PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

NFL.com ranking of backup QBs: Mallett #11, Tebow #17


Status
Not open for further replies.
I think it's right in a way and wrong in a way, but that's not the point. The point is that is the way they are judged, so you can't come in now and say that Tebow's wins are meaningless and move the goalposts just because you don't like one particular player.

Where did I say I don't like him?

And no it's never right in a way, it's always the wrong way to judge a QB.


No, no, and no to all your questions.

Really, cause I would think if QB's really win games the answers should be clear cut yes. The Dilfer one is the most stark reason why you don't give QB's sole credit for "wins".


So then, you agree that when the Broncos lost, it wasn't Tebow's fault? You agree that the team "backed into the playoffs" because the TEAM was not playing well?

If the QB stinks it up, obviously he would be a reason why they lost but not THE reason. That is not possible in a team sport like football. Wins and losses in the end are always team stats. Always. And the QB is part of the team last I checked.

I'll go back to the baseball analogy again. Pitchers can win games for a baseball team all by himself by striking out every hitter he sees. There is no such paradigm in football. QB's cannot possibly win games for teams so why do they get credit for it?


I don't agree. A QB can definitely win or lose a game for a team. Philip Rivers and Mark Sanchez last year are some good examples.

With that logic I can argue the same for other players. Adrian Peterson won a lot of games last year. Why won't anyone talk about his W-L record? And do you agree that Rahim Moore went 0-1 in the playoffs this year when he got beat by Jacoby Jones. I can go on and on.

It worked greatly? I thought you said Tebow sucks and looked like garbage? Now it worked greatly? Which one is it? lol.

It worked greatly until the Pats showed the league how to stop that offense. The point is the coaching staff created an offense for Tebow that didn't expose his flawed skills as a passer. Hence, credit to the TEAM - not the QB alone - for making it work greatly for a while.
 
Tebow, Tebow, Tebow!! :bricks:

Joker was RIGHT. :eek:

This place is INFESTED!! :eek:

Hahaha, where else to put discussions about Tim than in a thread named "NFL.com ranking of backup QBs: Mallett #11, Tebow #17"? (Rhetorical question)
 
Most of that run was in spite of Tebow. He led the offense to the worst production it had in nearly 30 years. Led the league in three and outs, and is the only starting QB to finish with completing under 50% of their passes since 1992. He was good against soft prevents in the 4th when a lot of QBs aren't, but it usually followed 3 quarters where he REALLY struggled out there to do much.

So I agree, this list isn't legit. they were being VERY generous to Tebow thanks to a couple of lucky strikes that beat an injury depleted Steelers team. He's probably good enough to be the #2 on a couple of really QB thin teams like Jacksonville, but He'd probably be the #3 guy on most teams at best.

not that a really care were Tebow is ranked as a backup QB but Denver was a much better passing team with Kyle Orton at QB but they where 1-4 say what u want about him but if Tebow was not the QB in Denver that year they end up with the first pick in the Draft
 
Where did I say I don't like him?

And no it's never right in a way, it's always the wrong way to judge a QB.




Really, cause I would think if QB's really win games the answers should be clear cut yes. The Dilfer one is the most stark reason why you don't give QB's sole credit for "wins".




If the QB stinks it up, obviously he would be a reason why they lost but not THE reason. That is not possible in a team sport like football. Wins and losses in the end are always team stats. Always. And the QB is part of the team last I checked.

I'll go back to the baseball analogy again. Pitchers can win games for a baseball team all by himself by striking out every hitter he sees. There is no such paradigm in football. QB's cannot possibly win games for teams so why do they get credit for it?




With that logic I can argue the same for other players. Adrian Peterson won a lot of games last year. Why won't anyone talk about his W-L record? And do you agree that Rahim Moore went 0-1 in the playoffs this year when he got beat by Jacoby Jones. I can go on and on.



It worked greatly until the Pats showed the league how to stop that offense. The point is the coaching staff created an offense for Tebow that didn't expose his flawed skills as a passer. Hence, credit to the TEAM - not the QB alone - for making it work greatly for a while.

By your logic...

Ok, then just throw any old QB out there. No need to go after a QB who has a history of winning. QB is not the most important guy out there on the field. QB's barely impact the game.
 
not that a really care were Tebow is ranked as a backup QB but Denver was a much better passing team with Kyle Orton at QB but they where 1-4 say what u want about him but if Tebow was not the QB in Denver that year they end up with the first pick in the Draft

Doubtful.

