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

A 46.4 completion percentage is normal for him and sustainable (I love that word!). It might still prove to be the top level of his ability. If he doesn't pick that up, he is probably not going to have a job.

In John Elway's first year as a starter, his completion percentage was 47.5, and he threw seven touchdown passes with 14 interceptions. I can't believe the Broncos even let him on the field again.

 

LSU fan? To be honest, I've never been an LSU fan and don't see myself particularly becoming one. Am neutral on Florida as well.

Yours is the argument of the weak-minded (not saying you are weak minded, but this "fan boi" nonsense is).

And your position that seems to indicate you believe Brees' fourth quarter touchdown passes count more than his first quarter turnovers IN A LOSS speaks for itself.

 

Well, they did count more in the way I'm talking about, because they left the 49ers with one chance needing to go 85 yards for a touchdown. The interceptions left the Saints in a 17-0 hole but with 45 minutes (what was that, 10 or 12 possessions?) to dig out of it.

Roethlisberger is a perfect example of this. In every big game he seems to make the biggest boneheaded fucking mistake you can imagine, and it puts his team behind the 8-ball. Then most of the time he fixes it with a fourth-quarter touchdown that leaves the opponent no time to come back.

 

Are you performance art?

 

Horseshit.

If Brees performed in the first quarter the way he did in the fourth quarter, he's not even in there at the end of the game. Chase Daniels takes a knee at the end as Brees rests up for the Giants.

Similarly, if Rothliesberger performed as well early as you say he does late, he'd be a better QB, period. The early stuff counts just as much as the late stuff.

Your performance throughout the game counts the same. Part of what gets young teams beat is they don't value all the details in a 60-minute game. They get beat early before they can get a chance to win late. Hell, even in your critique of Dilfer in comparison to Tebow, you noted he didn't have to win games late. Well, if all NFL games are so dang close, I hope he did something pretty good in the first three quarters to lead that team to the Super Bowl, right? And all that stuff counted, right?

Your thinking is absurd and it's completely convenient to an emotional attachment to a quarterback who gets way more credit than he deserves. I have no emotional attachment to the kid either way. I'm not offended by his religion like some are. I enjoyed watching him in college and, as noted before, rated him as probably the second best college QB I've seen behind Cam Newton (who's already a better pro, by the way ... unless you want to lean on the "all he does is win," argument which you say you don't believe).

But when a guy is just awful for three-plus quarters, then is all the rage for what he does for one drive, I'm going to call him overrated. It is what it is.

 

I hold the JESUS SAVES sign outside Caesars.

You might want to put a shiv in my kidney.

 

If he did, I doubt it would be because of your Christianity. He's kind of an asshole.

 

Why would even the most defensive-minded coach in the world want to lead the league in three-and-outs? Even if you're coaching the 2000 Ravens or the 1985 Bears, you're still going to want an offense that can score more than 19.3 points a game.

Just for the hell of it, here are the league ranks of the top rushing teams since 2000:

2011 - Broncos, 1 rushing, 31 passing, 23 offense, 25 scoring
2010 - Chiefs, 1 rushing, 30 passing, 12 offense, 14 scoring
2009 - Jets, 1 rushing, 31 passing, 20 offense, 17 scoring
2008 - Giants, 1 rushing, 18 passing, 7 offense, 4 scoring
2007 - Vikings, 1 rushing, 28 passing, 13 offense, 15 scoring
2006 - Falcons, 1 rushing, 32 passing, 12 offense, 25 scoring
2005 - Falcons, 1 rushing, 27 passing, 12 offense, 14 scoring
2004 - Falcons, 1 rushing, 30 passing, 20 offense, 16 scoring
2003 - Ravens, 1 rushing, 32 passing, 21 offense, 8 scoring
2002 - Vikings, 1 rushing, 9 passing, 2 offense, 8 scoring
2001 - Steelers, 1 rushing, 21 passing, 3 offense, 7 scoring
2000 - Raiders, 1 rushing, 15 passing, 6 offense, 3 scoring

Average finish: 1 rushing, 25 passing, 12 offense, 13 scoring

Even among No. 1 rushing teams, the Broncos' offense was far below average in total yards and scoring.

 

Buckweaver: He's not just about baseball, people!

 

They were below average in that grouping. Interesting.

Fox was playing to what he had -- avoid turnovers and keep the game as close as he could as long as he could. In that light, punting was better than risking turnovers. Because the defense was playing great, the games stayed close. I don't know what would have happened if the game got outside the 10-point range, but it almost never did. It really was incredibly good coaching. I can't tell you how many times they just ran it on third-and-long, a coaching decision that was wise under the system but surely increased the number of three-and-outs.

Tebow leading a below-average offense? I agree with that. Tebow having nothing to do with the success, and the Broncos going 8-5 despite him? Plainly not the case.

 

Who said Tebow had nothing to do with the Broncos' success?

 

A whole lot of people for two months. That's the center of the debate.