You make some real good points, ill add that he only has 16 starts , who looks good 14 or 15 out of thier first 16 ? The expectation level for him is unrealistic . He did much better in his first 16 games starting than a bunch of current starters , out of the starting 32 , he would fall in the middle .
by good I dont just mean stats wise. There have been guys that had horrible games but looked like an NFL QB star in the waiting. Manning had 16 starts as a rookie and I think he went 3-13 and his stats were pretty good. 57% completion, 3,789 yards 26 tds (28INT) but that isnt the whole story is it? Anyone that has ever watched football could see, with time, Manning would be very good and possibly great. Rodgers sat for 3 years and in his fourth year where he got 16 starts he completed 64% of his passes for 4,100 yards 28 tds and 13 ints for a 94 passer rating. before that he had a total of 59 passes completing 35 for a 1 td and 1 int. yet watching him I think most people thought he could be good (i didnt think anyone could guess how good) but what you saw gave you hope. Same goes for other good-to-great QB's. Again 16 games is a small sample size, but as I said before stats dont tell everything, but the eyes... the eyes dont usually lie and if I had to bet on my heart or my head or my eyes...i take my eyes every time. and my eyes tell me Tebow doesnt look like Manning, Rodgers, or even Flacco or Sanchez honestly. And to assume that after 3 years in the league where he spent the better part of that as the 2nd string QB with very little improvement in the his most deficient areas will somehow blossom in year 4 or 5.... well l would be surprised. Although, as I said before his future hasnt been written yet so maybe he is the one guy. We will see.
Nope -- Rodgers looked pretty bad in his preseason appearances in year 2. There were some seriously questioning his future. Part of the reason is that he was working on his mechanics. Check out this Youtube about the Packers picking Brian Brohm in 2008, three years after they picked Aaron Rodgers. At the 00:36 point, Merrill Hoge says he likes Brohm better than Aarron Rodgers -- this was after three preseasons of Rodgers, and some of them looked rough. At about 2:20, Hoge says the "disturbing" thing about Rodgers is he had to "see a route come open" and could not anticipate a receiver coming open. Keep in mind this whole conversation is 3 years into Rodgers' career, after three preseasons of watching him play [YOUTUBE]he0BIKmoq0s[/YOUTUBE] Todd McShay predicts in this video that Brohm will be starting over Rodgers.
I know there is no amount of talking back and forth that will change anyone's opinion on Tebow (have not seen anyone ever change their opinion going on 3 years). I have said this 1000 times and Ill say it again. His motion in college was unorthodox but he completed 66.4% of everything he threw and had a very strong arm ( I know college is not the NFL....indulge me for a minute) . It was good enough to break and set just about every PASSING SEC record. The pundits, talking heads and analyst started nit picking his motion and Tebow became determined to change it before the draft and has not stopped since (this was the single biggest mistake of his football life) . The rest is history. Joe Montana agrees with me by the way....but what does he know...? Go back and watch tape of the Steeler game, even his 80 yard TD to Thomas was the "old" college motion. When he stops thinking about his stupid motion and just plays , he gets it done. Phillip Rivers also has a very unorthodox motion (the Frankenstein shot putt) but he never tinkered with it and became a big time QB. Tebow should have left it alone
I don't agree with them -- they're the same ones saying Tebow can't play. The point is that is simply not the case that everybody that ends up good, looks good along the way. Come on, have an open mind. You thought Aaron always looked good, and the fact is he didn't. Particularly in his second season preseason, everybody was talking about how rough it looked. Looks. That was your point. And the facts show that the "eye test" doesn't always work, especially in preseason or when a QB is working through some mechanics issues.
He never passed the "eye test" imo. I was convinced it wouldn't work in college. Until I watched it work for years. I was convinced it wouldn't work in the NFL. Damn sure was a lot of fun being proven wrong at every turn though.
The point is not what the pundits say or even how they perform in preseason games. Practice is really what matters Aaron Rodgers earned the starting job in practice. They also were not trying to resign Favre there must have been some confidence in Rodgers. Practice is where the confidence in a player starts if Tebow is not producing in practice he will not get another shot. The only way I envision Tebow getting a shot at a starting Job in the NFL (With his current skill set) is with a team that wants put fans in the seats and will let Tebow play in a spread type offense. When it fails miserably (and it will it is just not sustainable in the NFL) Tebow will be done in the NFL. If Tebow improves to a point where he can make an accurate throw, on time and from under center he could be successful in Cam Newton style offense. People talk about Tebows low interception rate and low completion percentage. These are caused by the same thing unwilling to make a risky or tight throw. Tebow could probably be a successful QB with a completion percentage around 56-58% but at 46% he will not.
