PDA

View Full Version : Fox-Tebow is going to be a great quarterback



rjent
02-24-2012, 12:03 PM
This is better! :lol:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/23/fox-indicates-broncos-will-run-a-regular-offense/



Broncos coach John Fox was lauded for changing his offense during the 2011 to take advantage of Tim Tebow’s strengths.

With an offseason to prepare Tebow as a starter, it sure sounds like Fox wants to make Tebow look more like the rest of quarterbacks in the NFL.

“[Tebow] is going to be a great quarterback in this league. How long it takes (and) when? I can’t tell you. But he’s going to be that guy in a regular NFL offense,” Fox said.

The Broncos certainly didn’t run a “regular” offense last year. Fox indicated that he wouldn’t necessarily go looking for a Tebow-style backup, but would be open to any style of quarterback on the roster behind Tebow. Essentially, they want Tebow to fit more into the mold of a traditional quarterback.

“I’m not saying we’re going to totally abandon some of those things that present problems for the defense. But it’s going to be important [he grows as a quarterback]. He’s going to get the opportunity to improve and show he can make those strides.”

My only complaint is that John Elway had many of the same problems his first couple of years. I wonder if John would have been so pressured to "change" so fast.

This is going to be an interesting off season! :listen:

PAINTERDAVE
02-24-2012, 12:15 PM
I just would like to see what Tim can do after a full camp..
now that he has experience under his belt.. AND the confidence of EFX.

Look at the comments below the article...
It is fascinatng how many people HATE on this guy...
even as the Head Coach comes out
with huge statement of positive confidence in him.

No. I am not calling anyone here a hater..
I am talking about the comments below the article.

Have a GREAT weekend. :cool:

Ravage!!!
02-24-2012, 12:19 PM
Elway wasn't rated as the best PLAYER to come out of college because he had the same problems that Tebow has. Elway could run a passing offense in HS.

As far as Fox's comments... I wouldn't expect anything less from him. He leaves himself a lot of room here. "When, I don't know"... that could mean that it may not even be on the Broncos. So for those that are looking for Happy-happy-joy-joy comments from the coaches about Tim, I think the coaches are learning to pacify.

rjent
02-24-2012, 12:27 PM
Elway wasn't rated as the best PLAYER to come out of college because he had the same problems that Tebow has. Elway could run a passing offense in HS.

As far as Fox's comments... I wouldn't expect anything less from him. He leaves himself a lot of room here. "When, I don't know"... that could mean that it may not even be on the Broncos. So for those that are looking for Happy-happy-joy-joy comments from the coaches about Tim, I think the coaches are learning to pacify.

That is true and so could Tim. Elway's press when he became a pro was almost identical to Tim's and even the same coming from Reeves as to he runs too much, he can't read defenses, etc etc. Tim was a rookie by all wisdom in 2011, and I expect that Tim will vastly improve this off season. But John was nowhere near an elite QB in his first two years in the pros. Nobody is.

We were so supportive of Orton, Orton is our guy, Orton is the starter period, blah blah. I just wish the Broncos would commit. I think it would go a long way to stabilize everyone involved. It doesn't mean you married him (ask Orton :lol:), but it would at least create a foundation.

JMHO :coffee:

Ravage!!!
02-24-2012, 12:33 PM
That is true and so could Tim. Elway's press was almost identical and even the same coming from Reeves as to he runs too much, he can't read defenses, etc etc. Tim was a rookie by all wisdom in 2011, and I expect that Tim will vastly improve this off season. But John was nowhere near an elite QB in his first two years in the pros. Nobody is.

We were so supportive of Orton, Orton is our guy, Orton is the starter period, blah blah. I just wish the Broncos would commit. I think it would go a long way to stabilize everyone involved. It doesn't mean you married him (as Orton :lol:), but it would at least create a foundation.

JMHO :coffee:

John wasn't elite..that doesn't have anything to do with having the same problems that Tim does. Elway could at least throw the ball, and throw from the pocket. Tim wasn't a rookie, by all logic of the conversation.

The team was supportive of Orton. They are supportive of Tim. But because of the headache that revolves around the political nightmare of Tim Tebow, the coaching staff has to be SOOO careful of every single word. They didn't have to be careful on what they said about Orton. They could give the same ol' crap you always hear. But with Tim, you can't because people question and question and question.

When Cutler was being traded, the fan-base jumped up and down with the "any player can be traded" mantra. Now that the coaches are COMMITTING themselves to Tim Tebow, they get criticized for not signing in blood that he will always be the QB. Now the FO of the Broncos are on eggshells with every comment, wondering how the wording will come back to bite them.

Ravage!!!
02-24-2012, 12:36 PM
We were so supportive of Orton, Orton is our guy, Orton is the starter period, blah blah. I just wish the Broncos would commit. I think it would go a long way to stabilize everyone involved. It doesn't mean you married him (ask Orton :lol:), but it would at least create a foundation.

