Why didn't the Broncos keep Tebow as backup?

[chad72]

The Broncos were 23rd in TOP.

 

Do you have the stats for the games Tebow won? Tebow did not start till game 7 vs the Dolphins, if I am right.

 

Outside the Vikings game where the Vikings gave up big play after big play, my recollection is the O stayed on the field long enough for a push in TOP to win games (edit: I looked it up, Broncos won TOP 203 to 184 minutes in 6 out of the 7 games Tebow won in his 7-1 stretch before going 0-3 to finish 7-4 in regular season).

 

But still, it does not change the fact that Tebow was limited and inconsistent as a QB. If his ceiling was like a Kaepernick (purely running the ball), he would have still had a chance as a QB that could run more. That is the point I was trying to make.

[Qwiz]

Ok so you acknowledge his ability to throw in the NFL was very poor and very limiting.

 

I don't know what life was like on the Bronco's in 2011 but I agree it's highly possible that his leadership inspired players to play better.  Some Bronco's fans I've talked to in the past have seemed to indicate that they didn't think Orton cared very much.

 

If his leadership did inspire players to play better then I would say that he'd make a much better coach then a player though.  No amount of good leadership can make up for the fact that the guy just can't throw.  He just could not pass well enough to be a QB, especially a starting QB in the NFL.  (Although honestly if he wasn't so attached to being a QB and his fans where not a distraction I think a lot of teams would be bringing him in to see if they couldn't make him a TE or an RB or a LB. . . he's athletic enough that he could play those positions.)

 

As with DT and the others. . . it isn't just that Manning increased their stats or put up good stats with them.  It's the fact that Manning SET RECORDS with them at an age when he's clearly past his prime.  So based on that I would conclude that the receivers he had last year where far better then the receivers that he played with while he was on the Colts.  

 

That's why I say he proved these guys where good receivers if not excellent receivers.  If they where just average receivers Manning would have likely still thrown for 4000 yards and 30 TD's.  But putting up over 5000 yards and 50 TD's shows he had a very very special set of receivers to go along with his talent as a QB.

Who knows, maybe he is a better coach then player. But some leaders would rather lead by example than lead from the sidelines, though I'm definitely not underestimating any influence that coaches have. As with Manning on the field...players draw energy from that kind of leadership. I don't have a problem with Tim wanting to play QB and refusing to play in the NFL at any other position. He played quarterback from high school to the NFL when people said he couldn't, and that was the position he wanted to play. If anything I think the fact that he would rather turn away from the game is admirable. There's no doubt he would have the same following and the same craze he had as QB if he was a RB or TE so those who claim he does it for the fans don't have an argument in that aspect.

 As far as the Broncos receivers go, I would take a Marvin Harrison or Dallas Clark over Eric Decker, Emmanuel Sanders or Julius Thomas anyday. But that's just me. DT is indeed a physical freak and the guy isn't even in his prime yet. He is going to be a good player for sure long after Manning retires. But it all does come down to his throwing....I don't know, but it was said that Tebow's practices were terrible but he always found the receivers at the right time in the actual games.

[Qwiz]

So we're not allowed to critique the QBing because only wins matter?

We're going to give the credit for better defensive play to the QBs leadership skills?

No, not what I said at all. Tebow deserves criticism but not nearly as much as people accredit to him. And say what you will about the defense, cite the stats and everything, but that same defense didn't get good until Tebow became the starter. How else do you explain the sudden burst in the defense? And the leader on that defense, Champ Bailey, publicly came out and said how much of an influence Tebow was for that team. Of course he wasn't out there making tackles but like you said, there was something magical for the Broncos that season. Look up Tebow's Pittsburgh game stats and you'll begin to wonder about a lot of things in the world or about the Broncos that year lol.

[chad72]

I don't know, but it was said that Tebow's practices were terrible but he always found the receivers at the right time in the actual games.

 

If you are a set of coaches, do you hedge your bets and jobs on things that did not go right in practice hoping they will go right in actual games? Besides, what is the incentive then, for others to take it up a notch and have great practices to be given a chance with minutes on the field?

