How many of Tebow's throws have you actually, ACTUALLY analyzed? Because I've been keeping up with him a long time and a lot of the things that you say simply are not true. How many were actual misses? How many were drops? How many were throw aways? Can you tell the difference between him throwing the ball away and actually missing a receiver? Or have you just seen some of the low lights shown, looked at the completion % and that was enough for you to pass judgement and continue repeating the same mantra(incorrect mantra and this WILL be proven) that everyone else repeats? And for the next part because interception % IS more important, or more importantly turnover %. That's a fact. And interception % is not a shared stat. There is absolute 0 correlation between an NFL defenses and their ability to get interceptions. 95% of all picks are mistakes. Bad throws. Bad decisions. Which is why guys like Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Tim Tebow, Tom Brady or even Mark Sanchez, can string together 5-6 games without ever throwing one while other guys make stupid throws and get picked off. A quarterback has 3 options and they should be exercised at all times before he should EVER throw an interception: 1) throw the ball away 2) take a sack 3) throw an incompletion or ground the ball(except if it's in your own endzone). Tim Tebow does all 3, which is what every NFL QB should do, and very few, do. It may look bad, but if you look into Alex Smith's, Tom Brady's or Aaron Rodgers sacks, they are at the top of the league too....should offer you a hint. Your completion % oth, is only as good as your receivers and the offense you run(west coast, balanced, run first). High percentage short passing or low % deep pass offense. But the #1 reason QB's get benched in the NFL is turnovers. And not even touchdowns can make up for that. Neither can a completion %. Because the simple fact is ONE completed pass, or even 5 is usually not worth turning over the ball. All it takes in the NFL to win most football games, is winning the turnover battle. Tebow's low TO% combined with his high scoring % gives any NFL team a winning chance. And that's all these numbers show. And if you pay close attention, it's not JUST Tebow that ranks very well in these categories, but a lot of the quarterbacks that most consider elite also dominate these two categories.
So if a QB throws a perfect pass to his tight end, but the tight end has it bounce off his chest right into the defenders arms that's the QB's fault? Of course the same could be said for completion %, but at a much different rate since most QB's throw more than 8-10 passes a game.
Here we go again: I'm working my way through games I did not watch. I just saw every downfield attempt by Tebow in the Texans and Raiders game. I don't have much time, but from what I watched, Tebow missed some open receivers, had some drops, and also had wide receiver making incredible catches. Do you not take into account tipped interceptions, interceptions because of the wrong route, interceptions because the wide receiver didn't make a play on the ball, interceptions because the QB got hit while throwing, interceptions because the defender makes a great play, interceptions because the receiver doesn't adjust route, interceptions because a WR doesn't come back for the ball? There are so many reasons interceptions is not QB only. What stats are you using to say Brady/Rodgers are up there in sacks? With #1 being most sacks allowed: Giants 26th, Pats 22, Packers 11. To reach your first top tier QB, you had to get to #11. If you go by QB hits, you have to go to #18 to get your first top tier QB in Rodgers again. What stats are you using that show Brady,Brees, Rodgers are at top of the sacks list? Tim Tebow does not do all 3 because has thrown interceptions. You think Tebow willingly misses open receivers in fear of throwing a pick? What you listed is not the QB's job unless they are playing scared. The QB's job is to control the offense, adjust blocking, audible if necessary. Then when the play starts (lets say passing) make a completed pass to the primary receiver, then secondary, etc. If that doesn't work, depending on situation run. If it's 3rd and 6 and you know you can't run for it, buy time to complete a pass. If you are in the red zone and it is 3rd and 6, you run but get out of bounds, don't force anything. If you are on the edge of FG you take the yards. You take a sack if there is nothing open and you have nowhere to run. You throw it away if you can run and then nobody is open. It is not as cut and dry as you make it. Just because Tebow ran for 8 on 3rd and 15 because the defense let him does not make him efficient. You never addressed the fact that when you take out the 125 snaps from 2010-2011 season where Tebow was used situational as the Jets plan, his TD to turnover ratio drop .4. 125 out of all his snaps in 2011-2012 is a small amount but had a major negative effect on his TD to turnover. Add into the fact the many teams that don't have Tebow,Newton,Brady,Brees will use their RB or FB to pound the ball into the endzone from 1 yard out. The QB still led his team to a TD but your stats don't account for that. Why should 28 other QB's be punished for this? It inflates the stats of QB's who call their own number near the goaline. Also throw into the mix that do we count INT's thrown up on hail marys to end a game or half? The QB had one option and he made the right one, why should that hurt his efficiency. Also then you have to add in, when were the TD's scored and how. If the defense takes a pick and gets pushed out at the 1 yard line, and then Newton sneaks in, why does that help his efficiency rating? How about if Sanchez throws a TD down 28 with 2 minutes left in the 4th, why should that help his efficiency rating? Or how about a QB throwing down 28 in the 4th and gets a pick, why should that hurt his efficiency rating? How about when the interception is clearly not his fault? How about when a QB throws a bubble screen and then the wide receiver makes 3 guys miss and runs it in for a 60 yard TD. Should that help a QB's efficiency? Because in your system it does even though all that happened was a QB made a simple pass that I could make while backpedalling and then watch as the rest of team blocked and made guys missed. Or QB is buying time to throw a Hail Mary that can reach the endzone by the o line blocks poorly and the QB gets hit and fumbles? The QB held the ball too long but was it really not an efficient play? The QB would have to buy time just to give his team a chance to score, but the O line did not protect him long enough for it to happen. The research you did is very good and I appreciate the hard work, but to use it to say Tebow is currently an effective starting QB is wrong. To say he has more upside than Sanchez at QB is wrong. To say he should start for the Jets right now is wrong. Oh and another thing about these stats. They are going to look a lot better for Tebow since he has games where he throws less than 15 times and runs 15 times. If a team, like Tebow and the BRoncos did a lot, go 3 and out it is less chances to negatively affect his efficiency. SO QB that has a 10 play drive all passes ending in a TD is as efficient as a QB going 3 and out and 3 times all on passes then hitting a TD on his tenth pass. That seems misleading. Anyways, I appreciate the research as a starting point to make points, but you are looking way too much into it. Does this say Tebow can be a great use situationally and doesn't fumble a lot, yes. That is allthe Jets need from him too. Does this say Tebow is an average to above average QB, no.
