All-purpose, running Tim Tebow sucks/is a deity thread!

Sorry, but that is funny.

 

You doth protest too much.

 

Has that bell ever woke up Case?

 

ONLY I MAY DECLARE THAT OUTOFPLACE HAS A PAVLOVIAN URGE TO REPLY TO ALL MY POSTS!!!!!

 

Per Dick I am not allowed to bring up Case in my posts, Dools.

(Ha! Got his name in there twice!!)

 

Too bad Case cannot be referred to. Has he who shall not be named Tebowed yet?

 

Absofuckinglutely!! Voldemortbaby has been photographed Tebowing. Put it right there on my FB page.

 

Who are you again?

 

You really do not know very much football other than the New Orleans Saints and Oklahoma State are AWESOME because they can throw for 400 yards and score 45 points against air. So allow me to address the Trent Dilfer comparison.

If you want to see the true definition of a quarterback who had to do nothing, Trent Dilfer was it. In four playoff games, his defense allowed one touchdown and a grand total of 16 points. (The Giants also scored seven on a kick return long after the Super Bowl was decided.) The Ravens' defense and special teams scored 21 points in that postseason. If Trent Dilfer had handed off on every play and the Ravens had punted every time, the Ravens quite literally would have stood a fair chance of making the Super Bowl. Scaled against the scoring and statistical norms of the time, that defense was undeniably the best in the history of the NFL. Any starting quarterback, and probably any backup, in the league at that time could have won a Super Bowl.

Trent Dilfer also didn't have to lead comebacks. His teams were winning by at least two scores and usually by three or four.

The Broncos this year had a good if somewhat inconsistent defense. Let's not kid ourselves into thinking it was one of the league's best, certainly not one of history's best. It is a favorite strawman to say the defense gets no credit, but that isn't true. We all say they're a defense-first team. What is true is that for all of Tebow's scuffling and sometimes outright failure for the first three quarters, he helped keep the game close and he got the ball in his hands needing to lead the team down the field in the fourth quarter, and he did it a lot more often than not.

Statistically speaking, it is just flat dishonest to ignore the guy's running numbers. It is a large part of what makes him a player. So, he can't throw the 6-yard slant? Sure, that kills his percentage. But he can run the read option for 6 yards, and did, often. Whether this can continue is a subject for much debate, obviously, but disregarding it when assessing his contribution is either ignorant or intentionally misleading.

There are a lot of analogies to offer. As maybe Tebow's top-end expectation as a thrower, I would offer Captain Comeback himself, Jim Harbaugh, who had a career completion percentage of 58 percent and almost as many interceptions as touchdowns, but who also was a part of some successful teams and led one of them to the AFC championship game. I'm sure there are other possibilities that come to mind.

The Tebow/Dilfer analogy isn't as bad as your baseball analogies, but it is pretty dumb.

 

A case of a great use of Facebook. In case anyone wants to see that, you should post a link.

 

Well, now we're just talking crazy.

 

Tebow definitely needs to improve on his passing, there is no doubt about that.
But anyone who watched that game saw a POROUS offensive line that had pressure in Tebows face all day.
An immobile QB would have been sacked countless times during plays that Tebow was able to turn into positive, or simply not-negative, yards.
A quarterback is only as good as his offensive line.
He can be coached up.
It just burns you haters up that people like and admire the kid.