2013 NFL Football

[Eja117]

Right, but all things on the field being equal you'd sign Tebow over Vick or Cutler for the jersey sales and PR, right?

The fact that people who get paid to evaluate football talent seem to have reached a conclusion on his ability is telling. At least to me.

The same people that picked JaMarcus Russell #1 and Ryan Leaf #2 and didn't like Flutie?  And passed over Tom Brady? Yup. Same people

I'm not sure I can ignore the fact that you're talking about practice the draft, which is speculation based on performance at the college level and predicting translatable skills, when I'm talking about evaluating the proven talents (or lack thereof) of a player who has played professionally for a season and a half.

The proof is in the pudding. Tebow, thus far, seems to fall fairly well into the mold of Christian Laettner--great in college, no big deal in the pros.

He's a winning QB in the pros. Not only is he a winning QB but he can take over a losing team and take it to the playoffs.  It would be like if Laettner had gone to the Wolves...they were losing...they finally let him play. He plays well and hits a bunch of buzzer beaters, has a very good first round....then people say "i don't know. He can't hit the three or free throws and once they started defending him a little tighter he lost. He probably shouldn't be in the league".   Hey I guess he's a lost cause then

Except what if instead, for this analogy to actually be accurate, his teammates hit a bunch of buzzer beaters after he missed most of his shots in comical and laughable fashion.

Well is he the point guard and they were always missing before he started passing to them? Did they then get Chris Paul and did no better?

Your claim that they did no better with Peyton than with Tebow is inaccurate at best.  The Broncos were much better.

Even if wins and losses is your only measure, 13-3 is better than 7-4.

Where are the post season results to show for it? Not to mention Tebow was a first year starter. Peyton is a HOFer.  But Tebow's first year of starting was far more successful by any measure than Peyton's

I find it funny that you've praised Flutie in this thread and also often express the opinion that only playoff results really matter.

Flutie's playoff record is 0-2 and his playoff stats are putrid.  I'd be willing to guess that you didn't even know you were contradicting yourself.

Peyton lost to the eventual Super Bowl champions in overtime.  Tebow was embarassed in one of the worst playoff showings in a long time.  That's how their playoff runs finished, by the way.

Right. The Hall of Famer lost at home and the rookie lost on the road. Right. And his loss wasn't as bad as most of Peyton's playoff trips to Foxboro

Peyton earned home field with a 13-3 record.  Right.

hey Peyton was handed a playoff team by a first year starter and took it to 13-3. If you want to give Peyton a trophy for that go right ahead. I don't mind. It can go with all those other trophies he's been handed while Tom made him look junior varisty

I didn't know this turned into a Tom Brady vs. Peyton Manning debate.  They are both far better QBs than Tim Tebow.

Anyway, since you seem to think football is an individual sport and not a team sport, why hasn't Brady won a Super Bowl since 2004?  By your ridiculous method of QB evaluation, Brady must've been awesome in 2001, strangely became a worse player in 2002, became great again in 2004, and worse since.

Oh noooowww it's a team sport. Funny. With Tom and Tim both guys walked on the field and their teams started winning.   And I would definitely say Tom's best years was when he was winning Super Bowls. I know. Pretty ridiculous. I guess you'd say it was 2007.

[Eja117]

Right, but all things on the field being equal you'd sign Tebow over Vick or Cutler for the jersey sales and PR, right?

The fact that people who get paid to evaluate football talent seem to have reached a conclusion on his ability is telling. At least to me.

The same people that picked JaMarcus Russell #1 and Ryan Leaf #2 and didn't like Flutie?  And passed over Tom Brady? Yup. Same people

I'm not sure I can ignore the fact that you're talking about practice the draft, which is speculation based on performance at the college level and predicting translatable skills, when I'm talking about evaluating the proven talents (or lack thereof) of a player who has played professionally for a season and a half.

The proof is in the pudding. Tebow, thus far, seems to fall fairly well into the mold of Christian Laettner--great in college, no big deal in the pros.

