Buddy ... Tebow is pretty much done in the NFL as a QB. You're still on here coming up with weird angles to argue his worthiness as an NFL QB. You seem like a smart guy who has really fallen victim to trying to out think the room here. I can't figure out if you're the captain of the debate team and just refuse to let it go or if you're just delusional.
TD % per touch? Dude, that is sooo weird. Can't believe anyone would talk about that at all. Especially since it is probably more correlative to wins than either completion % or 3rd down conversion or 3 and out stats. You crack me up. :lol:
I have been following football my entire life. You are the first person I've ever heard refer to TD % per touch. Yes, you're taking weird angles. Will you still be here talking about his TD % per touch and the theory of relativity when he's riding the pine in the CFL? BTW - what was his TD percentage per touch in 2012?
You find me another team that had a 38/62% Pass/Run ratio, and had as high a percentage of drives with 3 runs in a row as the Broncos did with Tebow, and I'll show you a team that has a high % of 3 and outs and a very low offensive scoring ranking. Take your time, you'll be looking for a while.
Hey concerned, let's see the link to that post you are referencing. You are so retarded and full of shit I think you made it up just for a reason to post a 500 word essay to feed your unhealthy negative Tebow obsession. How about get a life and stop trying to get high sniffing Tebow's jock strap?
Broncos won the division and a playoff game. Nobody cares about that useless stat. Might as well start talking about how the Giants led the league in parking tickets last year even though they won the Superbowl. Who cares?
No one cares about it except for 32 NFL GM's. And who cares what they think because you guys have stats that everyone cares about except everyone but the tebots.
Sure, every GM cares bout that stat. They just didn't buy the bullshit you are shoveling that it was Tebow that did it. Unlike you and the rest of the "Tim Tebow walks on water kool-aid drinker brigade," they actually KNOW when a shitty player was carried when they see it. Broncos made the playoffs with Tebow, and therefore that makes him good, is probably the least educated and laziest argument ever as it relates to Tebow's talent. Especially when you actually watch those games and saw him dig the team in a hole that was only salvagable because the defense stepped up and carried his ass while he mopped most of the credit. Two teams figured it out and couldn't get rid of him fast enough. ...and I can see 30 teams that can't wait to sign him..... errr... no I don't. Got another weird angle stat that says he's good?
How do you look up 3 and outs, just curious, can you please post link? I have heard this repeated 10,000 times but its hard to find it on a google search. I would just like to look at 2013 etc.
And there you have it... pull up the 2011 pulldown, they had 62 of them. Nobody had more, and nobody tied them. ONE TEAM had a slightly higher percentage of drives go three and out, but they 18 less possessions because they didn't have a defense getting the ball back for them as much as the Broncos did. In ONE year the Broncos went from 62 to 36. That helped to go from one of the worst passing teams to one of the best. AMAZING how much easier the games get when you extend drives, isn't it? But thank you JFJets for sacking up and posting the stat that proves the Broncos IN FACT led the league in three and outs.
The 2010 Denver Broncos had 50 ...... Those extra 12 were a real back breaker , they led to double the wins in 2011 Keep hitching your wagon to that 3 and out stat . You make it sound like Tebow is the only reason they occured when in 2010 the Broncos had 50.
I don't know if you know this, but the 2010 teams sucked too. Are you denying the Broncos led the league in three and outs, and are you denying doing it 30% of the time or 62 was a real problem when it came to sustaining drives, giving the defense a break, or racking up points?
:lol::rofl2: I didn't think anyone was "hiding" the stat. From your reaction it is obvious you've never actually seen the stats, you've just been regurgitating what others have said. I never said the Broncos of 2010 or 2011 had good 3 and out stats. I said they weren't nearly as important a stat as you think they are. While you're looking at that list, look at some of the good teams that have a lot of wins that are also pretty far down the list. Like the Niners and the Ravens. You know, the Super Bowl teams this year? Having a low percentage of 3 and outs really did good things for the Cowboys, Giants, Dolphins, Panthers, Eagles and Buccaneers, huh? ALL of them had a better 3 and out % than both the Niners and Ravens this year. Now tell us again how crucial of a statistic that is?
