You just admitted to an even higher level of stalking than I had thought. What makes you think you know what goes on in the Cadre room? lol. You really are up in our business. You get brought up there because you are like the cartoon character of an anti-tebow fan. You just seem to embody all that is funny about them... all in one neat and tidy package.
It's because I don't care if he lied or not. Just like I don't really care if Elway lied. I just don't think Tebow lied. Just my opinion... you don't have to agree. I guess it's hilarious because the facts are that a Tebow led Broncos went as far as a Peyton Manning led Broncos. Like I said, you are arguing against the facts, when I am going with the facts. The Broncos that Tebow led to the playoffs were beefed up for Peyton Manning. It was a better, more experienced team by the time Peyton got them. He also had all the offseason to work with them. But... in the end, they had the exact same ending point in the playoffs.
so you think Tebow would have gotten us to 13-3 or past the Ravens? ...and where do you get this idea that the Broncos "beefed up" the team? They went out and got a couple of guys, (as every team does) but most of the core from 2011 was still there. Besides, how much "beefing up" can the Broncos do when Manning was getting almost 20 million bucks? No, there weren't a whole lot of names on the roster that weren't there the year before. Nice try, but I think we know where the upgrade was. Hmmmmm... Manning or Tebow... Tebow or Manning... Well, Tebow of Course!!! ...said the Gator fan alumni. ...and there is NO FACT about where Tebow coulda woulda shoulda led the Broncos in 2012. He was sitting on the bench for the Jets 99% of the time and only saw the field for special teams, a few gimmick plays, and a handful of passes.
you bring me up in there even though I am not a member because I live inside your skull. It's okay, you can admit it. All this talk about stalking, but you talk an awful lot about what goes on here even though all of you claim not to care. LOL
heh heh.... she said "member." Nahhh, I saw Jaxsuzy mention it once. Something about letting her rants go in there cuz she didn't want us to know what boards you guys were registering at to follow Tebow around.
13-3 got you the same Division title you got under Tebow. It is possible the Broncos could have beat the Ravens with Tebow under center. It is also possible they could have won with Manning... it just didn't happen. What he did or didn't do on the Jets has no relevancy.
Well, you're funny to us, so we laugh about you. I can't explain why. OBTW, I am a member here. Was before you were. What goes on here is my business as much as it is yours. Whereas... you are not a member of the other forum. Just stalking a Tebow fan forum. Anyways, can we just stop talking about the other forum? You read every post there... I get it. But this is the forum we are posting in. Keep it focused to this forum.
Okay, to get back on track. I want some legit thought on this. None of the usual junk that is said. Hypothetically speaking... Tebow doesn't get traded next week after the draft, he stays on through camp and the preseason and continues to be on the roaster into regular season without being released. Okay, with that in mind (and I don't want to hear that is not going to happen... I asking hypothetically and asking for legit answers if he does end up staying on the team) is he the second stringer to Mark, if not were does he stand in line with the other QBs? Another question to also ponder with this scenario in mind: If he is the 2nd stringer... if Mark plays like he did last season, should it be handled differently then how it was handled the previous season? Do you let Mark struggle along or bench him and give Tim a chance playing several series? I want some honest answers. I know I am really asking if the scenario is Mark as the starting QB and Tim as his backup... I guess I am pushing the other 3 QBs aside for a moment to see what opinion is regarding if the same situation plays out for a second year in a row. Thoughts?
Stick to facts guys, not what if's (I thought you guys hated those anyway?) 2012/2013: BRONCOS: Won more games than past two years combined, shit the bed in playoffs, 7 point favorites over Super Bowl champs to start next season TIM: backup to two of the worst starters in the league (Tebow '11 being an exception), fewer passing yards than Jeremy Kerley, Jets have blocked punt with Tim as PERSONAL PROTECTOR, on the field for as many points as me, my 12-year old neighbor, his grandma combined. Seems to me like one got a big boost (see:carried) from the other. Things went so great for both I just can't tell though. At least Tim's intangibles prevented any dissention and anonymous leaks...