[Qwiz]

If you are a set of coaches, do you hedge your bets and jobs on things that did not go right in practice hoping they will go right in actual games? Besides, what is the incentive then, for others to take it up a notch and have great practices to be given a chance with minutes on the field?

I don't know, you should ask John Fox. He was the one who saw every single Tebow practice and kept him in as the starter for the majority of the season in 2011. I'm not condoning what he did that year. But when you keep winning I guess that's enough incentive to put up with some bad practices from the starter. The 2011 Broncos was one of those sports anomalies that we probably won't ever see again.

[chad72]

Look up Tebow's Pittsburgh game stats and you'll begin to wonder about a lot of things in the world or about the Broncos that year lol.

 

Oh yeah, the one aberration that puzzles everyone. Why on earth did Dick LeBeau give high school reads thinking Tebow can't make those simple reads? Why on earth did Dick LeBeau not borrow a page from Belichick who stifled Tebow earlier (and later too)?

 

I don't have the answers to those but Tebow made Dick LeBeau pay for those follies of underestimation of Tebow.

 

No Steeler fan EVER wants to talk about that game.

[chad72]

I don't know, you should ask John Fox. He was the one who saw every single Tebow practice and kept him in as the starter for the majority of the season in 2011. I'm not condoning what he did that year. But when you keep winning I guess that's enough incentive to put up with some bad practices from the starter. The 2011 Broncos was one of those sports anomalies that we probably won't ever see again.

 

Fox's hands were tied with Orton injured. So, when you are winning and you don't have other options to go to, you make the most out of what you have. You change your system, tailor it to your QB's limitations and hope everyone else continues to step up.

[Qwiz]

Fox's hands were tied with Orton injured. So, when you are winning and you don't have other options to go to, you make the most out of what you have. You change your system, tailor it to your QB's limitations and hope everyone else continues to step up.

Yeah I think that is what it came down to as well. Winning. He had Brady Quinn there as well but I'm sure no one believed in him being able to save the Broncos season.

[Dustin]

but that same defense didn't get good until Tebow became the starter. How else do you explain the sudden burst in the defense?

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

[Superman]

No, not what I said at all. Tebow deserves criticism but not nearly as much as people accredit to him. And say what you will about the defense, cite the stats and everything, but that same defense didn't get good until Tebow became the starter. How else do you explain the sudden burst in the defense? And the leader on that defense, Champ Bailey, publicly came out and said how much of an influence Tebow was for that team. Of course he wasn't out there making tackles but like you said, there was something magical for the Broncos that season. Look up Tebow's Pittsburgh game stats and you'll begin to wonder about a lot of things in the world or about the Broncos that year lol.

 

The defense played better. It's that simple. How do you credit the QB for better defensive play? How does that work? The offense had fewer first downs, less time of possession, more turnovers, and scored fewer points. All of that makes it HARDER on the defense. But somehow, we're completely ignoring fact, logic and reason, because Tebow's intangibles not only make up for his bad QBing, but they somehow help the defense play better? That's not football; that's magic.

 

And maybe that's the better argument here: Tim Tebow is a practicer of magic. That makes more sense to me than the idea that worse offense = better defense.

 

As for his stats vs Pittsburgh, they weren't as awful as some of his other games. And to his credit, he made some HUGE plays in that game, including the game winner (most credit goes to DT, but Tebow made a really good throw). But he was still not a good QB in that game. He missed several throws which led to stalled drives, and was awful the entire second half, which allowed the Steelers to get back in the game. (But I guess he intercepted Ben Roethlisberger, had five sacks and forced a fumble, too...)

 

If you critique Tebow's QB play, it is very, very obvious that he's not a good QB. He has an inaccurate and inconsistent arm, his delivery is slow, his footwork is terrible, he doesn't go through is progressions, he stares down receivers, and he takes too many sacks. He is NOT a good QB; he's a bad QB. If you want a bad QB on your team because he had some wild, magical games that no one can explain, good luck with that. Most NFL people -- including on all three teams he's played for -- don't like the mixture of bad QB + magic. I wouldn't, either.