He's a winning QB in the pros. Not only is he a winning QB but he can take over a losing team and take it to the playoffs.  It would be like if Laettner had gone to the Wolves...they were losing...they finally let him play. He plays well and hits a bunch of buzzer beaters, has a very good first round....then people say "i don't know. He can't hit the three or free throws and once they started defending him a little tighter he lost. He probably shouldn't be in the league".   Hey I guess he's a lost cause then

Except what if instead, for this analogy to actually be accurate, his teammates hit a bunch of buzzer beaters after he missed most of his shots in comical and laughable fashion.

Well is he the point guard and they were always missing before he started passing to them? Did they then get Chris Paul and did no better?

Your claim that they did no better with Peyton than with Tebow is inaccurate at best.  The Broncos were much better.

Even if wins and losses is your only measure, 13-3 is better than 7-4.

Where are the post season results to show for it? Not to mention Tebow was a first year starter. Peyton is a HOFer.  But Tebow's first year of starting was far more successful by any measure than Peyton's

I find it funny that you've praised Flutie in this thread and also often express the opinion that only playoff results really matter.

Flutie's playoff record is 0-2 and his playoff stats are putrid.  I'd be willing to guess that you didn't even know you were contradicting yourself.

Peyton lost to the eventual Super Bowl champions in overtime.  Tebow was embarassed in one of the worst playoff showings in a long time.  That's how their playoff runs finished, by the way.

I am definitely saying wins and playoff results matter far more than how pretty the process is. Although I think running for 5.4 yards per carry is pretty pretty.  I am definitely saying the NFL missed badly on Flutie and Ditka said as much.

According to eja:

Only playoff results matter. Flutie went 0-2 in the playoffs.  The NFL missed on Flutie.  Makes sense.

The people that disagree with me....wins don't matter. Playoff results don't matter. Passing completion percentage matters.

The point I am making, which you obviously don't understand, is that you say only playoff results matter and then with Flutie you say playoff results don't matter. 

You contradict yourself.

Those who disagree with you know there is a package of skills and results to evaluate.  Try to keep up.

I didn't say playoff results with Flutie or anyone else don't matter.  Did I?  I said the NFL missed on Flutie. There are tons of QBs with bad playoff records or non existent playoff records. He could have been as good as them, right?   Don't just pay attention to what I say. Also pay attention to what I don't say. try to keep up.

There is so much nonsense that you have said that it makes it very difficult to know what is serious, what is sarcastic, and what is left unsaid.  I am finiding it hard to keep up.

You've also criticized Mark Sanchez in this thread, who has a pretty good playoff record and pretty good playoff results.  Since this is your only measure of QB evaluation, why?  Shouldn't you think Sanchez is pretty great?

You didn't notice a Mark Sanchez regression last year? Yes. Yes. He didn't have good receivers. Just like Tebow in Denver didn't.   Well then run. Oh wait. He can't. Tebow can.

I guess it makes sense that you would think Demaryius Thomas and Eric Decker are poor receivers.

It's taken you so long to admit that the quality of team surrounding a QB also impacts his ability to win and lose games.  I'm proud of you, you've made progress today.

So Tebow got a high quality 1-4 team that just happened to start winning the second he touched the field? Because the defense suddenly decided to carry him and not Orton? Is that what you are saying?  Or are you saying a QB doesn't impact the quality of his team more than anyone else? They're just kinda guys that throw and the best ones have the best passing percentage?  I mean in that case it would make sense you think Tebow isn't very good. Especially if you also ignore his running.  Or are you contradicting yourself?

[celtsfan84]

Right, but all things on the field being equal you'd sign Tebow over Vick or Cutler for the jersey sales and PR, right?

The fact that people who get paid to evaluate football talent seem to have reached a conclusion on his ability is telling. At least to me.

The same people that picked JaMarcus Russell #1 and Ryan Leaf #2 and didn't like Flutie?  And passed over Tom Brady? Yup. Same people

I'm not sure I can ignore the fact that you're talking about practice the draft, which is speculation based on performance at the college level and predicting translatable skills, when I'm talking about evaluating the proven talents (or lack thereof) of a player who has played professionally for a season and a half.

