TEBOW SUCKS!!!

[deerpathdave]

Are you serious? This is one of the dumbest arguments I have ever seen. Barkley has thrown a total of 50 passes. He has not had the opportunities that Tebow had.

When you look at Tebow's career stats it is easy to come to the conclusion that he is a horrible QB.

Then your not very good at looking at stats.

- Drew Brees's first two years were no better than Tebows.
- Carson Palmer's first year was about the same as Tebows.
- Eli Manning's first 4 years were no better than Tebow.
- Mark Sanchez didn't have stats better than Tebow until he came to Philly.
- Bradford's first two years were no better than Tebow.

And none of these guys added nearly 1000 yards rushing to their game.

Its fair to not like Tebow's game, and no question he has limitations. But the press is lazy in labeling his NFL statistics as being horrible. He but up decent numbers for a first year QB and won games as well. NFL starter? He hasn't proven that. But he is simply not as horrible as many say, and a damn good record for someone competing for a third string job.

 

[Wings]

By your logic Rick Mirer should have been a hall of famer then,

 

[deerpathdave]

By your logic Rick Mirer should have been a hall of famer then,

Barkley would kill for Mirer's career.

 

[PhillyGreen]

Then your not very good at looking at stats.

- Drew Brees's first two years were no better than Tebows.
- Carson Palmer's first year was about the same as Tebows.
- Eli Manning's first 4 years were no better than Tebow.
- Mark Sanchez didn't have stats better than Tebow until he came to Philly.
- Bradford's first two years were no better than Tebow.

I think I look at stats just fine. The difference between you and I is that I am not ignoring some of the stats. You are not looking everything just the few numbers you think validate your weak argument.

1. Drew Brees first two years are way better than Tebow's. The fact that you even said such a thing should be enough to label you clueless. Sorry but I am having a hard time trying to understand how you would even say such a thing.

2. Carson Palmer - First year was about the same? Why are you ignoring the others. Guess because it would make your argument look dumb.

3. Eli Manning - He is one of the most overrated QB's in my opinion but is a good one. To me just not as great as some make him out to be. Oh and BTW Eli was still in the NFL 4 years after he was drafted. Tebow was not so Eli has a huge margin in the stat (number of years play - first 4 years after college) Let's see you twist that stat.

4. Mark Sanchez - I don't think he is a good QB but to each is own. He is an average at best QB that should be be a backup.

Your argument is all over the place. You are picking and choosing stats you want to include. For Brees you compared 2 years, Palmer 1 year, Eli 4 years, Sanches whole career. Bradford does not even have enough stats to even consider comparing numbers. This is why I think your entire argument is nothing but blind homerism for Tebow. There is nothing objective here. You pick and choose what you want to include.

Tim Tebow misses wide-open WR for score, comes up short on run - CBSSports.com

Tebow sucks as an NFL QB.

 

[deerpathdave]

I think I look at stats just fine. The difference between you and I is that I am not ignoring some of the stats. You are not looking everything just the few numbers you think validate your weak argument.

1. Drew Brees first two years are way better than Tebow's. The fact that you even said such a thing should be enough to label you clueless. Sorry but I am having a hard time trying to understand how you would even say such a thing.

2. Carson Palmer - First year was about the same? Why are you ignoring the others. Guess because it would make your argument look dumb.

3. Eli Manning - He is one of the most overrated QB's in my opinion but is a good one. To me just not as great as some make him out to be. Oh and BTW Eli was still in the NFL 4 years after he was drafted. Tebow was not so Eli has a huge margin in the stat (number of years play - first 4 years after college) Let's see you twist that stat.

4. Mark Sanchez - I don't think he is a good QB but to each is own. He is an average at best QB that should be be a backup.

Your argument is all over the place. You are picking and choosing stats you want to include. For Brees you compared 2 years, Palmer 1 year, Eli 4 years, Sanches whole career. Bradford does not even have enough stats to even consider comparing numbers. This is why I think your entire argument is nothing but blind homerism for Tebow. There is nothing objective here. You pick and choose what you want to include.

Tim Tebow misses wide-open WR for score, comes up short on run - CBSSports.com

Tebow sucks as an NFL QB.

So as a simple comparison, I like to use QB rating and I compared the beginning of Tebow's career with other well known QBs. No one was calling these guys horrible, but somehow they don't give Tebow the same space.

Fact is Tebow is not Horrible, he is simply mediocre. And the combination of his incredible fame, his unusual playing style that is not ideally suited for the NFL (One read and then take off and run) have caused teams to be reticent to sign him.

Based purely on performance, Tebow should be having a long career as an NFL backup. But teams don't want the distraction of his fame in a backup player and they don't want to tailor their play to his skill set. It doesn't make for effective practices when your backup QB needs to emulate the opposing offense. Bottom line is he is a poor fit as a backup player and not quite good enough to be a starter.

So why should the Eagles look at him? First off, his passing may have improved (although he has not shown it in the preseason), secondly, he is a good fit for the read option which Kelly loves, third, the pressure of his fame is less after two years out of the league, and fourth, you won't find a better option as a third stringer. Having Tebow run the read option could be a season saver ala Denver that one year. And its not like their is any investment going on here. He is taking Kinne's snaps, and giving Barkley a little competition.