[Qwiz]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

[amfootball]

I don't know, you should ask John Fox. He was the one who saw every single Tebow practice and kept him in as the starter for the majority of the season in 2011. I'm not condoning what he did that year. But when you keep winning I guess that's enough incentive to put up with some bad practices from the starter. The 2011 Broncos was one of those sports anomalies that we probably won't ever see again.

I think the best team for Tebow was the Broncos and had they not won the Manning sweepstakes he may still be there today. Fox had revamped the entire O for his skillset which yielded the number one rushing attack which helped propel the team to many of their wins. It is a shame really as Fox is the perfect HC for a guy like Tebow because he is conservative, likes to run and play solid D. I have always believed he has been completely out of his comfort zone with the O that Manning runs which goes against his football philosophy and may help explain why he was clueless in the Super Bowl when it was obvious the Denver O was going to be shut down all game.

[amfootball]

No, not what I said at all. Tebow deserves criticism but not nearly as much as people accredit to him. And say what you will about the defense, cite the stats and everything, but that same defense didn't get good until Tebow became the starter. How else do you explain the sudden burst in the defense? And the leader on that defense, Champ Bailey, publicly came out and said how much of an influence Tebow was for that team. Of course he wasn't out there making tackles but like you said, there was something magical for the Broncos that season. Look up Tebow's Pittsburgh game stats and you'll begin to wonder about a lot of things in the world or about the Broncos that year lol.

That is right. I remember Bailey and Dawkins saying that they knew if they could just keep the game close that Tebow would win it for them in the fourth. His fourth quarter stats are very impressive overall.

[Qwiz]

The defense played better. It's that simple. How do you credit the QB for better defensive play? How does that work? The offense had fewer first downs, less time of possession, more turnovers, and scored fewer points. All of that makes it HARDER on the defense. But somehow, we're completely ignoring fact, logic and reason, because Tebow's intangibles not only make up for his bad QBing, but they somehow help the defense play better? That's not football; that's magic.

 

And maybe that's the better argument here: Tim Tebow is a practicer of magic. That makes more sense to me than the idea that worse offense = better defense.

 

As for his stats vs Pittsburgh, they weren't as awful as some of his other games. And to his credit, he made some HUGE plays in that game, including the game winner (most credit goes to DT, but Tebow made a really good throw). But he was still not a good QB in that game. He missed several throws which led to stalled drives, and was awful the entire second half, which allowed the Steelers to get back in the game. (But I guess he intercepted Ben Roethlisberger, had five sacks and forced a fumble, too...)

 

If you critique Tebow's QB play, it is very, very obvious that he's not a good QB. He has an inaccurate and inconsistent arm, his delivery is slow, his footwork is terrible, he doesn't go through is progressions, he stares down receivers, and he takes too many sacks. He is NOT a good QB; he's a bad QB. If you want a bad QB on your team because he had some wild, magical games that no one can explain, good luck with that. Most NFL people -- including on all three teams he's played for -- don't like the mixture of bad QB + magic. I wouldn't, either.

Yeah, there's no point debating with you. Again you manage to twist what I'm saying and ignore what I am actually saying. I've already told you that I obviously I don't think he getscredit for tackles and interceptions and things like that, yet you facetiously continue to harp on that. Whatever. As for the Steelers game, I was actually referring to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3:16_Game

And you are the one who said that it was magic. Point out to me where I said I wanted Tebow as my quarterback on my team? All I did in my initial post was say that criticism of him is blown way out of proportion. And it is. I didn't want to expound on this and make it a discussion about Tebow being a quarterback in the NFL again because for all any of us know that boat has sailed. So let me reiterate my initial point: Tebow's open Christianity thing is blown out of proportion as is the notion that he was some sort of guy who just let his defense win games for him and contributed absolutely nothing to the 2011 Broncos. Let's leave it at that.