JMHO :coffee:

One more thing. Lets understand that the players aren't looking for the words to the media to confirm their feeling of comfort. That comes from their interaction with the coaches and FO. The FANS are the ones that need the warm and cozy comments from the coaches to make THEM feel better. What the coaches say to the media/fans....doesn't create any foundation, other than for the fans that look for the coaches to tell, the truth and the whole truth, with everything they say to the media-heads.

rjent
02-24-2012, 12:46 PM
Ok, if you say so :salute:

BroncoStud
02-24-2012, 12:54 PM
Tebow will give us a Pro Bowl fullback for 10 years to come...

PAINTERDAVE
02-24-2012, 12:59 PM
But the players dont exist in a vacuum.

You get Les "the Oaf" Shapiro all week claiming he "knows" what
the FO is thinking... making wild speculation about...
"Tim better do this" or "Tim better do that" or the FO will suddenly ship him out.

Shapiro is butt hurt because Tim does not kiss his ass... and why would Tebow give Les an interview?
Les does nothing but make crap up about what Elway really thinks, etc..
and NONE of Shapiros nonsense is ever good for Tim.


The positive media around Tim may be prolific...
but the hateful comments by the "profesionals" is just as prolific.


There SO MUCH negativity about this QB from the "NFL profesionals"...
that a vote of confidence from the Head Coach IS important...
to counteract the bullcrap.

Just slow the roll until we can find out.... which will happen soon enough.
Do we have to endure an entire off season of negative speculation?

Ravage!!!
02-24-2012, 01:09 PM
But the players dont exist in a vacuum.

You get Les "the Oaf" Shapiro all week claiming he "knows" what
the FO is thinking... making wild speculation about...
"Tim better do this" or "Tim better do that" or the FO will suddenly ship him out.

Shapiro is butt hurt because Tim does not kiss his ass... and why would Tebow give Les an interview?
Les does nothing but make crap up about what Elway really thinks, etc..
and NONE of Shapiros nonsense is ever good for Tim.


The positive media around Tim may be prolific...
but the hateful comments by the "profesionals" is just as prolific.


There SO MUCH negativity about this QB from the "NFL profesionals"...
that a vote of confidence from the Head Coach IS important...
to counteract the bullcrap.

Just slow the roll until we can find out.... which will happen soon enough.
Do we have to endure an entire off season of negative speculation?

What Fox says to the media isn't going to "form foundation" of anything. Tim's interaction with teh coach is where Tim will either feel comfortable with his job or not. Not the media quotes.

The FANS are the ones that want to go over every word on what the coach says. THEY are the ones that "Need the QB to play on the field so he can be evaluated"... not the coaches. The FANS are the ones that want to "hear if he's our starting QB" from the press... not the team.

Its the fans that get all upset and upriled because the coach didn't say all the "positive" things about the QB that THEY feel about him. The players knows that coaches aren't going to throw around flowery comments.

Not to mention, if the players want to BELIEVE in their coach, and want to feel that he's shooting straight with them..... they aren't going to believe flowery words in the press if they know thats not how HE is. They know him. THey know he tells it how it is, and is truthful. Fox isnt' going to throw out fake works purely to pacify the uptight fans, and the players aren't going to believe the words if they know Fox is just saying them. Fox is being honest with the fans/media just as he is with the players. THe players will appreciate honesty a LOT more than feeling he's saying one thing to the media/fans, and another thing behind his back. Tim knows where Fox stands.

FlyByU
02-24-2012, 01:12 PM
Tebow will give us a Pro Bowl fullback for 10 years to come...

And a Pro Bowl QB to boot aint we blessed :D

nevcraw
02-25-2012, 12:08 AM
there is no reason to expect Tebow to have plateaued after 16 starts. he will improve -- how much is up to him and his left arm and mind.. I expect a better more efficient and secure passer in year 2 as the starter.
I am not sure how or why the expectation level has shifted from qb's getting 4 years to hit peak to a 16 game tryout. His mind and and body are not yet in synch and it's obvious he not yet completely comfortable with the NFL game but he sure has shown flashed of getting it.. I see a big upside vs. he's not going to make it.

Npba900
02-25-2012, 11:13 AM
That is true and so could Tim. Elway's press when he became a pro was almost identical to Tim's and even the same coming from Reeves as to he runs too much, he can't read defenses, etc etc. Tim was a rookie by all wisdom in 2011, and I expect that Tim will vastly improve this off season. But John was nowhere near an elite QB in his first two years in the pros. Nobody is.

We were so supportive of Orton, Orton is our guy, Orton is the starter period, blah blah. I just wish the Broncos would commit. I think it would go a long way to stabilize everyone involved. It doesn't mean you married him (ask Orton :lol:), but it would at least create a foundation.

