2013 NFL Football

[D.o.s.]

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.

[angryguy77]

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.

But has he really been given a chance to develop? He had a good run for 3/4 of a season in Denver, and the he went to the circus that is the NY Jets.

My belief is we don't have enough of a sample size to know if he'd be a good qb or not.

[D.o.s.]

That's possible. How many games would you say it would take? Another starting season?

[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

[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?

[Eja117]

I'd love to see a team built around Tebow.  I don't know how it would turn out, but I'd like to see a team take him and coach him up. The guy has the mentality of a winner, he may just need the right situation.

Maybe he just needs to convert to islam or come out and people would like him more.

I think it might help if he didn't suck so badly as a quarterback.

To clarify, I think that the NFL knows that there is a large built-in fanbase for Tebow. I sincerely believe that if any franchise thought that he would be an upgrade on the field over whomever they have starting right now, they'd do it in a heartbeat.

People laugh at Tebow being out of the league but they never laugh at the fact that the coaches who refuse to sign and play him are routinely out of the league too. I mean by all means go and start Jay Cutler or Mike Vick or something. You'll be coaching Tebow anyway. In the CFL I guess. I mean you can coach him in the NFL or the CFL I guess. Your choice.

The head coaches of the Broncos and the Jets are still there. 

He is a football player, but he is not a starting QB in the NFL.  He has never overcome the regular defenses of the NFL.  He is a terror against the prevent. 


Teams that went prevent, lost.  Teams that did not, won. 


Do you think NFL teams have noticed this?   Do you think this effects teams wanting to sign him?

Well wait a second.  Even if that were true then at worst he's an ineffective QB...who can run like a HOF running back.  So why should other ineffective QBs who can't run get to have jobs and he shouldn't?  Because "coach" Ryan cut him?

Look at his passing stats in college. Phenomenal completion percentages against top notch SEC teams. Teams with pro style defense and coaches like Saban and Les Miles.  Could it be that the difference is he had Percy Harvin and Aaron Hernandez? Instead of Eric Decker and....nobody? 

Since the consensus is that Tebow is a third string CFL guy I guess that means coach Fox is a genius and pulled off a miracle right?  But you don't hear people praising the coach that turned around a season with Tebow and did nothing better with Peyton.

[D.o.s.]

But that's the thing. All the teams passed on him. There's not a single NFL team that wants him to play QB for them.

Somehow I doubt that it has more to do with his religious beliefs than with how all of those teams, front offices and coaches, think he can help them win football games.

[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?

[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.

[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

[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.

[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

Mark Sanchez went to the AFC Championship in his rookie year and in his second season as well.  And his playoff stats are actually not bad.  You must think he's awesome.  After all, only playoff results really count.

[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

Mark Sanchez went to the AFC Championship in his rookie year and in his second season as well.  And his playoff stats are actually not bad.  You must think he's awesome.  After all, only playoff results really count.

There is no arguing that Sanchez had a far better start to his career than Peyton. Actually that's not hard to argue since just about anyone had a better start to their career than Peyton

[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

[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

Mark Sanchez went to the AFC Championship in his rookie year and in his second season as well.  And his playoff stats are actually not bad.  You must think he's awesome.  After all, only playoff results really count.

There is no arguing that Sanchez had a far better start to his career than Peyton. Actually that's not hard to argue since just about anyone had a better start to their career than Peyton

Mark Sanchez also advanced farther in his first season than Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, etc. Clearly your method of evaluating QB's needs some serious revision.