Tebow, Blount, Edelman

[Demosthenes]

sb1 is talking about Brady's QB sneaks, Ian's article is talking about Brady's passing.

Sure seemed like SB1 was talking about the Pats short yardage in general:

This team does not need short yardage help and any thought that Brady is coming off the field for Tebow for any reason is just a pipe dream.

Just so you know, Brady has not missed on a 3rd or 4th and 1 in eight years.

Ian's article discussed the team's short yardage statistics, both passing and rushing.

As I said, the discussion in that threat seemed to indicate that there was room for improvement in short yardage situations.

 

[Deus Irae]

Call me strange, but I side with Belichick on this one:

I'm not sure where there's much of anything for people to disagree about here. The Patriots' 2011 defense sucked.

Speaking of that defense: the Broncos put up 393 yards against it in the first meeting. It did shut down the Broncos in the second meeting, though, and the key in both games was shutting down the Broncos running game.

In the first game, Denver was doing well until Lance Ball put the ball on the carpet. That fumble (which led to a Patriots TD), followed by the Tebow fumble on the next Broncos drive(which led to another Patriots TD and a 24-16 Patriots lead), took the starch out of the Broncos. The loss wasn't on Tebow, and the Broncos played well at the start.

In the second game, the Patriots struck right away and took the 7-0 lead. That was followed by a Tebow fumble which led to a 14-0 Patriots lead. The Broncos cut the lead in half, but that Broncos defense simply couldn't stop the Patriots, the Broncos offense couldn's sustain long drives, and the Patriots put up 35 points in the first half, taking the 'Tebow' offense completely out of its comfort zone and rendering it essentially useless.

The Broncos just weren't the type of team that was really designed to hold up against their own turnovers, as their defense was a bit overrated and the offense was more of a grinding style. That's not really a Tebow fault, as the team was still better with him under center than with someone else there, but it was certainly a limitation in 2010.

 

[sb1]

Sure seemed like SB1 was talking about the Pats short yardage in general:



Ian's article discussed the team's short yardage statistics, both passing and rushing.

As I said, the discussion in that threat seemed to indicate that there was room for improvement in short yardage situations.

I stand by what I said in my post, this team does not need short yardage help.

They already have the best QB sneaker in football and power guys who can carry the rock to get those tough yards.

By the way, tebow is massively overrated as a runner. IMO he is NOT good enough of a running threat where you'd want to design offensive plays just for him.

 

[situational_awareness]

I've been trying to stay away from this whole Tebow argument, because I know that what will happen is people will start blaming the Tebow supporters for the discussion.

In reality, this whole argument happened because I made the unfortunate decision to say "Tebow is more experienced in the NFL than Ryan Mallet." Nobody paid one bit of attention to the comments I made about Edelman and Blount.

That HIGHLY controversial statement caused all types of people to go apesh@t. Then all the responses started coming and I defended my position.

I don't want this to become an "Us vs Them" situation. Yeah I support Tebow, yes, I think he is better than people say he is. But I enjoy the Pats, and football in general.

That being said, I'm back in it.

 

[situational_awareness]

By the way, tebow is massively overrated as a runner. IMO he is NOT good enough of a running threat where you'd want to design offensive plays just for him.

You have so much contempt for Tebow that now you are just making stuff up. I can understand people who say he can't throw... I disagree with them, but ok cool.

But to say Tebow is an overrated runner... come on man. Just stop it.

 

[Nunchucks]

I've been trying to stay away from this whole Tebow argument, because I know that what will happen is people will start blaming the Tebow supporters for the discussion.

In reality, this whole argument happened because I made the unfortunate decision to say "Tebow is more experienced in the NFL than Ryan Mallet." Nobody paid one bit of attention to the comments I made about Edelman and Blount.

That HIGHLY controversial statement caused all types of people to go apesh@t. Then all the responses started coming and I defended my position.

I don't want this to become an "Us vs Them" situation. Yeah I support Tebow, yes, I think he is better than people say he is. But I enjoy the Pats, and football in general.

That being said, I'm back in it.

There is nothing controversial about the statement that Tebow has more NFL experience than Mallet. It is absolutely true. Tebow has proven himself to be sub-par thrower at the NFL level. Mallet has yet to have the opportunity to prove himself one way or the other.

Having more experience in the NFL is not always a good thing, sometimes it means "you are what you are."

 

[situational_awareness]

There is nothing controversial about the statement that Tebow has more NFL experience than Mallet. It is absolutely true. Tebow has proven himself to be sub-par thrower at the NFL level. Mallet has yet to have the opportunity to prove himself one way or the other.