[Superman]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

 

 

 

You do realize that just because two things happened at the same time doesn't mean that one thing caused the other, right? Even if the two things are related to one another, correlation does not equal causation. 

[Qwiz]

I think the best team for Tebow was the Broncos and had they not won the Manning sweepstakes he may still be there today. Fox had revamped the entire O for his skillset which yielded the number one rushing attack which helped propel the team to many of their wins. It is a shame really as Fox is the perfect HC for a guy like Tebow because he is conservative, likes to run and play solid D. I have always believed he has been completely out of his comfort zone with the O that Manning runs which goes against his football philosophy and may help explain why he was clueless in the Super Bowl when it was obvious the Denver O was going to be shut down all game.

Yeah, Fox seems to get a lot of credit for a guy who has Manning as his quarterback. I am very intrigued at the idea of what may have happened in Denver if Manning had gone to Tennessee or San Francisco.

[amfootball]

Yeah, Fox seems to get a lot of credit for a guy who has Manning as his quarterback. I am very intrigued at the idea of what may have happened in Denver if Manning had gone to Tennessee or San Francisco.

Me too. Elway was freaking out. He had to say the Tebow was going to be his QB going into camp at the end of the season given Tebow won a playoff game and I think the fan pressure would have made him keep Tebow at least as the starter in preseason but I am sure he would have scanned as many QBs as he could have but really Manning gave him an easy out when he chose Denver.

[chad72]

That is right. I remember Bailey and Dawkins saying that they knew if they could just keep the game close that Tebow would win it for them in the fourth. His fourth quarter stats are very impressive overall.

 

 

There is a theory though. Mike McCoy's relatively conservative gameplan allowed for early deficits in both the Tebow year and first Peyton year against good teams (deficit vs Atlanta, Houston, NE and even SD before that MNF win). But then, the D or QB overcame them for close wins sometimes in the 4th qtr.

 

Lets even examine 2014 after McCoy went to the Chargers - McCoy's 28-20 loss to the Broncos with the Chargers earlier in SD - 28-6 Broncos lead, McCoy decides to open it up and the Chargers come back to 28-20 but Broncos hold on to win. Lets examine McCoy's 24-17 PLAYOFF loss to the Broncos - 24-7 Broncos lead, McCoy opens it up more and Chargers come back to 24-17 but Broncos hold on to win. Only win vs Broncos on short week on TNF, controlling tempo with the run 27-20 and playing ahead. Seems to be a recurring pattern against teams, early conservative game plan. If he gets ahead or the game is close, it works fine but more often, leads to quick score deficits.

 

If McCoy had stayed one more year with Peyton, the lustre of Mike McCoy being this mastermind could have worn off, IMO.

[Qwiz]

That is right. I remember Bailey and Dawkins saying that they knew if they could just keep the game close that Tebow would win it for them in the fourth. His fourth quarter stats are very impressive overall.

 

You do realize that just because two things happened at the same time doesn't mean that one thing caused the other, right? Even if the two things are related to one another, correlation does not equal causation. 

Yeah, so the defense just happened to magically get better at stopping the opposing team's points for no reason at all. And Tebow just happened to be the bum, good-for-nothing starter at that point, despite players on that team coming out and giving him credit for that turnaround. That's logic for you. I'm not usually one to be snarky but I don't need an explanation on correlation and causation, thank you.

[Qwiz]

Me too. Elway was freaking out. He had to say the Tebow was going to be his QB going into camp at the end of the season given Tebow won a playoff game and I think the fan pressure would have made him keep Tebow at least as the starter in preseason but I am sure he would have scanned as many QBs as he could have but really Manning gave him an easy out when he chose Denver.

Exactly. Elway was more than happy at the Manning situation. Otherwise Tebow would have stayed in Denver. And who knows how he would have done with an offseason with the ones and working with his quarterbacks coach and offensive coordinator and his throwing motion.

[amfootball]

Yeah, so the defense just happened to magically get better at stopping the opposing team's points for no reason at all. And Tebow just happened to be the bum, good-for-nothing starter at that point, despite players on that team coming out and giving him credit for that turnaround. That's logic for you.

