One possible explanation of Tebow recent wins

[catfish]

A shameless self promotion of a new stat by cold hard football stats, but they make a somewhat compelling case

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/kerry_byrne/11/29/tim.tebow/index.html

[Superchop 7]

Great job on the article.:salute:

[Northman]

Got to love the jab at Elway again. lmao

[claymore]

Those stats failed to mention that we barely won 3 of those games. One required a pick six, one required 2 missed field goals, the Miami game required a total meltdown by Miami with 2 miutes left ( I will credit tebow with that).

We straight up beat the raiders, but we faced a new QB and produced like 3 INT's multiple sacks and had a PR for a TD.

Fancy it up all you want, but Tebow has to throw the ball better. We cant continue to win with magic. Its impossible.

[catfish]

Got to love the jab at Elway again. lmao

shit , didn't even notice that....sorry Denver faithful, it wasn't intentional

[Dreadnought]

"We cant continue to win with magic. Its impossible."

I won't even say it, Clay. I won't go there. You and I both know the real reason we are winning, right? :D

[Northman]

Those stats failed to mention that we barely won 3 of those games. One required a pick six, one required 2 missed field goals, the Miami game required a total meltdown by Miami with 2 miutes left ( I will credit tebow with that).

We straight up beat the raiders, but we faced a new QB and produced like 3 INT's multiple sacks and had a PR for a TD.

Fancy it up all you want, but Tebow has to throw the ball better. We cant continue to win with magic. Its impossible.

Indeed.

Tebow and the Broncos are playing great defense, utilizing the run vs pass smartly, and limiting mistakes. But this doesnt mean that Tebow is a superior QB by any means. A Superior Qb is what you witnessed last night totally destroy the Giants.

[claymore]

I won't even say it, Clay. I won't go there. You and I both know the real reason we are winning, right? :D

And that is the ONLY reason we will continue to win like this. Its not all on Tebow though, those WR's have to start catching the ball.

I would make them work extra hours with a reversed spin juggs machine or something.

[catfish]

Those stats failed to mention that we barely won 3 of those games. One required a pick six, one required 2 missed field goals, the Miami game required a total meltdown by Miami with 2 miutes left ( I will credit tebow with that).

We straight up beat the raiders, but we faced a new QB and produced like 3 INT's multiple sacks and had a PR for a TD.

Fancy it up all you want, but Tebow has to throw the ball better. We cant continue to win with magic. Its impossible.

it doesn't mention it, but does somewhat take it into account...it simply states that in the games they have played Tebow has outperformed the opposing QB in that game. Meaning that this stat takes into account the performance of the defense as it will affect the other teams QB rating and takes into account the other teams defense as it will affect Tebows rating...the only unaccounted for item is the onsides kick recovery.

the only thing I wish is that they gave you a year to date ranking of their qb rating, but that is subscription required stuff. For all I know Tebow could be last on the list, and the QB's he is facing are performing well under their average due to lights out defense

[claymore]

Indeed.

Tebow and the Broncos are playing great defense, utilizing the run vs pass smartly and limiting mistakes. But this doesnt mean that Tebow is a superior QB by any means. A Superior Qb is what you witnessed last night totally destroy the Giants.

Tebow has a different style, maybe he can be as good as Bree's but in a different way.

These wins are putting lipstick on a pig though.

Id like to see us put some teams away before I can feel confident.

[Slick]

Over that 6 game stretch Denver's offense is averaging 19.3 points per game, and the defense is allowing 20 points a game.

Weird.

[Dreadnought]

Over that 6 game stretch Denver's offense is averaging 19.3 points per game, and the defense is allowing 20 points a game.

Weird.

The Lions game is a big indigestible statistical lump in there. We got our asses whupped but good, and it kind of warps everything. This is only partly offset by the Raiders game

[catfish]

Indeed.

Tebow and the Broncos are playing great defense, utilizing the run vs pass smartly, and limiting mistakes. But this doesnt mean that Tebow is a superior QB by any means. A Superior Qb is what you witnessed last night totally destroy the Giants.

I want to be clear I wasn't stating that he was anything other than a below average passing qb, with good running ability and great ball protection tendencies. The article doesn't say Tebow was good, only that he was better than the opposing QB on a given day

[Northman]

Tebow has a different style, maybe he can be as good as Bree's but in a different way.

These wins are putting lipstick on a pig though.

Id like to see us put some teams away before I can feel confident.

Exactly. IM all for letting this kid continue to grow and get better but my god how many articles do i need to see about him being the greatest thing since sliced bread?

If there is one thing that article is correct about it is that is much much more to it than just stats. In other words, Tebow is better than some believe and worse than others believe. Its a growing process but as you said it will take much more than winning every game at the last minute to make me a believer that he can be considered as good as Elway, Brady, or Rodgers, etc.

Simply cherrypicking stats isnt going to do it.

[claymore]

it doesn't mention it, but does somewhat take it into account...it simply states that in the games they have played Tebow has outperformed the opposing QB in that game. Meaning that this stat takes into account the performance of the defense as it will affect the other teams QB rating and takes into account the other teams defense as it will affect Tebows rating...the only unaccounted for item is the onsides kick recovery.

the only thing I wish is that they gave you a year to date ranking of their qb rating, but that is subscription required stuff. For all I know Tebow could be last on the list, and the QB's he is facing are performing well under their average due to lights out defense

Thats my point when you get down to it... How many teams lose when the ball bounces their way the whole game?

Miami-Onside Kick
Raiders- Newly aquired QB to many lucky/good things to mention
Jets-Pick six
Chargers-2 missed field goals

Heart cant be measured either, our team has alot more heart than ive seen in years... But Tebow hasnt been dominant. At all. He needs to in order for the wins to remain consistent.

[Northman]

I want to be clear I wasn't stating that he was anything other than a below average passing qb, with good running ability and great ball protection tendencies. The article doesn't say Tebow was good, only that he was better than the opposing QB on a given day


Im not picking a bone with you Cat so dont take it the wrong way. But as Clay pointed out there is so much more that goes on in those games that it really doesnt seem that the person writing the article took into consideration.

[claymore]

Exactly. IM all for letting this kid continue to grow and get better but my god how many articles do i need to see about him being the greatest thing since sliced bread?

If there is one thing that article is correct about it is that is much much more to it than just stats. In other words, Tebow is better than some believe and worse than others believe. Its a growing process but as you said it will take much more than winning every game at the last minute to make me a believer that he can be considered as good as Elway, Brady, or Rodgers, etc.

Simply cherrypicking stats isnt going to do it.

His nice to haves are off the charts, his need to haves need some work.

4 dropped passes and a couple bad calls during the Chargers game would have made him look like the QB i want to see though.

[claymore]

Im not picking a bone with you Cat so dont take it the wrong way. But as Clay pointed out there is so much more that goes on in those games that it really doesnt seem that the person writing the article took into consideration.