The defense also got better around the time Orton was replaced, and that was WITH the offense going three and out almost twice as often as the Orton era. Von Miller was finally figuring things out, Elvis Dumervil was getting back into for after missing the entire season before, the defense started to Gel in Fox's new system that couldn't even be ironed out until camp due to no offseason. D. Thomas returning from his long term injury.

Lots of things changed. It was also the worst start to a seaosn in Orton's at the time 7 year career too.

Plus, the level of competition got easier. The defense was able to hang with the likes of the New York Jets, the Dolphins, the injury depleted Chargers, the Chiefs, the Hanie led Bears, etc. Defense held 6 opponents to 15 points or less. Kyle Orton has a record of 23-2 when that happens, and he even beat Tebow head to head in a game that had a final score of 7 to 3.

Defense carried the way against a fairly easy schedule, and obviously coudln't handle teams like the Patriots.

So I think the record, while probably wouldn't have been better than the 8-8 season they finished with, was probably not likely to finish much below that if at all either. Tebow got far too much credit for that turnaround.

Nice kid, a lot of teammates loved him, but looking at the picture as a whole, it isn't hard to see why a couple months after he allegedly pulled the Broncos to the promised land on his shoulders, he only warranted a 4th rounder from just a couple of potential suitors, and couldn't even be given away a year later. He left a LOT to be desired as a QB.
 
Where did I say I don't like him?

And no it's never right in a way, it's always the wrong way to judge a QB.




Really, cause I would think if QB's really win games the answers should be clear cut yes. The Dilfer one is the most stark reason why you don't give QB's sole credit for "wins".

Brad Johnson has a SB ring.

In Denver, Orton was more productive, scored more points, and had longer drives out there. When Tebow took over, ALL production went south except for the running game, which came nowhere near making up for all the lowering of scores, yardage, third down conversions, and punting the ball away after three plays all the time.

Yet Orton got the blame for the losses and Tebow mopped up the credit for the wins. So how is it that more games were won with less production? it's the defense. I don't know why that is so hard a concept for a lot of these people to understand. 22 guys on the field, and they want to give credit to the 11th best player on the Broncos offense that year. This isn't to say I think Orton was any good either. I don't. But Tebow's record would be equal or worse than Orton's if he played the prior 2 years when the Broncos defense allowed an average of almost 30 points per game. How is it then that Orton went 23-2 when the defense gave up 15 points or less? (Most of that in Chicago.)

Logical conclusion, BOTH sucked when the game demanded offensive production to win the game. Keep the game down to 2 scores for a whole 60 minutes, I don't see why people have a problem admitting the defense did the heavy lifting that season waiting for the boy wonder to finally show up after teams dropped back into soft prevents with 5 minutes left.
 
Most of that run was in spite of Tebow. He led the offense to the worst production it had in nearly 30 years. Led the league in three and outs, and is the only starting QB to finish with completing under 50% of their passes since 1992. He was good against soft prevents in the 4th when a lot of QBs aren't, but it usually followed 3 quarters where he REALLY struggled out there to do much.

So I agree, this list isn't legit. they were being VERY generous to Tebow thanks to a couple of lucky strikes that beat an injury depleted Steelers team. He's probably good enough to be the #2 on a couple of really QB thin teams like Jacksonville, but He'd probably be the #3 guy on most teams at best.


Yet again you don't know what you are talking about.

Dating back to 1992, there has been 24 QB's with 6 or more starts in a season who have thrown for under 50%


Yet again you throw up this canard about facing "soft prevent defenses". I've corrected this "mistake" from you before, so now it's no longer a "mistake" on your part, but a flat out lie. Take the Bears for instance. They played Tampa2 against Tebow in the 4th Q and overtime. Tampa2 is not a soft prevent defense. It's was the Bear's base defense. The Jets didn't have a soft prevent defense out there either.

What happened in the 4th Q of games is that the Broncos went primarily from the shotgun with 3.4 and 5 WR sets. You know, a SPREAD offense. BUT, Tebow was still a threat to take off running. Teams were forced to choose as to whether to defend the pass with nickel/dime type packages, or to defend against the run with heavier packages.

Also, Denver went to a hurry up offense which didn't allow for teams to freely substitute. SO, if a team got caught with a dime package, and couldn't sub, Tebow could run. That's what happened with the Jets. IF the team stayed with a heavier set, Tebow could throw from the shotgun where he was comfortable.