JMHO :coffee:

You can't compare Elway's QB play of the 80's to the QB era that Tebow is playing today. The rules changes for the WR's and QB's from the 80's is comparable to comparing apples and oranges. Back in the 80's the QB position was a lot more difficult vs the pass friendly QB environment we see today.

broncobryce
02-25-2012, 12:35 PM
But the players dont exist in a vacuum.

You get Les "the Oaf" Shapiro all week claiming he "knows" what
the FO is thinking... making wild speculation about...
"Tim better do this" or "Tim better do that" or the FO will suddenly ship him out.

Shapiro is butt hurt because Tim does not kiss his ass... and why would Tebow give Les an interview?
Les does nothing but make crap up about what Elway really thinks, etc..
and NONE of Shapiros nonsense is ever good for Tim.


The positive media around Tim may be prolific...
but the hateful comments by the "profesionals" is just as prolific.


There SO MUCH negativity about this QB from the "NFL profesionals"...
that a vote of confidence from the Head Coach IS important...
to counteract the bullcrap.

Just slow the roll until we can find out.... which will happen soon enough.
Do we have to endure an entire off season of negative speculation?

Depends on where you spend your offseason.
You know where the negative nancy's hang out.

Good post.

Northman
02-25-2012, 01:03 PM
John wasn't elite..that doesn't have anything to do with having the same problems that Tim does. Elway could at least throw the ball, and throw from the pocket. Tim wasn't a rookie, by all logic of the conversation.

The team was supportive of Orton. They are supportive of Tim. But because of the headache that revolves around the political nightmare of Tim Tebow, the coaching staff has to be SOOO careful of every single word. They didn't have to be careful on what they said about Orton. They could give the same ol' crap you always hear. But with Tim, you can't because people question and question and question.

When Cutler was being traded, the fan-base jumped up and down with the "any player can be traded" mantra. Now that the coaches are COMMITTING themselves to Tim Tebow, they get criticized for not signing in blood that he will always be the QB. Now the FO of the Broncos are on eggshells with every comment, wondering how the wording will come back to bite them.

Indeed. Orton never had the cult following that Tim has and that is part of the issue in Denver along with his flawed mechanics.

turftoad
02-25-2012, 01:09 PM
You can't compare Elway's QB play of the 80's to the QB era that Tebow is playing today. The rules changes for the WR's and QB's from the 80's is comparable to comparing apples and oranges. Back in the 80's the QB position was a lot more difficult vs the pass friendly QB environment we see today.

That said, you can't compare Tebow to Elway at all.

Northman
02-25-2012, 01:11 PM
That said, you can't compare Tebow to Elway at all.

Night and day. They were never the same type of QB. Elway scrambled because he had too. Tebow scrambled because it was by design.

Chef Zambini
02-25-2012, 01:31 PM
there is no reason to expect Tebow to have plateaued after 16 starts. he will improve -- how much is up to him and his left arm and mind.. I expect a better more efficient and secure passer in year 2 as the starter.
I am not sure how or why the expectation level has shifted from qb's getting 4 years to hit peak to a 16 game tryout. His mind and and body are not yet in synch and it's obvious he not yet completely comfortable with the NFL game but he sure has shown flashed of getting it.. I see a big upside vs. he's not going to make it.QBs , FRDC qbS are expected to contribute to wins from day one !
big ben. matt ryan, cam newton,the detroit and baltimore QBs...
TEBOW is not being held to a higher standard, the expectations are high for a FRDC QB!
why are the comments from the FO so wishy-washy/
because TT has NOT earned anything stronger!
he id get 7 inexplicABLE SMOKE AND MIRROR WINS, AT BEST, THAT NMAKES THE fo GRATEFUL, not CONFIDENT.

CoachChaz
02-25-2012, 01:42 PM
Every time I have a cup of coffee and the microwave goes off before 7, my neck gets stiff, my balls tingle and I feel compelled to recite the Gettysburg address. Can any of you brilliant translators here explain to me how Tebow and Elways skills can help me cure my problem?


Want to know what Elway and Fox are saying? Just read it. We hope Tim gets better so we can be a better team. If he doesnt, then we'll deal with it then. Simple

Dreadnought
02-25-2012, 02:24 PM
Every time I have a cup of coffee and the microwave goes off before 7, my neck gets stiff, my balls tingle and I feel compelled to recite the Gettysburg address. Can any of you brilliant translators here explain to me how Tebow and Elways skills can help me cure my problem?


Want to know what Elway and Fox are saying? Just read it. We hope Tim gets better so we can be a better team. If he doesnt, then we'll deal with it then. Simple

I thought it was just me. Age related, perhaps?

As to the main point, its why there is only so much football posting I can do off season. I can't read Ouija boards, tea leaves, or sheep entrails either. After the draft and some free agency happens we'll see what we see. Sadly, Mr. Bowlen has not yet asked my advice on anything, though I'm sure I could square all this shit away myself quite easily if only he'd ask.

catfish
02-25-2012, 02:37 PM
You can't compare Elway's QB play of the 80's to the QB era that Tebow is playing today. The rules changes for the WR's and QB's from the 80's is comparable to comparing apples and oranges. Back in the 80's the QB position was a lot more difficult vs the pass friendly QB environment we see today.