Having more experience in the NFL is not always a good thing, sometimes it means "you are what you are."

I was being sarcastic about the controversiality of my statement.

Tebow has not "proven" to be a sub-par thrower, IMO. Ok, maybe a little. He has proven that he has some areas, like most young QBs, to improve upon. There are reasons why I believe one of college football's most accurate passers did not have a high completion percentage in the NFL, but they will be viewed as excuses, and therefore, I won't express that here. I will say that mathematically, we're talking about 2 or 3 more completed passes in a game that would have gotten him well into the over 50% category. It wasn't as bad as people said.

I think to summarize what Tebow has proved in his starts to "he is a sub-par passer" is a bit too simplistic.

He has shown that:

Pros
- He is clutch
- He can help win a division title
- He can help win a playoff game
- He can help turn around a bad team
- He can run over and around NFL defenders just like he did in college
- He can convert the 2 point play with high frequency and under pressure

Cons
- He needs to make quicker decisions
- He needs to execute better
- He needs to improve footwork
- He needs to improve ball security while running

Most of his cons are typical of young QBs. Most of his pros are not typical of young QBs.

And the conclusion...

On the Patriots, he is a benchwarmer. He's better than Mallet, but far behind Brady. If this were JAX, STL, CLE, TB, ARZ, OAK, or some other sorry team, he should start. On the Pats, he's here as QB3 and best case QB2. And no, he is not a RB/FB/TE. There are others on this team better than him at those positions.

 

[Nunchucks]

He has not proven that he is better than Mallet. He is clutch? What was the score of the last game he started? He certainly did not look clutch against the worst Patriots defense I've ever seen.

He had a nice couple of games, but in the NFL, you either improve or you get cut. Which direction has Tebow's play taken him? He has had time to improve his play...we have not seen evidence of improvement. We will see him in TC, but I ain't holding my breath.

 

[sb1]

You have so much contempt for Tebow that now you are just making stuff up. I can understand people who say he can't throw... I disagree with them, but ok cool.

But to say Tebow is an overrated runner... come on man. Just stop it.

Im not saying he's a bad runner, just overrated.

If you'd like I can discuss his atrocious 3.2 YPC last season as a wildcat QB... Or I can talk about his statistical decline in production on the ground in Denver once the league started to figure him out. Or I can talk about a group of some of the best running QBs in the league like Kaep and show that Tebow is inferior as a runner to most of them....

 

[Christiancat]

I've been trying to stay away from this whole Tebow argument, because I know that what will happen is people will start blaming the Tebow supporters for the discussion.

In reality, this whole argument happened because I made the unfortunate decision to say "Tebow is more experienced in the NFL than Ryan Mallet." Nobody paid one bit of attention to the comments I made about Edelman and Blount.

That HIGHLY controversial statement caused all types of people to go apesh@t. Then all the responses started coming and I defended my position.

I don't want this to become an "Us vs Them" situation. Yeah I support Tebow, yes, I think he is better than people say he is. But I enjoy the Pats, and football in general.

That being said, I'm back in it.

Alot of people want to bash tebow. We all should support the team, but they should support Tebow as he's now apart of their team. It's unfortunate that some long time members want to accuse all the posters who are new and support Tebow as a troll. It's just wrong.

 

[Nunchucks]

If you hadn't noticed, in New England people choose players to cut down and bash. It is a common occurance with fans of this team. You merely have to read a thread about Ras-I Dowling, Shane Vereen, Jenkins, or Donald Jones to see that the nature of NE fans is to hate on their own.

 

[sb1]

I was being sarcastic about the controversiality of my statement.

Tebow has not "proven" to be a sub-par thrower, IMO. Ok, maybe a little. He has proven that he has some areas, like most young QBs, to improve upon. There are reasons why I believe one of college football's most accurate passers did not have a high completion percentage in the NFL, but they will be viewed as excuses, and therefore, I won't express that here. I will say that mathematically, we're talking about 2 or 3 more completed passes in a game that would have gotten him well into the over 50% category. It wasn't as bad as people said.

I think to summarize what Tebow has proved in his starts to "he is a sub-par passer" is a bit too simplistic.

He has shown that:

Pros
- He is clutch
- He can help win a division title
- He can help win a playoff game
- He can help turn around a bad team
- He can run over and around NFL defenders just like he did in college
- He can convert the 2 point play with high frequency and under pressure

Cons
- He needs to make quicker decisions
- He needs to execute better
- He needs to improve footwork
- He needs to improve ball security while running

Most of his cons are typical of young QBs. Most of his pros are not typical of young QBs.

And the conclusion...