Its just like when we started 6-0 with McD. 3-4 of those games were sheer luck. It took mini miracles to win those games.

[HammeredOut]

Thats my point when you get down to it... How many teams lose when the ball bounces their way the whole game?

Miami-Onside Kick
Raiders- Newly aquired QB to many lucky/good things to mention
Jets-Pick six
Chargers-2 missed field goals

Heart cant be measured either, our team has alot more heart than ive seen in years... But Tebow hasnt been dominant. At all. He needs to in order for the wins to remain consistent.

The defense won those games. This is the best Defense in the League.

I don't give Tebow much credit, but that of Willis, and the Defense.

[catfish]

Thats my point when you get down to it... How many teams lose when the ball bounces their way the whole game?

Miami-Onside Kick
Raiders- Newly aquired QB to many lucky/good things to mention
Jets-Pick six
Chargers-2 missed field goals

Heart cant be measured either, our team has alot more heart than ive seen in years... But Tebow hasnt been dominant. At all. He needs to in order for the wins to remain consistent.

I will agree with luck on Miami game,

the raiders was just a great game. all around for the team.

Jets- interceptions happen every week(especially vs the Jets) I wouldn't call it luck, more a credit to a dominating defense that is required for a run first defense

chargers, the missed field goals were lucky, but the Broncos got well and truly ****** on some calls in that game so luck balanced out...see non-PI call on the 1.

On a run first ball control offense and a great D team you don't need a QB to dominate the game. The gameplan is not set up to do so. It is set up to wear the other team down so that at the end of the game if you are up by 3-4 they cant finish and if you are down by 3-6 they cant stop you.

There aren't going to be the pretty blowouts. It isn't that type of offense. The qb is basically asked to not put the defense in a bad position, nothing more. It is a successful formula that has worked in the past

[Dapper Dan]

The defense is playing well. Especially on passing situtations and keeping teams out of the endzone. But the run defense looks really bad. And I give everyone the same amount of credit for these wins. If Tebow isn't the starter, we don't go 5-1. If the defense wasn't playing this well, we don't go 5-1. If Britton Colquitt wasn't our punter, we don't make it to 5-1. Ect..

[claymore]

The defense won those games. This is the best Defense in the League.

I don't give Tebow much credit, but that of Willis, and the Defense.


I will agree with luck on Miami game,

the raiders was just a great game. all around for the team.

Jets- interceptions happen every week(especially vs the Jets) I wouldn't call it luck, more a credit to a dominating defense that is required for a run first defense

chargers, the missed field goals were lucky, but the Broncos got well and truly ****** on some calls in that game so luck balanced out...see non-PI call on the 1.

On a run first ball control offense and a great D team you don't need a QB to dominate the game. The gameplan is not set up to do so. It is set up to wear the other team down so that at the end of the game if you are up by 3-4 they cant finish and if you are down by 3-6 they cant stop you.

There aren't going to be the pretty blowouts. It isn't that type of offense. The qb is basically asked to not put the defense in a bad position, nothing more. It is a successful formula that has worked in the past
This defense has broke my heart to many times the past 5 years. If they changed instantly, i will be shocked. Maybe they are gelling. Maybe we needed leaders on a team that werent DB's.

The defense is playing well. Especially on passing situtations and keeping teams out of the endzone. But the run defense looks really bad. And I give everyone the same amount of credit for these wins. If Tebow isn't the starter, we don't go 5-1. If the defense wasn't playing this well, we don't go 5-1. If Britton Colquitt wasn't our punter, we don't make it to 5-1. Ect..

Its been a team effort, thats for sure. I really hope it continues, because I can feel the team "gelling" and becoming a real team.

[claymore]

There aren't going to be the pretty blowouts. It isn't that type of offense. The qb is basically asked to not put the defense in a bad position, nothing more. It is a successful formula that has worked in the past

We should be able to blow some teams out with the new found respect of our running game.

Maybe we will see some new wrinkles later in the year.

[Canmore]

Even with today's pass happy rules, you can go back to Football 101. Run the football, stop the run and don't turn it over. That is still a blue print for winning games. Denver is being successful doing just that.

[claymore]

Even with today's pass happy rules, you can go back to Football 101. Run the football, stop the run and don't turn it over. That is still a blue print for winning games. Denver is being successful doing just that.

We seem to be doing that, but still require missed field goals, PR for TD's Pick six's onside kicks etc...

I want to win a series of games that dont require magic.

[Northman]

It isn't that type of offense. The qb is basically asked to not put the defense in a bad position, nothing more.

Exactly.

Yet we keep seeing people who want McCoy to open it up more but the reality is if you do that you take the risk of having turnovers. This is why i posted my post on Sunday about them not changing anything. So as long as the defense and running game are doing what they are doing we shouldnt change anything that would put the team at risk of turning the ball over.


It is a successful formula that has worked in the past

Its work in the past but it works best when there is a total balance with the edge to the passing game. You can win a SB like this but im not in it just to win one, i want to win many and with that you need a much better passing game to go along with the run and good defense.

[Northman]

We should be able to blow some teams out with the new found respect of our running game.

Maybe we will see some new wrinkles later in the year.

If we get behind the Patriots by a couple of TD's i would expect to see them have to open it up more.

[Northman]

We seem to be doing that, but still require missed field goals, PR for TD's Pick six's onside kicks etc...

I want to win a series of games that dont require magic.


When we won Super Bowls with John we were averaging almost 30 points a game and allowing only about 14. I want to get back to that level.

[claymore]

If we get behind the Patriots by a couple of TD's i would expect to see them have to open it up more.

Thats going to be a good test. Good thing they have a bad defense.

If we win it though Im sure I can find a reason why we shouldnt have. :laugh:

[catfish]

Im not picking a bone with you Cat so dont take it the wrong way. But as Clay pointed out there is so much more that goes on in those games that it really doesnt seem that the person writing the article took into consideration.

we can disagree, I don't take offense. I have my opinion, but I am not married to them. Just like I don't think any less of any person who has a different opinion than mine and expresses it in a rational manner. As long as it doesn't devolve into name calling it is all good

[pnbronco]

Quote:
Originally Posted by claymore
Those stats failed to mention that we barely won 3 of those games. One required a pick six, one required 2 missed field goals, the Miami game required a total meltdown by Miami with 2 miutes left ( I will credit tebow with that).

We straight up beat the raiders, but we faced a new QB and produced like 3 INT's multiple sacks and had a PR for a TD.

Fancy it up all you want, but Tebow has to throw the ball better. We cant continue to win with magic. Its impossible.
Indeed.

Northman:
Tebow and the Broncos are playing great defense, utilizing the run vs pass smartly, and limiting mistakes. But this doesnt mean that Tebow is a superior QB by any means. A Superior Qb is what you witnessed last night totally destroy the Giants.

