NFL Network Discovers Blueprint to Defeat Tebow

[vandammage13]

http://www.nfl.com/videos/denver-broncos/09000d5d825398fa/Defending-Tebow-with-offense

Apparently, all you have to do is score tons of points.

A novel idea, IMO....

Thoughts??

[wayninja]

I think our gameplan against the bills should be to score more points than them.

[catfish]

I think our gameplan against the bills should be to score more points than them.

also we should make them score less points than us

[Northman]

Well no shit. Next they are going to tell us that the way to defeat Tebow is not to turn the ball over........

[chazoe60]

I heard you can even beat the Patriots 60% of the time if you score more points than they do.

[catfish]

also you should keep Tebow from running the ball or passing the ball or scoring touchdowns

[Ravage!!!]

I heard you can even beat the Patriots 60% of the time if you score more points than they do.

60% of the time, it works every time

[Dreadnought]

60% of the time, it works every time

No, only 60%, Rav. Thats how powerful the Belichick/Brady/Patriots mystique is.

[The Glue Factory]

http://www.nfl.com/videos/denver-broncos/09000d5d825398fa/Defending-Tebow-with-offense

Apparently, all you have to do is score tons of points.

A novel idea, IMO....

Thoughts??

BRILLIANT! Why didn't we think of that? :rolleyes:

[vandammage13]

also you should keep Tebow from running the ball or passing the ball or scoring touchdowns

I find it amusing that just a handful of weeks ago Tebow was considered a joke amongst most of the talking heads.

And now many in the media say that you have to score 35+ points to beat this guy who can't hack it in the league.

[artie_dale]

No, only 60%, Rav. Thats how powerful the Belichick/Brady/Patriots mystique is.

Don't forget, Brady is God's Nephew and Belichick is the Devil.

[BORDERLINE]

I find it amusing that just a handful of weeks ago Tebow was considered a joke amongst most of the talking heads.

And now many in the media say that you have to score 35+ points to beat this guy who can't hack it in the league.

So, he still can't win a Game in the NFL,:confused: NO wait,

I mean He can't go to the playoffs, :confused:No wait.

I mean he can't actually WIN a Super Bowl yeah that's ridiculous :lol:.

[TimHippo]

It's simple, winning against the Broncos is the formula to beat Tebow.

[rcsodak]

I find it amusing that just a handful of weeks ago Tebow was considered a joke amongst most of the talking heads.

And now many in the media say that you have to score 35+ points to beat this guy who can't hack it in the league.
35? TT's only led them to 30+ one time.
An attacking defense and 25 gets it done.

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

[rcsodak]

So, he still can't win a Game in the NFL,:confused: NO wait,

I mean He can't go to the playoffs, :confused:No wait.

I mean he can't actually WIN a Super Bowl yeah that's ridiculous :lol:.
Not in the playoffs yet. Lose 1 more and its over, methinks.

But 8wins is double over what most here were projecting.

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

[wayninja]

35? TT's only led them to 30+ one time.
An attacking defense and 25 gets it done.

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

That goes for the vast majority of teams in the NFL...

[vandammage13]

35? TT's only led them to 30+ one time.
An attacking defense and 25 gets it done.

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

Twice, actually.

[catfish]

That goes for the vast majority of teams in the NFL...

to be fair there was one game last weekend where the losing team scored more than 25, 3 scored more than 20

[wayninja]

to be fair there was one game last weekend where the losing team scored more than 25, 3 scored more than 20

Against 'attacking' defenses?

[catfish]

Against 'attacking' defenses?

oakland scored 27 against detroit

other than that it was buffalo 23 vs miami

minnesota 20 vs NO

Denver 23 vs NE

I guess they are calling NE attacking now? THey are good at keeping people out of the endzone I guess. Detroit is the only attacking D I see on the list

[rcsodak]

Twice, actually.
Yup....forgot about oak gm.

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

[wayninja]

oakland scored 27 against detroit

other than that it was buffalo 23 vs miami

minnesota 20 vs NO

Denver 23 vs NE

I guess they are calling NE attacking now? THey are good at keeping people out of the endzone I guess. Detroit is the only attacking D I see on the list

I was only trying to make the point that if you have a good defense (or 'attacking', whatever that means) and you can put up 25 points per game, you are probably a 10-11 win per season team.

[Fullback32]

Well no shit. Next they are going to tell us that the way to defeat Tebow is not to turn the ball over........

..and "execute." You can never forget to "execute" too much.

[wayninja]

..and "execute." You can never forget to "execute" too much.

Head over the Quan Cosby thread and you will see people wanting to execute...

[catfish]

I was only trying to make the point that if you have a good defense (or 'attacking', whatever that means) and you can put up 25 points per game, you are probably a 10-11 win per season team.

I was agreeing with you...my point was more to the 25 points would have won over 90% of the games last weekend regardless of the defense

[NightTerror218]

like saying the way to stop Michael Jordan is to block his shots.