No, that would be on the receiver that couldn't catch. But, those situations are accounted for in the other 5% of interceptions.
Yeah, 3 and outs are solely on the QB. Playcalling and the other offensive positions have nothing to do with that.
No obviously, but you are talking about the exception to the rule. What percentage of interceptions are because of a freak or flue play like you are describing? 5% 10 % tops? I'm talking about the 90%... Every completed pass on the other hand is a shared responsibility. There is no such thing as a quarterback with a high completion % with a the worst receiving corps in the NFL or receivers who can't catch or play the position well. It doesn't exist. Elite passers are only as good as their receivers, and that's a known fact. Do some do better than others and get a little more out of some receivers? Sure, absolutely. But they still need capable, solid receivers to work with for the most part and I'm just not sure Denver had that. Most interceptions come from most quarterbacks not doing exactly what Tebow's good at. And most of them come because they throw off the back foot instead of taking a sack or they force a pass instead of throwing it away. It's primarily bad decision making. Interception % is a much better measurement of accuracy as well as decision making than completion %. Tom Brady's completion % is completely dependent on his elite receivers, and offensive philosophy. Aaron Rodgers is also completely dependent on guys like Greg Jennings, and their offensive philosophy. Not every team in the NFL has the type of talent required in order to have quarterbacks completing passes at 65%. Other teams don't even believe that's the way to go. They prefer a more balanced attack. Tebow may not come out looking very consistent in completion %, but he is VERY consistent in the other two categories which matter more. The ones discussed here. And that's what most people fail to see. Why would you ever trade consistency in low turnovers and a high TD/TO ratio in favor of completing more passes? Maybe if you want to sell more tickets or rack up stats by having a more dynamic and exciting offense, but not if you want to win football games. The great thing about Tebow, is that you can have his style of efficient play and still sell tickets. That's what makes him attractive to teams and scary to opponents and diva receivers as well. They hate him because you're not going to have a team with 3 guys receiving over 1000 yards. He's also going to eat up into running backs carries. But from an ownership perspective, from an offensive perspective, Tebow brings a lot to an offense.
These freaken tebow nuts are all dicks,cant wait for him to leave and take all these so called new jets fans the fk out of here.
From my understanding, Tebow was not used as an every down QB in 2010-2011? Is that incorrect? Just checked wikipedia and I got this: Tebow finished his rookie season playing sparingly in six games as a back-up (primarily on plays involving the wild horse formation, which is Denver's variation of the wildcat formation) before starting the last three games of the Broncos' season. So of those 125 half might have been out of the wildhorse? That is what I meant situationally. And you take away the small sample size from 2010-2011 and his TD/TO number drops a lot. To clarify my post, I mean if you bring him in that formation in good positions to score, it will inflate his efficiency than if he was playing QB all game long.
True. But we all know this is a team sport, and it's not only the QB scoring OR going 3 and out. QB is the most important factor obviously, but not the only one. He's not elite yet, and i fail to remember a QB that was elite after a whopping 16 starts.
There are a handful, but they are obviously the exception. The reason I made the comment I did was that a lot of these Tebois are trashing the Broncos players and coaches saying Tebow had nothing to work with and giving him all the credit for the limited success they had. In the Broncos 8 regular season wins w/Tebow the other team scored more than 15 points twice. So, yea the elite scorer is probably the sole reason they won.
Sorry, not buying the argument that Tebow throws into the dirt to avoid interceptions. It has to do with mechanics, plain and simple. Every Sunday quarterbacks throw into coverage and succeed. Tebow also has legs that will gain yards, so no gain vs gain doesn't hold water. Tebow has potential, for all we know he could a great football player, he is not one yet. Tebow is a Jet and his mechanics must be fixed. Stick around during the season or read old posts, players abilities and failings get pointed out all the time. It isn't a vendetta against Tebow, Jets fans want their players to improve on their weaknesses.
Any sane person knows it wasn't all Tebow. However, saying it was anything BUT Tebow is just as wrong. The Jets picked up an exciting player that can help the team immediately for a measly 4th rounder, i just don't see why this is so bad.
