You said before one time, and I pointed out that Tebow's Gators destroyed the undefeated, third ranked Cincinnati -- the bowl game where Tebow went 31-35 and almost 500 yards. Why do you keep saying it when I pointed out it wasn't true?
Good points, but how many kids or casual fans will read that or know that about Cam? Media, fans, little kids all loved him because of that big smile and that superman celebration. My point was that these narratives are used for Tebow like it doesn't apply to any other athletes when it does. I personally like Tebow but the way he is portrayed by super fans (not you) and the media and the narratives around it is annoying. Sanchez's own college coach said he wasn't ready. Everyone called Sanchez a bust after his Buffalo game. Everyone said only reason Sanchez made the playoffs because he was let in. Everyone called the Cincy game luck, everyone called Sanchez in SD luck again, and then everyone pointed and said see Sanchez sucks in the Indy game where he actually played his best. Yet nobody that year fell in love with Sanchez and wrote these narratives. Then second year Sanchez had a LOT of late comebacks and wins, and in my opinion they were more impressive than Tebow. HOU comeback is one of the best ones ever. Yet nobody talked about his "heart" or "will to win", the narratives or phrases used for Tebow. Then when Sanchez fell apart in games this year, he was called "weak" (and in games his first two years also) even though Tebow had similar struggles against similar teams. Yet Tebow is called a "competitor"
And once again I will point out that Cincinnati was horribly over-ranked, and beat absolutely nobody that year. The Gators beat 1 ranked team, and got abused by Bama. Period. Also, I knew that was the only thing in my post you'd address. Tebow homers deflect, are insanely predictable, and, for the most part, extremely close minded.
Maurkice Pouncey was drafted the same year as Tebow--2010. He was pick #18 in the first round by Pittsburg and Tebow went #25 to Denver. Maurkice's twin brother, Mike, was pick #15 in 2011 by the Dolphins. Phaytal, you have the right to your opinion, but please be sure your facts are accurate.
I don't understand why people lump all Tebow supporters into one category. I support Tebow because I've seen what he is capable of on the football field. I honestly didn't know he had a throwing problem until the "experts" told me he could not pass during the draft process. In college, in the toughest conference, he was one of the most prolific and efficient passers of all time. In the NFL, he has shown flashes of good QBing when allowed to throw. He has also had terrible passing games, but that is to be expected early in a young QB's career. To make Tebow look badly, he is often compared to the likes of Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees. His completion percentage was admittedly very low, but I think that is a result of several factors... inexperience, lack of OTAs and reps in practice, and awful play-calling and coaching. I'm not one of those guys who thinks Sanchez is a better QB. I think Tebow has a much better athleticism, QB skill set, higher upside and should start day one. Obviously, that won't happen, but IMO Tebow is the kind of guy to build a franchise around. BTW, I'm an atheist so don't go there about the religious crap. I could care less about his religious views.
Then why use ranking as the measure of worth in your post? I think most of the SEC is better than half the teams that are ranked. Plus FSU is a decent team. But you hung everything on ranking, then ignore a #3 ranked team. As for your observations about me, that's not really interesting to the whole group. Let's stick to football.
As predictable as you, who when it would be a simple matter to just say, "I was wrong when I said the only ranked team they beat after Harvin went down was LSU," has to toss this weak sauce. Your statement was factually incorrect. Period. You're also quite wrong that Harvin was a "circus catch machine," unless you've got some idiosyncratic notion of what that means. What he was was a burner who could get open, and who due to his speed, possessed an unbelievable ability to get YAC.
This is why it's easy to lump all Tebow supporters together: facts are optional. The people I saw most comparing Tebow to those other QBs were Tebow supporters talking about how Tebow was the best QB ever. So if he's going to be compared -- accurately -- to those QBs he looks terrible because he has bad stats compared to them. Is Tebow a proven winner or lacking experience to justify bad numbers? I hear both comments from Tebow fans. He was, as you point out, the most efficient QB in SEC history, so how is he too inexperienced to throw a tight spiral or not fumble? How did he not get enough reps in practice when he was the starting QB? If inexperience was the sole reason for his numbers the offense would have improved as he gained experience. Instead he ended 1-4 in Denver (just like Orton). "Awful play-calling and coaching"??? They build an entire offensive scheme around his strengths. What more could they have done?
His mechanics and habits are not conducive to quick-fire throws. The arm motion was the obvious example, but really it's every part of his body from his feet all the way up. In college, the whole offense was geared to spread the field and throw for chunks, or else tuck and pick up 5 or 6 yards. And it affected his mechanics big time. He actually does throw a nice ball if it's 25+ yards in the air. But if he can't develop the ability to throw short, quick, accurate throws (and do it well), he won't last. All of his observed problems trace back to this point -- when he hesitates and doesn't throw, it's because he's not mechanically ready to throw in rhythm. When he throws a bad throw ( looks bad, goes off target), it's because he went ahead and tried despite not going through proper mechanics. But he can throw it, and throw it hard, and throw it on target. It's just that's he's having to do his job while deploying some new mechanics habits. And it's not easy. And there's no assurance of success. But it should be fun to watch.