The proof is in the pudding. Tebow, thus far, seems to fall fairly well into the mold of Christian Laettner--great in college, no big deal in the pros.

He's a winning QB in the pros. Not only is he a winning QB but he can take over a losing team and take it to the playoffs.  It would be like if Laettner had gone to the Wolves...they were losing...they finally let him play. He plays well and hits a bunch of buzzer beaters, has a very good first round....then people say "i don't know. He can't hit the three or free throws and once they started defending him a little tighter he lost. He probably shouldn't be in the league".   Hey I guess he's a lost cause then

Except what if instead, for this analogy to actually be accurate, his teammates hit a bunch of buzzer beaters after he missed most of his shots in comical and laughable fashion.

Well is he the point guard and they were always missing before he started passing to them? Did they then get Chris Paul and did no better?

Your claim that they did no better with Peyton than with Tebow is inaccurate at best.  The Broncos were much better.

Even if wins and losses is your only measure, 13-3 is better than 7-4.

Where are the post season results to show for it? Not to mention Tebow was a first year starter. Peyton is a HOFer.  But Tebow's first year of starting was far more successful by any measure than Peyton's

I find it funny that you've praised Flutie in this thread and also often express the opinion that only playoff results really matter.

Flutie's playoff record is 0-2 and his playoff stats are putrid.  I'd be willing to guess that you didn't even know you were contradicting yourself.

Peyton lost to the eventual Super Bowl champions in overtime.  Tebow was embarassed in one of the worst playoff showings in a long time.  That's how their playoff runs finished, by the way.

Right. The Hall of Famer lost at home and the rookie lost on the road. Right. And his loss wasn't as bad as most of Peyton's playoff trips to Foxboro

Peyton earned home field with a 13-3 record.  Right.

hey Peyton was handed a playoff team by a first year starter and took it to 13-3. If you want to give Peyton a trophy for that go right ahead. I don't mind. It can go with all those other trophies he's been handed while Tom made him look junior varisty

I didn't know this turned into a Tom Brady vs. Peyton Manning debate.  They are both far better QBs than Tim Tebow.

Anyway, since you seem to think football is an individual sport and not a team sport, why hasn't Brady won a Super Bowl since 2004?  By your ridiculous method of QB evaluation, Brady must've been awesome in 2001, strangely became a worse player in 2002, became great again in 2004, and worse since.

Oh noooowww it's a team sport. Funny. With Tom and Tim both guys walked on the field and their teams started winning.   And I would definitely say Tom's best years was when he was winning Super Bowls. I know. Pretty ridiculous. I guess you'd say it was 2007.

Football has always been a team sport, despite you blaming the QB for every playoff loss and praising the QB for every playoff win.

So you'd say he got much worse in 2002 and then better again in 2003?  And then stopped being the best QB in the league in 2004?

[Rondo2287]

Celtsfan84, there was one pretty crazy thread not too long ago started by a poster who will not be named saying that Sanchez was better than Brady after the jets beat the pats in the playoffs two years ago

[celtsfan84]

Celtsfan84, there was one pretty crazy thread not too long ago started by a poster who will not be named saying that Sanchez was better than Brady after the jets beat the pats in the playoffs two years ago

Too funny.  Thanks for sharing, TP.

[Moranis]

Denver was 1-4 with Kyle Orton.  Kyle Orton is a back-up QB in the league right now and may not even be on a roster next year.  Tebow comes in and gives the team an initial bump against awful teams and wins 7 of the first 8 games, before losing the last 3 and only making the playoffs as a result of some weird tiebreaker i.e. win percentage of common games (Denver had 5 wins, Oakland and SD only had 4).  Some of that was lucky scheduling, like Denver playing Chicago after Cutler went down (unlike SD who lost to Chicago in Cutler's last game of the year).  Denver gets rid of Tebow and ends up 5 games better with basically the same offense aside from Peyton for Tebow.  Tebow goes to NY and not only can't beat out Sanchez, he can't beat out Greg McElroy as the main back-up.  That really tells you what you need to know.

