Demo said Sanchez shouldn't get much credit for the recent wins because he barely did anything, and you feel Tebow barely did anything and received lots of credit for the broncos win from Demo and others. You called demo a hypocrite, because you feel he is treating two similar situations differently. No one here claims it was 100% tebow the defense was killing it last yr and deserves its share, but once the difference in QB contribution was pointed out you deflected from your point that both situations and qb contributions are the same and neither deserve credit and that demo is a hypocrite. Tebow has had his bad points, plenty even, but contributed WAY more to his teams wins then sanchez has in his last two games. Calling them the same is unfair and Demo is not a hypocrite, since both situations and Qb contributions are quite different. inb4 Tebow is a terrible QB and before you deflect by claiming someone has said the broncos wins were 100% Tebows merit. Even if some random poster did put that up, all the regular pro tebow posters don't hold that opinion and have stated it plenty of times.
Actually, what you probably should have done was just kept quiet Yes, the defense played an integral (essential or fundamental, just to help you out) part in the wins by keeping the game close. THAT SAID, it still came down to Tebow driving the offense down the field to win the game. The defense didn't drive 95 yards against the Jets. The defense didn't mount those two drives against the Bears. Do you understand that ? That at the end of the games, when Denver was behind, the ball was put in TEBOW'S hands and he was asked to go win the game. Compare that to Sanchez. Against AZ, he was actually taken out of the game and McElroy was put in and asked to win it. Against jacksonville, pretty much the only times that ball was in Sanchez's hands was when he took the snap from center and handed it off to Greene and Powell.
Phaytal I thought you were the worlds greatest comedic act but it turns out I was wrong. I want to sincerely apologize because I had not idea you were a world class Houdini in the making. When you mentioned disappearing acts I thought back on what I remember as some of the best disappearing acts I have ever seen in my life and I thought VIOLOA! Phaytal on the Broncos Country message boards last year ! Since we were debating the bears game in another thread I thought it appropriate to post and choose that game . So let me get this straight, Denver wins a dramatic come from behind overtime victory to almost make it a given Denver is going to the playoffs and you DISAPPEAR???? You have a real big mouth (now) for the bears game but its kinda crazy you never said much on your own board when it happened... you were still crying about the Vikings win though (boo hoo Tebow had a a real good game against Vikings but he still sucks waaa...waaaa...waaa)...where were you Mr. Montalban?
Forest Gump sad it best " These Cowboys are like a box of chocolates .....you never know what your gonna get"
Yep, if games were only 5 minutes long, Tebow might be a hall of famer already!!!! I do give Tebow props for being able to drive down the field when defenses decide to change up and hang on for dear life rather than just attacking him like they did all day. that's still a mistake on the other team but not every QB in the league is able to pull it off. So props for that. However, it also isn't lost on my why they are scratching and clawing to scrape their way out of a hole.... against bottom feeder teams week in and week out when ANY realy offense should be KILLING those teams. This is exactly why I felt winning the games the way they were with Tebow just wasn't going to be sustainable unless we could build the '85 bears. I look at the Broncos current offense ACTUALLY staying on the field. They even sustained a drive yesterday for more than 10 minutes. I do believe that is part of the reason the numbers against the Broncos defense are as low as they were. Had the offense been going three and out 7 or 8 times, and kept putting the defense out there with more possessions, the Broncos sure as hell wouldn't be ranked #4. THAT much I can promise you. The best defense was a good offense. Not gonna get that with Tebow.
I hope you're wearing some tasty shoes this morning, since you just inserted your foot into your mouth. I've already showed you statistically that 3 and outs and 3rd down conversion % aren't reliably predictive of Wins. Yesterday against Baltimore (whose Defense is hanging together with chewing gum and duct tape right now) Denver was a whopping 31% on 3rd down conversions (awesome, huh?) and had....no no, wait for it....7 three and outs. Cute cliche, but not always true, not by a long shot.
Oh but they CAN determine if a team is playing well or not. You'd just not going to crank out wins consistently unless you have a defense that is playing lights out. ...and as much as people try, you just can't give Tebow a whole lot of credit for THAT. Looking at those stats, it was definately easy to see which side of the ball was doing the heavy lifting. Someone in charge of the Broncos has to evaluate what went wrong and what went right. identify the biggest weaknesses on the team... and they see those stats. What do you think they are going to do? Stay the course and improve somewhere else? No, the Broncos saw SERIOUS flaws in Tebow's game, saw those stats and three and outs being a MAJOR thorn in their side. Chose to improve that and now the team is sitting at 11-3. Who would have thought? While true, it isn't 100% indicative as there are teams that have won with shitty offensive production like that. But silly to just ignore it too. SOMETHING was contributing to the worst offensive production in DECADES for the Broncos. The really low scores... it was because the offense did nothing. Yesterday, the Broncos still get 34 points. Most of those games with Tebow, we were lucky to get more than 13-16. A bunch of incompletes and inability to stay on the field, let alone score, was SERIOUSLY hurting the team. low production was something that was consistent with Tebow. (Aside from a couple of good ones.) Manning isn't going to go three and out 7 times week in and week out. Tebow did it all the time.