The game was different sure, but Elway had the lowest completion % in the league that year by 2% and the second lowest QBR, so while the game was indeed different, compared to his peers he struggled. You can't compare his #'s to Tebow, but to say imply his lower #'s were a product of the game being different is a bit disengenuous

he made a signifigant jump to middle of the pack in his 2nd year

Dzone
02-25-2012, 04:16 PM
As a lifelong Bronco fan, you have to love having the most famous athlete in the world playing right here in Denver!

All he do is win!

turftoad
02-25-2012, 04:19 PM
The game was different sure, but Elway had the lowest completion % in the league that year by 2% and the second lowest QBR, so while the game was indeed different, compared to his peers he struggled. You can't compare his #'s to Tebow, but to say imply his lower #'s were a product of the game being different is a bit disengenuous

he made a signifigant jump to middle of the pack in his 2nd year

This was Tebows second year.

catfish
02-25-2012, 04:40 PM
This was Tebows second year.

I am well aware of what year it is in Tebow's career. The point was made that Elway struggled early, the counterpoint was that it was a different era. I simply stated that it was true that you can't compare Elways numbers to Tebows, because it was a different era, but it is also true that he struggled in his first year as a starter. I didn't try to justify Tebows performace, simply said in Elways first year as the starter he struggled, then the next year moved up to middle of the pack.

turftoad
02-25-2012, 05:21 PM
I am well aware of what year it is in Tebow's career. The point was made that Elway struggled early, the counterpoint was that it was a different era. I simply stated that it was true that you can't compare Elways numbers to Tebows, because it was a different era, but it is also true that he struggled in his first year as a starter. I didn't try to justify Tebows performace, simply said in Elways first year as the starter he struggled, then the next year moved up to middle of the pack.

I understand.
If and I say if, Tebow is in the middle of the pack next year, I'd be happy with the progress.

catfish
02-25-2012, 05:28 PM
I understand.
If and I say if, Tebow is in the middle of the pack next year, I'd be happy with the progress.

I would be freaking amazed if that happened to be honest(completion% wise). I am hoping for better 3rd down%, keeping the TD to INT ratio high and higher ypa. Less sacks too would be good

nevcraw
02-25-2012, 05:46 PM
bottom line there is no book on who makes it and who doesn't.. I wonder why some here have seemed to have already read it on tebow. He defies the prototypical QB analysis based on drive, determination, and ability to thrive in the worst situations. he also doesn't play their way. skepticism is great but usually is based on some prior experience with a similar experience.. When has there been a guy like Tebow playing QB in the nfl? there is no similar experience..

HammeredOut
02-25-2012, 06:10 PM
What happens if our defense goes back to its old ways and gives up 28 points a game. While Tebow is doing his thing by putting up 17 points and giving us 2 completions per quarter, and 124 yards in the air a game. Does that mean Tebow is a failure if we start losing games 17-28, instead of winning them 17-10??

catfish
02-25-2012, 07:25 PM
What happens if our defense goes back to its old ways and gives up 28 points a game. While Tebow is doing his thing by putting up 17 points and giving us 2 completions per quarter, and 124 yards in the air a game. Does that mean Tebow is a failure if we start losing games 17-28, instead of winning them 17-10??

I counted 16 of 256 games last year where a team gave up 28 or more points and still won. If the D consistently gives up 28 points a game this team is screwed. You can't win consistently that way

Lancane
02-25-2012, 07:32 PM
bottom line there is no book on who makes it and who doesn't.. I wonder why some here have seemed to have already read it on tebow. He defies the prototypical QB analysis based on drive, determination, and ability to thrive in the worst situations. he also doesn't play their way. skepticism is great but usually is based on some prior experience with a similar experience.. When has there been a guy like Tebow playing QB in the nfl? there is no similar experience..

No, you are right Nev, there is no book or manual on who makes it and who does not. However, there is enough data from well over four decades compiled to develop a system of elimination to better look for those things that will allow a kid to succeed or not succeed at the next level. Is it perfect? Not even close, but a lot closer then people on here seem to realize. How many times have we seen board members 'nutter' over kids simply cause the Broncos drafted them, doesn't make a difference what round they were taken in, what scouts or others see...not until they realize for themselves.

