<p>Notrichenough, not seeing why it should be 1/3 less. According to the numbers you posted, the defense gave up 28ppg pre-Tebow and ~23 with Tebow. Only about 5ppg difference. So what is your hypothesis? Tebow didn’t play well during those last three games. I’ll concede that. Those two games at the end where they gave up 40 points kind of proves my point that the defense isn’t as good as the people who are making arguments against Tebow claim they were. They say that the defense was bad at the beginning, but they just coincidently got better when Tebow started. But explain those games at the end where they gave up a lot of points. If they were just improving each game, what happened at the end? If you watched the Broncos, you could see a complete change in the demeanor of all of the players. There was a different drive to them and they were playing inspired ball, like they were actually playing for something. There was a completely different excitement to the games. The offense fed off of the defense and the defense would then feed off of the offense. I’d say they each were beginning to inspire each other, thus creating better performances from the entire team. That is my theory. Also, they got pounded by Brady twice. I’d say that’s understandable. The Patriots were just better than them. That’s to be expected from a team that was 4-12 the year before. You seem like a reasonable person so I’d like to hear your take on the defense’s turnaround.</p>
<p>
During the 7 wins of the 7-1 streak, the Broncos D gave up an average of 16.7 points. This is a pretty sustained streak of excellence. </p>
<p>Was this due to Tebow? Was this a fluke?</p>
<p>I would argue, neither. This defense was clearly on the cusp of being really good if not great, and it showed for large parts of the 2011 season. But they weren’t quite there, and were inconsistent. In 2012, Denver led the AFC in points against, giving up an average of only 18 points per game for the entire season.</p>
<p>It’s also worth pointing out that <em>none</em> of the 7 teams Tebow beat in 2011 finished with a winning record. And against those 7 teams, the Broncos offense averaged only 22 points per game. In Tebow’s 4 losses, only 12.5 points per game.</p>
<p>So maybe Tebow really did somehow inspire the team to play over their heads, but I don’t think the numbers show it. Denver’s offense was pretty mediocre the entire year. I think a lot of luck was involved, he could have <em>easily</em> been 4-7 instead of 7-4, and we aren’t having this conversation. It does appear like someone stole his +5 Ring of Charisma after the Chicago game, though. Darth Belichick strikes again. :)</p>
<p>Look - no one denies Tebow was a great college player. He deservedly won the Heisman. But that doesn’t mean he’s 100% guaranteed to be great in the pros - history is filled with Heisman winners who have been complete busts in the NFL. Somehow, though, this giant hype machine built up around him. Whether it’s due to religion or something else, I don’t know. But if you look beyond the hype, I don’t think he has shown (yet!) that he is anything special.</p>
<p>Belichick has nothing to lose.</p>
<p>He only carried two QBs on the roster last year. If Brady and Mallet both get hurt for extended periods of time, the Pats are finished regardless. The most they need a 3rd QB for is if Brady is hurt, Mallet starts, and gets dinged enough to come out of a game for a few plays or a quarter. Then, they need an emergency QB who can take a few snaps. This could be a 3rd QB or a wide receiver who played QB in college or whatever. The guy they had in camp as a 3rd string QB wasn’t even in the NFL last year, so it’s not like they gave up much to clear a roster spot for Tebow.</p>
<p>If Tebow can carve out value to the team more than the other candidates for the 53rd roster spot, then it’s a plus. Special teams, trick plays, back up at a couple positions, emergency QB (he’s at least won games as an NFL starter which is better than some WR emergency QB). And, he can play a “scrambling option type” QB on the scout team – a look Mallet isn’t really suited for.</p>
<p>If he can’t, they’ll just cut him.</p>
<p>Notrichenough, I don’t understand why you’re not including those last 3 games when you’re averaging the ppg allowed by the defense. Why can you just discount those to make you’re argument that the defense was coming around and improving? Also, the Steelers had the #1 defense in the league that year. Tebow threw for 316 yards, 3TDs, and no INTs that game, I believe. If that doesn’t show you any signs of being any good, then what does? The problem is that people are setting their standards too high. I’m not saying he’s Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, or Aaron Rodgers. Just that he’s shown he’s good enough to be in the league. The fact that he’s in the league proves that, not any statements I make that are opinionated.</p>
<p>
It’s not unusual for teams to go on runs. Especially when, for the 8 game stretch in question, they only played one team with a winning record (and lost that one).
Don’t even get me started. That was one of the worst-schemed, worst-coached, defensive efforts ever on the part of Pittsburgh.
