No, it's called observational bias. I'm not looking for it. Just look at the OP in this thread, or really any pro-Tebow thread. It's right there. Even if I was looking for it, it doesn't change that the comments are made.
I looked at the OP in this thread. It wasn't there. I have a feeling it would go on like this forever. Pointless exercise all around.
Actually, for whatever reason, the coaching staff never adjusted. Many of us were screaming about it on the Denver forums. It was a huge bone of contention. In game day threads, many could pretty accurately call the plays before Denver ran them. And like I said, if you go back and look at the times they won games late, I've explained how it usually happened. Take the game against the Jets for example. here's the play by play from ESPN of that final drive: That's a 12 play drive, with 10 of those plays with Tebow in the Shotgun, and most of them were in Spread formation with 4 or 5 receivers. Or how about the last 3 Denver drives against the Bears that all resulted in points? Not counting kicks or spiking the ball, that's 21 plays with all 21 of them being run from the Shotgun, often with 4 or 5 receivers. Or the drive to tie the score against SD and take the game into OT ? Of course, he wasn't successful on every single series that they ran predominately from the Shotgun, but then again, no teams are successful on EVERY series. The simple fact of the matter though is that Tebow was much more successful operating out of the Shotgun and with spread formations and the numbers bear that out.
going to have some more fun with this and display what has to be your complete and total ignorance, or demonstrate that you are a frakking liar. here's some stat's from Harvin's last year at Florida (2008): Record: 13-1, .929 W-L% (2nd of 120) Player Cmp Att Pct Yds Y/A AY/A TD Int Rate Tim Tebow 192 298 64.4 2746 9.2 10.6 30 4 172.4 The following year (2009) Record: 13-1, .929 W-L% (3rd of 120) Player Cmp Att Pct Yds Y/A AY/A TD Int Rate Tim Tebow 213 314 67.8 2895 9.2 9.8 21 5 164.2 Whooo Boy, can really see where Tebow and the rest of the guys at Florida completely crumbled after Percy Harvin left. I mean, their record fell from 13-1 all the way to 13-1. Winning percentage plunged from 92.9% all the way down to 92.9%. Tebow's numbers of completions increased, his number of attempts increased, and his completion percentage increased. Yep, quite a fall off. Oh, wait, there's a stat to look at. His QBR fell from 172.4 all the way down to 164.2. Want to know how terrible a freaking 164.2 QBR is ? Why, it's only a measly 16.5 pts HIGHER than Peyton Manning's HIGHEST RATING of 147.7 while at Tennessee, or 16.1 pts HIGHER than Eli Manning's HIGHEST RATING of 148.1 while at Ole Miss. Yeah, they really crumbled pretty badly after Harvin left. /sarcasm. Got any other really stupid things to say Phaytal ?? PS: BTW, while you basically tried to claim that they didn't really beat anyone to speak of, their freaking Strength of Schedule was #8 in the nation in 2009. They played against 3 Top 5 teams that season and went 2-1 against them.
2008 - UF, with Harvin, beat 6 ranked teams, and won a BCS National Championship. 2009 - UF, without Harvin, beat 2 ranked teams, including a ridiculously over-ranked Cincy team, and got crushed by #2 Bama in the SEC Championship. Those two seasons are absolutely nothing alike, no matter how badly you want them to be.
You see, if Tebow wins a championship, a division, or a playoff game, it's not the win that matters -- because his stats reveal the truth. It's the stats that matter. But if Tebow loses a championship or a game, and stats are about the same, then winning is the only measure.
Your sarcastic comment would hold water if both seasons had the same difficulty of opponents. Having to beat 5 ranked teams to get to a bowl game, and having to beat 2 ranked teams to get to a bowl game are night and day differences. In 2008, he won all 5, and beat the 6th. In 2009, he could only beat one of them, and got crushed by the other. If he was the same Tebow without Harvin as you like to think he was, then his numbers should have gone up exponentially against a far, far weaker schedule, yes? So why did his QB rating go down? /backfire
God, now you are really showing your stupidity. Yes, they only beat 2 ranked teams and lost to the third because they happened to only play 3 ranked teams that year. What's to say that if they played 10 other ranked teams in 2009, that they wouldn't have won those games as well ? Their only loss was to the best team in the country, the team that won the NC. You said they freaking crumbled after Harvin left. I clearly showed that they did not. Yes, they lost to Bama, but they still ended up being ranked #3 in the freaking country. Going from #1 to #3 is crumbling ? Are you really that stupid or that much of a liar ?