Also, I would like to point out that quite a few bad QB's have started out with good success who haven't been good QB's.  I mean Rex Grossman started out 17-6, then went 2-1 in the playoffs (making the Superbowl) to start his career.  Is anyone here saying Grossman is a great QB?  Heck after the Superbowl run there was talk of Grossman not even starting to start the next year (he did, but it was discussed).  Early success or early failure doesn't mean much, it is all about the skills shown and presented.  Tebow just doesn't have them or some team would have given him the opportunity.

[Moranis]

And what is this nonsense about Thomas and Decker not being good WR's.  Last time I checked crappy receivers don't go for 94/1434 and 85/1064.  Tebow just couldn't hit them when they were open.  Something Peyton Manning didn't struggle with at all.  YOu know because Peyton Manning can actually throw the ball.

[Eja117]

Right, but all things on the field being equal you'd sign Tebow over Vick or Cutler for the jersey sales and PR, right?

The fact that people who get paid to evaluate football talent seem to have reached a conclusion on his ability is telling. At least to me.

The same people that picked JaMarcus Russell #1 and Ryan Leaf #2 and didn't like Flutie?  And passed over Tom Brady? Yup. Same people

I'm not sure I can ignore the fact that you're talking about practice the draft, which is speculation based on performance at the college level and predicting translatable skills, when I'm talking about evaluating the proven talents (or lack thereof) of a player who has played professionally for a season and a half.

The proof is in the pudding. Tebow, thus far, seems to fall fairly well into the mold of Christian Laettner--great in college, no big deal in the pros.

He's a winning QB in the pros. Not only is he a winning QB but he can take over a losing team and take it to the playoffs.  It would be like if Laettner had gone to the Wolves...they were losing...they finally let him play. He plays well and hits a bunch of buzzer beaters, has a very good first round....then people say "i don't know. He can't hit the three or free throws and once they started defending him a little tighter he lost. He probably shouldn't be in the league".   Hey I guess he's a lost cause then

Except what if instead, for this analogy to actually be accurate, his teammates hit a bunch of buzzer beaters after he missed most of his shots in comical and laughable fashion.

Well is he the point guard and they were always missing before he started passing to them? Did they then get Chris Paul and did no better?

Your claim that they did no better with Peyton than with Tebow is inaccurate at best.  The Broncos were much better.

Even if wins and losses is your only measure, 13-3 is better than 7-4.

Where are the post season results to show for it? Not to mention Tebow was a first year starter. Peyton is a HOFer.  But Tebow's first year of starting was far more successful by any measure than Peyton's

I find it funny that you've praised Flutie in this thread and also often express the opinion that only playoff results really matter.

Flutie's playoff record is 0-2 and his playoff stats are putrid.  I'd be willing to guess that you didn't even know you were contradicting yourself.

Peyton lost to the eventual Super Bowl champions in overtime.  Tebow was embarassed in one of the worst playoff showings in a long time.  That's how their playoff runs finished, by the way.

Right. The Hall of Famer lost at home and the rookie lost on the road. Right. And his loss wasn't as bad as most of Peyton's playoff trips to Foxboro

Peyton earned home field with a 13-3 record.  Right.

hey Peyton was handed a playoff team by a first year starter and took it to 13-3. If you want to give Peyton a trophy for that go right ahead. I don't mind. It can go with all those other trophies he's been handed while Tom made him look junior varisty

I didn't know this turned into a Tom Brady vs. Peyton Manning debate.  They are both far better QBs than Tim Tebow.

Anyway, since you seem to think football is an individual sport and not a team sport, why hasn't Brady won a Super Bowl since 2004?  By your ridiculous method of QB evaluation, Brady must've been awesome in 2001, strangely became a worse player in 2002, became great again in 2004, and worse since.

