November 18, 201114 yr Author Ever so slightly easier than Buffalo's schedule. Which, in the end, they're equivalent in easiness for any team desiring to make the playoffs, even though the Patriots schedule is a little easier. But it would still boil down to who wins their division games.
November 18, 201114 yr I mean, even if their schedule is only slightly easier than Buffalo's, they're a better team.
November 18, 201114 yr Author Indeed they are. But with that being said, it wouldn't surprise me if Buffalo and New England end up in a playoff in that last game for a division title (so long as Buffalo doesn't continue to fall apart).
November 19, 201114 yr You can't take away the late-game playmaking, though. I'd agree he's "not that good a QB" overall for all the reasons you state, but the fact of the matter is he has made clutch fourth quarter plays with games on the line. Who is taking that away? If anyone is trying to unfairly weight things, it's the people who say "HE JUST WINS," because they're using one or two good drives to ignore the totality of everything he does. Given that you judge him on the totality of what he does.. and that you think he's really bad... would you bench him?
November 19, 201114 yr You can't take away the late-game playmaking, though. I'd agree he's "not that good a QB" overall for all the reasons you state, but the fact of the matter is he has made clutch fourth quarter plays with games on the line. Who is taking that away? If anyone is trying to unfairly weight things, it's the people who say "HE JUST WINS," because they're using one or two good drives to ignore the totality of everything he does. Given that you judge him on the totality of what he does.. and that you think he's really bad... would you bench him? It would be PR suicide to bench him. Plus, he at least deserves a shot to improve. Right now, he indeed is an awful QB. It wasn't just because the Jets have good corners - he really struggles to make the throws.
November 19, 201114 yr You can't take away the late-game playmaking, though. I'd agree he's "not that good a QB" overall for all the reasons you state, but the fact of the matter is he has made clutch fourth quarter plays with games on the line. Who is taking that away? If anyone is trying to unfairly weight things, it's the people who say "HE JUST WINS," because they're using one or two good drives to ignore the totality of everything he does. Given that you judge him on the totality of what he does.. and that you think he's really bad... would you bench him? No.
November 19, 201114 yr I don't care for stats when it comes to football, honestly. I don't think they show you everything you need to know. However, I still don't think Tebow is a good QB despite me snapping on this thread, Twitter and Facebook. I do think he can be a good player in the NFL, though. Just at a different position. I don't care for stats when it comes to football, honestly. I don't think they show you everything you need to know. I disagree. I think in football, watching and analyzing is more effective than stats. Watching is not inherently flawed. Stats are useful, and I use them, but at the end of the day the tape never lies.
November 19, 201114 yr Camera angles are not a problem with coaches tape. It will be really, really hard to miss things on tape. Really hard. Not sure why you listed that. As for the bias, that doesn't have an argument here. You go by what you see on tape. You record what you see on film. Your feelings toward a team do not effect what they do when you are watching. You see more on tape than you do on the stat sheet, and that is a fact. My point is, you watch the tape and it tells you all you need to know. More than a stat sheet. I disagree. There is nothing inherently flawed when watching film, imo. Agree to disagree. This could go on forever. That is a complete catalogue of your comments. I omitted the stuff about bias. The only attempt at explanation was in the post about camera angles. But even then you didn't explain why you disagreed, you just said that you don't miss stuff. But you said "really, really hard" to miss stuff. Even if that's true, it's not impossible. And, in reality it's probably a lot further from impossible to miss stuff. Also, you were referencing the value of observation and stats in your own analysis. And I would imagine you don't have access to all the tape coaches do, so of course you're at even more of a disadvantage. And for the record I do agree with bobbob's summation, which you ultimately seemed to agree on, as well. Really, I'm not out to get you. But I do stand by what I said that you were repeating yourself without backing up your argument.