_______________


Totally agree with both you. After watching Brees, Rogers and Brady this last week there is a part of my heart that goes dang......I just wish we had some of that.

Magic with skill can go a long way, but you still need skill when the magic runs out. I have enjoyed the wins, but not giddy happy like the past. I just wish we had a legitimate offense threat to go with the growth of the D and Special Teams.

[NightTerror218]

Over that 6 game stretch Denver's offense is averaging 19.3 points per game, and the defense is allowing 20 points a game.

Weird.

The detroit game skews all stats lol

[claymore]

Quote:
Originally Posted by claymore
Those stats failed to mention that we barely won 3 of those games. One required a pick six, one required 2 missed field goals, the Miami game required a total meltdown by Miami with 2 miutes left ( I will credit tebow with that).

We straight up beat the raiders, but we faced a new QB and produced like 3 INT's multiple sacks and had a PR for a TD.

Fancy it up all you want, but Tebow has to throw the ball better. We cant continue to win with magic. Its impossible.
Indeed.

Northman:
Tebow and the Broncos are playing great defense, utilizing the run vs pass smartly, and limiting mistakes. But this doesnt mean that Tebow is a superior QB by any means. A Superior Qb is what you witnessed last night totally destroy the Giants.

_______________


Totally agree with both you. After watching Brees, Rogers and Brady this last week there is a part of my heart that goes dang......I just wish we had some of that.

Magic with skill can go a long way, but you still need skill when the magic runs out. I have enjoyed the wins, but not giddy happy like the past. I just wish we had a legitimate offense threat to go with the growth of the D and Special Teams.

Its almost like a feeling of dread cause you know its not going to last. Unless Divine Intervention takes place every single game.

[NightTerror218]

Quote:
Originally Posted by claymore
Those stats failed to mention that we barely won 3 of those games. One required a pick six, one required 2 missed field goals, the Miami game required a total meltdown by Miami with 2 miutes left ( I will credit tebow with that).

We straight up beat the raiders, but we faced a new QB and produced like 3 INT's multiple sacks and had a PR for a TD.

Fancy it up all you want, but Tebow has to throw the ball better. We cant continue to win with magic. Its impossible.
Indeed.

Northman:
Tebow and the Broncos are playing great defense, utilizing the run vs pass smartly, and limiting mistakes. But this doesnt mean that Tebow is a superior QB by any means. A Superior Qb is what you witnessed last night totally destroy the Giants.

_______________


Totally agree with both you. After watching Brees, Rogers and Brady this last week there is a part of my heart that goes dang......I just wish we had some of that.

Magic with skill can go a long way, but you still need skill when the magic runs out. I have enjoyed the wins, but not giddy happy like the past. I just wish we had a legitimate offense threat to go with the growth of the D and Special Teams.

Well we need to give a QB more then 2 years, how long have they been in the league before then shined? Brady became a starter but couple years later was he considered really good. Brees had to change teams before he come out of his shell to be really good. Rogers sat behind a HOF before he stepped on field and took a season or so to become really good.

It just takes time, but there has to be some glimmer of greatness to be shown before that happens.

[catfish]

Thats going to be a good test. Good thing they have a bad defense.

If we win it though Im sure I can find a reason why we shouldnt have. :laugh:

:) just try to remember that the plays that the talking heads write off as "tebow magic" happen every weekend all around the NFL. Punt returns for TD/Kickoff for TD,shanked Kicks, pick 6, int to end the game, I saw a damn whiff on a kickoff last weekend that led to a TD...all great plays, and on any other team written off as just that. For some reason on this team people want to somehow say it is all tebow

[G_Money]

I like how they brag on the stat, but it seems to be far more accurate as far as who wins football games, and it certainly shows the dark matter of Tim's production more accurately.

For an easy shorthand I just combine all of Tims numbers.

Tim was 31-of-40 for 210 yards and a TD on QB plays on Sunday.

It more accurately captures what he's doing for us and looks much better (nice secondary bonus).

If I said McGahee was 23-for-117 and Tebow was 31-of-40 for 210 and a TD it would seem like a normal game, right?

Production-wise, it is a normal game. It just looks ugly when you view it from a passing-only standpoint.

I want fewer QB runs and more (completed) passes as we go, but I don't see a good reason to eliminate the Tebow bootleg or all of the stretch-option plays. Just the threat of it can keep pass-rushers off of Tebow as he starts to throw more, and that's a good thing.

~G

[claymore]

Well we need to give a QB more then 2 years, how long have they been in the league before then shined? Brady became a starter but couple years later was he considered really good. Brees had to change teams before he come out of his shell to be really good. Rogers sat behind a HOF before he stepped on field and took a season or so to become really good.

It just takes time, but there has to be some glimmer of greatness to be shown before that happens.

I would love to see it. I guess the 95 yard Jet drive is close. Other than that ive seen alot of field position battles with 3 & outs.

[Northman]

Well we need to give a QB more then 2 years, how long have they been in the league before then shined? Brady became a starter but couple years later was he considered really good. Brees had to change teams before he come out of his shell to be really good. Rogers sat behind a HOF before he stepped on field and took a season or so to become really good.

It just takes time, but there has to be some glimmer of greatness to be shown before that happens.

All true, however just like those who shouldnt be writing him off there shouldnt be people praising him as much as they are which happens a lot on this board. We know that Tebow has heart, we know he can scramble. Now we just need all the other things to come to light to have a final say if whether or not he can be like the guys mentioned above.

[catfish]

This defense has broke my heart to many times the past 5 years. If they changed instantly, i will be shocked. Maybe they are gelling. Maybe we needed leaders on a team that werent DB's.


Its been a team effort, thats for sure. I really hope it continues, because I can feel the team "gelling" and becoming a real team.

from a new to the Broncos your comments make me chuckle....it reminds me of a 14 year old that just got his heart broken and is on a first date...."she seems great but I have been hurt so many times before" Not trying to offend, just saying I understand your hesitancy :)

[Slick]

Running teams usually don't blow people out, Clay. You might get a 2 touchdown win like the Raiders game once in a while.

[slim]

from a new to the Broncos your comments make me chuckle....it reminds me of a 14 year old that just got his heart broken and is on a first date...."she seems great but I have been hurt so many times before" Not trying to offend, just saying I understand your hesitancy :)

I agree. Clay is a lot like a 14 year old girl.

[catfish]

I like how they brag on the stat, but it seems to be far more accurate as far as who wins football games, and it certainly shows the dark matter of Tim's production more accurately.

For an easy shorthand I just combine all of Tims numbers.

Tim was 31-of-40 for 210 yards and a TD on QB plays on Sunday.

It more accurately captures what he's doing for us and looks much better (nice secondary bonus).

