Tebow, Blount, Edelman

[Kontradiction]

So now we're scouting Tebow based on one game in a sophomore season going up against one of the greatest coaches in NFL history - one famed for his ability to make adjustments.

Tebow-phobia really is plumbing the depths.

Nope. I've scouted him since he's been at Nease, since I did and still do live around that area. His weaknesses and shortcomings as a quarterback have been the same, and have not changed. For whatever reason, a point that I made as an example has become the forefront of the conversation (his playoff game against the Patriots).

I could point to the game against the Lions (ranked 23rd) where he 18/39 for 172 yards and lost 45-10, or against the Raiders where he went 10/21 for 124 yards and against the Chiefs where he went 2/8 for 69 yards, both of which he won. His accuracy was spotty and when one of those teams was able to contain him from getting outside and making plays, the Broncos were beaten badly. I can point to how he threw for over 200+ yards once since becoming a starter for Denver and use that to further the point that Pittsburgh had a horrific gameplan in the playoffs. I can point to how he stumbled down the stretch during that season and lost the last three games, the final game in which he went 6/22 for 60 yards 0 TD and 1 INT in a 7-3 loss to the Chiefs at home. I could use any number of methods to make my original point about Tebow, but the most effective one was showing how the second worst pass defense of all time beat him badly because they took away what he did well and he wasn't able to adapt because he's simply not that kind of quarterback.

 

[sb1]

Anytime you want to discuss Urban's Spread Option, I'll be happy to as I absolutely love it.

That said, it's not really applicable to this discussion as the Broncos didn't run Urban's Spread Option. Rather, they ran Mike McCoy's offense that had some option plays that he cobbled together. And yes, it was very predictable.

If you want, you can go over to the game day thread at the Broncos forum and you'll find guys who were Tebow critics even then, complaining about the predictability of the plays and they'd even call many of them out before hand.

Again, let me add that I'm not saying that Tebow played a great game. He definitely had his struggles. As I noted earlier in the thread, that happens some times, even to elite QBs like Tom Brady.

As for the defense itself, I still stand by what I said earlier. I don't know what kind of voodoo Belichick and company came up with, but they held both the Ravens and the Giants under their season avg in scoring. Ravens came in averaging 23.6 pts per game, defense held them to 20. Giants were averaging 24.6 pts per game, the D held them to 19.

You mean the same Ravens that the Pats D let come down the field in the last moments of the AFCCG for what should have been a game winning TD and then the kicker missed an easy FG?

Or the same Giants that in the same scenario twice actually did score the game winning TD....twice.

Yeah, real good defense.

You guys need to stop the excuse that a good defense was the reason why TT was lousy in the 11 AFC divisional playoff. It wasn't, and it isn't. Just stop this argument because it's 100% wrong. Just admit your binky got exposed, stunk it up, no excuses, and move on.

 

[sb1]

Tebow-phobia? No. Reality check? Yes.

 

[Kontradiction]

Anytime you want to discuss Urban's Spread Option, I'll be happy to as I absolutely love it.

That said, it's not really applicable to this discussion as the Broncos didn't run Urban's Spread Option. Rather, they ran Mike McCoy's offense that had some option plays that he cobbled together. And yes, it was very predictable.

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.

If you want, you can go over to the game day thread at the Broncos forum and you'll find guys who were Tebow critics even then, complaining about the predictability of the plays and they'd even call many of them out before hand.

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.

Again, let me add that I'm not saying that Tebow played a great game. He definitely had his struggles. As I noted earlier in the thread, that happens some times, even to elite QBs like Tom Brady.

Now we're getting somewhere.

As for the defense itself, I still stand by what I said earlier. I don't know what kind of voodoo Belichick and company came up with, but they held both the Ravens and the Giants under their season avg in scoring. Ravens came in averaging 23.6 pts per game, defense held them to 20. Giants were averaging 24.6 pts per game, the D held them to 19.

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.