Oh noooowww it's a team sport. Funny. With Tom and Tim both guys walked on the field and their teams started winning.   And I would definitely say Tom's best years was when he was winning Super Bowls. I know. Pretty ridiculous. I guess you'd say it was 2007.

Football has always been a team sport, despite you blaming the QB for every playoff loss and praising the QB for every playoff win.

So you'd say he got much worse in 2002 and then better again in 2003?  And then stopped being the best QB in the league in 2004?

You've realized that players can have better and worse years and aren't permanently the best players in the league at their position? You've made progress today. I'm proud of you.

[Eja117]

Denver was 1-4 with Kyle Orton.  Kyle Orton is a back-up QB in the league right now and may not even be on a roster next year.  Tebow comes in and gives the team an initial bump against awful teams and wins his first 7 of the first 8 games, before losing the last 3 and only making the playoffs as a result of some weird tiebreaker i.e. win percentage of common games (Denver had 5 wins, Oakland and SD only had 4).  Some of that was lucky scheduling, like Denver playing Chicago after Cutler went down (unlike SD who lost to Chicago in Cutler's last game of the year).  Denver gets rid of Tebow and ends up 5 games better with basically the same offense aside from Peyton for Tebow.  Tebow goes to NY and not only can't beat out Sanchez, he can't beat out Greg McElroy as the main back-up.  That really tells you what you need to know.

Also, I would like to point out that quite a few bad QB's have started out with good success who haven't been good QB's.  I mean Rex Grossman started out 17-6, then went 2-1 in the playoffs (making the Superbowl) to start his career.  Is anyone here saying Grossman is a great QB?  Heck after the Superbowl run there was talk of Grossman not even starting to start the next year (he did, but it was discussed).  Early success or early failure doesn't mean much, it is all about the skills shown and presented.  Tebow just doesn't have them or some team would have given him the opportunity.

I can semi-accept this reasonable argument.
After Tom's initial starting season there was talk about whether it should be him or Drew and that was after he WON a superbowl.  Given what we know now we know the correct decisions. But given what they knew then would it have been wise to not go with Rex? Given what they knew then? Would it have been even wiser to bring in a 36 year old QB with 5 neck surgeries?  And not keep the 25 year old around?

[fairweatherfan]

A Tebow flamewar on a basketball site in early May?  Well played fellas.

[Eja117]

And what is this nonsense about Thomas and Decker not being good WR's.  Last time I checked crappy receivers don't go for 94/1434 and 85/1064.  Tebow just couldn't hit them when they were open.  Something Peyton Manning didn't struggle with at all.  YOu know because Peyton Manning can actually throw the ball.

Gee with such a great QB/WR corps you'd think they might have won a playoff game at home, especially with a bye to get ready for it.

[Eja117]

A Tebow flamewar on a basketball site in early May?  Well played fellas.

Thank you Thank you.  We've earned it

[Eja117]

Celtsfan84, there was one pretty crazy thread not too long ago started by a poster who will not be named saying that Sanchez was better than Brady after the jets beat the pats in the playoffs two years ago

I said Sanchez pwned Tom/the Patriots in a playoff game in Foxboro (he did), that Brady looked like a lost high school QB (he did) and that the Pats shouldn't trade him but should look into what they could get for him (they should have). 

[nickagneta]

Comparing Tebow to Manning is like comparing Terrence Williams to John Stockton as PGs and NBA players......its ridiculous and really, eja, you're smarter than that.

[Moranis]

And what is this nonsense about Thomas and Decker not being good WR's.  Last time I checked crappy receivers don't go for 94/1434 and 85/1064.  Tebow just couldn't hit them when they were open.  Something Peyton Manning didn't struggle with at all.  YOu know because Peyton Manning can actually throw the ball.

Gee with such a great QB/WR corps you'd think they might have won a playoff game at home, especially with a bye to get ready for it.

They lost to the Superbowl Champion in a game in which the defense gave up 38 points.  The only real difference between Indianapolis, Denver, New England, and San Francisco is the date in which they played the best team in football.