Also the units in football play off of each other. This is why Belichick always talks about football being symbiotic and that the team has to play well in all three phases of the game to win. The Tebow led offense was first in rushing, that helps a defense the most.

[Superman]

Yeah, there's no point debating with you. Again you manage to twist what I'm saying and ignore what I am actually saying. I've already told you that I obviously I don't think he getscredit for tackles and interceptions and things like that, yet you facetiously continue to harp on that. Whatever. As for the Steelers game, I was actually referring to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3:16_Game

And you are the one who said that it was magic. Point out to me where I said I wanted Tebow as my quarterback on my team? All I did in my initial post was say that criticism of him is blown way out of proportion. And it is. I didn't want to expound on this and make it a discussion about Tebow being a quarterback in the NFL again because for all any of us know that boat has sailed. So let me reiterate my initial point: Tebow's open Christianity thing is blown out of proportion as is that he was some sort of guy who just let his defense win games for him and contributed absolutely nothing to the 2011 Broncos. Let's leave it at that.

 

Qwiz, come on. You say you're not calling Tebow magic, and then you point to 3:16? Really? I don't know how to respond to that.

 

And I wasn't saying you wanted Tebow. I'm saying most NFL people wouldn't want Tebow, so the question about why the Broncos didn't want Tebow seems to have an obvious answer. Didn't mean to direct that at you. It was a very general statement.

 

Also, I didn't twist anything you said. It's called sarcasm. 

 

Last thing, I agree that Tebow's religion was unfairly attached to the hype, and then used as a sinkweight against him (at least by some). But notice that my point is entirely to do with his QBing, and was from the very beginning, because you said that people blew his religion out of proportion "as they do with how the kid played football." If not for that line, I wouldn't have said anything, because the religion was blown out of proportion. But the criticisms about how he plays QB weren't/aren't, IMO.

[Qwiz]

Also the units in football play off of each other. This is why Belichick always talks about football being symbiotic and that the team has to play well in all three phases of the game to win. The Tebow led offense was first in rushing, that helps a defense the most.

Exactly. Belichick knows his football. That is why the Broncos got by in the AFC with a defense that was far from great but then got roasted when their offense met a greater force in the Super Bowl. If that offense isn't doing well then the defense surely wasn't going to be able to feed off of them and play with excitement and purpose.

[Qwiz]

Qwiz, come on. You say you're not calling Tebow magic, and then you point to 3:16? Really? I don't know how to respond to that.

 

And I wasn't saying you wanted Tebow. I'm saying most NFL people wouldn't want Tebow, so the question about why the Broncos didn't want Tebow seems to have an obvious answer. Didn't mean to direct that at you. It was a very general statement.

 

Also, I didn't twist anything you said. It's called sarcasm. 

 

Last thing, I agree that Tebow's religion was unfairly attached to the hype, and then used as a sinkweight against him (at least by some). But notice that my point is entirely to do with his QBing, and was from the very beginning, because you said that people blew his religion out of proportion "as they do with how the kid played football." If not for that line, I wouldn't have said anything, because the religion was blown out of proportion. But the criticisms about how he plays QB weren't/aren't, IMO.

Eh, for the religious 3:16 is more about a higher power than magic, but I guess that doesn't qualify in every discussion. As for the Broncos, it seems to be that a lot of players bought into what Tebow, despite his limitations. The only people who spoke out against him were a disgruntled receiver and back-up quarterbacks. As I mentioned to AM, imagine Tebow with an offseason with the ones, a chance to thoroughly learn the playbook, and also having time to work on his mechanics, which, like you said, weren't up to par for an NFL starter. I disagree with your last line but that's just my perspective on it as a football fan.

[Superman]

Yeah, so the defense just happened to magically get better at stopping the opposing team's points for no reason at all. And Tebow just happened to be the bum, good-for-nothing starter at that point, despite players on that team coming out and giving him credit for that turnaround. That's logic for you. I'm not usually one to be snarky but I don't need an explanation on correlation and causation, thank you.