I am sticking to the facts. Tim is a Jet currently so the reality of my last post needs to be thought about. It's not a what if at this point. Once people start acknowledging that Tim Tebow is a Jet until further notice, realities need to be look at seriously. Do you continue to deny that there is a QB controversy or do you actually have a legit competition. Because according to the current FO, that is their intentions. Regardless of how you or I want it to be, we need to look at what is actually going on. You are bringing up the Broncos like Tim is still on them. Manning is an incredible QB, no doubt in that. However, let's look at Tim in his one year as the starting QB as a Bronco and Manning as a Bronco. I know for a few of you this argument is not going to jive well because you are going to want to look at both QBs as a whole with all history included. Think outside the box for a second and put that aside. At the end of the day, Tebow went further with the Broncos then Manning did. I know that is sore spot with everyone. I am not trying to rub it in. Just pointing out what happened. Also, you compare the last two years of the Broncos as if Tebow was active as a first stinger on his other team. He wasn't, so comparing that doesn't hold. Because your asking me to forget one aspect while your not looking at the other. That makes no sense. Had Tebow been the starting Qb for the Jets last season and had a terrible season, then your argument stands. But that didn't happen. Once again, just debating with you, not trying to attack your point. Your second argument is also acting as if Tebow was in for more than one series in a row. Which wasn't the case. I know, I watched every single game last season. hehe. He literally was pulled after one rushing play. Then was pulled to have Sanchez put in. Which totally disrupted both of them not letting either get into any sort of rhythm to get anything done. T The locker room being lost once again to the media is total crap. Players that were much more active then Tebow was the entire season where placing blame where it should not have been. They should have been expressing distaste with the FO for allowing the circus as pointed out by Mark, whom I actually agree with in this case. You can NOT place blame on a player that played five minutes the entire season, when you yourself have played. That to me is not a Tebow fan speaking distastefully of the Jets players, but just a football fan in general. Watching a team talk to the media like that and then not put their name to it pisses me off. Own it. If you need to go to media sources anonymously then you clearly are a coward who can't back up what you have to say.
You really think that the 2011 Tebow Broncos are comparable to the 2012 Manning Broncos simply because they both made the playoffs? In 2011 the AFC West sucked some serious ass. Everyone was horrrible. There was a race to see who would fall apart most at the end of the season. Denver fell ass-backwards into the post-season that year. The Broncos went 7-1 when they started Tebow for a couple of reasons... 1. As the incoming head coach during a lockout-crippled offseason, John Fox didn't get his defensive scheme squared away until he got a breather during the bye week. Tebow's first start was after the bye. 2. They hit the soft white underbelly of their schedule, facing craptastic teams like Miami and teams riddled with critical injury losses like Chicago (Cutler, Urlacher). 3. The run-option Offense that they instituted for Tebow was an oddball scheme which took NFL teams a while to adapt to. A lot like Miami's wildcat a few years before. Once opposing DCs had enough gamefilm, they shutdown Tebow effectively - even teams like the "wheels-are-falling-off" Chiefs were too much for the Tebow-led Broncos. Timmy had a 1-4 finish to the year. Same as the start that got Orton benched and then released...
Now that you said it for the 1000th time, I all of a sudden agree with you. As of April 22, 2013... I officially agree with you. Psych.
Actually the Broncos made it to the SECOND round. They had a first round bye due to a 13-3 record. So in order to make it just as far as Manning did, Tebow would either have had to have a top conference record (which there is no way in hell we would have had with Tebow) or he would have had to beat a playoff team to get there. I think the Pittsburgh game in 2011 was a fluke. That DOES happen in the NFL, so that doesn't make me think Tebow is a good QB. Few of you think Sanchez is worth a shit. But he played in two AFC championship games in his first 3 years. So by your logic, shouldn't that have given Sanchez instant credibility? Nobody is going to say he is better than Manning even during those seasons and there is no way in hell I'm gonna see you apply that same logic for Sanchez being better than Tebow.
Am I missing something? Because the Tebow-led Broncos made it to the second round also. The difference is Tebow's team won a playoff game. Manning did not. Still the same *end result* though. What consolation is 13-3 when you lose in the divisional round. Peyton Manning was not brought in to get to the second round like Tebow did. He was brought in for one thing only... Superbowls.
