I have the same position on every ESPN pundit: they're saying what they're saying because they were paid to (and likely specifically told what to say).
Yeah some of these Tebots think that as the ESPN analysis are hating when they are critical. They are just doing their job and studying film.
Who's being naive now? And I think you completely misunderstood VanderbiltJets' point, because that is not what he was saying at all. He is saying the exact opposite of what you said.
You see? Why is it that Tebow's shortcomings is always someone elses fault? Bet the next guy will be as bad or worse too, and we don't even know who that is going to be. Instead of thinking every coach he has is a moron, maybe you should consider it isn't the coach, but maybe Tebow? Kinda like the old saying that if you wake up in the morning, and you think everyone you talk to is an asshole... maybe the problem is you are the one who woke up on the wrong side of the bed. Same principle for Tebow. If every coach he gets is an idiot, maybe the problem isn't with the coaching. What the hell were they supposed to do? Fox and Elway had been calling the shots for just a few months prior. Then they change things up in the middle of the season when it was obvious Tebow wasn't going to be able to run the offense they came in with. Fortunately for them, the guys they have running those offenses can do MORE than just run the ball. They can actually hit the broad side of a barn throwing it. You're only a "dual" threat if you can run AND pass. Otherwise, you are either Kyle Orton, basically a legless statue waiting to get sacked. Or you are a running back playing out of position. that's pretty much what the Bronco QB stable was a year ago.
Hyperbole. I don't think any Tebow fans say he doesn't need to improve, but there is merit in the argument that the Broncos offensive plan was not great last year. Even so, they won a playoff game. Point is, you can win with Tebow in the NFL as your QB and that is the whole reason you play.
LYING again. I have never even implied that Tebow's shortcomings are always someone else's fault. Consider this, most people here (even those that didn't want him) think that Tebow could have been used as a weapon, but that Sparano's WC design, play calling and timing has sucked. That's not on Tebow, but rather, Sparano. Let me guess, you think all those people are making excuses for Tebow ? Kind of ironic on a Jets board where you see lots of arguments talking about how we fired one shitty OC and replaced him with another shitty OC. Oh, wait, I guess in your world, all change is good ? There's enough incompetence in the NFL that players could go from one lousy coach to another fairly often. If you knew what you were talking about, you'd know that they didn't really change things up all that much. They kept most of the existing playbook, they just changed the approach that they used with it. You know, they changed the run/pass ratio. They also added a handful of option plays that McCoy either found in a book or that he got from some of the players. What he SHOULD have done and easily COULD have done would have been to go with a Spread Option system with Tebow in the gun for every single play. Biggest change would have been in blocking schemes, but the changes aren't actually that big or hard to teach as most plays have largely the same scheme and funny enough, they are extremely similar to NFL schemes in their design. Only real difference is that one player, usually the playside DE is left unblocked. Only other change is having the back learn how to "mesh" with the QB, closing his arms and keeping the ball, or letting the QB pull the ball back. I've explained this before. Take an off tackle run from the Single back set. QB is under center, RB is 7 yards behind him. Ball gets snapped and RB goes toward whichever side of the line the play is called to. A staple NFL play. Now, how do you modify that to be run as part of a Spread Option system ? If QB is in the gun, you simply move the RB from behind the QB to his left or right. Ball gets snapped, RB goes forward just like he did previously. Instead of always getting the ball on a handoff, he now goes through the "mesh". He continues forward into the line. What changed in that play ? You moved the RB over 1 yard at the onset of the play, and he has to learn the "mesh". With the blocking, only change is that the playside DE is left unblocked so the QB can option off of him. What McCoy didn't get is that Option is a SYSTEM, not just a handful of plays. It works because it's part of a system. A system that has constraint plays that you run to keep defenses honest. It works because the defense can't anticipate what you are going to do. Look at Washington. After they beat the Giants, Ron Jaworski noted that they really didn't run that many option plays. BUT, they did run most of their plays out of "Spread Option" formations, which for Washington, is usually the Pistol. This creates conflict for the defense because even if the play isn't an Option, the defense still has to defend against it. But no, Denver couldn't do that. Instead, the lined Tebow up under center for a majority of the 1st - 3rd quarters of each game, and then they put hm in the shotgun now and then in those quarters to run some option plays. Defense said "oh, look, here comes the Option". So can Tebow, as the Steelers found out. Again, ask the Steelers about that.