Strength of schedule for 08 was 5th in the country. SoS for 09 dropped all the way frakking down to 8th in the country. Yeah, a far weaker schedule. And again, you continue to LIE since in 09, he won 2 of the games against ranked teams. Oh, no, his QB rating went down to a lowly 164.2, WHICH IS STILL HIGHER than ANY RATING that Peyton or Eli Manning managed to achieve. Again, he really crumbled there.
One formation? No. One system ? Not really. By this I mean that you can run many different spread formations in a spread system. It's not like the NFL Wildcat where there is basically 1 formation. As to the system, it means that it's the one he was most comfortable in last year. That doesn't preclude him from getting better and progressing in another system. Who knows, he might actually get really comfortable and learn how to drop back from under center and get his timing down. I mean, he did just that against Pittsburgh. Most of his passes in that game were on play action passes from under center, with only 2-3 receivers out running routes. One thing to note though, say that he ends up only being able to do well in the spread option or plain spread system. Thing is, lots of NFL QBs are like that. Take them out of one system where they do well and put them in another system and they look terrible. It's why people talk about whether QB X is a good fit for a WCO, versus a EP offense.
Nope. You are still ignoring coaching and development. Do you believe that a rookie who spends the entire year on the bench does not develop at all? I'm sorry, but NFL experience is NFL experience. Comparing Tebow's first 16 starts to Sanchez is 100% illogical and invalid. Hell, lets look at Aaron Rodgers' or Tom Brady's first 16 starts. Do you really think his stats would be almost the same if he started his rookie year? You are way off base, not even close to reality making that apples to oranges comparison.
Unless both QBs have the exact same situation, vis a vis, when they start in the league, the comparison I did is about as close as you can get. I haven't ignored coaching and development, though, that even has to be looked at objectively. Tebow was the third string QB during his rookie TC while Sanchez got the first string reps. Oh, but Tebow had another offseason you would argue. yes, an offseason severely shortened by the lockout. An off season where Denver also had a coaching change and a new system was put in place. An offseason where Tebow was still only the second string QB and perhaps even the third. Remind me again of how long offseason was last year and how many OTAs/Practices teams actually had before the season started ? Again, this wasn't a case like that of Aaron Rodgers, where you had a QB who sat and learned for 3 full offseasons as the #2 QB. Not even close.
His mechanics are not conducive to the quick drops or even quick read-and-fire reads. He'll need to improve on that or else. Doesn't mean he has to get elite in that area, because he's got a lot going for him besides that. But he will need to reach consistent, repeatable competence in that area.
I pointed out some useful information in response to this complaint earlier -- Tebow's stats actually look better if you just look at rookie year. One of the reasons to consider his first 16 games is to give a bigger sample size and make it more fair. It's still not perfect, but it's about all you can do. After all, stats aren't everything. Here's the earlier post in case you missed it (I looked up some numbers to make it):
What the heck, given what I said in my other reply still does apply, let's go ahead and compare Mark's 2nd year as a starter, his 19th - 33rd overall start. Code: Passing Rushing Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD Int Rate Y/A AY/A Att Yds Y/A TD Sanchez 278 507 54.80% 3291 17 13 75.3 6.49 6.01 30 105 3.5 3 Tebow 172 362 46.78% 2618 17 9 82.53 7.70 7.92 156 872 5.61 9 Yep, Sanchez had a higher comp %, attempted and completed more passes and threw for 673 more yards, an avg of 44.87 more ypg. BUT, Tebow ran from 767 more yards than Sanchez, for an avg of 51.13 more ypg. Combining totals puts Sanchez at 3396 total yards while Tebow had 3490. Also, Sanchez had 17 passing TDs, as did Tebow. Sanchez had 13 INTS while Tebow only had 9. Sanchez rushed for 3 TDs while Tebow ran for 9. That brings total TDs to 20 for Sanchez, and 26 for Tebow. (Am looking to try and find fumble stats for both Sanchez and Tebow as they should be included as well.) And lastly, let's look at QB Rating. For Sanchez, it's 75.3 while Tebow earned an 82.3. Again, let me reiterate that these are that stats for Sanchez's 19th - 33rd start in the league, after he had 2 full complete offseasons and TCs as the first string Starter and 18 NFL starts already to his name, compared to Tebow's 1st - 15th start, with no offseasons or TC as a starter, and one of his two offseasons was severely abbreviated by the lockout. Comparing the two, Tebow gained more yards, put more TDs on the board, had fewer INTs/turnovers (pretty sure that's still the case even with his fumbles) had a higher Yards per attempt, a higher Adjusted yards per attempt, and a higher passer rating. Now, by all means, go ahead and tell me what is supposedly unfair for Sanchez about this comparison.