 

Well, if you don't mind, explain to me how Tebow being the QB was the cause of the defense playing better?

 

To me, that's the magic. Switching QBs has never made a defense better, because QBs don't play defense. If the QB helps the offense improve, it might make things easier for the defense, but that can be explained in football terms (less TOP, better field position, etc.) In the case of Tebow, the offense scored fewer points and was on the field less, making the job of the defense harder, not easier. This argument goes against everything we know about football.

 

If your argument is about intangibles, that's fair. Can't measure intangibles. (However, that also means that you can't prove causation.)

 

This is an honest question. I'm not trying to be snarky. I'm just saying that I don't believe Tebow was the cause of the improved defensive play. 

[Superman]

Eh, for the religious 3:16 is more about a higher power than magic, but I guess that doesn't qualify in every discussion. As for the Broncos, it seems to be that a lot of players bought into what Tebow, despite his limitations. The only people who spoke out against him were a disgruntled receiver and back-up quarterbacks. As I mentioned to AM, imagine Tebow with an offseason with the ones, a chance to thoroughly learn the playbook, and also having time to work on his mechanics, which, like you said, weren't up to par for an NFL starter. I disagree with your last line but that's just my perspective on it as a football fan.

 

Higher power... magic... I don't think either influence the outcome of football games. I'm not being dismissive of spirituality, but I don't buy into the 3:16 thing.

 

I agree that players bought into Tebow. I'm sure that helped them win some games. That doesn't make him a better QB, though. 

 

And a full offseason as the starter (no one would rather have Tebow than Manning, right? We're assuming the Broncos don't get Manning...) would benefit him, absolutely. But he still would have been a severely limited QB. Mechanics can be improved, but it's rare that you go from poor mechanics to good mechanics, not at 25 years old.

 

And in a league so starved for even above average QB play that Andy Dalton gets $16-19m/year, NO ONE has gone anywhere near Tim Tebow. To me, it's about the way he plays the position. If he were a good QB, the distraction and the hype wouldn't matter to teams like the Jaguars, etc., who are desperate for relevance. 

[Qwiz]

Well, if you don't mind, explain to me how Tebow being the QB was the cause of the defense playing better?

 

To me, that's the magic. Switching QBs has never made a defense better, because QBs don't play defense. If the QB helps the offense improve, it might make things easier for the defense, but that can be explained in football terms (less TOP, better field position, etc.) In the case of Tebow, the offense scored fewer points and was on the field less, making the job of the defense harder, not easier. This argument goes against everything we know about football.

 

If your argument is about intangibles, that's fair. Can't measure intangibles. (However, that also means that you can't prove causation.)

 

This is an honest question. I'm not trying to be snarky. I'm just saying that I don't believe Tebow was the cause of the improved defensive play. 

You nailed it. The immeasurables were my argument. And I guess causation is a bit hard to determine in this situation, and I know this is getting repetitive but leadership and the will to win are everything in football. I think the defense drew a new sort of energy from what could have very well been another lost season watching this guy who, according to the analysts, would never play quarterback in the NFL and who was too bad to win games going out and proving people wrong by making plays, at just the right time, despite consistent atrocious quarterbacking. So the exact opposite of Tony Romo I guess. I also guess that is why the two of them are such polarizing figures.

[BOTT]

Exactly,,.,..,his ego got the best of him,.If he'd have been willing to switch to slot receiver or H-Back.....he'd be staring somewhere

I doubt he could play either position

[Qwiz]

Higher power... magic... I don't think either influence the outcome of football games. I'm not being dismissive of spirituality, but I don't buy into the 3:16 thing.

 

I agree that players bought into Tebow. I'm sure that helped them win some games. That doesn't make him a better QB, though. 

 

And a full offseason as the starter (no one would rather have Tebow than Manning, right? We're assuming the Broncos don't get Manning...) would benefit him, absolutely. But he still would have been a severely limited QB. Mechanics can be improved, but it's rare that you go from poor mechanics to good mechanics, not at 25 years old.

