From what I saw, McCoy's offense incorporated large chunks of Meyer's offense at Florida. The Broncos typically attacked one high safety by running the football (though it wasn't out of the ordinary to throw against it either), always attacked two high safeties with the run, and attacked through the air when both safeties cheated up and the CB's played straight press on the outside. Those were generally the rules for Meyer's spread option at Florida, and that's what the Broncos typically did since the spread was essentially a numbers game. That's why it looked predictable. Further, if you're going to make the point that the offense McCoy ran was predictable, you have to be able to account for the entire season, and not just one playoff game to excuse the quarterback.
Will start with your last point. Go back to any of the game day threads and you'll see people complaining about the predictability of the offense.
As for Denver and Urban's Spread, yeah, there were some similarities which you have mentioned, but that's where it stops. The beauty of Urban's spread is that it creates mismatches and to a large degree, dictates coverages. He literally spreads the field both in width and in depth.
Take the playoff game against the Pats for example. The base defense the Pats used all game was a version of a 50 defense, primarily, a 5-2. On almost every play, they had a 5 man front with 2 LBs, giving them 7 in the box. What did Denver counter this with ? Usually, tight formations with a 7 man line with Tebow under center, or in the gun, with a RB to one side or the other. Often, 1 of the WRs would be lined up tight as well, leaving 1 WR out wide to the other side.
Here's an example (both side view and rear view).
And another:
As you can see, the offense isn't "Spread" by any sense of the imagination. It doesn't dictate coverage or a change in defensive scheme.
I'm good on that, Demo. People here have complained that the play calling was too predictable under Weis, McDaniels, O'Brien, and McDaniels again after losses. Most fan bases use the "predictability of the play calling" as a coping mechanism for a loss to excuse the players and execution.
One key difference is that I'm not talking about guys pissing and moaning after a game. DURING the game, guys would sit there and call the plays right in the thread. First down, "Handoff to McGahee up the middle". Second down "Read Option left with McGahee". Third and long "Deep to Decker or DT".
Also, like I said, it wasn't just Tebow supporters who were making the comments. Even a number of Tebow critics were saying the same things.
Now we're getting somewhere.
Actually KontradictioN, I've been here all along, you are the one just getting there. I've never claimed that Tebow was a hall of famer, great, or even particularly good QB overall in 2011. I've said that he did pretty well given that he was a young and inexperienced QB with fewer than 16 starts under his belt coming in off the bench and taking over as the starter
There was no voodoo. I cited the changes that he made. The Ravens were actually on their way for the game-winning score before Sterling Moore made the play of his life, and were going to tie it, and meet their season average, before Cundiff choked on the fat one. They got in that position by finally abandoning the run and attacking us through the air. As for the Giants, good gameplan (take away the vertical passing game), bad execution on the rest of it. Further, Eli isn't the quarterback that some people make him out to be. He still went 30/40 though and controlled the clock for his team.
Eli might not be the QB that many make him out to be, but he's still Eli and he's better than Tebow (and most other QBs in the league) and much more experienced at the NFL level. Yet as I said, the Pats D held him and the Giants under their season avg. You say that it was a good game plan? Why wouldn't that apply to the Denver game as well ? Good game plan.