 

[Demosthenes]

Roethlisberger was playing on one leg, Mendenhall was out. Pouncey was out. Ryan Clark didn't play due to sickle cell (and that came into play especially in the final play of the game.) They had a couple others out too.

Tebow fans never want to talk about the Patriots game or his performance in the last 4 games of the regular season. It took a RB running out of bounds against Chicago and then fumbling the ball in OT to even beat a Caleb Hanie led Chicago Bears team.

I will give Tebow credit for setting one record with the Patriots though as a starting QB... How about a 29 yard sack?

Tebow Sacked For Longest Sack in NFL History | 5GuyProductions - YouTube

Yawn. Denver was without Brian Dawkins, the leader and QB of their defense. They were without Kris Kuper, the anchor of their offensive line. Denver was without their leading receiver, Eric Decker, prior to scoring their first points iirc. Denver was without their fullback, Spencer Larsen.

Now we get to the kicker. Guess what ? Everyone knew that Ben was hobbled and that Clark wouldn't be playing. They knew that Mendenhall was going to be on the sidelines, along with Pouncey.

So, even with all that known, what did just about EVERY "expert" predict ? That the Steelers would win.

Let's look to Terrell Suggs, a very vocal Tebow critic. What did he say after the game ?

“I’m shocked,” Suggs texted Sunday night. “Jaw is on the floor!!!!!!! He shocked us all.”

Hmm, I don't see anything there that's remotely close to "Well, yeah, he didn't do anything really, it was that the Steelers were beat up".

Or how about Brett Keisel ?

Steelers defensive lineman Brett Keisel also still believes Tebow can play.

“He beat us. You have to give him credit for that,” Keisel said. “I think he’ll get another shot.”

There we have a member of the Steeler Defense that got burned that day, giving credit to Tebow for what he did.

And here we have an avowed Broncos fan (you) trying to downplay what Tebow did that day.

How utterly pathetic.

 

[sb1]

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.

They did take away Cruz and Nicks but basically conceded the run to do so. The Giants were not a good running team but they were able to run almost 30 times in that game. In the end, on that last drive they (the Pats D) were exposed for what they really were.

 

[Demosthenes]

You mean the same Ravens that the Pats D let come down the field in the last moments of the AFCCG for what should have been a game winning TD and then the kicker missed an easy FG?

Or the same Giants that in the same scenario twice actually did score the game winning TD....twice.

Yeah, real good defense.

You guys need to stop the excuse that a good defense was the reason why TT was lousy in the 11 AFC divisional playoff. It wasn't, and it isn't. Just stop this argument because it's 100% wrong. Just admit your binky got exposed, stunk it up, no excuses, and move on.

Yes, that same defense. There's a huge difference between looking at an entire game and looking at a last drive. A defense might bottle up Brady and the offense during a game or perhaps a half, but if you give Brady the ball on the 20, with 1:00 minute left on the clock and he's down by 1 or 2, chances are very high that he's going to drive down the field and score.

WRT the Broncos, Ravens and Giants, if the defense was as bad as you all believe, and if the Broncos managed 10 pts against them, the Ravens and the Giants should have put up 40 or 50 against them, right? Afterall, the Bills put up 34 against them during the regular season and hell, Orlovsky and the Colts put up 24 pts. Surely Flacco and Manning should have done much better. But they didn't. As I said, the Pats D in the playoffs held both teams to below their season average in scoring. That is a fact that you just simply can not dispute.

 

[sb1]

Yawn. Denver was without Brian Dawkins, the leader and QB of their defense. They were without Kris Kuper, the anchor of their offensive line. Denver was without their leading receiver, Eric Decker, prior to scoring their first points iirc. Denver was without their fullback, Spencer Larsen.

Now we get to the kicker. Guess what ? Everyone knew that Ben was hobbled and that Clark wouldn't be playing. They knew that Mendenhall was going to be on the sidelines, along with Pouncey.

