If you can't see the reason why that was flawed, then I can't help you. And if you can't understand it, then :lol::rofl2:
Tebow has six 4th quarter comeback wins (1 in 2010, 5 in 2011). Luck has six in 2012 already. Both of them are amazing clutch players. Losers pad stats in garbage time but fold when things really matter. Winners like Brady, Eli Manning shine when everything is on the line. Luck and Tebow still have long way to go, but they both have winner's heart. I can't wait to see how their careers pan out.
And if he surpasses 9 wins? So what? Tebow did not start the first 5 games of the season. You will never be able to make this argument stick because we will never know what the Broncos record would have been if he started from the beginning of the season. Could have been 5-0 or 0-5 in those first five games or anywhere in between. It is possible, though unlikely, that Tebow could have been 12-4. It's too hypothetical and not a good comparison.
Luck is good, no doubt. Apples to oranges though. Tebow missed the first 5 starts of the season in 2011.
Sure it is. You didn't care about the circumstances on how he got the wins to begin with when he was carried to most of them, but now you're going to make excuses for him not having more of them? People were comparing Tebow's first time starts with those of other QBs who succeeded in this league in making a case for him to get more time. Why is it no longer valid when comparing him to Luck, a rookie, who DIDN'T get the benefit of having NFL coaching for over a YEAR before he made most of his starts?
True but Tebow had at least one + seasons in the NFL Luck a rookie and started right away. So that there should end that argument.
Their is no Luck vs. Tebow argument. It's monumentally stupid. Only Tebots would ever make such an argument.
How can you not understand the ridiculousness of counting TOTAL wins 9-7 vs 9-4, when one guy's hasn't finished the season yet, and the other guy's stats start at the end of 2010, then take a 5 game break, then resume again in week 6 of 2011. Now... I know that Tebow supporters have compared Tebow's first 16 starts vs xxx QB's first 16 starts. But this is not hypocrisy, because Luck has not started 16 games yet. So if a guy starts the season 6-0, next year, will you allow people to compare him to Andrew Luck and say he's better if say Luck ends up with a 10-7 record (assuming a playoff loss for argument's sake)? Don't you think you'd have to wait until the end of the season to make sure the guy didn't go 6-10? I mean what are you talking about and defending here? Seriously, I do not understand how you cannot see the simple and obvious point here. This is not Tebow vs Luck... this is YOU vs MATH.
Not it isn't. Here's the concept you either don't get, or are refusing to get. Statistically, Luck has eclipsed Tebow by a margin in almost every stat that matters... in fewer games. That margin ain't gonna get better in 3 weeks. Sure, they have the same number of wins, but what are you gonna say when Luck winse one or two of them and pass Tebow up in THAT department too? You really gonna squeal about Tebow not getting reps with the starters? I doubt Tebow wins any of the earlier games that Orton lost either. Defense wasn't holding anyone to 15 points or less. Don't see Tebow getting plopped in there and immediately becoming productive. His preseason resembled the one on the Jets. Luck vs. Tebow.... not even close. Unless you are talking about the kind of luck that is on Tebow's side with running backs going out of bounds and then fumbling in OT.
Here is the concept you don't get... it's called arithmetic. I'll help you out though: 11 < 16 Therefore, it will be impossible to say that Luck did more than Tebow in fewer games, come the end of the season. He was 7-4 last year. 8-5 counting playoffs.
ummm, he already has almost 1000 more yards passing in his career than Tebow did. He did it in fewer games. You think that gap is gonna narrow any once Luck plays a couple more games? doubt his completion percentage of almost 8 percent higher than Tebow will come down to Tebow levels by then either. Also has an equal amount of wins in fewer games... A 16 game to 16 game comparison can ONLY make your case worse. tebow gonna have to step it up.... if he ever starts again. but that's another topic. ... How does "your math" cover that one? Tebow's stats look more like JaMarcus Russell. Bet Russell would have more wins with a defense that gave up 15 or less 6 times.
He has played fewer games, but the season is not complete. Even when the season is complete, he will have had 16 starts vs 11 starts (in a complete regular season) What part of math is so confusing to you? Neither Jamarcus Russell, nor Luck has won a playoff game, nor a won a division. Chew on that for a minute.
Neither had a defense play the way the Bronco defense did either. Plus, Luck isn't in a division where he can get away with an 8-8 season and get in in a THIRD tiebreaker against 2 other teams who got the same record. (Especially when Tebow had to lose 3 games with the playoffs in doubt to get there.) Luck in his ONLY season, which is at 13 games is unfortunately in a division that has an 11-2 team in it. Chew on that one for an hour. Tell ya what.... We'll put that achievement of Tebow's resume on the epitaph of his career. Deal?
just out of curiosity. why do any of you bother? every thread in in this forumn ends up being the same freaking argument. the tebow forumn is like groundhogs day
"Now, you've achieved more than anyone ever dreamed. But, fighting these odds, it looks like rage, not courage." ...
I take it that you've never played "Whack A Mole" before >?? Basically, you have these little mole targets that pop up, completely devoid of any logic thought, or reason. You then proceed to bash the hell out of them with your hammer. It's a completely pointless and brainless game, but it's actually kind of fun
Problem is you dont have a hammer. what you have is a computer and a keyboard. You dont win arguments, you never have. the only person that believes that is you. Its the internet bub... nobody wins. Your cherry picked stats dont invalidate others and vice-versa. What we have (tebow realists) is Tebow is riding pine behind a shitty qb. What you have is stuff that happened last year, supposition about what could have been this year and dreams of what could happen if someone goes "all in" with Tebow some day. Neither one of us knows anything.
It's a lazy argument. Tebow not playing does not indicate an inability to play. It indicates the coach's lack of desire to play him.