 

And in a league so starved for even above average QB play that Andy Dalton gets $16-19m/year, NO ONE has gone anywhere near Tim Tebow. To me, it's about the way he plays the position. If he were a good QB, the distraction and the hype wouldn't matter to teams like the Jaguars, etc., who are desperate for relevance. 

Yeah as a spiritual guy I loved the 3:16 game. And if I wasn't spiritual I would still find it eerie lol. You are right in that players believing in a guy doesn't make him a better quarterback, no doubt about it. I know the Broncos won the lottery with Manning and that of course is vastly more desirable than hoping Tebow throws a game-winner in the last three minutes of a game. I don't know why his throwing motion didn't get better, be it stubbornness or something else, but I think he improved in his footwork and dropbacks from college. He definitely needed to work on his reads and decision-making, because matching those deficiencies with not being able to accurately get the ball there leads to bad play. Like Case Keenum with us last year, though arguably some of his deficiencies like his awareness were also his strengths. As far as the Jaguars go, I recall that they tried to trade for Tebow just for the relevance like you said, but Tebow chose the Jets because he believed the staff actually wanted him, not his fame. He chose to go to a place where Sanchize was the coach's pet over a place like Jacksonville, his hometown, where he actually would have probably started. But I guess that's not entirely relevant to the discussion. Just wanted to point out that Jacksonville did indeed make a bid for him, just for all the wrong reasons.

[Thewholefnshow28]

Tebow would never have been able to run Peyton's offense. Fox completely revamped the O for Tebow's skillset. Then revamped again for Manning. Best to have two QBs that can run the same offense.

Exactly. You need an offense specifically designed for Tebow's skill sets. The offense for Tebow and Manning are polar opposites and it would be nightmare to implement.

Also, his fan base was just a pain in the butt. They would have been seriously calling for Tebow to start over Manninf. Having to deal with that noise is not worth the headache.

The bottom line is Tebow was not good enough to stay in the NFL.

[oldunclemark]

I doubt he could play either position

You and I can both doubt it but he proved he cant play QB

[akcolt]

I don't think Tebow got on the soapbox anymore the Warner did.  And as Qwizboy said, he was never really trying to convert people.  

 

I do think that aspect of him gets blown out of proportion by the media.

 

Now I agree his play as a quarterback was bad.

 

Tebow was openly Christian like any other player but it isn't like he was out there telling people to switch to Christianity. There was nothing wrong with what he did and still does, and people blow that as much out of proportion as they do with how the kid played football.

I don't recall Kurt Warner making commercials about his opinions on abortion maybe I have a bad memory but in my opinion Tebow used his fame to try to push his beliefs don't feel that way about Kurt there is a difference between thanking god after games and in interviews and making commercials

[House]

This thread pretty much sums up why Tebow is no longer in the league.

[BloodyChamp]

I don't know how everybody knows everything about Tim Tebow when they apparently haven't watched him play or atleast read up on him. He's been offered positions as a FB and/or a TE more than once and flat out said "no." I'm not saying that was a wise a decision or anything...I'm just saying that's what happened. I also know that had Peyton freaking Manning not fell into the Bronco's lap, Tebow would have been the starter. No starting quarterback was going to survive being replaced by Peyton. Even if they were good, they would have been traded because they were good enough to trade. Shoot they even did alright trading Tim Tebow if you ask me (a 4th and 6th rounder).

[Qwiz]

I don't recall Kurt Warner making commercials about his opinions on abortion maybe I have a bad memory but in my opinion Tebow used his fame to try to push his beliefs don't feel that way about Kurt there is a difference between thanking god after games and in interviews and making commercials

He made one ad during the Super Bowl that was pro-life. And that's about as much as I'll say about that particular subject. Tim Tebow is a devout follower in Christianity, and he isn't a guy to tell you to convert or anything else that you don't want to do.

[chad72]

He made one ad during the Super Bowl that was pro-life. And that's about as much as I'll say about that particular subject. Tim Tebow is a devout follower in Christianity, and he isn't a guy to tell you to convert or anything else that you don't want to do.