November 19, 201114 yr Stats can be used as an important tool to analyze players and teams. But so are mechanics AND intangibles (and WINS). You can find a happy medium. It's not that black and white. There will always be skeptics and stat monkeys and there will always be purists, and they will always argue their points to no end. It doesn't change any minds, as much as you want it to. You're just proving your points to yourselves. If you're going to stick your neck into an argument you're not a part of and treat those involved with condescension, at least be right. What do mechanics have to do with it? And get out of here with that "stat monkey" BS. Bobbob clearly said that both ought to be used, and I agree. I think Ashraf might even agree with that statement to some extent, too. Not only are you unfairly characterizing our thoughts, but you're doing it rudely, and all in an argument where you were uninvolved until now. Why are you so defensive? It's a forum. I'm not being rude, condescending or unfair, I'm just adding my two cents on the debate itself. You also have to understand that I am extremely bored right now. I was merely observing that both parties are set in their arguments and neither will change the other's mind. It's like Republicans and Democrats debating a bill. It gets nowhere. My bored self was just pointing that out. Because it's a forum. I don't see how it was rude or condescending. Being rude would be asking you if it was your time of the month. I'm really just trying to have us all hold hands and sing a song. Something really cool happened in Denver last night and that's what I wanted to focus on. As for bringing up mechanics, my point is critics are always ripping Tebow's mechanics just as they do statistics, but the kid just finds ways to win games despite his unconventional style. I'm sorry? Calling me "defensive" is a great and convenient way of turning it around You being bored doesn't affect the merits of your comments, but okay. In fact, you are wrong about nothing productive coming from it, because Ashraf and bobbob actually seemed to agree eventually. You chose to highlight "skeptics," "stat monkeys," and "purists" as people who will argue their points to no end. Do you put yourself into any of those categories? Rather, you chose 3 terms that are along the lines of those commonly used by those who think chemistry/being a gamer/will to win, etc. are really important to criticize those who don't (or at least value those less). And, by quoting me, you are saying that I argue to no end, that it won't change minds, and that I'm arguing to prove my own point to myself. That's rude and condescending. And not true. If you meant to say that those attributes describe a wider group, then you failed to make who that was clear. Also, you don't know the dynamics here. I like to think Ashraf and I are on quite good terms. And even if we weren't, as you said, it's just a discussion board. Where we discuss things. Including things we disagree on. I don't perefer it to always be a hand-holding campfire. But this paragraph is all essentially just an aside.
November 19, 201114 yr I wonder what the opinion would be on Tebow if his defense sucked ass in his starts and still put up similar numbers. Methinks that hardly anyone would be calling him much of a QB at all.
November 19, 201114 yr You can't take away the late-game playmaking, though. I'd agree he's "not that good a QB" overall for all the reasons you state, but the fact of the matter is he has made clutch fourth quarter plays with games on the line. Who is taking that away? If anyone is trying to unfairly weight things, it's the people who say "HE JUST WINS," because they're using one or two good drives to ignore the totality of everything he does. Given that you judge him on the totality of what he does.. and that you think he's really bad... would you bench him? Probably not. He's young and does show flashes of being not terrible at time. It's worth trying to develop that for a team that's not going anywhere, 4-1 run against a pretty mediocre schedule notwithstanding. The mistake would be in taking this stretch and thinking he's secured a starting QB position and you can worry about other positions. He's shown nothing to make one think he's the guy moving forward.
November 19, 201114 yr I wonder what the opinion would be on Tebow if his defense sucked ass in his starts and still put up similar numbers. Methinks that hardly anyone would be calling him much of a QB at all. We did this 3 or 4 years ago with Vince Young. He was putting up mediocre numbers, but his team kept winning. That house of cards came tumbling down pretty quickly, largely because of his play, but also because Jeff Fisher was a turd and the public turned on VY. Our public will give Tebow a much longer leash, because he's the type of person our culture roots for (take that however you want.) However eventually, the defense is going to face a team they can't stop and he'll actually have to have more than one good drive to win a game.
November 19, 201114 yr Camera angles are not a problem with coaches tape. It will be really, really hard to miss things on tape. Really hard. Not sure why you listed that. As for the bias, that doesn't have an argument here. You go by what you see on tape. You record what you see on film. Your feelings toward a team do not effect what they do when you are watching. You see more on tape than you do on the stat sheet, and that is a fact. My point is, you watch the tape and it tells you all you need to know. More than a stat sheet. I disagree. There is nothing inherently flawed when watching film, imo. Agree to disagree. This could go on forever. That is a complete catalogue of your comments. I omitted the stuff about bias. The only attempt at explanation was in the post about camera angles. But even then you didn't explain why you disagreed, you just said that you don't miss stuff. But you said "really, really hard" to miss stuff. Even if that's true, it's not impossible. And, in reality it's probably a lot further from impossible to miss stuff. Also, you were referencing the value of observation and stats in your own analysis. And I would imagine you don't have access to all the tape coaches do, so of course you're at even more of a disadvantage. And for the record I do agree with bobbob's summation, which you ultimately seemed to agree on, as well. Really, I'm not out to get you. But I do stand by what I said that you were repeating yourself without backing up your argument. I'm sorry. I thought I was explaining my self thoroughly but it does seem I wasn't. When I say watching film, i do not mean watching a game once then basing your opinions off that one viewing of the game. I mean literally keying in on one player, and focusing the entire game on him. Literally pausing and rewinding a play multiple times to understand what happened. Watching film allows you to see things a stat sheet will not tell you, like the example I gave when Tim Tebow ran in on the game winning touchdown. It allows you to see a teams offensive or defensive philosophy, how a player fits into a teams scheme, players technique and skills, their strengths and weaknesses, etc. Like I said, I use stats. But at the end of the day, I'm not taking stats over film. They don't show you enough. The entire NFL is this way. Every coach, every scout, every player will tell you film over stats.