As to the Steelers, yet again, I'll point out that almost NO analyst or expert predicted that Tebow and the Broncos would beat the Steelers, and they knew about most of the injuries before the game. Vegas certainly didn't have the Broncos winning in the morning line.

Yet, to hear you speak about it, everyone under the sun knew that the Steelers had no chance.

Your entire post is a freaking joke.
 
Also, Denver went to a hurry up offense which didn't allow for teams to freely substitute. SO, if a team got caught with a dime package, and couldn't sub, Tebow could run. That's what happened with the Jets. IF the team stayed with a heavier set, Tebow could throw from the shotgun where he was comfortable.


Almost sounds like you're talking about the Patriots.
 
Yet again you throw up this canard about facing "soft prevent defenses". I've corrected this "mistake" from you before, so now it's no longer a "mistake" on your part, but a flat out lie. Take the Bears for instance. They played Tampa2 against Tebow in the 4th Q and overtime. Tampa2 is not a soft prevent defense. It's was the Bear's base defense. The Jets didn't have a soft prevent defense out there either.

Call it what you want, Sunshine. Urlacher himself said they dropped back and stopped clogging things up for Tebow and it cost them. Calling it a "prevent" or "soft prevent" is just arguing over semantics. Fact is, they backed off a bit, gave Tebow time to think, and it cost them. teams shut him down all day and always made that same mistake. The one team that did not fall into that trap beat the Broncos 7 to 3 that day.

What happened in the 4th Q of games is that the Broncos went primarily from the shotgun with 3.4 and 5 WR sets. You know, a SPREAD offense. BUT, Tebow was still a threat to take off running. Teams were forced to choose as to whether to defend the pass with nickel/dime type packages, or to defend against the run with heavier packages.

Nope. Teams backed off. Most teams are guilty of that. This is why a lot of teams end up losing close games in the waning minutes, Sunshine.

As to the Steelers, yet again, I'll point out that almost NO analyst or expert predicted that Tebow and the Broncos would beat the Steelers, and they knew about most of the injuries before the game. Vegas certainly didn't have the Broncos winning in the morning line.

you know the old saying, any given Sunday, Sunshine? Tebow was a blind squirrel that found a nut. that was proven a week later when facing the Patriots and found himself once again in way over his head.

Your entire post is a freaking joke.

Nope. Tebow's throwing motion is a joke, sunshine. You are in complete denial that Tebow caught a lot of lucky breaks, and seem to not realize that opposing defenses simply made the mistake of backing off on what worked and shut Tebow down all day. Left a lot of things open for even him to find. It was clear in 4 out of his last 5 games that things were just happening too damn fast for him and teams had adjusted to what he was doing the first 5 or 6 games or so. Unfortunately, by the end of the season, his lousy passing skills never caught up to the rest of his game, and boy that hurt.
 
By your logic...

Ok, then just throw any old QB out there. No need to go after a QB who has a history of winning. QB is not the most important guy out there on the field. QB's barely impact the game.

^
Strawman and non sequitur.
 
you kind of have to when its the same team in the same year......

how about brady (16-0) > cassel(11-5)?

Touche.

I just always hated the the "QB's win games" argument, to me it's just an admission that one does not know much about the sport.
 
you know the old saying, any given Sunday, Sunshine? Tebow was a blind squirrel that found a nut. that was proven a week later when facing the Patriots and found himself once again in way over his head.

Fact: The numbers show Pitt's defense in 2011 was nothing but a paper tiger (as I mentioned more than once before) and was extremely overrated that year

Fact: 31.6 yards per completion says a lot more about the defense than it does about the QB. That is not opinion, that is fact.

I am not exactly a Steeler lover so I was ecstatic as anyone that Tebow's Broncos beat them, but I'm also a realist. Whatever "good" came out of that for Tebow was obliterated the following week.
 
Call it what you want, Sunshine. Urlacher himself said they dropped back and stopped clogging things up for Tebow and it cost them. Calling it a "prevent" or "soft prevent" is just arguing over semantics. Fact is, they backed off a bit, gave Tebow time to think, and it cost them. teams shut him down all day and always made that same mistake. The one team that did not fall into that trap beat the Broncos 7 to 3 that day.

Yes, they went from what they had been running, a game plan specific defense, to playing Tampa2, the base defense that they use in most games.

And no, it's not semantics to argue over "prevent" or "soft prevent" when discussing NFL football. Most people engaged in honest debate understand what is meant when you say "they went to a prevent defense". You know, dropping safeties back 30 yards or so and having DBs play 10, 15 and 20 yards off the line of scrimmage.