So, even with all that known, what did just about EVERY "expert" predict ? That the Steelers would win.

Let's look to Terrell Suggs, a very vocal Tebow critic. What did he say after the game ?



Hmm, I don't see anything there that's remotely close to "Well, yeah, he didn't do anything really, it was that the Steelers were beat up".

Or how about Brett Keisel ?



There we have a member of the Steeler Defense that got burned that day, giving credit to Tebow for what he did.

And here we have an avowed Broncos fan (you) trying to downplay what Tebow did that day.

How utterly pathetic.

And yet Elway still decided to move on from Tebow. For a good reason.

 

[manxman2601]

Tebow-phobia? No. Reality check? Yes.

What are we reality checking though? We (or you and others) are scrutinising a 3rd string QB who has had one full sophomore season only and applying the same level of scrutiny you would a first overall pick. If it isn't Tebow-phobia, where was the same game by game analysis of Mike Kafka?

So Tim Tebow isn't as good as Peyton Manning. Well you can knock me down with a feather. Now back in the real world, how about we consider whether he's good enough to be a 3rd string QB that could push for a possible #2 spot?

 

[Concerned_Citizen]

I could point to the game against the Lions (ranked 23rd) where he 18/39 for 172 yards and lost 45-10, or against the Raiders where he went 10/21 for 124 yards and against the Chiefs where he went 2/8 for 69 yards, both of which he won. His accuracy was spotty and when one of those teams was able to contain him from getting outside and making plays, the Broncos were beaten badly.

His accuracy was actually worse than the 46% most of the time. Through the first 3 quarters, he acutally averaged around in the 30. Worse numbers than the ones that got JaMarcus Russell fired. the 4th quarter marches against soft prevents when teams backed off a bit were his saving grace and he scratched and clawed back up to 46%. That detroit game.... he started doing well when the Lions pulled their starters and had mostly second and third stringers out there. That made it look like Tebow had a better day than he really had, and that was often the case.

Thankfully the defense was holding teams to 15 points or less in most of his games, so one good drive at the end after 3 1/2 quarters of massive suckitude was often just enough. But holding teams to 15 or less will win you a lot more games more often than not. By contrast, Kyle Orton was 23-2 when defense gave up that little, (mostly in his Chicago days) so there is nothing special there. Tebow fans can't stand having that pointed out to them because that pretty much proves that 6 out of Tebow's 9 wins really weren't all that special. After all, if a scrub like Orton could do it 23 out of 25 times, is it really all that impressive if Tebow does it 6 out of 7... (That one loss was 7 to 3 against... Kyle Orton.)

 

[sb1]

Yes, that same defense. There's a huge difference between looking at an entire game and looking at a last drive. A defense might bottle up Brady and the offense during a game or perhaps a half, but if you give Brady the ball on the 20, with 1:00 minute left on the clock and he's down by 1 or 2, chances are very high that he's going to drive down the field and score.

WRT the Broncos, Ravens and Giants, if the defense was as bad as you all believe, and if the Broncos managed 10 pts against them, the Ravens and the Giants should have put up 40 or 50 against them, right? Afterall, the Bills put up 34 against them during the regular season and hell, Orlovsky and the Colts put up 24 pts. Surely Flacco and Manning should have done much better. But they didn't. As I said, the Pats D in the playoffs held both teams to below their season average in scoring. That is a fact that you just simply can not dispute.

It's totally understandable that you are not aware of how bad the Patriots defense really was, since you are new and were not watching this team a couple years ago. But the fact is, it was horrific. For reasons explained many times in this topic. If you choose not to see it that way then so be it, but that doesn't make it any less true.

And the fact they couldn't stop teams on the last drives in the biggest moments of the season, is very telling. Perhaps if Tebow played better, he might have been in a position to take advantage of it... and my money would have been on TT.

 

[belichick010405]

What are we reality checking though? We (or you and others) are scrutinising a 3rd string QB who has had one full sophomore season only and applying the same level of scrutiny you would a first overall pick. If it isn't Tebow-phobia, where was the same game by game analysis of Mike Kafka?

