Going three and out as many times as he did in many ways hurt as bad as fumbling the ball and turning it over did. Defenses just don't get a break when they get short breaks and are asked to keep making key stops. Granted, the ball is getting kicked downfield and not giving the other team the ball in their own zone (most of the time.) Might work (consistently) if you had the 2000 Baltimore Ravens defense. Broncos didn't though and neither do the Jets. but I gotta wonder if you told each and every defensive coordinator before a game that they will not see many turnoevers, maybe a fumble and/or an interception at best... but you will also cause the other team to go three and out 9 or 10 times in the game, and probably see their punter 11 or 12 times... I gotta wonder who wouldn't take that. I know I'm pretty happy when I see the defense get off the field.
Alright. Let's look closer at three Tebow games from last year and see if your claims hold water. For a fair representative choice, I'm looking at the second Chargers game (the one most indicative of the Tebow-style offense, with 23 QB carries and triple-option packages), the Bears game (the one where 80% of Americans agreed he was just lucky, and the Bears mocked him as a QB before & after the game), and the first loss to the Patriots, since the Patriots were the team to supposedly "figure out" Tebow, and beat him badly each time. I understand that the Broncos offense was better in the first Pats game than the second, but the first game was the one in which Tebow was healthy. Yes, I am omitting 6 other games in which Tebow went 3-3 and often struggled. But, we are also omitting Denver 38, Raiders 24...Denver 32, Minnesota 29...and of course the Steelers game, which as we all know by now, never actually happened. I will post three times, possession by possession for each game, with a few observations and stats along the way. Here's the first one. Denver at San Diego, 11/27 SD -- Take opening touchback and drive 55 yards for a field goal. D -- Take kickoff out to the 28. Run 6 times to drive to the SD 44. Tebow misses badly on his first pass. Punt, downed on SD 9. SD --Pinned down, three and out. Punt, Denver takes over on their own 38. D -- 8-play methodical drive, another 3rd down pass falls incomplete in Chargers territory. Punt, against downed at the 9. SD -- The Chargers drive 91 yards for a touchdown. 10-0 San Diego. D -- Ensuing kickoff, Denver takes a penalty backing them up to the 7. 3 plays net 11 yards, but two pre-snap penalties force a punt, returned to the Denver 44. SD -- The Broncos hold them to two yards in great field position. SD punts Denver inside their 10. D -- Tebow drives out to the 30 yard line, moving the clock to 2:19 in the half. Punt on 4th and 2 to the SD 29. SD -- Chargers go three and out, punt back to Broncos, good return, Broncos ball at midfield. 1:27 left. D -- In the two-minute drill, Tebow throws completions of 19 and 18 yards, the second being a TD pass to Eric Decker. Halftime: San Diego 10, Denver 7 Notice that the Broncos only went three-and-out ONE time in the half, and gained 11 yards on those plays, with -10 penalty yards. 2nd Half D -- Opening touchback. Read-option for 9, ordinary run for -1. 3rd down pass to Jeremiah Johnson, dropped. Punt. SD -- From their own 45, San Diego drives another 40 or so yards and kicks a field goal. 13-7. D -- Return kick to the 26. McGahee loses 6 on first down, Tebow fumbles on second down, recovers. Three and out, punt. SD -- Three and out from their own side. Long punt for a touchback. D -- 11 play drive, 10 spread-option runs and 1 complete pass for 60+ yards total. Short FG, 13-10 SD. TOP: 6:08 SD -- Drives down the field again to start 4th quarter, 48 yd FG missed. D -- Broncos drive from the 38 to field goal range, great scramble by Tebow to the 25, nullifed by penalty. Punt for a touchback. SD -- One first down, then Rivers is sacked. Punt with 5:27 remaining. D -- Broncos drive down for a field goal. 13-13. Four runs and two Tebow passes good for 62 yards combined. The Chargers front seven has given up trying to sack or chase him by this point, choosing to wait in gaps and allowing unlimited time to throw. With Tebow's long balls connecting, it's odd that the Broncos abandon play-action at this point. SD -- Final drive of regulation, stopped near midfield. Overtime. Again, the rash of three-and-outs seems nonexistent. There are two in a row at the start of the half, the first due to a dropped pass and the second after the blocking broke down completely. After that, Tebow led three drives downfield, tied the game, and warmed up the long ball. OT D -- From the 20, Denver runs "college" style out to the 45. On 4th and 1, John Fox elects to punt. Throughout the Tebow games, Fox almost always punted on 4th and short. It had its positives, like giving his (average) defense margin for error and keeping the pace of the game slow, which favors a running team. However, it must be said that Tebow is a modern-day Bronco Nagurski in short-yardage. Never going for it on 4th and short, even in good field position, is taking away one of his greatest assets as a QB. SD -- Chargers go nowhere, 50 yard net punt to Den 30. D -- On 3rd and 11, Tebow completes a pass for 11 yards. The play is reviewed and the Broncos are a foot short. Again, Fox elects to punt in a situation where 99% of college coaches would simply go for it & convert with Tebow. Then again, a college coach would never be in this situation in OT. Punt for a touchback. SD -- Drive to the Denver 35. 