And your assessment is skewed Nev, there have been quarterbacks with his drive, his passion for the sport, determination, and they were better passers, that statement in itself is a slight at the likes of Terry Bradshaw, John Elway, Otto Graham, Joe Montana, Bart Starr, Joe Namath, Tom Brady and Johnny Unitas. Yes, he defies prototypical quarterbacks, but he is nothing new, much of what you're saying was said about the likes of Vince Young, Michael Vick, Kordell Stewart, Mark Malone, Akili Smith, Jason Campbell, Andre Ware, Steve McNair, Randall Cunningham, Steve Young, Quincy Carter, Giovanni Carmazzi, Daunte Culpepper and I could go on. Of those listed, the only ones to find success actually conformed into more prototypical, pro-style NFL quarterbacks, and that is an inarguable fact. It's not simply skepticism, it's that he's not new, his character...yes, but the rest? And we're not the individuals that have to prove ourselves to others and the rest of the league, he is and so far, he hasn't. Despite what's been said by the fans, many noteworthy people throughout the league still are not buying into it. And the worst completion percentage and worst overall quarterback rating among starting quarterbacks does back their assessments more so then that of his supporters.

catfish
02-25-2012, 07:43 PM
No, you are right Nev, there is no book or manual on who makes it and who does not. However, there is enough data from well over four decades compiled to develop a system of elimination to better look for those things that will allow a kid to succeed or not succeed at the next level. Is it perfect? Not even close, but a lot closer then people on here seem to realize. How many times have we seen board members 'nutter' over kids simply cause the Broncos drafted them, doesn't make a difference what round they were taken in, what scouts or others see...not until they realize for themselves.

And your assessment is skewed Nev, there have been quarterbacks with his drive, his passion for the sport, determination, and they were better passers, that statement in itself is a slight at the likes of Terry Bradshaw, John Elway, Otto Graham, Joe Montana, Bart Starr, Joe Namath, Tom Brady and Johnny Unitas. Yes, he defies prototypical quarterbacks, but he is nothing new, much of what you're saying was said about the likes of Vince Young, Michael Vick, Kordell Stewart, Mark Malone, Akili Smith, Jason Campbell, Andre Ware, Steve McNair, Randall Cunningham, Steve Young, Quincy Carter, Giovanni Carmazzi, Daunte Culpepper and I could go on. Of those listed, the only ones to find success actually conformed into more prototypical, pro-style NFL quarterbacks, and that is an inarguable fact. It's not simply skepticism, it's that he's not new, his character...yes, but the rest? And we're not the individuals that have to prove ourselves to others and the rest of the league, he is and so far, he hasn't. Despite what's been said by the fans, many noteworthy people throughout the league still are not buying into it. And the worst completion percentage and worst overall quarterback rating among starting quarterbacks does back their assessments more so then that of his supporters.

out of curiosity...which QB rating are you referencing?

Lancane
02-25-2012, 07:58 PM
out of curiosity...which QB rating are you referencing?

That new tutti frutti one developed by ESPN, I find that it's a bit more accurate on some things. Even then, if we go by the standard NFL rating system he was still 27th in the league, and the only reason that is not lower is because the lack of interceptions but there is a counterbalance argument that I prefer not to raise, because as you know Cat then that just drags this on and on.

In truth I want to see him improve, erase the criticism by conforming and becoming better...leave no doubts. Until then I am going to be skeptic, he's not unique, he's not new - we've seen others like him and his numbers don't support he is better then those that have come before who've been much the same.

catfish
02-25-2012, 09:29 PM
That new tutti frutti one developed by ESPN, I find that it's a bit more accurate on some things. Even then, if we go by the standard NFL rating system he was still 27th in the league, and the only reason that is not lower is because the lack of interceptions but there is a counterbalance argument that I prefer not to raise, because as you know Cat then that just drags this on and on.

In truth I want to see him improve, erase the criticism by conforming and becoming better...leave no doubts. Until then I am going to be skeptic, he's not unique, he's not new - we've seen others like him and his numbers don't support he is better then those that have come before who've been much the same.

fair enough, there are too damn many QB ratings, I personally am not a fan of the ESPN one, but only because it is a black box system. LIke you said we have re-hashed this before so no need to dig into it again

Lancane
02-25-2012, 09:53 PM
fair enough, there are too damn many QB ratings, I personally am not a fan of the ESPN one, but only because it is a black box system. LIke you said we have re-hashed this before so no need to dig into it again

That's how I see it Cat, both rating systems have flaws.

I will say this though, if Tebow proves himself and becomes what Elway 'hopes' he can become then I'll be his biggest supporter. He's got the arm strength, he's got the physical ability and everything else, hell...I think he's gifted enough to play a plethora of positions at this level from safety and linebacker to tight end or fullback. The problem, seriously is that his mechanics or the lack thereof is hurting him. And it's not so easy to coach mechanics as people think, especially not at that position because they entail so much, if he could just fix his footwork, his release and his reads he'd improve ten-fold.

Simple Jaded
02-25-2012, 10:37 PM
"Tebow defies the prototypical QB analysis based on drive, determination, and ability to thrive in the worst situations".

I'm having a hard time understanding this. Does this imply that prototypical QB's lack "drive, determination, and ability to thrive in the worst situations"? And/Or that Tebow shouldn't be judged like prototypical QB's because he supposedly has more "drive, determination, and ability to thrive in the worst situations"?