If I said McGahee was 23-for-117 and Tebow was 31-of-40 for 210 and a TD it would seem like a normal game, right?

Production-wise, it is a normal game. It just looks ugly when you view it from a passing-only standpoint.

I want fewer QB runs and more (completed) passes as we go, but I don't see a good reason to eliminate the Tebow bootleg or all of the stretch-option plays. Just the threat of it can keep pass-rushers off of Tebow as he starts to throw more, and that's a good thing.

~G

really they are eliminating the short and intermediate passing game(2-5 yd passes) in favor of Tebow run plays

[catfish]

Running teams usually don't blow people out, Clay. You might get a 2 touchdown win like the Raiders game once in a while.

2 touchdowns when you are dominating with the run is an impossible comeback. It is a blowout

[catfish]

I agree. Clay is a lot like a 14 year old girl.

not at all what I meant lol

[claymore]

from a new to the Broncos your comments make me chuckle....it reminds me of a 14 year old that just got his heart broken and is on a first date...."she seems great but I have been hurt so many times before" Not trying to offend, just saying I understand your hesitancy :)

It used to be worse. I used to really love the Broncos. I love them now, but I really really loved them.

McD taking this team to the gutter was like watching your GF getting all her holes filled on a couch by 3 minorities.

I cant ever go back to that innocence. I will never be that 14 yo again.

[claymore]

2 touchdowns when you are dominating with the run is an impossible comeback. It is a blowout

A one dimensional running team will never be 2 TD's ahead unless its a fluke. I agreee.

The Broncos of the late 90's were great running games and we consistently blew teams out. We werent one dimensional though.

[slim]

It used to be worse. I used to really love the Broncos. I love them now, but I really really loved them.

McD taking this team to the gutter was like watching your GF getting all her holes filled on a couch by 3 minorities.

I cant ever go back to that innocence. I will never be that 14 yo again.

Oh man, I wish MUG was here.

[G_Money]

We seem to be doing that, but still require missed field goals, PR for TD's Pick six's onside kicks etc...

I want to win a series of games that dont require magic.

Me too. :salute:

But Tebow's giving me enough for me to stay patient with it. I want to hang some crooked numbers on the Vikings and KC, and playing NE and CHI will be a great test for how far we've come since the Detroit debacle. We're not a great team, and we need improved talent all over the field.

But we're playing hard, and I'd like to see us keep the tough games close and start pulling away in easier ones.

The Vikings should be a win, but will we blow them out? ATL didn't and they've got WAY more talent than we do. You mentioned all the things that went right for us this year, well...the Vikings lost all those close games.

Decided by a score or less: The Vikings went 1-6.

That's a lot of close games. I expect this one to be pretty close too.

But winning close games is a skill rarely seen around these parts in recent years.

Tebow's record in games decided by a lone score: 5-1
Orton's record in games decided by a lone score: 5-8 (3 of those in his first 6-0 run with the team)

How much of that is D? A lot.

How much of the D's performance is their knowledge that (as one defender said) if they keep it within a score, their QB is gonna win the game at the end?

Our offense isn't pretty, or anywhere near perfected. But it's working. With the talent and coaching situation, I can't complain too much.

I leave that to clay. :cool:

~G

[Northman]

A one dimensional running team will never be 2 TD's ahead unless its a fluke. I agreee.

The Broncos of the late 90's were great running games and we consistently blew teams out. We werent one dimensional though.


Yea, the only team i can remember being truly one dimensional was Baltimore in 2000. They won the Super Bowl but it took having one of the greatest defenses ever, a HOF TE in Sharpe, and a running back who eclipsed 2000 yds that season to win it.

Pitt in 05' is close to that but had a second year QB, another HOF running back and great defense. But since then their QB has been slinging it and slinging it well to go along with everything else they have.

Sadly, Bmore never found that guy under center to help them get back. Maybe Flacco will be that guy i doubt it, but their defense isnt nearly as great as it was a decade ago.

[claymore]

Me too. :salute:

But Tebow's giving me enough for me to stay patient with it. I want to hang some crooked numbers on the Vikings and KC, and playing NE and CHI will be a great test for how far we've come since the Detroit debacle. We're not a great team, and we need improved talent all over the field.

But we're playing hard, and I'd like to see us keep the tough games close and start pulling away in easier ones.

The Vikings should be a win, but will we blow them out? ATL didn't and they've got WAY more talent than we do. You mentioned all the things that went right for us this year, well...the Vikings lost all those close games.

Decided by a score or less: The Vikings went 1-6.

That's a lot of close games. I expect this one to be pretty close too.

But winning close games is a skill rarely seen around these parts in recent years.

Tebow's record in games decided by a lone score: 5-1
Orton's record in games decided by a lone score: 5-8 (3 of those in his first 6-0 run with the team)

How much of that is D? A lot.

How much of the D's performance is their knowledge that (as one defender said) if they keep it within a score, their QB is gonna win the game at the end?

Our offense isn't pretty, or anywhere near perfected. But it's working. With the talent and coaching situation, I can't complain too much.

I leave that to clay. :cool:

~G
Tebow has played himself into the starter next year. We have been a rudderles ship for awhile. Its good to have a leader. Even though he throws left handed jump passes.

[NightTerror218]

All true, however just like those who shouldnt be writing him off there shouldnt be people praising him as much as they are which happens a lot on this board. We know that Tebow has heart, we know he can scramble. Now we just need all the other things to come to light to have a final say if whether or not he can be like the guys mentioned above.

I defend rather then praise. TT needs to improve passing, defense reading and making his progressions. Killed me seeing open players when he was staring down Decker.

But as long as he keep taking steps forward as a passer I will be on board. I liked seeing some real spirals in the air and not wobbly passes and they are getting closer and closer on target each game. But his TO ratio is awesome and helps the defense. This offense is keeping defense off the field more.

[catfish]

Yea, the only team i can remember being truly one dimensional was Baltimore in 2000. They won the Super Bowl but it took having one of the greatest defenses ever, a HOF TE in Sharpe, and a running back who eclipsed 2000 yds that season to win it.

Pitt in 05' is close to that but had a second year QB, another HOF running back and great defense. But since then their QB has been slinging it and slinging it well to go along with everything else they have.

Sadly, Bmore never found that guy under center to help them get back. Maybe Flacco will be that guy i doubt it, but their defense isnt nearly as great as it was a decade ago.

tampa bay was fairly bad on offense from what I recall...not a great argument but still

[Northman]

tampa bay was fairly bad on offense from what I recall...not a great argument but still

They were a bit more productive than Bmore's but again, their defense was phenomenal. Unfortuantely, like Bmore, they never made it back even with a great defense.

Like i said, one SB win is great but i want to be more in the vein of NE and Pitt and make multiple appearances like we did back with Elway. If we get one with Tebow i will enjoy it obviously but i dont think we can substain this type of offense and win consistently with it.

