I agree with almost all of your knowledgable points except the biggest one, about the waiting period for Tebow to start. You sound as if Tebow is sitting behind Peyton Manning or Brett Favre, he is not. As of the 2nd preseason game the Jets with Mark Sanchez as their starting qb are the only team in the NFL to have not scored a touchdown. Sanchez has led the Jets to exactly 0 points throught the course of 2 games. Actually negative 7 points when you factor in the pick six. Tebow hasn't played great by any stretch, but if Sanchez doesn't get something going Tebow will end up starting by default.
The great irony of this situation is that this is where I expected to be in following Tebow -- I thought he'd go about round 3 to a team with an established quarterback (my two suggestions were Patriots and Colts), where he could (1) give them an immediate jolt as a change-up, putting them over the top in contending; (2) be a competent #2 QB, while giving something extra so that roster spot doesn't go to waste; and (3) work on his mechanics for 3 years. The Denver thing (first round pick to a team without a good quarterback) threw it all out of whack, but I think it's because Tebow is just that enigmatic -- suprisingly good and surprisingly bad, all at the same time. If the Jets can just get it in gear and win some ballgames, this could be a great thing. If the Jets lose, it's going to be turmoil, and some people will blame Tebow and his fans. But there's no reason for that -- just win, baby.
1) Functions? No. Roles on the New York Jets in 2012? Yes. 2 & 3) The line between respectful and disrespectful for those that an individual doesn't know personally begins at offensive, and I wasn't offensive ergo I wasn't disrespectful towards him.
There's no hidden agenda in my question. I can tell there are less errant throws. He stays in the pocket longer rather than taking off running as his second read. But, I'd like some specifics on how Tebow has gotten better. If you could break down some videos, I'd really appreciate it. I know this is time consuming, but I'd really like to increase my football smarts. Thanks!
Ball is up higher. Has a quicker release. Passing is much more consistent. He puts the ball where he means to. Ball has nicer spin. He's also going through progressions better, which you can see on replays. If he has time in the pocket, he looks for 2nd and 3rd reads instead of running the ball.
Thank you Demosthenes9. I can tell the progressions are better. I can't tell on the release but will look at some more video.
Guys I am a huge Tebow fan, Tebow has sucked, Sanchez has sucked and the offensive line does not even look like a pro football level offensive line. I understand its pre season, I know its a vanilla offense but unless they figure out something quick in that O-line, both Sanchez and Tebow are headed for a very looooong year.
I agree with most of what you said, but I tend to put more stock in the pick-6 Mark threw against the Broncos as more of a contributing factor to the outcome. The incompletions certainly contributed to the loss, but without that Pick-6, I don't think the Broncos could have mustured up enough offense to win the way the Jets Defense was playing... Had the Jets went three and out on the drive where Sanchez threw the pick-6, I think the Jets would have won... So I tend to agree more with the other guy...Incompletions are drive killers, while interceptions (particularly pick-6's), are game killers.
That Broncos game was a perfect microcosm of Tebow vs Sanchez. Tebow can play like Helen Keller's crippled cousin for the first 45 minutes of a game, but he never makes the critical error. Conversely, Sanchez can be in control and coasting, and he routinely does the one thing you can't survive. In the case of that Broncos game, it was a pick-6 in a game that our defense had an absolute stranglehold on. All he had to do was NOT throw a field-flipping interception. He did, the rest is history.
See the thing is the pick 6 tied the game. The Jets only went on to put up 3 more points the rest of the game because their drives died down. You complete and important pass here or there the ball never gets back to Tebow. That's why I don't buy that phrase that interceptions lose games, incompletions stall drives. Incompletions can lose games too, a lot of them actually
YW Apple. Only way I am judging that his release is better is that the he's spinning the ball pretty nicely. Last year, even on passes that got to receivers, as opposed to killing worms, the passes were wobbly. ALL of his passes against Cincy and the Giants had nice spin and most of them were on target. Even the ones that were off target had nice spin.
Yep...and if that pick 6 was merely an incompletion, the Broncos most likely never would have had a shot.