On the Patriots, he is a benchwarmer. He's better than Mallet, but far behind Brady. If this were JAX, STL, CLE, TB, ARZ, OAK, or some other sorry team, he should start. On the Pats, he's here as QB3 and best case QB2. And no, he is not a RB/FB/TE. There are others on this team better than him at those positions.

"He can convert the 2 pt play with high frequency"

-----

The Broncos were 50% (3 for 6) on the 2 pt convert in 2011.

50% isn't exactly what I'd call high frequency.

 

[g8orballboy]

"He can convert the 2 pt play with high frequency"

-----

The Broncos were 50% (3 for 6) on the 2 pt convert in 2011.

50% isn't exactly what I'd call high frequency.

The broncos were 3 for 6 but Tebow was 3 for 5 (60%)... You can't add an Orton run play when we're talking about Tebow not the broncos.

Tebow was also 4 for 5 with the broncos on scoring when running from the 3 yard line or closer with the one miss being when he was centering the ball at the end of the Minnesota game.

So not too shabby if you ask me.

 

[sb1]

The broncos were 3 for 6 but Tebow was 3 for 5 (60%)... You can't add an Orton run play when we're talking about Tebow not the broncos.

Tebow was also 4 for 5 with the broncos on scoring when running from the 3 yard line or closer with the one miss being when he was centering the ball at the end of the Minnesota game.

So not too shabby if you ask me.

I didn't realize that one of them was Orton's, I stand corrected.

 

[Ironman44]

I'm not sure where there's much of anything for people to disagree about here. The Patriots' 2011 defense sucked.

Speaking of that defense: the Broncos put up 393 yards against it in the first meeting. It did shut down the Broncos in the second meeting, though, and the key in both games was shutting down the Broncos running game.

In the first game, Denver was doing well until Lance Ball put the ball on the carpet. That fumble (which led to a Patriots TD), followed by the Tebow fumble on the next Broncos drive(which led to another Patriots TD and a 24-16 Patriots lead), took the starch out of the Broncos. The loss wasn't on Tebow, and the Broncos played well at the start.

In the second game, the Patriots struck right away and took the 7-0 lead. That was followed by a Tebow fumble which led to a 14-0 Patriots lead. The Broncos cut the lead in half, but that Broncos defense simply couldn't stop the Patriots, the Broncos offense couldn's sustain long drives, and the Patriots put up 35 points in the first half, taking the 'Tebow' offense completely out of its comfort zone and rendering it essentially useless.

The Broncos just weren't the type of team that was really designed to hold up against their own turnovers, as their defense was a bit overrated and the offense was more of a grinding style. That's not really a Tebow fault, as the team was still better with him under center than with someone else there, but it was certainly a limitation in 2010.

One of the clearest and most precise explanations of that game I have heard yet.

 

[Brady6]

Alot of people want to bash tebow. We all should support the team, but they should support Tebow as he's now apart of their team. It's unfortunate that some long time members want to accuse all the posters who are new and support Tebow as a troll. It's just wrong.

I think that if the supporters of Tebow were to engage in discussions that weren't solely based around Tim Tebow you'd be received much better.

When you come into a forum of a team that currently has 88-90 players, just had one of its star players released for unprecedented allegation against a NFL player but despite all this every thing you say is centered around just one player it is clear to me that you're not here with sincere intention but rather you're here with your own agenda.

That is not fair to the users of this forum and frankly I don't think it's fair to players in the NFL that worked just as hard as Tim Tebow to get where they are and take a back seat because they don't have a cult like following. I'm not a church goer but I'm certain that God doesn't want one human being to be the centric of all. And that what you all are attempting to do in this forum. It's not right. Be a fan of the Patriots and all it's players or go take the time and the money that Ian did and build a Tim Tebow forum where you can discuss him and only him.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Politely well said Brady6 & I like our 3rd string QB but think he's a long shot for the 53

 

[Brady6]

Politely well said Brady6 & I like our 3rd string QB but think he's a long shot for the 53

Thank man! I like Tebow just fine as well. But right now he isn't integral part of this team.

 

[manxman2601]

Thank man! I like Tebow just fine as well. But right now he isn't integral part of this team.

The first person to say you are wrong will be BB who I'm sure would say that every player is integral to the team.

 

[Deus Irae]

Alot of people want to bash tebow. We all should support the team, but they should support Tebow as he's now apart of their team. It's unfortunate that some long time members want to accuse all the posters who are new and support Tebow as a troll. It's just wrong.

It is what it is.

You're either a mult or a fellow traveler getting in on that dude's act. a Mult's more likely, IMO. Your account was made the day after that one, and your posts largely consist of attaboys to his posts.