[NightTerror218]

Tebow has played himself into the starter next year. We have been a rudderles ship for awhile. Its good to have a leader. Even though he throws left handed jump passes.

I have seen the jump pass down by other NFL QBs and several in college now. TT is contagious or something. I read an article that stated that other NFL teams were have a couple option plays during the games.

[catfish]

I have seen the jump pass down by other NFL QBs and several in college now. TT is contagious or something. I read an article that stated that other NFL teams were have a couple option plays during the games.

the NFL is a copycat league, if it is working people will run it until it is figured out....the problem with the option is that there really isn't anything to figure out it basically gives an extra player to the offense and lets the QB pick the best running lane for every run play on the fly. This offense created mismatches all around the field because you aren't able to double team anyone

[catfish]

A one dimensional running team will never be 2 TD's ahead unless its a fluke. I agreee.

The Broncos of the late 90's were great running games and we consistently blew teams out. We werent one dimensional though.

I was thinking along the lines of with this particular coach if the team gets up by 14 point expect 50 run plays in a row

[Thnikkaman]

I'm starting to think that everyone just shits on Tebow because he isn't performing the same way that every other team thinks a QB should.

I should admit that I am a big fan of Cold Hard Football Fact's articles, especially their advanced stats. Before they went for pay on much of their analysis, I had noticed that they were damn good at predicting outcomes of football games.

I do think that he will develop into a better passer, but I'm also loving our run first mentality in order to win games.

Here is another fun article for everyone to read.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_4777_Thou_Shall_Not_Doubt%3A_Tebow_delivers_ano ther_win.html

[Thnikkaman]

A one dimensional running team will never be 2 TD's ahead unless its a fluke. I agreee.

The Broncos of the late 90's were great running games and we consistently blew teams out. We werent one dimensional though.

We were the new thing though. We had the new scheme for run blocking back then (so good that we created a penalty). And that Running game is what opened up our passing game.

We also had elite players at all skill positions. Tell me that you don't think that TD, Easy Ed, and Rod Smith don't all belong in the HoF. We are also a really young team. Tebow can develop into a better pocket passer (if Vick could do it, Tebow sure as hell can do it), and still work the option in to confuse defenses. Our current O-Line needs to be more disciplined and stop costing us 1st downs, our receivers (minus Decker) need to be more sure handed, Tebow needs to develop his touch, trust his receivers, and utilize our TEs more.

But we are fans and its fun to analyze like we are getting paid for it. I'll always be a ying to your yang clay.

[Mike]

Totally agree with both you. After watching Brees, Rogers and Brady this last week there is a part of my heart that goes dang......I just wish we had some of that.

Magic with skill can go a long way, but you still need skill when the magic runs out. I have enjoyed the wins, but not giddy happy like the past. I just wish we had a legitimate offense threat to go with the growth of the D and Special Teams.

Remember how bad Brees started. Rogers was groomed and learned from the bench. Don't remember what Brady did, but think he sat a year before the injury to Bledsoe.

Tebow will never be those guys anyways. But with time he might do well enough being a different kind of QB.

The luck will bounce the other way eventually. But at the very least we know that we have a player that is capable of stepping up when the chips are down and coming through. And seeing as how 4-5 wins appeared to be the ceiling this year, I will just enjoy the ride and worry about next year, next year.

[BroncoNut]

And that is the ONLY reason we will continue to win like this. Its not all on Tebow though, those WR's have to start catching the ball.

I would make them work extra hours with a reversed spin juggs machine or something.

damn Clay. You kinda a hardass

[TXBRONC]

Its just like when we started 6-0 with McD. 3-4 of those games were sheer luck. It took mini miracles to win those games.

I don't think any of the games that we've won with Tebow at quarterback can be considered sheer luck. The Miami game is the closest to that description but I still wouldn't call it sheer luck that we won the game. Denver had to make plays to win that game. Yes there was a "lucky" bounce on the onside kick but like not like something as unexpected as the deflected pass against the Bengals in '09. Other than that what other games required sheer luck? The Jets was close the whole and Sanchez made a critical mistake that that swung the momentum our way. Even so Denver had to march 95 yards for winning score. There weren't any quirky plays on that drive that I can remember. The Chiefs game we lead from start to finish. The game against Chargers took overtime like the Dolphins game did but nevertheless we didn't win because of fluke play or missed call.

All of that said, I would like see Denver scoring more about 17 points a game.

[G_Money]

A one dimensional running team will never be 2 TD's ahead unless its a fluke. I agreee.

The Broncos of the late 90's were great running games and we consistently blew teams out. We werent one dimensional though.

See, I don't agree with that. Unless you mean One-dimensional on offense and zero-dimensional on D, I guess.

The way running teams blow out the opposition is with an opportunistic D. The argument for passing offenses being superior is that you can score on quick strikes, so you don't have to chain together 12 play drives all the time in order to score, and that incompletions stop the clock so there tend to be more possessions and more opportunities to score than if you're running the ball and depleting the clock with no opportunity for extra possessions.

But turnovers give those extra possessions, usually on a short field, that allow running offenses to score without needing 12-play drives either.

Running teams can blow out other teams just fine, if the turnover margin is in their favor (and field position just increases that ability).

If you wanted to create a successful team built around a run-centric offense you would need a defense that can rush the passer and create turnovers off of that pressure. You'd also want a kicking game that can affect field position and turn long field goals into points.

Turnovers and field position sway the balance of power in any game. We've been very fortunate that Tebow and McGahee both have exhibited outstanding ball security in all but one game. And our Special Teams have been excellent. We've had that field position advantage for the most part, and a turnover advantage. And so we've won.

The offense has to pick it up, but not EVERY game has to be a dogfight just because we're fielding a good running attack. Get Tebow to convert some 3rd downs in the first 3 quarters and we could put up a lot of points. Hell, in several of these games one more first down would have led to a field goal on multiple occasions. How many punts have we made from inside enemy territory?

Too many.

Score from the 30 instead of punting from the 40 and the offense can help the D out quite a bit. And then we can stop having so many nail-biters.

~G

[catfish]

See, I don't agree with that. Unless you mean One-dimensional on offense and zero-dimensional on D, I guess.

The way running teams blow out the opposition is with an opportunistic D. The argument for passing offenses being superior is that you can score on quick strikes, so you don't have to chain together 12 play drives all the time in order to score, and that incompletions stop the clock so there tend to be more possessions and more opportunities to score than if you're running the ball and depleting the clock with no opportunity for extra possessions.

But turnovers give those extra possessions, usually on a short field, that allow running offenses to score without needing 12-play drives either.

Running teams can blow out other teams just fine, if the turnover margin is in their favor (and field position just increases that ability).