That's one thing that long-time Tebow fans (like myself) don't often express well -- one reason we're so fascinated is that, at first, we felt the same way has his current "haters" (detractors, non-fans, whatever you want to call them). The first instinct in watching him play or throw is "this is not a quarterback I am looking at." And "this guy can't throw." Then you hang in there, and there's this uncanny tendency to make throws, particularly down the field. He goes out and has one of the most statistically efficient passing careers in the history of college football (by every single measure). And you end up saying, "well, throw out that brain impulse I had just from looking at it." It makes him sort of an enigma, and sparks more interest, when you go from thinking he can't throw to realizing he can. Some people, obviously, never get there, and disagree.
NFL.com team power rankings... "Ranked #13: Tebow" http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap10...kings-robert-griffin-iiiled-redskins-shoot-up This is insulting.
Wow, that's pretty crazy. By each of the other 31 team logos, their team name is listed. Next to the Jets' logo is "Tebow" in the same font as the other teams' names instead of "Jets". And that is the NFL's site, not a Tebow fan site. I agree that it is disrespectful to the team, the rest of the players, and the organization. But... it is pretty funny at the same time.
Tebow is the one being mocked by the idiot Elliot Harrison and by extension the Jets organization , don't worry if the Jets keep winning they will get the last laugh on the NFL.com clown troop.
I'm not insulted personally. Doesn't bother me one bit. I think it's funny. Now... if I was on the Jets or in the Jets front office, I wouldn't be happy about it.
It insults all 53 players on the roster, including Tebow. If Tebow is the person I think he is then he's embarrassed and unhappy about the fact that they're putting his name there instead of the team's name.
That is exactly what I said. EDIT: Minus the part about Tebow being embarrassed/unhappy. He's probably apathetic by now.
He tries to tune out all of this ridiculous noise, there are about 200 Tebow stories a day, I doubt he will ever even know or give two shits about an nfl.com listing his name by a logo.
Thats the point though isnt it? It really hasnt worked in the nfl. sure he won some close games and he had some very exciting moments but truly what did he or the broncos get out of it? 8-8 and a playoff win? So what. Now the broncos are saddled with one of the toughest schedules in the NFL. And a guy named Peyton took his job. and what did Tebow get? well he got shipped out as fast as Elway could get it done and signed with a team that uses him in a myriad of positions that have nothing to do with being a QB. So his reward for supposedly proving everybody wrong was, getting kicked to the curb by Elway, a demotion to 2nd string QB and a new team. Also, the college argument doesn't hold water, this is the NFL where only the best get invited and only the best of the best become great. I saw Tebow play in college (on TV not live...florida never made it to the west coast that im aware of) and he looked good but he also played in an offense designed specifically for his skill set and he was on the best college team on the planet often playing undersized and under manned defenses. If his college stats meant anything wouldnt his QB rating, completion percentage, yardage totals and scoring drives all be higher?
WHy? Its neither a negative or positive comment on my part. Its merely the truth. His coaches, were amazing at creating a game plan that lead to his success, it also helped he was surrounded by an abnormal amount of NFL talent. But above even that, he was placed in a system that worked wonders for him, he clearly was a great college QB but that doesn't mean squat. Colin Kaepernick from the 49ers was the same type of QB, he could run and throw and had similar numbers to Tebows. 10,098 yards passing (9,286 for tebow) 82 TDS (88 for tebow) 24 INT (15 for Tebow) 4000 yards rushing (2947 for tebow) 59 rushing TD (57 for tebow) I found this out about him: Kaepernick is the only quarterback in the history of Division I FBS college football to have passed for over 10,000 yards and rushed for over 4,000 yards in a collegiate career. Kaepernick is also the only Division 1 FBS QB to have passed for over 2,000 yards and rushed for over 1,000 yards in a single season three times in a career (consecutively). Thats pretty cool! And I would say he was a product of a system (the Pistol offense). same goes fro Case Keenum or David Klingler or a myriad of other NCAA QB's with stud stats. Its not an insult if its true.
