Tim Tebow - Let's Talk

Coltsfan · Post by **Coltsfan** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:52 pm

Apparently the Tebow thing is really helping ratings. They are comparing it to when Tiger Woods burst onto the scene.

The hottest act on American sports television – let’s make that American television – is Tim Tebow.

There are very few athletes whose presence in a telecast guarantees a bigger audience merely because he is playing.

Michael Jordan did it. Tiger Woods does it. Brett Favre on occasion could nudge into that territory.

Now Tim Tebow is doing it.

When Tebow, the quarterback of the Denver Broncos, helped lead his team to an overtime victory against the visiting Pittsburgh Steelers, 42.4 million watched, the most-watched wild card game on TV in 24 years and the highest-rated in 18. It was the most-watched show since Super Bowl XLV, when the Packers beat the Steelers.

The vice chairman of Fox Sports is Ed Goren. Like many network television executives, he is loath to talk about what’s going on at another network. These guys prefer to talk about – that is, promote - only what’s happening on their own air.

But you could hear the awe, the wonder he felt for the Tebow Effect as a television phenomenon in his answer to a reporter’s question this week during a conference call.

"Of the 42 and a half million people who watched that Steelers-Broncos game, what percentage were there just because of Tebow?" Goren was asked.

"Boy, huh," Goren said. "A lot. A lot. It’s really been a phenomenon. I have reached out to my (football) guys and asked them if they can ever recall anything quite like it in the NFL."

No one could.

Fox analyst Jimmy Johnson said Tebow watchers, at least many of them, are not NFL fans.

"They are people who don’t normally follow the game," Johnson said. "They are all in tune with Tim Tebow."

The president and chairman of CBS Sports, Sean McManus, was asked in an interview with Jim Rome about the Broncos-Steelers playoff game.

"We thought that if the Broncos could keep it close, because that’s what everybody was hoping for, that we could do a really good rating," McManus said. "But nobody anticipated the kind of game we were going to get, nobody anticipated the kind of game we were going to get, nobody anticipated it obviously going into overtime, and whatever ratings projections we had were completely blown out of the water."

McManus compared the Tebow burst to the one Woods brought when he started to win on the PGA Tour.

Diesel · Post by **Diesel** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:02 pm

Is it true that Tebow can take water and turn it to Gatorade?

CoMoHusker · Post by **CoMoHusker** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:05 pm

Originally posted by Coltsfan:
My biggest fears for Tebow in regards to fantasy football next year:

1. Benching

2. His coach not letting him play (by that I mean not letting him throw the ball)

3. His receivers. Although Thomas has potential.

All of the other "stuff" really doesn't bother me. I love stats but it's hard to apply them to Tebow as his game is so different. But if I was to guess I think his biggest problem is benching. Have you seen the Broncos schedule next year?? It is brutal and they will have a hard time matching their playoff run in 2011.

Wayne Wayne, I am in full agreement about the Broncos schedule.

Steelers, Texans, Saints, Ravens, Bengals, Patriots, and Falcons. I also look for Rivers and the Chargers to be a major force in that division next year. That's tough action for more than half your games.

Not to mention, a match up with Cam Newton where I'm certain Cam will be ready to show that he was deserving of Tebow like hype for his rookie performance.

Coltsfan · Post by **Coltsfan** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:06 pm

Originally posted by Diesel:
Is it true that Tebow can take water and turn it to Gatorade? I'm not sure about that but I do know that he can take Steelers and turn them into spectators....

Wayne

Diesel · Post by **Diesel** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:43 pm

Originally posted by Coltsfan:
quote:Originally posted by Diesel:
Is it true that Tebow can take water and turn it to Gatorade? I'm not sure about that but I do know that he can take Steelers and turn them into spectators....

Wayne [/QUOTE]Good one. LOL

bobsgym · Post by **bobsgym** » Thu Jan 12, 2012 3:18 pm

Sandman

After start 5, you saw the perfect opportunity to strike with your median rankings. Tebow scored 27.95, 18.9, 30, 19.75, & 18 in this years first five starts. The 18 in wk 5 dropped his avg just 1.23 but his median score plummeted 4.1. So after a whopping sample size of 5 and at the exact moment where it just happens to fit your argument, you begin using it.