If you wanted to create a successful team built around a run-centric offense you would need a defense that can rush the passer and create turnovers off of that pressure. You'd also want a kicking game that can affect field position and turn long field goals into points.

Turnovers and field position sway the balance of power in any game. We've been very fortunate that Tebow and McGahee both have exhibited outstanding ball security in all but one game. And our Special Teams have been excellent. We've had that field position advantage for the most part, and a turnover advantage. And so we've won.

The offense has to pick it up, but not EVERY game has to be a dogfight just because we're fielding a good running attack. Get Tebow to convert some 3rd downs in the first 3 quarters and we could put up a lot of points. Hell, in several of these games one more first down would have led to a field goal on multiple occasions. How many punts have we made from inside enemy territory?

Too many.

Score from the 30 instead of punting from the 40 and the offense can help the D out quite a bit. And then we can stop having so many nail-biters.

~G


agreed, and will add although the defense has been playing light out for the last few games, some of those dropped picks need to get caught. decreasing offensive turnovers helps, but additional defensive turnovers would be great

[G_Money]

I can't ask the defense to do more than it's doing. Sacks, QB pressure, low scores thanks to keeping the opposition out of the endzone and in some cases driving them back out of field goal range, deflected passes...

I'd love for them to get more picks too but our safety with good hands, Moore, is out for injury/ineptitude, Goodman doesn't have good hands, and nobody wants to throw at Champ and he STILL has a few picks.

Get me the MLB Burfict in the draft to get some strips and caused fumbles and we'll see if we can increase our turnover margin that way, but for the talent we have on the field now they're doing all they can on D.

I've got the moon, it's not fair to ask for the stars too. ;)

~G

[catfish]

I can't ask the defense to do more than it's doing. Sacks, QB pressure, low scores thanks to keeping the opposition out of the endzone and in some cases driving them back out of field goal range, deflected passes...

I'd love for them to get more picks too but our safety with good hands, Moore, is out for injury/ineptitude, Goodman doesn't have good hands, and nobody wants to throw at Champ and he STILL has a few picks.

Get me the MLB Burfict in the draft to get some strips and caused fumbles and we'll see if we can increase our turnover margin that way, but for the talent we have on the field now they're doing all they can on D.

I've got the moon, it's not fair to ask for the stars too. ;)

~G

yeah, I forgot the first few games skewed the overall +/- on turnovers too...my bad

[broncosfannum24]

We also need to catch better. And also call screens, and not just throw the ball when its only 3rd down try letting him throw it on first down defenses dont expect, and another reason were probably jwinning games is because with tebow starting we are 5th in time of possesion in the league, with orton we were 30th, also tebow takes care of the ball, and question how come no one is talking about blaine gabberts in accuracies? He has a 48% cmp pct% but its all good its only good to bash on tebow for it

[atwater27]

A shameless self promotion of a new stat by cold hard football stats, but they make a somewhat compelling case

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/kerry_byrne/11/29/tim.tebow/index.html

I have a better theory.

http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://www.godssufficientgrace.com/uploads/Hand_ofGod2.jpg&sa=X&ei=CmnVTuz-C4agiQKjvPSxDg&ved=0CAwQ8wc4Fg&usg=AFQjCNGSrIrfN1q1xcMIsorpKB2nQkiptQ

I'm dead serious.

[catfish]

We also need to catch better. And also call screens, and not just throw the ball when its only 3rd down try letting him throw it on first down defenses dont expect, and another reason were probably jwinning games is because with tebow starting we are 5th in time of possesion in the league, with orton we were 30th, also tebow takes care of the ball, and question how come no one is talking about blaine gabberts in accuracies? He has a 48% cmp pct% but its all good its only good to bash on tebow for it

he is a rookie so he gets a pass

[Joel]

A shameless self promotion of a new stat by cold hard football stats, but they make a somewhat compelling case

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/kerry_byrne/11/29/tim.tebow/index.html
They completely stole my QBRS, which I've used and applied many times on this and other sites. Here's a post I made on Broncomania (before it became Broncos Country) back on Christmas Eve of '06, detailing my QBRS, the NFLs PRS and the differences:

http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?p=1490126#post1490126

Well, maybe not "stole." Maybe just independently formulated; if you understand the PRS and what it's missing, the modifications that turn the PASSER Rating System into a QUARTERBACK Rating System are logical, obligatory (and had already been made by others at least as early as 1993: http://www.profootballresearchers.org/Coffin_Corner/15-01-506.pdf) The nice thing about the system is that by encompassing virtually every act an offensive player can take from behind the LoS it can also be used to comprehensively rate and compare RBs or even entire offenses: When asking whether LaDainian Tomlinson is a better RB than Matt Forte the formers proclivity for THROWING TD passes is considered.

Anyway, having developed it myself years ago I already knew Tebow does extremely well in it; virtually all rushing QBs do, because it rewards things (namely rushing yardage and TDs) and penalizes other things (namely sacks and fumbles) the NFL PRS completely ignores. Tebow does even better than most because he also has a very low interception percentage that also helps him with the traditional PRS. It doesn't help him ENOUGH to make him shine in the PRS, but since nearly every QBs rating goes down in the QBRS (as noted in my five year old post) advantages in any given category loom larger.

I stand by the system, though whether the NFL weights SI and I simply copied and pasted are more or less valid than the ones Neft used is VERY open to debate, for reasons covered in The Hidden Game of Footballs chapter on "The Glory, the Blame and the Ratings." It boils down to the fact the NFL PRS basically just divides yards by attempts with a bonus, with bonuses of 20 yards for completions, 80 yards fot TDs and -100 yards for interceptions. In other words, a 70 yard pass from your 10 yard line and a TD pass from their 10 yard line are both worth exactly 90 points, and an interception is more costly than either. A more surprising, annoying and palpably unfair fact is that the NFL PRS treats a pass that LOSES 5 yards like a 15 yard GAIN, because of the 20 point completion bonus that makes completion percentage the single most important stat in the PRS.

The Hidden Game of Football consequently throws out the completion bonus entirely, then drops the bonus to 10 for TDs and -45 for interceptions on the grounds that most TDs aren't bombs and most interceptions happen well downfield. I think that reduction TOO great; a more relevant figure would probably be somewhere in the middle (though, like all the books conclusions, that one has a solid statistical basis) and I do see a value in completion percentage, though maybe not as much as the NFL sees. I (and Michael Neft, who the alert reader may note also cites THGoF) still factor in THGoFs second observation: Since QB fumbles usually happen at or behind the LoS and interceptions happen way downfield, a QB fumble is a lot more costly than what is often little different from a third down punt, and I penalize LOST fumbles twice as heavily (I don't penalize fumbles recovered by the offense at all, but they do count as attempts.)