So Tim Tebow isn't as good as Peyton Manning. Well you can knock me down with a feather. Now back in the real world, how about we consider whether he's good enough to be a 3rd string QB that could push for a possible #2 spot?

He isn't as good as the 32 starting quarterbacks either. And do you know how I know this? Because the other 31 GM's decided to pass while he cleared waivers.

Preteritus effectus est optimus postulo of posterus requiro quod effectus.

 

[sb1]

What are we reality checking though? We (or you and others) are scrutinising a 3rd string QB who has had one full sophomore season only and applying the same level of scrutiny you would a first overall pick. If it isn't Tebow-phobia, where was the same game by game analysis of Mike Kafka?

So Tim Tebow isn't as good as Peyton Manning. Well you can knock me down with a feather. Now back in the real world, how about we consider whether he's good enough to be a 3rd string QB that could push for a possible #2 spot?

When I see posts that are wrong or I disagree with, I will respond appropriately. So would anyone. Such is back and forth debate on a message board.

 

[Concerned_Citizen]

And yet Elway still decided to move on from Tebow. For a good reason.

2 teams had a look at him. The Broncos didn't even want him as a backup to learn under Manning and decided the team was better off with Tebow on another roster. Elway apparently thought he'd be a bigger headache than contributor to the team.

The other team took a good look at his throwing and moved him to punt protector within a week or two and couldn't GIVE him away.

 

[manxman2601]

Nope. I've scouted him since he's been at Nease, since I did and still do live around that area. His weaknesses and shortcomings as a quarterback have been the same, and have not changed. For whatever reason, a point that I made as an example has become the forefront of the conversation (his playoff game against the Patriots).

I could point to the game against the Lions (ranked 23rd) where he 18/39 for 172 yards and lost 45-10, or against the Raiders where he went 10/21 for 124 yards and against the Chiefs where he went 2/8 for 69 yards, both of which he won. His accuracy was spotty and when one of those teams was able to contain him from getting outside and making plays, the Broncos were beaten badly. I can point to how he threw for over 200+ yards once since becoming a starter for Denver and use that to further the point that Pittsburgh had a horrific gameplan in the playoffs. I can point to how he stumbled down the stretch during that season and lost the last three games, the final game in which he went 6/22 for 60 yards 0 TD and 1 INT in a 7-3 loss to the Chiefs at home. I could use any number of methods to make my original point about Tebow, but the most effective one was showing how the second worst pass defense of all time beat him badly because they took away what he did well and he wasn't able to adapt because he's simply not that kind of quarterback.

My problem with this type of analysis - and I'm talking generally and not directed at you per se - is that when Tebow supporters want to talk about his wins, Tebowphobes say it's a team game and that it was the coaching or the defense or whatever else that got the Broncos to the playoffs that year. On the other hand, Tebow gets all the blame for his passing statistics as though receivers, O-Lines and gameplans don't factor in in any way.

There's not many suggesting that Tim Tebow can walk in to a starting job and hold it down immediately. But when was it decided that a players ceiling is limited to his performance in an soph. season or one game against the Patriots and that he can't improve? He cost us next to nothing to acquire, he's a potentially positive force in the locker room, he's arguably one of the better #3 QBs in the NFL (with experience) and he's an athletic beast to boot. And people are moaning about his acquisition. It's frankly unbelievable.

NB. None of that is directly an attack on you or anyone else specifically, it's just a general rant.

 

[Concerned_Citizen]

There we have a member of the Steeler Defense that got burned that day, giving credit to Tebow for what he did.

And here we have an avowed Broncos fan (you) trying to downplay what Tebow did that day.

How utterly pathetic.

Tebow fanatics love to play that card, but there really is a difference between being happy about how the game turned out and NOT being in denial about the big picture on what ACTUALLY happened.

