Tim Tebow - Let's Talk

[Sandman62]

If you're going to call me out for a personal attack Tom, shouldn't you at least quote the alleged post(s)? I'm pretty sure the board consensus might suggest otherwise (well, unless this new "personal" debate brings back some of the nowhere-to-be-seen-todays?)

I know that I try to choose my words wisely, always trying to stay focused on the debate, the facts, even the varying opinions instead of guessing at anyone's motives or why they feel the way they do. Even when we (or maybe just I?) were being called out by some as "not being man enough to admit we were wrong" or "ignorant", etc., I did not retaliate at the same level.

I'm really shocked and disappointed in you trying to turn this into something I supposedly made personal. It's been a lively, fun, sometimes-frustrating debate these past couple months. But this new turn was a real surprise (not a good one either).

[ January 15, 2012, 01:40 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]

[bobsgym]

This is about Tebow vs Stafford - seriously?

How about a Tebow/Freeman or Tebow/Flacco. I can't even argue with Mike on this one.

[Tom Kessenich]

Originally posted by BobSquad:
This is about Tebow vs Stafford - seriously?

No, it's not really about Tebow vs. Stafford. I was simply using Stafford as an example of a low-end QB1 going into this season who was a risk-reward option. I clearly stated Stafford's upside is higher and always has been. I just believe that if you targeted Stafford this season you assumed the risk that came with that pick. It obviously worked out because Stafford stayed healthy but that does not change the fact there was risk involved with that selection.

Next season, there is likely to be risk involved with Tebow as well. If he keeps the job the entire season and performs to his past level of production, the risk will have been worth it. If he gets benched it will not have been.

Edited to add - if someone can come up with another risk-reward low-end QB1/high-end QB2 who they think is a good analogy for Tebow next season we can move in that direction. Stafford struck me as a very obvious example but I'm not married to it by any means.

[ January 15, 2012, 01:56 PM: Message edited by: Tom Kessenich ]

[alanr824]

I will say my opinion and then I am out. Were all of us watching the same game I was yesterday? Tebow had his share of bad throws and decisions yesterday. He had absolutely no time to throw. It was a 14-0 game immediately. The Denver defense was horrendous yesterday. Granted it was Brady, but Denvers defensive game plan was so bad, it was like they hadn't seen film on Brady all season. Tebow put up bad numbers, but Tebow will not win games in a shoot out. Its not his game. Before Sandman and TR point out the obvious, yes, Tebow had a bad completion percentage and he always will when he has only 1 guy to throw to and no time at all to throw. Give him some improved targets next year including a receiver type RB out of the backfield and a decent TE, improve on the offensive line, and one more year of experience for Thomas, and you will see improved passing numbers from Tebow. Denver with Tebow will always be a run first team, but like any run first team, if you are losing 35-7, you dont have much of a chance to put up decent numbers, let alone win many games. I admitted earlier in the week that Tebow and Denver would not have much of a chance against the Bradys. This was not much of a surprise, but I didn't expect the offensive line to be so horrible (more plays for lost yardage than any playoff game in history). Blame Tebow all you want and say he should be benched but not many QBs had a chance yesterday against New England. You can say I am making excuses and in fact, they are legit considering yesterday was not Tebows fault. Put a team around him and he will win and put up stats. Yesterday, the Broncos team as a whole, was horrible.

[Sandman62]

Just to make sure I understand the formula:

- All Denver victories are due to Tebow.
- All Denver losses are everyone else's fault.

Gotcha!

[TR]

Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
quote:Originally posted by Sandman62:
The big difference between Stafford and Tebow though is that Stafford doesn't also have the risk of "even if he doesn't get hurt, he could be benched at any time for just plain sucking". As a Stafford owner in 2010 who saw that pick go up in flames in the first half of Week 1, I'd say the threat of major injury is about the same as the threat of being benched. I'm willing to wager that if Tebow opens next season as the starter he'll produce more value in 2012 than Stafford did in 2010.

It's all about risk tolerance and where you can get them in your draft. I think waiting on QBs and drafting Stafford as a QB1 this season was an extremely risky proposition. It obviously paid off but that doesn't mean the risk wasn't there. It was. Stafford was a far better QB2 option in my opinion. Tebow's the same way. As we sit here today, he's risky to draft as a QB1 even though it could pay off nicely. But if you can get him as a QB2, like Stafford, you could end up in real good shape next season. All depends on what improvements he makes and if the Broncos can add more weapons to the passing game. [/QUOTE]With Stafford u could buy injury insurance as well as know that his backup Shaun Hill could put up low qb1 numbers in that offense...could insurance be bought for tebow being benched for flat out sucking and would u feel good about his backup? lol

[BillyWaz]

Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
quote:Originally posted by BobSquad:
This is about Tebow vs Stafford - seriously?

Edited to add - if someone can come up with another risk-reward low-end QB1/high-end QB2 who they think is a good analogy for Tebow next season we can move in that direction. Stafford struck me as a very obvious example but I'm not married to it by any means. [/QUOTE]Sanchez, Fitzpatrick, Dalton, Flacco, etc.

I wouldn't take Tebow over any of them.

(1) 35-40 point game will be nullified by 3-4 where he scores 10-12....or less!

Decent #2 DC QB......nothing more IMO.

[ January 15, 2012, 02:07 PM: Message edited by: BillyWaz ]

[Tom Kessenich]

Originally posted by TR:
quote:Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:
quote:Originally posted by Sandman62:
The big difference between Stafford and Tebow though is that Stafford doesn't also have the risk of "even if he doesn't get hurt, he could be benched at any time for just plain sucking". As a Stafford owner in 2010 who saw that pick go up in flames in the first half of Week 1, I'd say the threat of major injury is about the same as the threat of being benched. I'm willing to wager that if Tebow opens next season as the starter he'll produce more value in 2012 than Stafford did in 2010.

It's all about risk tolerance and where you can get them in your draft. I think waiting on QBs and drafting Stafford as a QB1 this season was an extremely risky proposition. It obviously paid off but that doesn't mean the risk wasn't there. It was. Stafford was a far better QB2 option in my opinion. Tebow's the same way. As we sit here today, he's risky to draft as a QB1 even though it could pay off nicely. But if you can get him as a QB2, like Stafford, you could end up in real good shape next season. All depends on what improvements he makes and if the Broncos can add more weapons to the passing game. [/QUOTE]With Stafford u could buy injury insurance as well as know that his backup Shaun Hill could put up low qb1 numbers in that offense...could insurance be bought for tebow being benched for flat out sucking and would u feel good about his backup? lol [/QUOTE]Depends who his backup turns out to be. If it's Brady Quinn, heck no.

[CoMoHusker]

Originally posted by Sandman62:
Just to make sure I understand the formula:

- All Denver victories are due to Tebow.
- All Denver losses are everyone else's fault.

Gotcha! Looks right to me. :rolleyes: Same Bronco offense yesterday that so many celebrated for dominating the "#1 ranked defense" just last week. Tebow didn't get his sixth pass completion until after Brady tallied his sixth TD pass.

[alanr824]

Originally posted by Sandman62:
Just to make sure I understand the formula:

- All Denver victories are due to Tebow.
- All Denver losses are everyone else's fault.

Gotcha! One guy who didn't watch the game yesterday.. Anyone else?