Only Tebowmania.......

HammeredOut
02-25-2012, 11:16 PM
. Yes, he defies prototypical quarterbacks, but he is nothing new, much of what you're saying was said about the likes of Vince Young, Michael Vick, Kordell Stewart, Mark Malone, Akili Smith, Jason Campbell, Andre Ware, Steve McNair, Randall Cunningham, Steve Young, Quincy Carter, Giovanni Carmazzi, Daunte Culpepper and I could go on. Of those listed, the only ones to find success actually conformed into more prototypical, pro-style NFL quarterbacks, and that is an inarguable fact. .

Noope...

None of those QBs had almost as many rushes as completions through out the season, and ran spread option college ball plays with your QB leading the team in Rushing Attempts and Yards on the Ground, only completing 2 passes to win a game.

Not even close to any of those players....

None... Zilch, notta, nothing, absolute misconception.

Lancane
02-25-2012, 11:45 PM
Noope...

None of those QBs had almost as many rushes as completions through out the season, and ran spread option college ball plays with your QB leading the team in Rushing Attempts and Yards on the Ground, only completing 2 passes to win a game.

Not even close to any of those players....

None... Zilch, notta, nothing, absolute misconception.

Of course they didn't, because that doesn't translate the position, again an inarguable fact. They still were rushing quarterbacks, at the very core meaning of the term and some did in fact run spread offenses, maybe not the option. But the option is the most flawed offensive scheme in football, so few run the offense because of that very fact...indeed you'd be hard pressed to find more then a handful that have had success with the option beyond the mundane.

And who gives a rat's ass that he won a game where he only completed two passes in a game? Elway wants him to conform! They're also getting rid of the option as our base offense, maybe you missed that as well by chance?

So your argument is because he ran a spread option, and rushed for more yards then the others that he is better and unique? That's not the way it works Hammer, never is and never will be. He's not unique, his character is, but I've seen others from similar systems and with similar intangibles that have utterly failed and those nearest to his skill set that succeeded did indeed have to conform to find success. And that's what the Broncos want as well, they're not going to put up with similar numbers and statistics. So the only misconception is your own because where you rank him, not in the eyes of the sports world, the real world.

Northman
02-26-2012, 09:32 AM
bottom line there is no book on who makes it and who doesn't.. I wonder why some here have seemed to have already read it on tebow. He defies the prototypical QB analysis based on drive, determination, and ability to thrive in the worst situations. he also doesn't play their way. skepticism is great but usually is based on some prior experience with a similar experience.. When has there been a guy like Tebow playing QB in the nfl? there is no similar experience..

Actually, they said a lot of the same things about Michael Vick. While Vick doesnt have the type of "heart" that Tim has that doesnt mean that QB's before Tim didnt have that. In fact, Elway had the ability to rise above when he needed too. But from an athletic standpoint Tebow plays a lot like Vick only Vick was a better passer (not by much) coming out of college.

Ravage!!!
03-01-2012, 01:18 PM
The game was different sure, but Elway had the lowest completion % in the league that year by 2% and the second lowest QBR, so while the game was indeed different, compared to his peers he struggled. You can't compare his #'s to Tebow, but to say imply his lower #'s were a product of the game being different is a bit disengenuous

he made a signifigant jump to middle of the pack in his 2nd year

But they didn't ask Elway to only throw the ball 10 times a game, either.

Simple Jaded
03-01-2012, 02:11 PM
But they didn't ask Elway to only throw the ball 10 times a game, either.

Nor did they didn't go to Elway and tell him "You're screwed in a real offense, we better call your high school coach and gets some advice. Maybe he could fax over a their playbook".......

Npba900
03-01-2012, 02:18 PM
The game was different sure, but Elway had the lowest completion % in the league that year by 2% and the second lowest QBR, so while the game was indeed different, compared to his peers he struggled. You can't compare his #'s to Tebow, but to say imply his lower #'s were a product of the game being different is a bit disengenuous

he made a signifigant jump to middle of the pack in his 2nd year

I believe the glaring difficulty for Elway during his rookie year and first couple of years as a starter was that they're wasn't a rule of not touching the WR after 10 yards.

Back then defenses to bump/chuck wr's up and down the field so long as the ball wasn't in the air thrown in the WR's direction. Back then it was harder for receivers to get open and run their routes. This made it difficult for QB's like Elway and his peers to complete passes.

Fast forward to the era of QB era Tebow is in, its the exact opposite. Tebow can now enjoy a system where corner-backs can't touch receivers after 10 yards, thus the receivers can get open more often giving QB's open receivers to throw to.

catfish
03-01-2012, 04:44 PM
I believe the glaring difficulty for Elway during his rookie year and first couple of years as a starter was that they're wasn't a rule of not touching the WR after 10 yards.