If this is really all about Tebow and not about Sanchez, then why are you so reluctant to explore the reasons that Greg McElroy was back on the deactivated list a week after leading the Jets to a game winning TD drive against Arizona? Okay, honesty time: 1) Would either Kyle Orton or Brady Quinn have led the Broncos to an 8-8 record and into the playoffs last year? If your answer is "not likely", then wasn't it established that Tebow was indeed the best player at that position on the team? 2) If one player is great in practice but awful in real games, and one player is awful in practice but has a knack for getting wins in real games, who you gonna' start? 3) Would the other guys in the locker room rather be led by a great practice player who can't win games, or a poor practice player who can win games? Would they rather win ugly, or practice great, is what it boils down to. Yep, you're right, so who you giving the ball to in the games? I'll ask you also, do you think Orton or Quinn would have led the Broncos to the playoffs last year? If your answer is no, then I think Fox made the correct decision in starting Tebow (eventually). Problem is, that argument only works when you're actually winning games. When your 4th year starter is playing putrid and losing games, you have no objective reason whatsoever to say that he gives the team a better chance of winning when you haven't even given either the 2nd string or 3rd string QB a chance. And then when the 3rd string QB goes in and WINS a game after the starter gets benched, then you have even less reason to say Sanchez gives the best chance to win games. Again, why are you avoiding the fact that McElroy led them to a win and yet was back on the deactivated list a week later? For starters, he had a better start than Elway and Young in most aspects. Secondly, I didn't see anyone say that makes Tebow better than Elway or Young as an NFL QB, or that he will end his career having been better, but you also don't know otherwise. For now, it suffices to say that he definitely started out better than either of those two. And if the other 21 players on the field in Tebow's case consisted of a world class O-line and a world class Defense, then I would agree that Tebow doesn't get as much credit for the run last year. But he didn't have either of those things, so he does get a lot of credit. Well, as you said, it's only a lie if it isn't true. Those things are true. But I and other Tebow supporters have acknowledged again and again that he also needs to improve his passing. It doesn't negate the other factors, though. Even that statement is absurd when talking about a guy who in his first 16 starts, despite a sub-par completion % last year, played the QB position "efficiently" when you look at his TD and INT stats, his high y/a and his ridiculously high yards per completion. This is absolutely correct. The ironic thing is how inconsistently and situationally you apply that principle to Tebow, though. I'd suggest that you might want to get the log out of your own eye before you look for a toothpick in your neighbors eye. I don't want Tebow to get special treatment, just equal treatment. Actually, what McCoy did last year was borderline incompetence. The only question is how much input did Fox have in the offensive gameplan, and how much of it was McCoy's doing. Tebow and the Broncos succeeded in spite of McCoy's play-calling, not because of it. Even the most staid Tebow haters were ripping on McCoy's crazy predictable play-calling all throughout the season last year. As I was just saying....
^ but wait how did it go for him next week! 1X to 4X to the Pats lol Tebow will never be an NFL QB! Matt shuab and the Texans just lost to the pats 1X to 4X, both should retire right now, because its obviously neither will ever give a franchise its first play off win in a long time or be a top ten rated qb. (This is actually a response to the post above the one above mine when I was typing)
Look, many of the Tebots on this forum are not as delusional as some of them in the state of Florida (Gainesville) and on twitter.
You make the incorrect assumption that the coaches have a better option to to to. Just because a team isn't winning doesn't mean the backup QB gives them a better chance of winning. Oh and by the way ... the Jets have won three of the last 4 games.
Nice way to prove your point lol. For example, does Kyle Orton give the Cowboys a better chance to win? Does Charlie Whitehurst give the Chargers a better chance to win? Does Shaun Hill give the Lions the best chance to win? I don't think so.
Jets have won 3 of their last 4 games by limiting the impact their QB has one the game. Fortunately enough for us, the teams we have played have sucked badly enough for this strategy to be successful. Oh, and one of those games was won by the 3rd string QB.
Same can be said for Tebow's winning streak last year, the best team he beat as a starter during that 6 game winning streak.... a Jets team reeling of a blowout loss to the Pats on a Thursday night, with Schotty and Wayne Hunter.
:rofl::rofl::rofl2::rofl2: holy shit balls! Is a tebot REALLY posting this? Do you have any idea how hypocritical that sounds after your propping up Tebow because of his wins last year? lmfao! You guys are too much!
Difference is, at the end of the games, the ball was in Tebow's hands and he usually drove the team down for the winning score. Another difference is that last year, Tebow was a second string QB who took over as the starter and had fewer than 16 starts under his belt. Sanchez is a 4th year starter with 65 starts.
In the last 3 touch down drives the jets have scored Sanchez has thrown a total of 2 passes for 16 yards. neither of which were to convert on a 3rd down or for a touch down. No one is denying Tebow sucked badly at times last yr, but he contributed a lot more to his teams touch down drives then 16 yrds over two games, so comparing them is quite unfair.
Sanchez inspired the defense to play better so that they were in a position to win with those touchdowns.
your point was proved wrong so you deflected it. If your wrong about something its ok to admit it. Im sure I've been wrong about a couple things. If you don't want to do that fine, your awesome in your own special way anyways. I admit tebow gets way too much credit for the defensive play. I think he had a little bit to do with it, but the grand majority of it is fully the defenses credit.
Nothing was proven wrong. You guys credit Tebow for a bunch of wins where the offense was historically bad for the majority of the game and the defense/special teams played amazing to keep them in the game. You're all so full of shit it's unbelievable. Their is no reasoning with you folks. I should have just stuck with Tebow is a terrible QB.
