Luck is a better QB, but you have to account for the INT take we're pick 6's and horrible position he put the D in. That is my only qualm with Newton too. He puts the defensive in bad spots.
1) The OP never provided links or statements to the experts. 2) The OP is acting like their games against the Pats are the only time we saw both of them QB 3) I feel bad for the reasonable Tebow fans on here for this thread. This frustrates them as much as it frustrates me but it leaves them with a bad rep
I'm sure they would rather have Luck. At this point, I might as well. Doesn't change the fact that Tebow is still judged by a different set of standards. many of us argued this last year when we'd see the game breakdowns where the analysts were killing Tebow, but then they'd turn around and show Ponder or Gabbert and they'd talk about how these guys were young QBs who were young and developing.
That is because Ponder and Gabbert where rookies last season Tebow was not. They are are held to either standard in year 2.
Make as many excuses as you want, it doesn't change the real, quantifiable stats. And cherry picking stats would be pointing out obscure stats, or pointing out one set of stats for one QB and a different set for the comparison with another QB. I didn't do that. lol, if you haven't seen them then I can't help you if your head has been buried in the sand for the last several years. False, I used that game as a comparison because it was a common frame of reference, i.e., against the Patriots, and the Patriots won both games by exactly a 35 point margin. Also, see my earlier post about their stats through their first 10 NFL starts. That is utter and complete nonsense. I never said that Tim Tebow is a better drop-back, traditional passer than Andrew Luck, nor did I say that he will ever be better than Luck in that department. But given their comparative, overall stats, it is as plain as the nose on your face that Tebow has been judged by a different standard than other young QB's in the NFL, and those 2 games against the Patriots - by the Broncos in the playoffs last year and by the Colts on Sunday night - are simply the most recent example, and a darn good one given the exact margin of loss by both teams.
Do you realize how stupid it looks when you try to act like Tebow was this grizzled veteran because he'd started a whopping 3 games at the end of the 2010 season and therefore unable to be compared to the rookies who started last year? By the end of the playoffs last year, he had finally started one full season's worth of games, just the same as any other rookie that started last year.
Again, you are using that one game to say the standard is different. The standard is different because of the other 9/16 games. You also can't just compare similar games, the NFL doesn't work like that. For example, Sanchez played better against the Texans than Joe Flacco yet Flacco is regarded as a better QB. Chad Henne lit up the Texans, more so than any other QB, yet every other QB that played the Texans is regarded as a better QB. Why is this, because of the rest of the sample they have shown.
No, the standard has been different for Tebow's entire NFL career to date, before Andrew Luck started a single game in the NFL. I simply used that one game because both teams lost by the exact same point margin to the exact same team, and one QB got a complete pass for it (even with 4 turnovers/2 pick 6's) and the other basically had his career declared as at an end. One game after he led his team to a playoff win against the #1 defense in the league. Sorry, different standard of judgement, especially considering expectations both those QB's had coming into the league. By the way, Sunday night wasn't Luck's first sub-par performance this year, just his most recent. You guys who are desperate to write Tebow's NFL obituary are going to have to wait until he starts losing a lot more games than he wins as a starter. Until then, he's doing his job as a QB in the NFL, leading his team to wins. Which is a lot more than a lot of other young QB's in the NFL are doing, including a lot who were drafted a lot higher than he was.
There IS no "desperation" here to write Tebow's career off. Open your eyes and take a look for a second. His career is sinking and all you can do is say his throwing motion isn't a problem and he's some sort of a victim of double standards. He has been in the league for 3 years. The team that drafted him gave a thumbs down, his second team doesn't look like they want him anymore. It is unlikely he will land on a team that "gets what he's about," and overhauls their offense to fit a 46% passer. Yeah, he's probably going to go out of the league with more wins than losses as a starter. Why? because anyone actually paid by an NFL team knows just about anyone could have won most of the games he is credited for when a defense carries him like that. Trent Dilfer won a Superbowl, but nobody thinks HE won it. Everyone knows it was their defense keeping teams to 10 and under and they could have won with a friggin offensive lineman behind the center taking snaps. ...and besides... WHAT double standard? I don't think it is a lot to ask an NFL QB to be actually able to pass.
lol, okay whatever. False. What I actually said is that his original throwing motion wasn't a problem, but his frankenstein throwing motion (mix of his new motion + remnants of his old motion) is the main problem for his inconsistent accuracy so far in the NFL. Try to keep up, or at least stop lying. 2 1/2, actually, and he's only started a single season's worth of games. lol at this comparison^^^. Trent Dilfer was playing with a historically great NFL defense. Denver's defense wasn't even in the top half of the league last year, much less historically great. Still waiting on your explanation, by the way, for how this "great" Denver defense last year had all their best games against back-up's and some of the worst starting QB's in the league? And oh yeah, that whole thing of giving up more 40+ point games in one 16 game season than the Patriots and Packers have given up in more than 240 games COMBINED. Take your time trying to formulate your excuse and line of BS to explain away those inconvenient facts. I'm a patient man.