53 yard FG missed. D -- From the 43, Tebow misses a long ball to Johnson, but the Chargers defense is worn out. QB option run for 12. Option give up the middle for 20+. Easy FG and a Broncos win, 16-13. Total 3-and-outs: Philip Rivers 5, Tim Tebow 4 Kicking game: Matt Prater outkicked Novak, but it's noteworthy that Denver put their kicker in much easier FG range. There were no "miracle" kicks. In my opinion this game was a perfect example of how an NFL team can win on the road with Tim Tebow. The score was low, but that's what happens when you run the ball consistently and neither side turns the ball over. The Broncos defense had ran, pursued, tackled, and covered equally hard in games with Kyle Orton, but turnovers and lack of ball control hampered them. For instance, they gave up 23 points in Week 1 vs. Oakland, but 16 Raiders points were scored off turnovers, and the Broncos lost the TOP 34-26 in that game. If you added a few Kyle Orton interceptions to the game detailed above, the Chargers would have likely scored twice the points. Pass-happy offenses give out gifts. So, the myth of the miracle defense + hapless lucky QB was being fabricated by an ignorant fan & media contingent who are swayed by completion % and final scores, even as this game took place. The Chargers' gained yards, but they weren't handed anything. The resulting stalemate allowed Tebow, always the best-conditioned and most passionate guy on the field, to outlast the opposing defense, hit bombs and score points when it counted. In short, the #1 ranked running game and strong ball security propped up the Denver defense and enabled them to sweep their division on the road with Tebow. The reasons were not glossy, big-stats performances that the average fan latches onto, but it's something that has always worked, from Lombardi to Parcells to Harbaugh. Run the ball well, play hard D, don't give them anything and you'll win a lot more than you lose. It's sad to think that this was the Jets' organizational attitude for so many years. Now, their attitude seems to be "it's a passing league, any novel attempt at a dominant ground game is stupid." Or also: "Our defense could never play as well as Denver's did last season, so we can't win with Tebow."
If you think anyone is actually going to read that wall of gibberish, you are mistaken. Also, this seems appropriate being that you probably put a shit load of effort in to that post:
Hey phaytal, it's a drive-by-drive analysis of a football game, yo. I'm sorry that this concept has never occurred to you before. Among thousands of others, Paul Zimmerman used to publish stuff like that for SI. I'm sure you know who Paul Zimmerman is, since you put in a shit ton of effort at not being a chump.
Hey let's play the "pick a random game that fits my argument and ignore ones that don't" game. That is always fun. Do the Lions game next that should be fun. I belive it involves 7 3 and outs and 3turnovers in 15 possessions
I didn't do that at all. I have addressed the Lions game and other games where the Broncos offense struggled badly. It's wise to throw out the games where Tebow was asked to run conventional plays (Miami, Detroit) but I also threw out the HIGH-SCORING games from the regular season, where the offense put up impressive numbers in beating Oakland and Minnesota at their venues. If we throw out the very bad performances and the shootout wins, we're left with the "typical" Tebow games from last year -- his average level of production. Those included a lot of tight games where they won in the 4th quarter (oak, KC game 1, chicago, SD, NY) and a few implosions (NE, Buffalo). So, looking at two games where they went to OT and one lopsided loss feels like a decent choice. Remember that especially after the Bears win, the prevailing attitude was that Tebow was awful but lucky. So, if the Tebow haters are so confident, why be afraid to take a closer look. Let's see if he did move the ball and complete passes. Let's see if he was a good game manager. If you are correct, then an analysis of his actual performance should bear you out & prove that Tebow was a helpless retard at QB.
