every NFL team gets blown out when you are -3 or -4 except those with GREAT defenses. Denver is no exception and their defense couldn't help them when they turned over the ball. They were no Pittsburgh Steelers, that's for sure. The Patriots divisional playoff game is the only game where they were +1 and lost. The Patriots are also one of about only 3 teams in the NFL who can win games despite a - turnover margin. They won both their playoff games and a number of regular season games despite a - turnover margin. And even that's an exception to the rule. I just don't know too many NFL teams that win football games when they go -3 in turnovers. Do you?