Only 6 QBs had a worse QB rating than Tebow in 2011. He had only a 46.5% completion percentage. In 8 of his 11 games they scores less than 20 points. 4 of his wins were by 4 points or less.</p>
<p>This just doesn’t cut it in an offense-oriented league.</p>
<p>“Oh but he inspired his team to greatness!” I think this stuff is overrated or even imagined by fans.</p>
<p>What does it tell you that the only team that was interested in acquiring him from Denver did it as a PR stunt? That the Jets couldn’t trade him for a bag of balls? That he went unsigned until 1 day before minicamp? That 30 other teams passed on him when they could have him for chump change? That the best he could do is a contract with no guaranteed money?</p>
<p>Regardless of this athletic ability, he is a 3rd-string caliber QB at this point. And maybe not even that. Can he be developed by the Pats into something better? I hope so, but I am not holding my breath.</p>
<p>In Belichick We Trust.</p>
<p>Notrichenough, Maybe, just maybe, that stretch where you thought that the defense was playing well was due to them playing bad teams. You can’t use that as a justification for Tebow and the Broncos winning but completely ignore that when you’re talking about how few points the defense is giving up. Also you said only 6 QBs had a worse QBR than Tebow. That literally proves my point. I said he’s not near the upper half of the league, but obviously if he’s ahead of 6 people, he belongs in the league. There’s 32 QBs in the league, and less than 15 of them are really good. You have to fill these other spots with average players. You could literally make the same argument you make against Tebow about plenty of QBs in the league, but SOMEBODY has to play. Not everyone can be a HOFer.</p>
<p>But that doesn’t answer NRE’s last point–that clearly, the league doesn’t see him as a viable alternative, certainly not as a starter, despite being “only” 6th worst.</p>
<p>They’re out to succeed. If a team thought he could make them do so, they’d have picked him up sooner. I have to assume that the entire NFL leadership knows more than any of us do about assessing talent.</p>
<p>Belichick just likes having Heisman trophy winners as his backup QBs. Flutie, Testaverde and now Tebow…
Maybe they could have him live with Gronkowski and do a remake of The Odd Couple…</p>
<p>Bucs signed reserves too not only Patriots.</p>
<p>
When you have a QB in the bottom 20% of the league you either </p>
<ul>
<li><p>replace him (Rex Grossman, John Skelton, Curtis Painter, Colt McCoy);</p></li>
<li><p>stick with him because you’ve bet your job he’s your QB of the future (Sam Bradford, Christian Ponder, Blaine Gabbert)</p></li>
</ul>
<p>If Josh McDaniels had survived at Denver, maybe Tebow would have gotten another chance.</p>
<p>But right now he is down there with the Curtis Painters of the world, <em>and</em> comes with significant baggage in the form of huge distractions from his followers and the media. Did you see or read any of Belichick’s press conference? Practically every friggin’ question was “Tebow”. Is it any wonder practically no one wants him?</p>
<p>P.S. Please break your posts into paragraphs, they would be much easier to read.</p>
<p>I’m on my iPhone. It’s not easy to do things on here and worry about paragraph-format. Plus, I don’t know how a space makes anything easier to read.</p>
<p>Also, what does his name being brought up in press conferences often have to do with anything? That doesn’t add or take away what happens on the field. If its annoying, so what. Play on the filed isn’t affected. Do you think the play the of Heat is affected when every question centers around Lebron? No. His name sells and generates revenue, as does Tebow. If you’re tired of hearing his name, don’t watch ESPN.</p>
<p>No need for me to beat a dead horse over this. I’ll end with this post. We each have our own opinion. It was nice conversing with you and being able to have a conversation without resulting in immature behavior. Good day to you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s not just my opinion:</p>
<p>
[Tim</a> Tebow’s media circus not worth it, AFC coach says - NFL.com](<a href=“http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000168270/article/tim-tebows-media-circus-not-worth-it-afc-coach-says]Tim”>Tim Tebow's media circus not worth it, AFC coach says)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It would be pretty easy to list the “really good” players that’d fall in the “fewer than 15” but let’s look at the next 20 who might not be “really good”</p>
<ol>
<li>Matthew Stafford </li>
<li>Jay Cutler </li>
<li>Philip Rivers </li>
<li>Alex Smith </li>
<li>Ryan Tannehill </li>
<li>Matt Schaub </li>
<li>Sam Bradford </li>
<li>Andy Dalton </li>
<li>Michael Vick </li>
<li>Carson Palmer </li>
<li>Josh Freeman </li>
<li>Christian Ponder </li>
<li>Jake Locker </li>
<li>Nick Foles </li>
<li>Kevin Kolb </li>
<li>Matt Hasselbeck </li>
<li>Matt Cassel </li>
<li>Ryan Fitzpatrick </li>
<li>Brandon Weeden </li>
<li>Blaine Gabbert </li>
<li>Mark Sanchez </li>
</ol>
<p>Everything is a matter of opinion!</p>
<p>PS The others who made the cut are
Aaron Rodgers
Tom Brady
Drew Brees
Peyton Manning
Ben Roethlisberger
Matt Ryan
Eli Manning
Andrew Luck
Robert Griffin III
Tony Romo
Colin Kaepernick
Joe Flacco
Cam Newton
Russell Wilson</p>
<p>PS–if you want your kid to be an NFL quarterback, name him Matthew.</p>
<p>There are so many inconsistencies with those “not really good” QBs that you can’t rank them 16.-35. Some can even be TOP10 during one season and then struggle to discern cornerback and receiver or make your tackle sack you from behind.</p>
<p>Jay Leno ; “So the good news, Tim Tebow got a job with the Patriots. The bad news: now that he’s associated with the wold “Patriot” he’s being audited by the IRS. Yeah, yeah, so, little tricky. Tightrope.”</p>
<p>Took out the link since it is too political.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The point was not to rank them. I borrowed an existing list. The point was to show that there are plenty more QBs who have shown to be very good than 15. And that list does not even list a number of very good backups. For instance, Kaepernick was a backup when the season started in San Francisco.</p>