You are also ignoring the change in Denver's offensive alignment in the 4th Q's of games. When a team switches gears from being run centric, to spreading the field out every play with 3, 4 and 5 WRs and operating exclusively from the shotgun, teams are going to change the defense they employ.

Everyone knows that if you wanted to stop the Broncos running game, you put 8 men in the box and seal the edges. How are you going to do that when Denver puts 5 WRs out ? IF you cover the 5 WRs with straight man coverage, you only have 6 defenders left. That means you can't have 8 men in the box against a 5 WR set. Ergo, the defense was FORCED to change.



you know the old saying, any given Sunday.... Tebow was a blind squirrel that found a nut. that was proven a week later when facing the Patriots and found himself once again in way over his head.

And John Elway won 2 playoff games 1 year then got trounced something like 55-10 by the Pats in the SB.

But oh no, Tebow lost a playoff game to the Pats (on their way to playing in the SB I might add), therefore, it's de facto proof that he's terrible.

Yet another asinine position.




Nope. Tebow's throwing motion is a joke. You are in complete denial that Tebow caught a lot of lucky breaks, and seem to not realize that opposing defenses simply made the mistake of backing off on what worked and shut Tebow down all day. Left a lot of things open for even him to find. It was clear in 4 out of his last 5 games that things were just happening too damn fast for him and teams had adjusted to what he was doing the first 5 or 6 games or so. Unfortunately, by the end of the season, his lousy passing skills never caught up to the rest of his game, and boy that hurt.

And you seem to have forgotten that when he played the first of the "last 5 games", he had only had something like 8 NFL starts under his belt.

Wow, hold the phones. Young and inexperienced QB had trouble with what NFL defenses were throwing at him ? You don't say. That has to be the first time anything like this has ever happened in the entire history of the NFL.
 
As I've mentioned more than once, the numbers show Pitt's defense in 2011 was nothing but a paper tiger.

31.6 yards per completion says a lot more about the defense than it does about the QB. That is not opinion, that is a fact.

I am not exactly a Steeler lover so I was ecstatic as anyone that Tebow's Broncos beat them, but let's be realistic. Whatever "good" came out of that for Tebow was obliterated the following week.

As a Bronco fan, I sort of felt violated that following week. Here I was thinking at the time that the Broncos had a decent chance all week, maybe the rest of the team would step it up and pull out another upset, but those hopes were dashed like 5 minutes into the next game. They really should have just mailied the game in, cuz the Pats could have easily ran it up past 60.
 
Fact: The numbers show Pitt's defense in 2011 was nothing but a paper tiger (as I mentioned more than once before) and was extremely overrated that year

Fact: 31.6 yards per completion says a lot more about the defense than it does about the QB.

I am not exactly a Steeler lover so I was ecstatic as anyone that Tebow's Broncos beat them, but I'm also a realist. Whatever "good" came out of that for Tebow was obliterated the following week.


Fact: The 2011 Pitt defense was #1 in scores allowed, probably the most important defensive stat there is.

If you want to argue that they got burned because of a bad game plan, that would be a fun debate. But it's a non starter to try and claim that they were nothing but a paper tiger.

The fact is, the Steelers dared Denver and Tebow to throw, Tebow did, and he owned them. One can argue about whether he could ever do it again, but the one thing you can never take away is the fact that he did it on that day.
 
As a Bronco fan, I sort of felt violated that following week. Here I was thinking at the time that the Broncos had a decent chance all week, maybe the rest of the team would step it up and pull out another upset, but those hopes were dashed like 5 minutes into the next game. They really should have just mailied the game in, cuz the Pats could have easily ran it up past 60.

I wasn't taking anything for granted especially not with the state of the Pats defense....... but the moment when I saw Brady casually talking to the ref after his last TD pass before the half I figured the Pats were good for the game.

Don't know why it was that moment in particular but that's what did it for me...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Patriots Kraft ‘Involved’ In Decision Making?  Zolak Says That’s Not the Case
MORSE: Final First Round Patriots Mock Draft
Slow Starts: Stark Contrast as Patriots Ponder Which Top QB To Draft
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/24: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/23: News and Notes
MORSE: Final 7 Round Patriots Mock Draft, Matthew Slater News
Bruschi’s Proudest Moment: Former LB Speaks to MusketFire’s Marshall in Recent Interview
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/22: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-21, Kraft-Belichick, A.J. Brown Trade?
MORSE: Patriots Draft Needs and Draft Related Info
Back
Top