So to sum all that up, you found a couple of games where he didn't have quite so many three and outs as he usually did. Bravo. There were three games where he nearly set a record for number of three and outs IN A ROW!!! They still led the league in three and outs long before the season was over, and they didn't during the Orton era. Chalk it up to him being young and inexperienced if you want, but you are about as dumb as a sack full of hammers if you are trying to say the three and out problem was a myth or not his fault. This is assuming you didn't actually watch the games. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you just didn't see it and are just looking at what is on paper.
No, I picked two games where the prevailing take-away from fans like yourself was that Tebow sucks but is lucky. Then I picked another game where the take-away was "see we told you he sucks, hahaha!" That's not exactly cherry-picking in my favor. Analyzing every game from the Detroit pits to the playoff game where the offense had their way with the Steelers D seems pointless and yes, long-winded, but an analysis of three games that helped to spark the actual luck vs. talent Tebow debate is very fair. Three and outs are a problem for any team they happen to. My point is if we look at your typical "suck/lucky" reaction games and the Tebow haters are right, then none of those suck/lucky games should show him having less three-and-outs than Philip Rivers. I don't even remember how many three and outs the Broncos had in the other two games I picked out, but I figure I'll learn when I peruse the stats, and people can talk about it. You know, informed debate based on what *actually* happened on the field, instead of just posturing. Imagine that.
Nice analysis. Thanks for putting the time into it. Everyone is so eager to jump to a pass happy offense with big stats and higher turnover ratios. I agree it does make rooting for your team more fun to see them scoring so much but I think it's harder to win a Super Bowl that way. Take a look at the winners for the last ten years....only the Saints, Packers, and Colts have won with high octane offenses. Super Bowls are won usually won by teams with great running games, great defenses, and great game managing QB's who make clutch plays when needed. The Patriots won all of their Super Bowls before their offense changed to the high % passing offense. Since the change, they have lost both times to a team with a great defense, great running game, and great game managing QB that makes clutch throws when needed. It was the same for Rapisberger's two Super Bowls. Seven out of the last ten Super Bowl winners have not been these high octane offense like Brady and Manning run, though the media would make you think it's the only way to win. Take it back to 2000 and you can include the Ravens and Buccaneers...two other teams that used the Steelers/early Patriots/Giants method. Your QB does not need to be prolific in terms of passing yards. That's a waste of time imho. But he better be clutch. That matters most. I think Dilfer and Johnson are the only ones who actually won it all without having to make any clutch throws whatsoever.
You are cherry-picking data. There is no reason to throw out the very bad and the shootouts. There is no such thing as a mode in football games, they all count. The point of the Tebow isn't a good QB argument is at least partly based on the fact that you can't trust him to be consistent. People aren't afraid to take a closer look, by eliminating games to come up with a tiny sample you are actually DECREASING the accuracy of your analysis. There is a reason we use the entire season as a sample rather than one or two games, there are natural variances within a season based on quality of opponent, quality of teammate play, weather, officiating, and just plain luck. By looking at ALL of the games we normalize the data. Further, the argument has somehow gone from he's a good QB to "he can under certain circumstances, sometimes, but not consistently be a mediocre game manager?" You can't throw out games where he had to run conventional plays for a simple reason... YOU CAN"T GO THROUGH A SEASON WITHOUT RUNNING CONVENTIONAL PLAYS. eventually you will fall behind and have to throw, it is inevitable in football.
I know that we all love to micro analyze stuff 'n all... but how many new quarterbacks have ever been consistent in their first 16 starts? Not very many. Tebow had some great moments last year, and some terrible ones. At least he showed something amazing, at times, unlike the vast majority of qb picks.