The odd thing about Tebow is that he'll get roasted for having a bad (or nonproductive) game for "up until the last 5 minutes), but Sanchez gets by with having a bad game the whole 60 minutes. Because, after all, bad games happen (I agree). And I submit to you, that Tebow was facing a much better defense that night than Sanchez was. The Jets were still an elite defense.
This is just going in circles. I could say if the incomplete pass before the pick 6 was complete there was no need to throw there. My whole point was you (not you specifically whoever said it) can't just say incompletions don't lose games. They do. They do lose a lot of games. It isn't cut and dry like that phrase says and using one game to prove a point is dumb and misguided. Sanchez and Tebow both played bad that game. Sanchez got roasted in 10 too for some of his comebacks because some articles came out saying "If Sanchez played better earlier, they never need a comeback. No need to celebrate it" Although there is an essence of truth in the statement, you still have to appreciate the fact the QB was able to lead a big drive late. You would rather a QB consistently do well to avoid the comeback, but the comeback should be appreciated not looked down upon.
If you are taking it that far, then 10 yard runs by your offense can kill you. I mean, if it's 3rd and 12 and you only get 10 yards, then you have to punt. That hands the ball to the other team and they might score. Ask just about any coach on the planet and they will tell you that they would rather have an incomplete pass than a pick 6 going the other way.
The phrase was something like Interceptions lose games, incompletions lose drives. I was showing that it isn't cut and dry and it's misguided to use one game to show that point. The incompletions can be as brutal and even worse. It isn't as simple as saying interceptions=bad, incompletions=not as bad. There are very rare instances where each one can be okay and not bad, but football isn't cut and dry enough to say one only leads to losses then use a one game example. And the phrase was never which is worse, it wasn't even a pick six. The phrase was something interceptions lose games, incompletions end drives. You set up an argument I wasn't arguing. That's like me saying "yada yada yada, but every coach would take a win over a loss right?" You have to agree but it isn't what I was saying or arguing. And to your 10 yard run thing, I just said using one game to prove something is dumb and misguided so you you break it down further and go into 1 random game example? It was never pick 6 vs incompletions. It was saying that incompletions can be just as bad as interceptions (not just pick 6s) and incompletions can be and usually are game losers and that using one game to say "See I am right" is misguided especially when you are trying to prove some phrase or idea.
This is a good point. When Mike Vick came into the league, he had a completion percentage nearly as bad as Tebows. It really took years for him to throw the ball better. The problems might have been different (Motivation vs Mechanics?) but I think if Tebow can get a little bit better on the short and intermediate routes he will be an amazing QB because of his rushing ability. What makes me think he should have been given more of an opportunity to start is that he generated more yardage in his first 16 NFL starts than Sanchez did in his last 16. Here are the numbers: Mark Sanchez entered his third year in 2011 with 38 career starts under his belt. He started 16 games in 2011, here were his statistics (all include rushing and passing stats): 3577 Yards 32 tds 26 turnovers Tim Tebow in his short career has started 16 games. Here are his stats: 3757 yards 26 tds 16 turnovers The two quarterbacks are comparable despite Sanchez having 38 more starts, and a better supporting cast on offense. Tebow generated about 200 yards more than Sanchez did. He had 6 less TDs with 10 less turnovers. How much better could Tebow be by start 38 if he's already comparable to Sanchez now? He protects the ball better, and helps the run game control the clock. That is a huge boon to a great defense. Part of what made the Jets D worse last year was all the offensive turnovers. See: http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8192370/the-jets-had-tough-2011-was-anomaly-trend It's pretty obvious at this point the coaching staff is going with Mark. He is their "guy" that they drafted. Who knows, maybe this will be the year Mark makes a huge step forward and can at least put up Flacco and Ryan like numbers.
Also: Even if Tebow can't improve as a passer/never starts, I love the trade just because Tebow could do so many other things on the football field. The guy could probably be a decent fullback, a great special teamer, wildcat QB, and emergency QB (remember tom tupa?). I'm not sure if he'd ever give up on being a full time starting QB, but if the Jets really aren't considering starting him they should be looking to get him in there as more than just a wildcat QB/personal punt protector.