Fair enough. I think he will stand at #2 at best or perhaps #3 behind Garrard. Garrard I think will stand a better chance in the West Coast offense. He WON'T be #4 even if McElroy manages to outperform Tebow in the passing game. Tebow has far too many other uses to just relegate him to practice squad. But he can be in at #3 now thanks to CBA rule change. His rookie year, he was the #2, due to his abilities in wildcat situations and such, which was why McDaniels wanted him to begin with. They still had that rule in place about emergency (3rd string) QBs that didn't allow starter to come back if they played them. That is gone now. Only reason they'd list him #2 is if they only planned on dressing 2 QBs that day. He's just too damn usefull as a runner and gimmick player to not do so. However, even if listed at #2 and Sanchez is gone for a couple weeks, look for Garrard to get the start and Tebow still being listed at #2 for the occaisional wild-cat play. New CBA rules got rid of that stupid emergency QB rule. I'd give my true #2 a shot first, and to be honest, I still think the TRUE #2 will be Garrard. Tebow may be listed at #2 for reasons I say above, but that doesn't mean he's the real backup for the long term. At best he'd get to finish a game Sanchez was taken out in. But yeah, if both of them flop, they really lose nothing by playing Tebow. He's going to have to show them more to get that playing time though. I think his inability to impress between Sundays had more to do with McElroy getting a look than people want to admit. If the other 3 QBs are taken out of the equation, and Sanchez screws it up again, and it appears they have lost the trust in Sanchez, then I don't see why tehy woudn't put in Tebow... unless, again, they believe in Tebow even less than Sanchez. That is one thing I though was lacking in the Tebow/Sanchez debate. Sanchez reeked, no doubt about it. but the assumption seemed to be that Sanchez sucking automatically = Tebow is better. Not neccessarily true, logically. Sanchez may indeed suck, but Tebow still could be seen as sucking more and not worth the time. It could be that Rex and Sporano still thought based on what they saw every day that Tebow was actually worse.
That was 2011. We have no idea where Tebow would have or would not have led the 2012 team. I don't think he would have taken the Broncos anywhere near where Manning got them this year. You could see the difference in 2012 from the 2011 team, it was like night and day. there is no doubt in my mind that Manning made this team far better than it was in 2011. Even if the results weren't what I wanted them to be in the post season. You claimed they'd be at least as good if not better. Then you claimed to be factual only, but projected what happened in 2011 as something that would have happened again in 2012. That is opinion, not fact. Seeing the difference in production from one of the worst offenses Denver had in decades to one of the top offenses in 2012 leads me to believe you are high on crack if you don't think the 2012 team OVERALL was far superior to the 2011 team. ...and NO, there weren't a lot of other new faces on the team from one year to the next. sure, there were some, but none were the big difference makers you seem to think they suddenly beefed the team up with. Manning was the biggest reason for the improvment. Besides, how much room do you think the Broncos had to add all these other supposedly key players that made the Broncos better after giving Manning between 18 to 20 million for the season? they had to talk an old Stokley who hadn't played in a year out of retirement.
I would venture to say that the Bronco's had written off the 2011 season by week 6, keep in mind they got rid of 2 week one starters, Orton (I understand why) and Lloyd (their most productive receiver). That being said, with the acquisition of Manning, it was very apparent they were all in on the 2012 season, not so much the season before.
What you are missing is the painfully obvious fact that Tebow sucks dick and Manning is a HOF QB. That's all.
All that reaching to say the Broncos beefed up to help Manning... when the REAL upgrade to the offense should be obvious to anyone with an IQ greater than their shoe size. I think they should get out more and actually look at other QBs rather than just the shitty ones ahead of them in the depth chart, cuz Sanchez and Orton aren't exactly the model example to follow on what a QB should actually be. No wonder they don't see a lot of difference between Manning and Tebow. They're used to seeing him being somewhat comparable to the starter on his team and thinking the same would be true across the league. Guess that is why they seem to think the upgrade was everywhere else. There aren't too many new faces on the team, and last I checked, Thomas and Decker were still the primary receivers in 2012. Would adding Stokley and Tamme REALLY have taken the Broncos passing offense from DEAD LAST in the league all the way to the 4th best if it were Tebow throwing he ball? No, I don't think so either. I think it had more to do with exchanging a shitty QB with a HOFer. But maybe that is just me. Don't blame the Teboners though, that's just the kool-aid talking. That stuff is dangerous for society.