You need some help moving that goalpost? Wouldn't want you to hurt your back. I never said anyone should ignore it, just that they aren't the end all and be all stats you make them out to be, and furthermore, there were extenuating circumstances that are perfectly logical explanations for why they were higher with Tebow under center, namely that the playcalling, particularly on 3rd and long, was ridiculous. That's easy to see just by comparing those stats from Tebow's 2010 starts to Tebow's 2011 starts, when the offense was significantly more run-heavy and significantly more conservative under Fox. The Patriots had 34 points, 13 more first downs, 137 more offensive yards, and less 3 and outs than the Niners last night, and lost. Who, looking at all those stats, would have thought the Patriots would have lost that game? You know how many Super Bowl winning teams since 1995 have even been in the top 5 best teams in the league that year in terms of their Three and Out %? A whole 6. Out of 17 Super Bowl winners since 1995, a measly 35% of them were even top 5 in the league in best 3 and out %. Of those 17 Super Bowl winners, their average 3 and out % ranking in the year they won the Super Bowl was 10th. Exactly 1 of them was ranked #1, and 3 of them weren't even in the top 20! Look at the below stats and tell me how correlative having a low 3 and out % is to winning Super Bowl Rings over the course of a QB's career: ______________________ Tom Brady: 1) Career 3 and Out % ranking - 9th 2) Years at #1 - 2 3) Out of top 10 in league 4 times in career 4) Ranking during Super Bowl win years - 15th, 21st, 7th 5) Super Bowls Won - 3 ______________________________________________ Peyton Manning: 1) Career 3 and Out % ranking - 5th 2) Years at #1 - 4 3) Never out of top 10 in league since #12 in rookie year 4) Ranking during Super Bowl win year - 1st 5) Super Bowls Won - 1 Not true, not even close. In Tebow's first 16 starts, the Denver offense averaged 19.8 pts./game. Including Elway's rookie year in 1983, there have been 4 seasons between then and now where the Broncos scored less points per game than in Tebow's first 16 starts. 19.6, 16.4, 19, 18.9. The three worst of those were with the great John Elway under center. There were also years with the following points/game: 20.4, 20, 19.9, 20.7, 20.4, one under Brian Griese, a few more under Elway, and the rest under Cutler. That sound you hear is another one of your wild, unsubstantiated claims crashing to earth. I would have thought you had learned your lesson by now about using hyperbole and exaggeration to try and make your points, but apparently not. Either that or you are just ignorant like you were about Denver's 7 three and out drives yesterday against the Ravens. So, you're back to suggesting that a team with the ridiculously run-skewed pass-run ratio the Broncos had last year actually can be a prolific, high-scoring offense? Even though you finally acknowledged a few weeks ago, when I pressed you, that there probably is no team in recent NFL history that had a pass-run ratio that skewed to the run, that was also a high-scoring offense? So, were you lying then or are you lying now? Oh, and you can stop with the nonsense that the "Peyton Manning, low 3 and out % effect" is the primary reason that Denver went from the #24 ranked Defense last year to the #5 ranked Defense this year. In Manning's 13 years worth of starts with the Indianapolis Colts, the Colts Defense had an average ranking of 15th in the league, including one year at #1 and five years at 20th or worse, including a few at or near the bottom of the list. They spent more years in the bottom half of the league Defensive rankings while Manning was QB, than they spent in the top half. Oh, and here is one other little interesting tidbit....That Denver Defense that you have variously referred to as "lights out", "played their butts off" and "carried Tebow to those wins", gave up an average of 25 pts./game in Tebow's first 16 starts. In the 29 years since John Elway's rookie year, there have only been three - THREE - years when Tebow wasn't the QB (including the 13 games in 2010 with Orton starting) - where the Denver Defense gave up that many or more points in a single season. Denver's Defense performed better overall in Tebow's 16 starts compared to the first 13 games of 2010 with Orton starting, but Denver's Defense while Tebow was starting was still an historically bad Denver Defense, and Tebow led that team to a 56.25% winning percentage (9-7).
I know you mean this pejoratively, but it could be interpreted as you saying Tebow is so good, he only needs 5 minutes to win a game, as opposed to other QBs who need 60 minutes.