The sample size alone renders a median score so meaningless at that point that your own words used against Tom recently are enough to debunk it. I cannot believe I didn't look at the exact timing until now. By simply moving 35 rushing yards one time from one game to another he would have been Top 10 in median rankings.

I have to call that out for what it is and it ain't good.

[ January 12, 2012, 09:20 PM: Message edited by: BobSquad ]

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 2:23 am

Yes, because at that time, all we had to go on was 5 games. Why should median count any less than average at that point? I mean, if his scores were 50, 10, 10, 10, 10, should we place more emphasis on his average of 18 or his median of 15?

And looking at those numbers, yeah, I focused more on the 3 games than the 2 because if I were going to make a decision on whether I'd draft him the following year based on that, I'd also be looking at median.

You do realize that he's since played 5 more games and that I've provided a lot more numbers during that time and almost all of them have been much more focused on average than median? :rolleyes:

In the end, we should all realize that:
a) All the warning numbers in the world aren't going to sway the supporters away from him.
b) The skeptics are never going to care one bit about what a gamer he is or how many miracle comebacks they win; he's a marginal NFFC starter, and probably close to the last option for someone who likes to wait at QB.

[ January 13, 2012, 08:27 AM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]

bobsgym · Post by **bobsgym** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:10 am

Originally posted by Sandman62:
Yes, because at that time, all we had to go on was 5 games. Why should median count any less than average at that point? I mean, if his scores were 50, 10, 10, 10, 10, should we place more emphasis on his average of 18 or his median of 15?

And looking at those numbers, yeah, I focused more on the 3 games than the 2 because if I were going to make a decision on whether I'd draft him the following year based on that, I'd also be looking at median.

You do realize that he's since played 5 more games and that I've provided a lot more numbers during that time and almost all of them have been much more focused on average than median? :rolleyes:

In the end, we should all realize that:
a) All the warning numbers in the world aren't going to sway the supporters away from him.
b) The skeptics are never going to care one bit about what a gamer he is or how many miracle comebacks they win; he's a marginal NFFC starter, and probably close to the last option for someone who likes to wait at QB. If starts 5-7 would have gone 28-18-18 you would have waited until his 7th start to mention it. That's all I'm saying. Median average didn't fit your argument until start 5 and if it didn't then you would not have mentioned it until it did.

Your 50-10-10-10-10 example would have more value. But a 20-30-20-30 is a median and average of 25. If #5 is a 20 then avg=24 med=20, if #5 is a 30 then avg=26 med=30. The median isn't volatile in a 50-10-10-10-10 but in the 2nd example #5 has too much affect on the median to use without an asterisk.

The funny thing is that I believe that your side is more likely to be proven correct. I just understand data manipulation so I'm calling it out.

bobsgym · Post by **bobsgym** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 4:04 am

So that it isn't used to deflect from the point, I didn't literally want an asterisk.

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Fri Jan 13, 2012 4:12 am

You're entitled to your opinion. But I know I didn't use median to make my argument stronger. I used it in attempt to try to be thorough and consider how some people might use median to help evaluate a QB's H2H potential (whereas average PPG is likely more relevant for NFFC points purposes).

Might I suggest that instead of cherry-picking my comments out of context in an effort to discredit my input that you read them WITHIN the context provided? :rolleyes: I know I've tried very hard to stay focused on the ARGUMENTS and not turn this into some kind of personal battle to discredit other posters.

Let me help you:

On November 18, 2011 11:44 AM, I posted:
http://nffcboards.stats.com/cgi-bin/ult ... 07125;p=18

In NFFC playoff and payout determination, total points is more important than H2H record. So it seems fair to consider comparisons by Average PPG. However, H2H can't be ignored either, as that is still a valid way to make the playoffs or cash. Therefore, Median PPG is important too, as that indicates what you can expect from a player in any given week.

Keep in mind that we’re still dealing with a very small sampling size of games for him (5 this season). So by season’s end, this data could be drastically different, largely based on what he does more of from here on - lays stinkers (less than 20 PPG) or goes off (25+). But so far, Tebow is barely a consideration as a starter: 11th in Average PPG and 15th in Median PPG.