Details aside, the bottom line here is that any modification of the PRS that includes rushing yards, TDs and interceptions, and counts each rush as an additional completion (the most valuable stat in the PRS) obviously treats Tebow and all running QBs a lot better than it does pure passers. The bigger revelation for me was that including sacks as (essentially) incomplete passes that cost yards hurts ALL quarterbacks (even most of the runners.)

[Joel]

I like how they brag on the stat, but it seems to be far more accurate as far as who wins football games, and it certainly shows the dark matter of Tim's production more accurately.

For an easy shorthand I just combine all of Tims numbers.

Tim was 31-of-40 for 210 yards and a TD on QB plays on Sunday.

It more accurately captures what he's doing for us and looks much better (nice secondary bonus).

If I said McGahee was 23-for-117 and Tebow was 31-of-40 for 210 and a TD it would seem like a normal game, right?

Production-wise, it is a normal game. It just looks ugly when you view it from a passing-only standpoint.

I want fewer QB runs and more (completed) passes as we go, but I don't see a good reason to eliminate the Tebow bootleg or all of the stretch-option plays. Just the threat of it can keep pass-rushers off of Tebow as he starts to throw more, and that's a good thing.

~G
If McGahee legitimately had a 100% completion percentage he'd be our starting QB. I like the stat, obviously, but it's useless if we don't see it for what it is.

[rcsodak]

Those stats failed to mention that we barely won 3 of those games. One required a pick six, one required 2 missed field goals, the Miami game required a total meltdown by Miami with 2 miutes left ( I will credit tebow with that).

We straight up beat the raiders, but we faced a new QB and produced like 3 INT's multiple sacks and had a PR for a TD.

Fancy it up all you want, but Tebow has to throw the ball better. We cant continue to win with magic. Its impossible.
Dont forget the onside kick recovery vs miami. Without that, miami grabs its 1st win.

And vs SD, franklin's impossible recovery of fell's fumble (with 3 bolts having touched it 1st).

Always said this game requires luck. And the O/B has had its share lately.
Deservedly so, imo.
Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

Tebow has a different style, maybe he can be as good as Bree's but in a different way.

These wins are putting lipstick on a pig though.

Id like to see us put some teams away before I can feel confident.
See what Balti did to SF? They took away their bread n butter..the run, and then pinned their ears back and totally dominated smith.

I'm afraid thats exactly what would happen, should denver play a stout run D.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

The defense won those games. This is the best Defense in the League.

I don't give Tebow much credit, but that of Willis, and the Defense.
Lmao

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

Even with today's pass happy rules, you can go back to Football 101. Run the football, stop the run and don't turn it over. That is still a blue print for winning games. Denver is being successful doing just that.
Well, i keep hearing running the ball will win you games, but the passing will win you championships.
Just need to look at the last 2 SB's.

Foxy was on Sirius NFl. He was asked how they would scheme vs minnesota. He said he'd have to wait to see how THEY scheme first, then make adjustments from there.
PKirwin thought that might be the main reason denver tends to start out so slow, and with so many 3 n outs. Makes sense, i guess.

I'm just happy we finally have a coaching staff that actually makes adjustments as the game progresses.
PK also talked about the big plays (20+yds). He said a team NEEDS to have them to be successful in the league, long-term. That a team cant be expected to make 15 play drives...there's too many chances for a TO.
Again, makes sense.
Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

Tebow has played himself into the starter next year. We have been a rudderles ship for awhile. Its good to have a leader. Even though he throws left handed jump passes.
Lol and I'm STILL waiting for one of those. ;')

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[I Eat Staples]

I won't even say it, Clay. I won't go there. You and I both know the real reason we are winning, right? :D

The defense?

[pnbronco]

Remember how bad Brees started. Rogers was groomed and learned from the bench. Don't remember what Brady did, but think he sat a year before the injury to Bledsoe.

Tebow will never be those guys anyways. But with time he might do well enough being a different kind of QB.

The luck will bounce the other way eventually. But at the very least we know that we have a player that is capable of stepping up when the chips are down and coming through. And seeing as how 4-5 wins appeared to be the ceiling this year, I will just enjoy the ride and worry about next year, next year.

I do remember when they started. The difference is that they all came in with NFL pro skills.

They had to learn how to deal with the speed of the game in the pros and all that goes with those growing pains, but they didn't have to learn basic NFL skills.

This is the part that is so hard for me....I think Tim is a super person, great kid in so many ways. Love how hard he works, would so love to see him lead this team to great things. But he has not learned nearly enough in being in a NFL program for over a year and 1/2 now and still struggles with basic QB skills.

Look Quinn can not even seem to be able to execute in a preseason game, but dang if he didn't work with 2 QB coaches in his off/lock out season and looked much better in camp from camp the year before. He can't seem to get out of his head but his muscle memory was working.

That's all I want to see from Tim. Improvement in basic skills, I know he is not and will not be a typical QB but I would just like to see a game where I feel like the team won and was not on the right side of another lucky break. BTW I was working in Houston for the Raider game so I didn't get to even see the highlights on that game, drove home all day Monday.

I will support Tim and this entire team because it is my team. It just feels like the other shoe will drop once a D cord figures out how to stop what they are doing for now and then well who knows.......

[G_Money]

If McGahee legitimately had a 100% completion percentage he'd be our starting QB. I like the stat, obviously, but it's useless if we don't see it for what it is.

I was listening to The Drive on the way home and Alfred Williams was talking about how foolish Elway and Fox would be to be the only executive and coach EVER to go with option play as a system in the NFL going into next year, then 30 seconds later complained about Tebow's accuracy saying, "Do you know how unstoppable this offense would be if we could complete passes?"

:confused:

Well if we'd be unstoppable, then why would Elway and Fox be fools to incorporate all this running into our next offense that includes better passing?

The only way that makes them fools is if Tebow can never throw better than he has so far. I believe he can be better, so I'm not really that worried going forward.

Tebow absolutely has deficiencies, but I'm not gonna view his normal stat line as a joke just because we like to run it for 4 yards instead of throw it for 4. As you said, stats like this help to balance the scales and at least show the contributions of running QBs in a more favorable light.

If receivers can hold onto the ball it'll make a big difference. Drops matter more when there are fewer balls thrown. Dropping 5 balls out of 40 doesn't have the same effect as dropping 5 out of 20. Every pass matters if you're not gonna throw a lot of em, especially for getting first downs, stretching the field and coming up with the big play.

One of my main hopes for this offseason is a sure-handed blocking receiver. If we want to draft one from a running program, fine. Nick Toon from Wisconsin, for instance.

But a guy who can block AND catch would be nice. DT can block but he's not catching the ball the way I'd like. Royal will probably be gone, and he's dropped several makable catches. Decker will be here, but he's not enough, and of our TEs nobody's standing out as Mr. Reliable.

Tebow's runs are nice, but he can't keep running like this, so to keep his efficiency up we need players to make the catches when he gets the ball to em.