Why would there be desperation when his career is a sinking ship right now? Not my fault. I can't help it if he sucks. I don't give a rat's ass WHAT "caused" the bad throwing motion. It's just an opinion anyway, not fact. The point is that it is there and his accuracy is suffering because of it. Even IF I believe it is a mish mash of some of the throwing coaches work, he still needs to fix it. Which I don't believe because I think he's reverting to what worked in college when the guys around him were good enough for him to get away with it. Tebow by his own admission once said he wished he didn't run it as much earlier in his college years becuase it hurt his development. Besides, for every one of you that say they tried to change his throwing motion and "ruined him," others say he's throwing it the same way he had his whole life. Who cares, in the next 6 games, he's not gonna get much more out of the next 6 weeks that he hasn't gotten already. And a single season's worth of games in 2 seasons is a HELL of a lot more than many get. He should count his blessings that it worked out that way for him, because most teams that actually had another option probably would have used it. Let me write it out in crayon for you. I'm not surprised you completely missed the boat on the point behind that. Plus you have to lie about what I said. Never said Denver's was a GREAT defense. Just stated that they were good enough to allow 15 points or less in 5 of "Tebow's wins." When a defense plays "lights out" like that, even shitty quarterbacks will probably walk away with a win. I used Dilfer as an example of what even a shitty QB can do when the defense is having an outstanding game. Yet you ignore that and insist Tebow is something special. Denver's defense was nowhere near "great" for reasons you were listing. Overall, they allowed 22 points per game. Had they allowed that, every single friggin one of those 5 games I'm talking about would have been a loss. LOOK AT THE GAMES THEMSELVES!!! Allowing almost 50 against the Pats had nothing to do with barely eking out wins against bottom feeders liek the Dolphins or Hanie led Bears despite either of them not racking up points. Would have been a great argument had I tried to make that argument. For some reason you and Demosthenes9 have to keep taking my comments 5 steps further and arguing against something that isn't there. Fact: Denver's defense allowed 15 points or less in 5 of the 7 reg. season wins. The playoff game wouldn't be in the conversation if ANY ONE of those weren't lights out by the defense. Fact: It is much easier for shitty quarterbacks to get a win when they only need 13-16 points. Fact: Even Orton (a shitty quartterback) was 23-2 when a defense allowed 15 points or less. Why you can't seem to wrap your head around that is anyone's guess.
Lets look at those 40+ point games, shall we? Tebow's offense vs Lions: - 7 punts - 2 failed 4th down attempts - 3 Tebow turnovers - 6, 3-and-outs - 7 sacks (most were Tebow's fault) One word: Pathetic. Tebow's offense vs Bills - 7 punts - 1 failed 4th down attempt - 4 Tebow turnovers - 7, 3-and-outs - 4 sacks (most were Tebow's fault) One word: Abysmal. Tebow's offense vs Pats - 7 punts - 1 failed 4th down attempt - 1 Tebow turnover - 5, 3-and-outs - 5 sacks (most were Tebow's fault) One word: Laughable. You simply can't give a high caliber opponent that many opportunities and expect your defense to hold up every single week. The sad this is, is that these types of performances were the norm for Tim Tebow, not the exception. He shit the bed almost every single week with these pathetic numbers. But you just cant do that with high powered offenses and expect to be in the football game. Care to guess where our defense is this year? #6. It is essentially the same group of players, and this year we are 6th. What changed? We have a quarterback that doesn't fucking go 3-and-out 7 times a game. We have a quarterback that can sustain drives, and let the defense rest in between series'. We have a quarterback that doesn't shit the bed for the first 55 minutes of every game, and scores points early, so that our defense can play with a lead. I'm sure you'll ignore this, just like you always ignore common sense analysis, but there is one very poignant fact that you can't ignore. Not one coach in the NFL thinks Tim Tebow has the skill set to be their franchise QB. That is painfully obvious.
Cherry picking isn't using different stats for each guy, it is comparing stats using only those categories that help your argument, and doing so without context. For example: Junichi Tazawa had an ERA of 1.43, he only lost 1 game and he only gave up 5 BB. Justin Verlander had an ERA of 2.64 he lost 8 games and walked 60 guys. Therefore Tazawa was the better pitcher. Of course we both know this isn't true, because Verlander also pitched well over 200 innings as a starter, struck out far more batters, and was generally much more impactful than a middle reliever.