 

I agree. Just because folks make a commercial about vodka or beer, it doesn't mean I convert from wine . I know what I want to stick to and will have my own reasons to stick to it. That is how I view that Tebow commercial. It doesn't bother me one bit.

 

Pro-life or High life (love that 1 second shortest SB commercial), it is all good .

[Qwiz]

I agree. Just because folks make a commercial about vodka or beer, it doesn't mean I convert from wine . I know what I want to stick to and will have my own reasons to stick to it. That is how I view that Tebow commercial. It doesn't bother me one bit.

 

Pro-life or High life (love that 1 second shortest SB commercial), it is all good .

I like the one with the puppy and the horses. Come close to tears every time I see it.

[Shane Bond]

Any ideas?

I always thought that he could have been a decent backup for a few years, then take over for Peyton when he retires; e.g. go the Aaron Rodgers route with Brett Favre. Not trying to say he was going to be the next Aaron Rodgers, but they also spent a 1st round (#25 pick on him), only to trade it away for a 4th and 6th round pick.

My guess is it was just a temporary marketing ploy to sell tickets?

That's right. He could have been Rodgers 2.0.

[Synthetic]

Fox's hands were tied with Orton injured. So, when you are winning and you don't have other options to go to, you make the most out of what you have. You change your system, tailor it to your QB's limitations and hope everyone else continues to step up.

 

 

I have to disagree with you here. The fans rode Orton for every mistake he made. Anytime he threw an interception or just made an honest wrong mistake (All QB's make mistakes) they made sure they screamed and demanded for Tebow. It don't help when the player himself is a marketing gimmick by the national media to sell a product, but in Orton's case, even had he not got injured, Tebow still would have started cause the fans demanded it.

 

I'm predicting the same to happen in Cleveland. They already bought their Manziel jerseys, and once Hoyer starts throwing interceptions and losing to better teams (that schedule is brutal), the fans will be booing and chanting in high demand for Manziel to start. Thank God he's Kerry Collins Jr and likes to party cause I can't take another QB coming into this league with a big religious following. It's only a matter of time until we get some hilarious break down moments from Manziel's party animal behavior effecting on field play.

[amfootball]

I have to disagree with you here. The fans rode Orton for every mistake he made. Anytime he threw an interception or just made an honest wrong mistake (All QB's make mistakes) they made sure they screamed and demanded for Tebow. It don't help when the player himself is a marketing gimmick by the national media to sell a product, but in Orton's case, even had he not got injured, Tebow still would have started cause the fans demanded it.

 

I'm predicting the same to happen in Cleveland. They already bought their Manziel jerseys, and once Hoyer starts throwing interceptions and losing to better teams (that schedule is brutal), the fans will be booing and chanting in high demand for Manziel to start. Thank God he's Kerry Collins Jr and likes to party cause I can't take another QB coming into this league with a big religious following. It's only a matter of time until we get some hilarious break down moments from Manziel's party animal behavior effecting on field play.

Orton was horrible in 2011 and that was reflected in the teams losses before Tebow was inserted. Any QB that was playing the way he was would have been booed and the back up would have been demanded. The thing is Quinn was the back up not Tebow. It was one of the rare instances where fan response did have pull with mgmt.'s decision. Fox seemed perturbed by the whole thing every time he spoke. But the fact is Tebow was a national champion and Heismann trophy winner who had a penchant for winning and being clutch. What fan base would not want to see him play? While he had his Christian contingent, anyone who saw him play in college wanted to see him have a shot in the pros. I know I did.

 

In terms of Manziel, I think you are probably right in what could happen if Hoyer struggles and as you say the scenario is also similar. Maziel is a Heismann trophy winner with a penchant for improvising and making great plays. I know I want to see him play at some point to see if he has the goods but in the end it is all moot if Hoyer plays well. And the same held true for Orton. If you don't play well, it is on you. No one in the NFL gets to keep their position just because and if you can play and play well you don't lose your position no matter your pedigree.