November 19, 201114 yr You can't take away the late-game playmaking, though. I'd agree he's "not that good a QB" overall for all the reasons you state, but the fact of the matter is he has made clutch fourth quarter plays with games on the line. Who is taking that away? If anyone is trying to unfairly weight things, it's the people who say "HE JUST WINS," because they're using one or two good drives to ignore the totality of everything he does. Given that you judge him on the totality of what he does.. and that you think he's really bad... would you bench him? Probably not. He's young and does show flashes of being not terrible at time. It's worth trying to develop that for a team that's not going anywhere, 4-1 run against a pretty mediocre schedule notwithstanding. The mistake would be in taking this stretch and thinking he's secured a starting QB position and you can worry about other positions. He's shown nothing to make one think he's the guy moving forward. I'm surprised you wouldn't bench him given that: - you think he's so bad - you don't think he has shown anything to make you think he's the guy going forward - they're right in the middle of the playoff hunt down with just a few games to go - they have a capable guy in Orton who was actually better than average the past couple of seasons
November 19, 201114 yr You can't take away the late-game playmaking, though. I'd agree he's "not that good a QB" overall for all the reasons you state, but the fact of the matter is he has made clutch fourth quarter plays with games on the line. Who is taking that away? If anyone is trying to unfairly weight things, it's the people who say "HE JUST WINS," because they're using one or two good drives to ignore the totality of everything he does. Given that you judge him on the totality of what he does.. and that you think he's really bad... would you bench him? Probably not. He's young and does show flashes of being not terrible at time. It's worth trying to develop that for a team that's not going anywhere, 4-1 run against a pretty mediocre schedule notwithstanding. The mistake would be in taking this stretch and thinking he's secured a starting QB position and you can worry about other positions. He's shown nothing to make one think he's the guy moving forward. I'm surprised you wouldn't bench him given that: - you think he's so bad - you don't think he has shown anything to make you think he's the guy going forward - they're right in the middle of the playoff hunt down with just a few games to go - they have a capable guy in Orton who was actually better than average the past couple of seasons They're not a legitimate contender. Just because the NFL is designed to force parity doesn't mean they should ignore that. They're 20th in the league in point differential right now. They're not a playoff caliber team. In the NFL, if you're building for the future, it's best not to be distracted. It's not like MLB, where the additional revenue from a playoff appearance can radically alter your outlook, so if you are looking forward, you should always do so and not let a 3-game winning streak deter you. Tim Tebow might not be the guy moving forward. I don't think he has the skills to be and he hasn't shown enough to earn anything. However, they should give him every opportunity this year to show them whether he is or isn't so they can make an informed decision going forward. Orton definitely isn't the guy going forward, so there's relatively little to be gained by going with him.
November 19, 201114 yr You can't take away the late-game playmaking, though. I'd agree he's "not that good a QB" overall for all the reasons you state, but the fact of the matter is he has made clutch fourth quarter plays with games on the line. Who is taking that away? If anyone is trying to unfairly weight things, it's the people who say "HE JUST WINS," because they're using one or two good drives to ignore the totality of everything he does. Given that you judge him on the totality of what he does.. and that you think he's really bad... would you bench him? Probably not. He's young and does show flashes of being not terrible at time. It's worth trying to develop that for a team that's not going anywhere, 4-1 run against a pretty mediocre schedule notwithstanding. The mistake would be in taking this stretch and thinking he's secured a starting QB position and you can worry about other positions. He's shown nothing to make one think he's the guy moving forward. I'm surprised you wouldn't bench him given that: - you think he's so bad - you don't think he has shown anything to make you think he's the guy going forward - they're right in the middle of the playoff hunt down with just a few games to go - they have a capable guy in Orton who was actually better than average the past couple of seasons I never said he was 'so bad' nor did I ever say 'bad.' I said he doesn't look that good right now overall and that it can be hard to watch early in the game. But that is because -- as I have said this before -- I am 100 percent biased because I watched him play for four years in The Swamp. He gave me two of four national championships when I was in college -- this is my bias. I call it The Gator Factor. I never called him bad. His play in the NFL is FAR from perfect, but I know he will continue to work on his passing game. I'd leave him in late-game situations because I've seen him pull off comebacks in the past. For me, Tim Tebow doesn't have to be like anyone else in the NFL except himself. And a lot of people are haters and critics and skeptics. And they will continue to be. UF alum will continue to revere him. You wouldn't understand unless you were there during "The Time." I am also referring to the 2006 and 2007 UF basketball team. I support them all in the NBA, especially the one everyone loves to hate.
November 19, 201114 yr PurpleHaze - I never said you said those things...bobbob did. I think it would be insane to bench a guy with a 78 QB rating who averages 6.9 yards rushing and has a 10:1 TD:TO ratio.
November 19, 201114 yr PurpleHaze - I never said you said those things...bobbob did. I think it would be insane to bench a guy with a 78 QB rating who averages 6.9 yards rushing and has a 10:1 TD:TO ratio. Oopsie...That's who I was responding to. Sorry -- not enough coffee today.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.