 

[PhillyGreen]

NFL teams don't want his fame as a distraction? Sorry I call bullshit on that. This is the NFL and Tebow is not the most famous player there is.

Mediocre: of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barely adequate:

Sorry but Tebow is far from falling under that category. He is much worse than that.

 

[deerpathdave]

NFL teams don't want his fame as a distraction? Sorry I call bullshit on that. This is the NFL and Tebow is not the most famous player there is.

Mediocre: of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barely adequate:

Sorry but Tebow is far from falling under that category. He is much worse than that.

The statistics simply don't support your case. Hate on Tebow all you want, but you can't take away the incredible season he had for Broncos. Great rushing yards, positive winning percentage, positive TD to INT ratio. Good Yards per completion. The only real negative stat from that year was completion percentage which is largely explained by the fact that he did not throw short passes but instead ran the ball himself.

 

[deerpathdave]

And as far as Fame as distraction, Jacksonville is the best example. They could have used a QB a couple of years back, but Tebow is so revered in Jax that there would have been incredible pressure to start him. Same would likely have been true in several southern cities like Tampa, Miami or Tennessee.

 

[PhillyGreen]

The statistics simply don't support your case. Hate on Tebow all you want, but you can't take away the incredible season he had for Broncos. Great rushing yards, positive winning percentage, positive TD to INT ratio. Good Yards per completion. The only real negative stat from that year was completion percentage which is largely explained by the fact that he did not throw short passes but instead ran the ball himself.

And neither do yours. You can spin it all you want but 47% completion percentage is horrible at any level. Especially since he had a small number of attempts. And lets not forget he averages less than 70 yards passing a game. That is just bad.

 

[deerpathdave]

And neither do yours. You can spin it all you want but 47% completion percentage is horrible at any level. Especially since he had a small number of attempts. And lets not forget he averages less than 70 yards passing a game. That is just bad.

70? In the games he started in Denver in 2011, he passed for 1729 yards in 12 games. That is more than twice that. Then he added 660 yards rushing as well.

 

[deerpathdave]

You also need to understand that the 47% is partially a product of the offensive design. Look at the typical offensive design of say Kurt Warner and the greatest show on Turf. Warner would drop back. Look for Bruce or Holt, and if they were covered, he would swing the ball out to the flat for Marshall Faulk.

In 1999 in his first year, Warner completed 325/499 for 4353 yards and a 65% completion rate. 87 of those completions were to Faulk for 1048 yards. The vast majority of those passes were third read dump offs after his primary reads were covered. If Warner were a running QB (like Teobw), he may have opted to run himself on those situations, but he would have ended up with fewer passing yards and a lower passing percentage by about 7 points.

Tebow is essentially his own Marshall Faulk dump off pass, and while very effective overall, it makes his passing statistics look much worse. His 122 runs in 2011, it he were to have dumped off to a RB instead, would have raised his completion percentage into the 60s.

Now that is alot of what if, and if Tebow was better at short passes (and not as good at running), it would be more ideal to be Kurt Warner, but the point is that he was effective in what he did in an unusual way that is not fully accounted for when you take a look at passing statistics only.

Most running QBs have the same statistical anomaly going for them. Vick completed 44% of his passes as a rookie. Randall Cunningham 42%. When your your own dump off option, it hurts your passing statistics.

 

[PhillyGreen]

70? In the games he started in Denver in 2011, he passed for 1729 yards in 12 games. That is more than twice that. Then he added 660 yards rushing as well.

So now we are using only one year instead of the career statsyou threw out there initially when comparing him to Barkley. You pick and choose certain years when comparing other QB's and now want to change the rules when it comes Tebow. In that ONE year Tebow's numbers are not better than any of the other QB's you listed when you do a fair an accurate analysis. It appears you are punishing the other QB's for not running. You are constantly adding Tebow's rushing stats as if they prove something. The reality is that they only prove how bad a passer he really is. Tebow has so many rush yards because he is a one read QB. If his first option is not there he runs. He cannot follow progressions and he needs to be able to do that in this offense.

His 2011 stats are horrible and the rushing stats contribute it. You are looking at the yards alone but not the overall number. While I admit a QB that has some scrambling ability could be a very good thing. McNabb used it as part of his game and he was a far superior passer to Tebow. McNabb had average accuracy so that should tell you something. Tebow runs way too much and that is a detriment to the NFL game. In 2011 he started 11 games and had 115 rushes during those games. If you average that out to 16 game total that would come out to 167 rushes in a season. That is twice the number McNabb in his highest total (86 in 2000). Even Michael Vick did not rush that much (123 in 2006) and even he was a much better passer than Tebow.

So while Tebow does add the rushing dimension it is actually a bad thing because he relies it way too much and you can't get away with that in the NFL.

 

[PhillyGreen]

Most running QBs have the same statistical anomaly going for them. Vick completed 44% of his passes as a rookie. Randall Cunningham 42%. When your your own dump off option, it hurts your passing statistics.