Following a player you hate, to his next team's forum to kick him in the shins at every opportunity = Desperate. Anyone with eyes who's been watching Tebow since his college days can tell that is incorrect. I never said otherwise, just wish you would stop acting like he's had 3 years worth of starts now, when he's just only had 1 year's worth of starts. . You sure as heck have acted like it, talking about how they "played their ass off for 60 minutes" and played lights out in those games and other such comments. If we're going to start the "if this, then that" game, then how about this one: If Tebow had been allowed to employ a balanced running and throwing attack in the first 3 quarters of the games, there would have been no need for the defense to hold opposing offenses to 15 points a game or less. I don't care if Tebow starting did turn them into the #1 rushing offense in the league, that is never going to be a high scoring type of offense. Tebow did well throwing in the 4th quarter when he had to in order to bring the team back. Once he did this again and again and again, it was sheer idiocy that they didn't let him do it more in the first 3 quarters. Fact: It is much easier to score more than 13-16 points when you're not running the ball 55 times during the game and only passing 8 times. Why you can't seem to wrap your head around that is anyone's guess.
To add. 2 of Tebow's turnovers: One was a pick 6 that went 99 yards. Another was a fumble picked up and returned for TD. So 14 points in that game were with Tebow actually on the field and NOT the defense. To add. 2 of Tebow's turnovers: One was a pick 6. Another was what looked like a pick six, but later ruled a fumble and returned for TD. So 14 points in that game were with Tebow actually on the field and NOT the defense. Yep, this is the guy that "DIDN'T turn the ball over." This is the guy that "took care of the ball." (If you call punting 10 times a game doing that.) Uh huh... and Pee Wee Herman will play Rambo in the next remake. He's pretty damn good though. Steve Young in the making, some say.
Who cares? One year, three years... quarterbacks come and go with much less. What makes Tebow so damn special that he should get more? Cuz he's a nice guy? He had 3 years of coaches coaching him and evaluating... and he's probably going to be on a third team in his young career when this season is done with. He's had 3 years of NFL coaching. Tudors in the offseason. It appears most of the league has seen enough. If he was such an unknown still with all this alleged sky high potential, I think more teams would be interrested in giving him an honest shot at starting. As it sits, the rest of the league isn't nearly as impressed with what they know of him as you are. But they did in those games. Are you arguing that they didn't? You keep dodging it and pointing to overall stats rather than those 6 games (one was a loss 7 to 3) where they DID put in a 60 minute effort. Enter Tebow with 5 minutes left... and watch him mop up all the credit when you talke about "TEBOW'S WINS." It's a fact. An inconvenient one for those that think Tebow is something special. No he isn't. Just about anyone would have won those games under those circumstances..... and the best part is.... YOU KNOW IT!!!! It's comical watching you guys try to dance around that fact.
You mean kind of like those two pick-6's that Luck threw to go along with the 3rd INT and the fumble? Tell me, what was the reaction on Tebow's turnovers after the game, compared to the reaction on Luck's turnovers after the game? Same for the Bills game. What was the reaction? Ask any football coach in existence whether punting or turnovers is his idea of taking care of the ball better. Because words mean things, that's why. You want to try and fool yourself by perpetuating the false notion that he had the experience of someone who has started for 3 years in the league, then fine, but don't try to foist that nonsense off on other people, it's just flat out dishonest. I'm sorry, but I'm just not impressed with a defense holding back-ups and some of the worst starting QB's in the league to 15 points or less. Is it a good performance? Sure, in a relative sense. Does it mean they weren't an overall poor defense? No. Is it something unusual or something unexpected? No. See the Bears and Niners game last night. Jason Campbell is a career back-up. And what did he do in those last 5 minutes (+ overtime in a few games)? Did the Denver defense lead game winning scoring drives the length of the field? Did the football throw itself to a waiting receiver for a touchdown? Did the defense run the ball into the end zone for a 2-point conversion? Whatever you think about his play in the first 3 quarters of the game, you're crazy not to admit that he was a master of late game comeback heroics and no, not any old QB in the NFL could do that again and again and again like he did. Multiple Denver teammates spoke with awe about his ability to orchestrate late in the game comebacks for wins. Champ Bailey, Bryan Dawkins, to name a few.
I don't know. Didn't watch the game. Not a colt fan and not particularly an Andrew Luck fan. I cared what I saw in the Buffalo game and the Detroit game because it was my team. I can tell ya if it was Andrew Luck on my team and I saw a pick 6... I'm not gonna say, "Oh well, he's young..." Wasn't particularly pleased when Manning did it either. Just thought it was funny that you guys blasted the defense for giving 40ish points against Detroit and Buffalo when Tebow gave each of them 14. So if you were a defensive coordinator, and someone with a crystal ball told you that you would see the other teams punter 11 times and cause the other team to go three and out 8 times.... you wouldn't take that? That's 11 possessions that don't score, 8 of them puts your offense back on the field after about 2 minutes. I think most defenses would be perfectly fine with it. Never said you SHOULD be impressed, now did I? Anyone looking at the Bronco defense could tell you they left a lot to be desired. But they managed to hold teams to 15, 3 of those times the game went to OT. Fact is, had they not held all those teams to 15, Tebow would have won 3 at best. his record would be 4-11. Not hard to pick a winner out there on who of the Broncos did the heavy lifting in those wins. At least you are admitting scores were held low. I agree with WHY they were held low, but Tebow wouldn't have done jack shit record wise without it.