Back then defenses to bump/chuck wr's up and down the field so long as the ball wasn't in the air thrown in the WR's direction. Back then it was harder for receivers to get open and run their routes. This made it difficult for QB's like Elway and his peers to complete passes.

Fast forward to the era of QB era Tebow is in, its the exact opposite. Tebow can now enjoy a system where corner-backs can't touch receivers after 10 yards, thus the receivers can get open more often giving QB's open receivers to throw to.

that rule was in place for all QB's it's not like Elway was the only one facing the rule that year. He struggled the first year when compared to his peers, he was a rookie so no big deal IMO, did much better his second year, having said that I agree you can't compare Tebow's # to Elways for the reasons you stated. I wasn't trying to make that comparison. I was comparing him to the other QB's who started in 83.

topscribe
03-01-2012, 04:53 PM
This is better! :lol:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/23/fox-indicates-broncos-will-run-a-regular-offense/


My only complaint is that John Elway had many of the same problems his first couple of years. I wonder if John would have been so pressured to "change" so fast.

This is going to be an interesting off season! :listen:

Pressured to "change" so fast? Elway lost all of two (2) games in his
second year. He had a 56.3% comp. avg., when DBs were still able to maul
receivers. And, yes, he could run the ball, and then some -- but why, when
he could pass the ball like he could?

Let's don't make the mistake of trying to compare Tebow to Elway. Tebow
couldn't carry Elway's jock . . .

-----

Ravage!!!
03-01-2012, 05:01 PM
fair enough, there are too damn many QB ratings, I personally am not a fan of the ESPN one, but only because it is a black box system. LIke you said we have re-hashed this before so no need to dig into it again

Personally, I find that both QB Ratings are ridiculous. To try and put a "rating" number on how a player performs individually, is absurd. We've seen terrible play have good QB ratings due to the fact of trash time, or tipped passes going for lucky TDs. Just as we've seen VERY good QB play have a very average number. The formula uses 1972 averages to compute the totals. That alone, is absurd. No wonder the QB ratings of today are so much better than yesterday. Every QBs numbers have skyrocked due to many factors...either because of the fact that they are being groomed from the age of 4, playing pro-style offenses much earlier, more pro coaches moving into the HS and College ranks, and whatevers. But why don't they alter the stats to use LAST years "averages" for THIS years QBR? At least then, the formula is always up-to-date.

The QB rating was developed in a time where people didn't get the chance to watch all the games. There wasn't MNF, there wasn't SNF, and certainly no ESPN or up-by-the-second updates on the internet. The only way they got information on games was reading the newspaper the following day. Even then, the average fan (at that time) didn't know NEARLY as much about football as the average fan of today, purely because of the education of the game that has developed over the last 40 years.

So to think that we are STILL trying to use some "formula" and "number given" to determine how well a QB plays... to me... is just SOOOO outdated and ridiculous. Its embarrassing.

topscribe
03-01-2012, 05:20 PM
Personally, I find that both QB Ratings are ridiculous. To try and put a "rating" number on how a player performs individually, is absurd. We've seen terrible play have good QB ratings due to the fact of trash time, or tipped passes going for lucky TDs. Just as we've seen VERY good QB play have a very average number. The formula uses 1972 averages to compute the totals. That alone, is absurd. No wonder the QB ratings of today are so much better than yesterday. Every QBs numbers have skyrocked due to many factors...either because of the fact that they are being groomed from the age of 4, playing pro-style offenses much earlier, more pro coaches moving into the HS and College ranks, and whatevers. But why don't they alter the stats to use LAST years "averages" for THIS years QBR? At least then, the formula is always up-to-date.

The QB rating was developed in a time where people didn't get the chance to watch all the games. There wasn't MNF, there wasn't SNF, and certainly no ESPN or up-by-the-second updates on the internet. The only way they got information on games was reading the newspaper the following day. Even then, the average fan (at that time) didn't know NEARLY as much about football as the average fan of today, purely because of the education of the game that has developed over the last 40 years.

So to think that we are STILL trying to use some "formula" and "number given" to determine how well a QB plays... to me... is just SOOOO outdated and ridiculous. Its embarrassing.

Not really. The factors that were important for QBs back then are still
important today: YPA, comp %, TDs, INTs. That is all the QBR is all about,
those factors. The QBR is not a tell-all, no . . . but it is still a good
supporting factor . . .

-----

vandammage13
03-01-2012, 05:32 PM
Not really. The factors that were important for QBs back then are still
important today: YPA, comp %, TDs, INTs. That is all the QBR is all about,
those factors. The QBR is not a tell-all, no . . . but it is still a good
supporting factor . . .

-----

Our current QB is pretty good at 2 of those criteria (YPA, INTs)...and average at TD's (above avg if you account for rushing TDs)....

So based on your criteria all he has to do is improve the completion % and he's all set...perhaps Tebow's not that far off after all.

broncobryce
03-01-2012, 05:56 PM
Our current QB is pretty good at 2 of those criteria (YPA, INTs)...and average at TD's (above avg if you account for rushing TDs)....