Tebow was not the factor you dream when you view the 62 three and outs (for starters how many did orton have for a quarter of the season ?)
Nowhere near as many. For good reasons AND bad reasons. The problem with Orton wasn't so much three and outs. He was actually pretty good between the 20s, marched them down the field fairly often, but couldn't get touchdowns. That had been the knock on him the years prior. He was actually mentioned as a pro-bowl candidate during the 4-12 season as he was on pace for almost 5000 yards passing that year, if you can believe that. I thought it was a cruel joke, honestly. That would have been fine if the defense wasn't also allowing close to 30 points per game, cuz field goals just weren't going to cut it. (most of his time as starter, defense allowed an average of just over 28 points, which was at or near the bottom of the league for close to 4 years. His big thing wasn't so much that we punted a lot due to three and outs. It was more he couldn't seal the deal, and then he really got shitty his last couple games. Started throwing picks at a far more disproportionate rate than he had his whole career. (He was a good game manager for Chicago. Wasn't known for throwing interceptions that much because he wasn't asked to do much of anything other than not put the defense in harms way. But the answer to your question and the direction you were trying to go with, is they were nowhere near first in three and outs by the time Orton was pulled. There was a stat shown during the Chicago game where they were like 20th and shot up to first place in three and outs in the 8 weeks Tebow played up to that point. Wish I could find it. But if you are insinuationg Orton was responsible for equal or more than his proportianate share, it just isn't true. You can chalk the three and outs to bad coaching, play calling, people not knowing how to use him if you wish. Call it the Broncos fault for not starting him in game one or getting reps if you wish. You can even blame it on trading the top receiver (Brandon Lloyd) at the deadline, which just happened to be around when the switch was made. I don't really care, it is beside the point. It is true, more three and outs per drive happened when Tebow was starting. Scoring average by offense went down too. Before you try it, you're better off making the kinds of excuses I listed in the last paragraph and stick to it, than you are by trying to suggest equal or more of the three and outs per drive happened under Orton. It simply isn't the case.
Yes, but most of those teams that are near the bottom of the list that had wins also had pretty good defenses. They were able to win with less points. Does that theme sould familiar? Look at the Noners and Ravens. You really think with all the praises Alex Smith got last year and Flacco got this year would have amounted to anything without those defenses? Alex Smith was fools gold. I guess where the disconnect is in this argument we have been having the last few weeks is that you are seeing it as not ALL important when it comes to winning and losing games. I'm not saying you can't win with a lot of three and outs, but I'm simply saying it severely hurts offensive production. Broncos were dead last in most areas, and it it werent' for finishing #1 in rushing (cuz that was really all Tebow could do) the Broncos wouldn't have even finished at #25 overall in offense. When offensive production is handicapped like that, it becomes much more difficult to win. You end up having to rely on the defense to carry the load, and that was exaclty what happened with the Broncos last season. Too many wins (against poor teams) had to come down to a miracle/brain fart on the part of another team, and a wing and a prayer after seemingly playing from behind the 8-ball all day. This is why I give far more credit to defense and special teams than I do an offense that was inept most of the time. Sooner or later, you will understand that it is easier to win with offenses that are productive, move the chains, keep the defense off the field, and score more points makes it easier to win than punting the ball away all day. Tebow might be one of those like Orton who are better game managers playing with a really good defense than they are as a QB expected to carry an offensive minded team. Trent Dilfer won a Superbowl behind a hall of fame defense, but nobody thought he was great. As I recall, his team punted a lot too. But that sure put a lot of pressure on the defense to win the game, didn't it? Broncos don't have that kind of defense, and needed an offense. Offense was the weak link last year, and most of that fell on the shoulders of the QB. Blame it on whatever you wish, but he was the one in the drivers seat on that weak link. Broncos fixed that, I would say.