I could have come away from that game with the warm and fuzzy feeling that Tebow could walk on water and pull out wins with fire in his eyes and bolts of lightning from his ass...

...or I could simply recognize that while a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while and while that was VERY exciting seeing the team get to the post season again, what HE did as an individual effort really wasn't all that damn special and simply wasn't a sustainable way to win. I TRULY think the defense deserved more thanks for that than Tebow, who, yes, did have his moments.

Elway agreed with the latter and moved on and now the team is light years better than it was in 2011. He traded Tebow away the NEXT DAY even with all the question marks about the neck and nerve damage in his arm. The end of the season didn't work out, but you'd be a damn fool if you thought the Broncos as a whole wasn't a whole lot better of a team in 2012 than they were in 2011.... MOSTLY on the upgrade of one position. 2012 didn't see a whole lot of changes on offense, unless you think and aged Brandon Stokley was the bigger diffference from being a near bottom ranked offense to a top 5 in ONE year.

Just face it.... Tebow was/is not that damn special.

 

[Kontradiction]

My problem with this type of analysis - and I'm talking generally and not directed at you per se - is that when Tebow supporters want to talk about his wins, Tebowphobes say it's a team game and that it was the coaching or the defense or whatever else that got the Broncos to the playoffs that year. On the other hand, Tebow gets all the blame for his passing statistics as though receivers, O-Lines and gameplans don't factor in in any way.

There's not many suggesting that Tim Tebow can walk in to a starting job and hold it down immediately. But when was it decided that a players ceiling is limited to his performance in an soph. season or one game against the Patriots and that he can't improve? He cost us next to nothing to acquire, he's a potentially positive force in the locker room, he's arguably one of the better #3 QBs in the NFL (with experience) and he's an athletic beast to boot. And people are moaning about his acquisition. It's frankly unbelievable.

NB. None of that is directly an attack on you or anyone else specifically, it's just a general rant.

The only thing I really cared about when we acquired him is the type of media storm that it would bring. But, since then, Aaron Hernandez may have murdered a couple of people. So Tebowmania pales in comparison at this point in time.

 

[belichick010405]

My problem with this type of analysis - and I'm talking generally and not directed at you per se - is that when Tebow supporters want to talk about his wins, Tebowphobes say it's a team game and that it was the coaching or the defense or whatever else that got the Broncos to the playoffs that year. On the other hand, Tebow gets all the blame for his passing statistics as though receivers, O-Lines and gameplans don't factor in in any way.

There's not many suggesting that Tim Tebow can walk in to a starting job and hold it down immediately. But when was it decided that a players ceiling is limited to his performance in an soph. season or one game against the Patriots and that he can't improve? He cost us next to nothing to acquire, he's a potentially positive force in the locker room, he's arguably one of the better #3 QBs in the NFL (with experience) and he's an athletic beast to boot. And people are moaning about his acquisition. It's frankly unbelievable.

NB. None of that is directly an attack on you or anyone else specifically, it's just a general rant.

You clearly did not watch many Tebow games in 2011. If it wasn't for Denver's defense, they would have not made the playoffs because that team won in spite of that offense.

Ut vigilo atrocious effectus quod ut volo magis atrocious effectus est a fossor errand.

 

[manxman2601]

He isn't as good as the 32 starting quarterbacks either. And do you know how I know this? Because the other 31 GM's decided to pass while he cleared waivers.

Preteritus effectus est optimus postulo of posterus requiro quod effectus.

So you are saying that if a player passes through waivers, that means no teams want him. This is your logic is it? There aren't perhaps other reasons for a player passing through waivers - like having to pick up his contract for example.

 

[manxman2601]

You clearly did not watch many Tebow games in 2011. If it wasn't for Denver's defense, they would have not made the playoffs because that team won in spite of that offense.

Ut vigilo atrocious effectus quod ut volo magis atrocious effectus est a fossor errand.

I don't really care about the Broncos. I care about what he'll do for us in the future.