The blueprint to a Emmit Smith to tackle him.
The blueprint to a Joe Montana/John Elway/Dan Marino to sack him or block his pass at line.

(I chose great players on purpose to prove article was dumb not to compare Tebow to great players)

[catfish]

gotta love the "all you have to do to win is beat the other team" gameplan....thank you John Madden

[arapaho2]

Not in the playoffs yet. Lose 1 more and its over, methinks.

But 8wins is double over what most here were projecting.

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


those projections of 4 wins were with orton at the helm ...right?:coffee:

[TimHippo]

those projections of 4 wins were with orton at the helm ...right?:coffee:

Just as an aside. Your sig. I guess you've never seen the Mexico Joe logo.


http://www.mexicojoes.com/

http://www.mexicojoes.com/sites/all/themes/mexicojoes/logo.jpghttp://img509.imageshack.us/img509/11/imagineac6.gif

[Joel]

Well, I mean, yes and no. The NFL gurus aren't really saying anything except what most of us were saying coming into this game: This offense isn't good enough to win a shootout yet. While I'm pretty sure most us still feel that is true, we were doing a pretty darned good job until the turnovers (in that sense, you could say NE was an attacking D THIS weekend; Ninkovich was EVERYWHERE.) In fact, we were in front pretty much all the time until Balls fumble, and even made the first defensive stop. We should've gone down the field yet again and taken control of the game right there. Instead we lost control by losing the ball.

All of which is to say, their argument boils down to the (false) premise that "all he does is run," which naturally invites the well known approach for weak defences against good running teams: Score so many points it takes their running back out of the game. The talking heads are just (mistakenly) treating Tebow as no more than a running back again. That's pretty much what I expected NE to try given their weak D and McGahee and Tebows strong running, and pretty much what they did, just not in the way I expected: They needed a lot of help from us.

Fact is, they were getting to Tebow a lot when he dropped back to pass, especially in the second half once they had an 18 point lead and everyone knew we HAD to pass. Even when he had time, I only recall one big pass play that wasn't to Thomas (Balls lone catch that set up the last TD.) Tebow's not throwing picks, or missing receivers badly, and when he ducks out of the pocket it's usually to buy time to throw, not run. With any other QB the wags would opine that his beat up LT, rookie RT and second year C and LG weren't getting the job done in protection, but since it's Tebow the problem MUST be his lack of pocket awareness.

Whatever the reason, the bottom line is that we fell badly behind, needed to pass to get back in it, and couldn't, so we lost, which is pretty much what everyone expected, if not for the reason we expected. We can beat a lot of teams playing tough D, pounding the rock and winning the field position battle, but the best teams, playoff teams, will have 1) a D as good or better that shuts down our run, 2) a high powered offense that puts up lots of points or 3) both. Against THOSE elite teams we can't count on keeping the game close and squeaking it out at the end: We MUST be able to pass, either to get back in games we're losing badly, or close out games where we have a narrow lead. I still want to run more WHEN WE CAN, but we have to recognize that won't always be an option, then plan, and play, accordingly.

Until we can do that, yes, any team that can light up our awful secondary can take McGahee and our run first offense out of games; that's just how football has always been played, not some startling revelation.

[I Eat Staples]

Wait, you mean to tell me that if the other team scores more points than us, we lose the game?

Shit, they exposed us.

[TimHippo]

Whatever the reason, the bottom line is that we fell badly behind, needed to pass to get back in it, and couldn't, so we lost, .

Actually we did pass well and came back to cut the lead to 11. Which is still winnable. But then the defense couldn't stop Brady and the Pats ate up 4:30 minutes of the clock and scored again.

Basically nobody can come back down 18 with 4 minutes left.

It might have been better to kick an onside kick after the lead went down to 11. If you get the onside kick you have a good shot at coming back. If you miss on the onside kick then the Pats have a shorter field to work with which would eat up less clock. (basically this is conceding that they will score but instead of eating up 4:30 minutes, they eat up maybe 2 minutes). So the onside kick is a calculated risk but I remember thinking at the time that if they don't do it they probably weren't going to comeback.

[Joel]

Actually we did pass well and came back to cut the lead to 11. Which is still winnable. But then the defense couldn't stop Brady and the Pats ate up 4:30 minutes of the clock and scored again.

Basically nobody can come back down 18 with 4 minutes left.

It might have been better to kick an onside kick after the lead went down to 11. If you get the onside kick you have a good shot at coming back. If you miss on the onside kick then the Pats have a shorter field to work with which would eat up less clock. (basically this is conceding that they will score but instead of eating up 4:30 minutes, they eat up maybe 2 minutes). So the onside kick is a calculated risk but I remember thinking at the time that if they don't do it they probably weren't going to comeback.
I disagree; I don't think we passed well at all, or we would've scored more than once in the second half against a weak D whose secondary is so depleted they've been drafting backup RECEIVERS to start as DBs. Our first drive didn't feature much passing, but moved well until we neared FG range. Then they stopped the run, forcing us to pass, and it ended with Tebow spinning out of the pocket into a sack (or shortly thereafter; I honestly can't remember exactly at this point.)