I think one thing that is overlooked is how many halves Tebow sat because they put up 40 points in a half.
Regarding reps. At Florida, he took every snap from the shotgun and they ran a completely different scheme in their passing game. All those reps didn't give him any experience with working under center and taking 3, 5, and 7 step drops, or with the timing of those types of passes. As for the coaching and awful play calling, yes, that's exactly what it was in most cases. Sure, they reworked a large part of the offense, supposedly to tailor it to Tebow's skillset, but that doesn't mean that they did a good job of it. McCoy had no experience to speak of with Spread Option, or with other variations of Option football. He basically watched some film and took some plays from what he saw. He also brought in players like Tebow and D Thomas and picked their brain. Then, he drew up some plays. Problem is, lots of Option football is series based. You run a couple of plays to set up others. There are also things called constraint plays which you use to try and keep defenses honest. McCoy showed that he really had little understanding of this. Now, if you really paid attention and knew what you were talking about, you'd know that Tebow and the Broncos beat the Steelers using a largely "conventional" offense. Most of the big plays came against zone coverages and they were "conventional" play action passes. That was, without a doubt, the best game that Mike McCoy has ever called/planned. The next week, he followed that up with a stinker against the Pats. It's hard to say if McCoy never figured out that the Pats were playing a 5-2 (50) defense, or if he just had no idea how to attack it. If you look at most the other games, you would have seen a rather predictable pattern. For 3 1/2 Quarters, the play calling and the game plan sucked. Then, Denver would find itself behind in the 4th Q, they would throw the gameplan out and would go from the shotgun with 3,4 or 5 receivers and Denver would move down the field.
Wait, I thought Tebow was some superstar clutch player and his 4th quarter was his time to shine? It can't be both ways. Either Tebow sucked for 3.5 quarters and suddenly raised the bar under pressure (proving he's not a solid player) or he couldn't operate within an NFL offense until they turned the offense into his college offense (proving he's not an NFL level player). If the play calling was that bad and his inexperience was that much of an issue the team should have had the bulk of its Tebow-led losses at the beginning of his tenure, not at the end, especially when they played shitty teams like KC at the end. This is exactly what I'm talking about. Everytime Tebow is talked about positively, he singlehandedly carried 53 players to victory. Anything negative is somebody else's fault.
You know not of which you speak. The Gators completely fell apart after Tebow left, with Urban Meyer and all of that NFL talent. Take it from a Gator grad, I know what I am talking about.
Did you watch any of the games? How about he handed the ball of on 1st and 2nd down and was put in 3rd and long repeatedly for 3.5 quarters before the coaches were forced to let him play.
I think you're seeing it because you're looking for it, and straining to see it. I don't think anybody thinks that or says that. Football is a complex game, with 22 starters. To discuss something, you kind of have to simplify it and stick to one thing at a time. It's really not possible to mention all the great players and lousy ones in every sentence. If the discussion is about any quarterback, its understood he has teammates that make him look good, and its understood that that not everything is his fault. If you're willing to listen carefully, most of the time the discussion goes something like "Tebow is not an NFL quarterback because ________," citing some past example. And someone responds why, in their opinion, that example or reason doesn't support the conclusion that Tebow is not an NFL quarterback. Then, someone like you goes the other way, crying "Oh, so nothing is his fault and his teammates get no credit!" Of course that's not true. But in life, you sometimes have to deal with things one at a time. If everybody could just relax, and give Tebow the same benefit of the doubt as say, Josh Freeman or Jake Locker, or even Colin Kaepernik, then there'd be no need to rehash all this pain that is supposedly being caused by shooting the breeze on the internet (the so-called "circus").
There are plenty of posts in the tebow forum where people are dismissing the rest of the broncos team. I'm seeing it because I'm reading it.
You are putting words in my mouth. I did not say the sole reason for his completion percentage was inexperience. It was a contributing factor. Also, if you think the offense Denver installed was playing to Tebow's strengths, you are once again mistaken. That offense was nothing like what he ran at Florida. Tebow was not an "option" QB ala Tommie Frazier at Nebraska. Tebow was a "spread option" QB which is completely different. The guy can throw. When Denver got behind, they would often put him in the shotgun and let him do his thing. I believe that is why he had so many 4th quarter comebacks. And yes, it is possible to be inexperienced and talented at the same time. One does not cancel out the other. What I am saying is that his upside is huge, and much larger than Sanchez's. That is my opinion. I don't expect you to agree with me, but if you talked about how great Sanchez was, I would respectfully disagree... I would not attempt to put you into some Sanchez worshipping category. That is the problem with Tebow detractors. It's as if you can't stand it when someone likes Tebow's game. It offends you. It gets under your skin. Why do you care so much if we think Tebow is good? And yes, I strongly believe he is better than Sanchez, even on this day, without him having to improve a lick.
Giving Tebow the benefit of the doubt makes you a Tebot, Tebowner, Tebowite... etc... Apparently, Tebow is the one player in the NFL in which it is not possible to think he is good without worshipping at his altar and being a religious zealot.