Yet they were able to stay in the NFL because they were capable passers as well. They showed that part of their game early on. Tebow show how bad he was and it was so bad he hired a coach to work on his mechanics and while they may have improved his field vision has not.

Randall Cunningham did not run as much as you think. 16 years in the NFL and only 3 seasons with more than 75 rushes.

The Kurt Warner comparison makes no sense. Joe Montana had Roger Craig what does that have to do with anything? You still have to see the field and use the dump off. Tebow can't because he has one read and he is done. He never makes it to the checkdown anyway.

 

[deerpathdave]

So now we are using only one year instead of the career statsyou threw out there initially when comparing him to Barkley. You pick and choose certain years when comparing other QB's and now want to change the rules when it comes Tebow. In that ONE year Tebow's numbers are not better than any of the other QB's you listed when you do a fair an accurate analysis. It appears you are punishing the other QB's for not running. You are constantly adding Tebow's rushing stats as if they prove something. The reality is that they only prove how bad a passer he really is. Tebow has so many rush yards because he is a one read QB. If his first option is not there he runs. He cannot follow progressions and he needs to be able to do that in this offense.

His 2011 stats are horrible and the rushing stats contribute it. You are looking at the yards alone but not the overall number. While I admit a QB that has some scrambling ability could be a very good thing. McNabb used it as part of his game and he was a far superior passer to Tebow. McNabb had average accuracy so that should tell you something. Tebow runs way too much and that is a detriment to the NFL game. In 2011 he started 11 games and had 115 rushes during those games. If you average that out to 16 game total that would come out to 167 rushes in a season. That is twice the number McNabb in his highest total (86 in 2000). Even Michael Vick did not rush that much (123 in 2006) and even he was a much better passer than Tebow.

So while Tebow does add the rushing dimension it is actually a bad thing because he relies it way too much and you can't get away with that in the NFL.

Again your simply inaccurate in reading the stats. Tebow averaged nearly 150 yards per game passing when he started. Adding in those cameo one or two rush performances with the Jets gives an inaccurate portrayal.

While it has been portrayed differently, when you take a close look at Tebow's 2011 Denver season (and in another thread back at kffl I did just that), there really is no question that he was quite effective as a QB for that team. He was not "horrible", but rather led the team on a winning streak into the playoffs and beat the number one ranked defense in the league with a 300 yard passing game and a 120+ Quarterback rating.

Hate on him today all you wish, but his 2011 Denver season is history that cannot and should not be discounted for what it was.

 

[PhillyGreen]

What did he do the next game against an inferior defense or do you have an excuse for that one?

 

[deerpathdave]

What did he do the next game against an inferior defense or do you have an excuse for that one?

He sucked in that game. You seem to think the guy is auditioning for a starting job? He is fighting for a third string position.

 

[PhillyGreen]

He sucked in that game. You seem to think the guy is auditioning for a starting job? He is fighting for a third string position.

He is auditioning to be an NFL QB and should be able to play the position and that is my point. For the record he was really good against the Steelers and I will admit to being suprised. I personally consider that the exception not the norm.

Tebow is auditioning for a position that can only enter the game in an emergency. As the third QB if he was to ever enter the game the starter and the backup cannot enter the game again. So if Tebow is going to be that player he will need to be able to run the offense like the other QB's on the team and so far he has not show that he can. That is why he has not been the NFL for the past few years because he sucks as a QB. Sure those are harsh words but it is reality.

If I am a coach I would expect my QB's to be able to run my offense. I understand there will be some talent differences but my QB's should be able to do the basics.

 

[deerpathdave]

He is auditioning to be an NFL QB and should be able to play the position and that is my point. For the record he was really good against the Steelers and I will admit to being suprised. I personally consider that the exception not the norm.

Tebow is auditioning for a position that can only enter the game in an emergency. As the third QB if he was to ever enter the game the starter and the backup cannot enter the game again. So if Tebow is going to be that player he will need to be able to run the offense like the other QB's on the team and so far he has not show that he can. That is why he has not been the NFL for the past few years because he sucks as a QB. Sure those are harsh words but it is reality.

If I am a coach I would expect my QB's to be able to run my offense. I understand there will be some talent differences but my QB's should be able to do the basics.

So again, you have the facts wrong. The 3rd QB rule was changed a couple of years back. Teams now have a 46 man roster and no emergency QB rule. Teams have rarely opted to dress the 3rd quarterback. I don't think Barkley was active for any games last year.

Because of this rule change, I really think there is a good chance that neither Barkley or Tebow make the team this year. There doesn't seem to be much of a market for either player, so its pretty safe to just float them out there unemployed and sign them if you have an injury.

 

[PhillyGreen]

I stand corrected but it still does not change my opinion on Tebow not making the team and the reasons why. Tebow brings nothing to the table that warrants the need for his talents. He is a Running Back who thinks he can play QB. He is horrible passer.

 

[PhillyGreen]

The team will keep 3 QB's there is no way they go in with only 2 given Bradford's history.