THAT was critical, because we'd already stopped them on their first drive of the half, but that drive and ours each took about 4:30 and left us down 11. When NE got the ball back they spent the rest of the quarter driving down for the TD that put them up by 18. We were probably screwed at that point, down three scores at the start of the 4th.

We did manage to put together our only good second half drive then, passing (from necessity) to get BACK to 11 points down, but when NE answered with a TD of their own that was pretty much it. We got the ball again, went into "Tebow Time" and the Pats did a good job of covering our receivers and chasing our QB until we self destructed. Basically, just what the Jets tried, but far more successfully (on the other hand, they were up by 18, not 3, and didn't have to respect the running game that had been killing them.)

As far as passing itself though, we had one good drive in the GAME; it just happened to be our only second half score. There were a few nice passes elsewhere, but they didn't accomplish anything except displaying and continuing Tebows development. That's not passing well.

[sneakers]

OMG THIS IS ALSO THE BLUEPRINT TO DEFEAT ANY OTHER QUARTERBACK WHO HAS EVER PLAYED!!!!




zzzzzzzzzzz

[SpringsBroncoFan]

35? TT's only led them to 30+ one time.
An attacking defense and 25 gets it done.

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

The extra 10 points are to allow for Tebow time... :laugh:

[Sinthor]

http://www.nfl.com/videos/denver-broncos/09000d5d825398fa/Defending-Tebow-with-offense

Apparently, all you have to do is score tons of points.

A novel idea, IMO....

Thoughts??

I had this novel idea the other day after the game. I think the Broncos should have employed MY strategy to beat the Patriots and Tom Brady. Check this out......if they had just scored MORE POINTS than the Patriots...they'd have won the game! I should be a coach....right? I know!!

Maybe if I email enough to DenverBroncos.com, they'll hire me as a consultant for the rest of the season, or maybe as an analyst (funny how often the first part of that word seems to match up with those guys, huh?) and then I can tell them my secret strategy to help beat Buffalo and KC. Hey, if it would work on Brady, I'm SURE it would work on Orton!

[MNPatsFan]

I find it amusing that just a handful of weeks ago Tebow was considered a joke amongst most of the talking heads.

And now many in the media say that you have to score 35+ points to beat this guy who can't hack it in the league.Now I didn't watch the clip, but I think what they may be saying is that the Broncos style of play is to keep the game close and low scoring into the 4th quarter to allow Tebow the opportunity to lead one of his game winning drives. Therefore, if you score a number of points early and build a big lead over the Broncos, Tim Tebow and the Broncos aren't designed and built to catch up. Not sure where the 35 points comes from because my recollection is that Tebow and the Broncos score or average between 17-20 points per game.:confused:

So it is my understanding that a number of commentators opine that if a team jumps out to a 21 to 3 or 24 to 7 lead over the Broncos, Tebow won't be able to lead the Broncos to a comeback win.

[catfish]

Now I didn't watch the clip, but I think what they may be saying is that the Broncos style of play is to keep the game close and low scoring into the 4th quarter to allow Tebow the opportunity to lead one of his game winning drives. Therefore, if you score a number of points early and build a big lead over the Broncos, Tim Tebow and the Broncos aren't designed and built to catch up. Not sure where the 35 points comes from because my recollection is that Tebow and the Broncos score or average between 17-20 points per game.:confused:

So it is my understanding that a number of commentators opine that if a team jumps out to a 21 to 3 or 24 to 7 lead over the Broncos, Tebow won't be able to lead the Broncos to a comeback win.

I think you are correct in your assesment...the responses are more to the point of if you jump out to a 21-3 or 24-7 lead on ANY team you most likely are going to win barring a pretty major disaster....it's along the lines of saying "the way to beat the Patriots is to not let them score a bunch of point because thier D isn't great"....well no shit, now how do you do it

[Locnar]

Expose our horrendous secondary and hope our offense has a few turnovers. BadaBOOM.. That easy..

[vandammage13]

Now I didn't watch the clip, but I think what they may be saying is.....

This is where I stopped reading.

[MOtorboat]

When you have a 13-7 lead and have the ball inside your opponents 10 yard line in the second quarter, you should be able to manage more than 10 more points the entire game.

But, hey, that's just me thinking out loud.

[catfish]

When you have a 13-7 lead and have the ball inside your opponents 10 yard line in the second quarter, you should be able to manage more than 10 more points the entire game.

But, hey, that's just me thinking out loud.

there were only 3 punts by the Broncos in the whole game, aside from the fumbles they moved the ball pretty well...they just didn't get that many chances due to the fact they couldnt hold on to the ball

[BroncoJoe]

Giving up 13 points within a 5 minute span would kill just about any team playing the Patriots.