So based on your criteria all he has to do is improve the completion % and he's all set...perhaps Tebow's not that far off after all.

Plus he has to be named kyle orton

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

Ravage!!!
03-02-2012, 01:39 PM
Not really. The factors that were important for QBs back then are still
important today: YPA, comp %, TDs, INTs. That is all the QBR is all about,
those factors. The QBR is not a tell-all, no . . . but it is still a good
supporting factor . . .

-----

But puttting a "number" on anyone to determine their play, is silly. The averages they use to compute the "rating number" ..is literally 40 years old. They didn't have pass happy offenses, pass happy rules, and a pass happy league 40 years ago. The GAME is still played the same, but the system was derived SPECIFICALLY to give a number to the fans that didn't know much about football.

Thus the "he had a _____ number tells us he played well." We don't need that today. Why don't they have a formula for every position? Why not give a Madden number of just 1-99 to tell us how good a player is? I mean, we see ALLLL kinds of kids telling us just how good a player is based on his Madden score, why not make it official? Its a numerical ranking/rating either way.

I just think using the QBR is entirely outdated due to the fact that the common NFL fan is a LOT LOT more educated than 40 years ago purely based on the availability of information. No math formula can take in all the factors and add the "obvious" eye test.

Let's look at the Chicago game this last year as an example. Our QB couldn't do SQUAT for n early the entire game. He looked like shit, and couldn't complete anything. His play was horrible. Then the other team goes into prevent, the QB completes some big passes, and now people actually look at the stats and his "QBR" and try and use that as a game where our played well. I mean, it leaves you scratching your head going "man, I watched that game all the way through and our QB looked like CRAP...but the QBR tells me he played well. I guess I was wrong?" That's just ridiculous. The QBr is NOT a formula that accurately tells anyone anything. Some purely want to look at stats and feel "stats don't lie." The hell they don't.

claymore
03-02-2012, 01:45 PM
I like the old QBR, its a quick eyeball test when looking at overall performance.

topscribe
03-02-2012, 01:58 PM
But puttting a "number" on anyone to determine their play, is silly. The averages they use to compute the "rating number" ..is literally 40 years old. They didn't have pass happy offenses, pass happy rules, and a pass happy league 40 years ago. The GAME is still played the same, but the system was derived SPECIFICALLY to give a number to the fans that didn't know much about football.

Thus the "he had a _____ number tells us he played well." We don't need that today. Why don't they have a formula for every position? Why not give a Madden number of just 1-99 to tell us how good a player is? I mean, we see ALLLL kinds of kids telling us just how good a player is based on his Madden score, why not make it official? Its a numerical ranking/rating either way.

I just think using the QBR is entirely outdated due to the fact that the common NFL fan is a LOT LOT more educated than 40 years ago purely based on the availability of information. No math formula can take in all the factors and add the "obvious" eye test.

Let's look at the Chicago game this last year as an example. Our QB couldn't do SQUAT for n early the entire game. He looked like shit, and couldn't complete anything. His play was horrible. Then the other team goes into prevent, the QB completes some big passes, and now people actually look at the stats and his "QBR" and try and use that as a game where our played well. I mean, it leaves you scratching your head going "man, I watched that game all the way through and our QB looked like CRAP...but the QBR tells me he played well. I guess I was wrong?" That's just ridiculous. The QBr is NOT a formula that accurately tells anyone anything. Some purely want to look at stats and feel "stats don't lie." The hell they don't.

Yes, you've made some good points. It's just a fact that there are no
perfect rating systems, nor could there be, really. It will always have to be
supplemented by the old-fashioned "eyeball" method, i.e., being there and
seeing the play . . .

-----

NightTerror218
03-02-2012, 02:01 PM
i CANT WAIT TILL TC TO SEE HOW TT IS DOING AND WHAT OUR NEW ROOKIES CAN DO!!!!!!!!!

I CANT WAIT TO HAVE THE ANSWER OF HOW WE ARE ACTUALLY SITTING AT THE QB POSITION AND I THINK AFTER TC AND PRESEASON THAT WILL BE ANSWERED.

Ravage!!!
03-02-2012, 03:09 PM
Yes, you've made some good points. It's just a fact that there are no
perfect rating systems, nor could there be, really. It will always have to be
supplemented by the old-fashioned "eyeball" method, i.e., being there and
seeing the play . . .

-----

I think that's my problem with it, top. It's that a lot of people use the QBR as their gauge on the player, and not really watching the player. I just hate the fact of ANY player being judged by some 'rating' number that is formulated by some mathematical calculation...when as we know... no mathematical formula can TRULY tell us who is playing a game well and who isn't.

I dunno. I guess anyone being given (and judged) some arbitrary "number" that is derived by something that can't possibly judge physical play, bugs me.