The more he can hit the target, and the more the target can hold onto the ball, the fewer runs Tebow will need to provide useful production.

We're just not there yet.

~G

[Joel]

Well, i keep hearing running the ball will win you games, but the passing will win you championships.
Just need to look at the last 2 SB's.

Foxy was on Sirius NFl. He was asked how they would scheme vs minnesota. He said he'd have to wait to see how THEY scheme first, then make adjustments from there.
PKirwin thought that might be the main reason denver tends to start out so slow, and with so many 3 n outs. Makes sense, i guess.
With all the great respect due to John Fox, I can't help thinking that sounds like a defensive coach talking: Offenses don't react, they make defences react. Doing otherwise surrenders their greatest advantage.


I'm just happy we finally have a coaching staff that actually makes adjustments as the game progresses.
PK also talked about the big plays (20+yds). He said a team NEEDS to have them to be successful in the league, long-term. That a team cant be expected to make 15 play drives...there's too many chances for a TO.
Again, makes sense.
Long drives increase the risk of turnovers too much? Sounds like PK's spent too much time watching NFL teams pass twice as often as they throw. What makes sense to you there makes none to me and John Fox.

Used to be drives with many plays were considered a component of success, because they kept the ball in the hands of ones own playmakers and away from those of opponents, while wearing out their defences and minimizing turnovers. The great weakness of quick strike offenses is their failure to do all those things. Precious few running plays have large probabilities of being big plays, mostly things like end arounds and reverses that are also as high risk as passing plays. As a rule, big running plays happen by continuing to run for short but valuable gains until the defence makes a mistake or gets tired, or your back just flat out makes a great play. Meanwhile, you are protecting the ball, moving the chains and killing the clock so that when you finally score your opponent has time to do nothing more than return your kickoff, or be forced into a two minute drill that ends when you intercept him.

The notion our offense having the ball is dangerous simply because they might give it back is a fallacious product of the pass dominant offenses so popular now. I mean, really, if it's more dangerous to have the ball why are we so worried about losing it? A turnover puts them right where we want them, right? :tongue: Long drives are to be avoided only if there's a relatively large risk of a turnover on any given play, which is true enough when passing but NOT when running. Looking at the stats it should be obvious that a team seeking to avoid turnovers should run like, well, the Denver Broncos (wonder if there's a correlation there.... ;))

In 2010 NFL teams ran 13,920 times and lost the ball 132 times, just under 1% of the time or just over every 105 plays. They also threw 17,269 passes and 511 interceptions, or just under 3% of the time and every 33 plays. Subtract the chance of a turnover from 1 and you get the chance of NOT turning the ball over on any given play; for runs that's 99.0517241% and for passes it's 97.0409404%. Multiply that number by itself for every play in the drive and you get the chance the drive won't end in a turnover: A 12 play running drive has a 89.1958141% chance of holding onto the ball and a 4 play passing drive has a 88.6788365% chance. If you can promise every passing drive will end in 4 plays or less that's safer than a 13 play running drive, but otherwise the safe route is running, because you'd have to run 16 times to have a greater turnover risk than 5 passes. I think it VERY unlikely any team will run 16 times without getting to the end zone.

So I guess it comes down to what is meant by "long drives increase turnovers." If it means we should try to routinely bust out 30 yard runs, sure, I'm all for it if anyone has a good suggestion how. If it means we should protect the ball by throwing more passes, that's just factually inaccurate, because each pass we throw is three times more likely than a run to be a turnover. It's proportionately more likely to score points, too, which is the appeal and the reason I hate the dink and dunk WCO (let's triple our chance of a turnover with NO increase in scoring potential, yea! :rolleyes:) but as far as ball security, many short runs are eminently better than a few long passes. Again, many long runs would be more than welcome, but also once again the best route to that goal is still many more short runs.

I was listening to The Drive on the way home and Alfred Williams was talking about how foolish Elway and Fox would be to be the only executive and coach EVER to go with option play as a system in the NFL going into next year, then 30 seconds later complained about Tebow's accuracy saying, "Do you know how unstoppable this offense would be if we could complete passes?"

:confused:
Allow me to clarify: 100% "run completions" is irrelevant because the NFL rushing average has been around 4 YPA for decades (it was 4.2 in 2010) but a high completion percentage is VITAL because NFL PASSING

1) YPA is much higher (6.6 in 2010,)
2) TD percentage is nearly twice as high (4.3488332% to 2.8663793% in 2010) and
3) turnover percentage is thrice as high (as the above stats have shown.)

So if you aren't completing your passes all you're doing is tripling your chance of a turnover with none of the compensating advantages you SHOULD be getting in extra yards and scoring. Most bad runs usually get a yard or two, but the best case scenario for a bad pass is usually losing the down. That an interception is usually no worse than a short punt while running backs usually fumble near the LoS mitigates that slightly, but not much.

Tebow absolutely has deficiencies, but I'm not gonna view his normal stat line as a joke just because we like to run it for 4 yards instead of throw it for 4. As you said, stats like this help to balance the scales and at least show the contributions of running QBs in a more favorable light.

If receivers can hold onto the ball it'll make a big difference. Drops matter more when there are fewer balls thrown. Dropping 5 balls out of 40 doesn't have the same effect as dropping 5 out of 20. Every pass matters if you're not gonna throw a lot of em, especially for getting first downs, stretching the field and coming up with the big play.

One of my main hopes for this offseason is a sure-handed blocking receiver. If we want to draft one from a running program, fine. Nick Toon from Wisconsin, for instance.

But a guy who can block AND catch would be nice. DT can block but he's not catching the ball the way I'd like. Royal will probably be gone, and he's dropped several makable catches. Decker will be here, but he's not enough, and of our TEs nobody's standing out as Mr. Reliable.

Tebow's runs are nice, but he can't keep running like this, so to keep his efficiency up we need players to make the catches when he gets the ball to em.

The more he can hit the target, and the more the target can hold onto the ball, the fewer runs Tebow will need to provide useful production.

We're just not there yet.

~G
We MUST stop the drop, no question. Looking around online just now I saw that one of the preferred treatments for edema (once known as "dropsy") is "daily bed rest," so maybe some therapeutic bench time would help. You are absolutely right that when we're only throwing a dozen or two passes a game one or two drops can be lethal; there just aren't as many chances to make up for them as exist in, say, Green Bay or New England.

Four yard passes vs. four yard runs, however, is not a choice I want us to make, for reasons already amply stated. Aerial running combines all the worst aspects of running and passing while eliminating most of the benefits. In fact, everything I said about incompletes tripling turnover risk without any of the benefits of big gains and scoring applies nearly as much to short passing; the only difference is you get five yards on the successful passes instead of nothing, but since a good running game accomplishes the same thing just as easily with a much lower risk of turnovers, I fail to see the appeal.