The single worst play for the Jets last year (yes, worse than the butt fumble*) was when Tebow as the intended receiver at tight end. It was a perfect pass – that hit Tebow in the back of the helmet; he didn’t have the timing to turn around.
*Which occurred only because the center was shoved backwards unexpectedly.
He’s a good player in that he made it to the NFL. The worst player in the league is still a phenomenal player, just not compared to the rest of the league who are even better.
When Tebowing was a big fad(meme), was he in the NFL or college, then? I thought he was a big NFL star at that point, but again, I don’t follow it.
He was QB of the University of Florida Gators, where he was phenomenally successful. He was drafted by the Broncos, was backup QB and got stuck with the starting job due to injuries. He then won an improbable string of victories with absolutely atrocious performances - the wins were largely due to the Broncos having a very good D. In spite of the fact that he’d finish games with stats like 5 completions from 17 attempts for 106 yards, his fans would say, “All he does is win.”
Then in the off-season, the Broncos picked up Peyton Manning and dealt Tebow to the Jets where he did absolutely nothing. Tebow has never shown any sort of performance in the NFL, although some people apparently think he should be given credit for the stellar performances of the Bronco defense.
Teblow was a good college QB & thats all. All he is now is a big distraction.
To continue the baseball comparison, Rickey (it’s spelled that way) Henderson would NOT have dominated rep league ball the way I did; he would have been far, far better, because in addition to walking a lot and stealing bases he would have been doing things I could not do that would translate to success at higher levels. He had bat speed and power far beyond my own, defensive ability far beyond my own, and the quickness needed to keep one’s hands back long enough to hit a curve ball but still catch up to a fastball. Once the pitchers started controlling breaking balls around age 16, I was dead meat; Rickey was hitting those pitches 400 feet.
But now more to your point, suppose… lemme see, who’s a good example… okay, suppose Evan Longoria had been in my league. Longoria is kind of slow and it’s safe to say he would not have stolen eight bases in one game. (He is a good baserunner, just not super fast.) It is, I suppose, theoretically possible that had we been in the same league at age 14 I would have looked, statistically, like a superficially better player, by virtue of on base percentage and the endless parade of steals. Maybe.
But NO scout would have thought my potential was the same (if they scouted 14-year-olds.) My skills were extremely specific to exploiting the weaknesses of teenaged pitchers; Longoria had a set of skills much broader and more applicable to all levels of baseball. Nobody would have seriously thought my stolen base total meaningful as compared to what Longoria was capable of; they would have seen his power, his smooth and elegant swing, his defensive abilities, and said “That kid can play some ball.” They would have looked at me and said “he has the arm to play no position other than first or second base, minimal power, no bat quickness, and he’s too tall for the walking schtick to last.” History proved them right.
I admit this isn’t a perfect comparison to Tebow but it’s the same fundamental problem; **exploiting a weakness common to a lower level of a sport is not the same thing that will work at the upper level. **You can come up with an example in ANY sport. In high school basketball just being 6’9" will make you useful; in college not so much, and in the NBA you’d better have some talent, even if you’ve reached 7’0", or you’re useless.
It’s also a phenomenon in hockey; you’ll have a major junior player score 120 points and he just will not make it at a higher level, usually because he is a clever player who lacks physical gifts but is unusually good at exploiting common defensive errors. But then in the AHL, or NHL if he’s rushed, those errors aren’t there; the defencemen are always in the right place, and that obvious pass towards the other winger is always picked off. Or a defenceman who was really useful in the OHL because he was 40 pounds bigger than anyone else and could just destroy forwards who came down the ice in a straight line learns that in the NHL, the forwards know you’re there and don’t come in a straight line, or will suddenly dump the puck past you before you’re close enough to hit them, and because YOUR turning radius is 15 feet 6 inches and not 14 feet 6 inches, you’re always beaten by a step and suddenly you’re Captain Quicksand and you look silly.
In addition to what others have said, Tebow played on some loaded Florida teams. It’s easy to look good when you have all day to throw to wide open receivers. This is actually fairly common for college QBs on great teams. Except for Cam Newton, no BCS winning QB has amounted to much in the NFL.
That said, he was a phenomenal college QB, no doubts about that. He hasn’t translated to NFL success due to his inaccuracy (his “good” season in Denver had less than a 47% completion percentage), slow delivery, inability to progress to 2nd and 3rd receivers, average arm, and lack of awareness. You can see the lack of awareness when he gets knocked out of the Kentucky game here. The guy comes straight at him from the front and Tebow never sees him. That’s “pocket awareness” that all good QBs have. Granted, anyone can look bad on one play, but you see that a lot with Tebow. He locks on to a receiver and doesn’t see the whole defense. For his (admittedly short) career, he gets sacked on over 10% of his pass attempts, in addition to his low completion percentage. That’s not going to cut it in the NFL.
Also, one of his major strengths in college was running. He timed at 4.7 in the combine, which isn’t fast enough to be much of a threat in the NFL. Plus, running QBs get killed in the NFL. Tebow wasn’t near the runner Vick was and he’s not as big as Daunte Culpepper. Both of those guys were effective running QBs (who could also pass), but they got hurt due to the abuse an NFL runner takes. Any running QB will have to throw effectively in the NFL against far better, faster, smarter, and more complex defenses than they ever see in college.
In short, he was a great fit for some outstanding teams in college, but his skill set didn’t translate to the far more competitive NFL.
To use another analogy, imagine there are two 18 year old high school pitchers: Charles “Crafty” Croft and Mike “Lightning” Lee.
Lightning Lee has a live arm can can throw the ball HARD- he’s been clocked at 93 MPH. But he’s wild, throws a lot of wild pitches, and walks a lot of batters. His won-loss record is barely over .500.
Crafty Croft’s fastball is only about 82 mph, but he has good control, and has a decent curveball, which most of the opposing batters haven’t seen much of before. He has a very low ERA and a 10-1 record.
Now, there’s no doubt that Croft deserves whatever pitching awards his school or his league may give out, and Lee doesn’t. But which one would a pro scout be more interested in? And which one may actually have the potential to be an MLB star?
Lee does. He can LEARN control, and he can LEARN to throw a breaking ball, but Croft can’t learn to throw hard.
In the same way, Tebow may have looked a lot more polished than some of the pocket passers who played in the NCAA when he did. But they could learn to do what the NFL requires, while Tebow COULDN’T learn to make NFL throws.
The higher you go, the more sheer physical talent matters.
A partial answer for this has been given by others, but both his percentage rate, and yards per attempt in college were based on a few factors:
If you look at his success in Denver, a lot of it can be laid at the feet of a tremendous defense and a great kicker who had the altitude advantage to get a lot of long kicks. Tebow hit on a few big passes, including the game winner in the playoffs, but that is a very low percentage system to build a team around.
In closing - this was perhaps the worst quarterbacked football game I have ever seen that was not played in a blizzard: http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=311117007
Exceptions: Stu Miller, Todd Van Poppel
The ability to throw hard does not GUARANTEE major league success. It is, however, something that is a PREREQUISITE for major league success.
There are basically zero pitchers in modern major league ball who throw a maximum of 80-82 MPH. Not a single one. Even knuckleball pitchers are always guys who could throw in the mid to high 80s and later convert to knuckleball pitching. The slowest pitchers of modern times, guys like Jamie Moyer or Dan Quisenberry, could throw well past 82 when they started. A young man who cannot throw faster than 82 will not be a major league pitcher, no matter how much he can dominate high school ball. It’s not possible.
A pitcher who can throw 98 might not become an all-star, but it is at least possible.
I don’t know, given his throwing ability, how it could be possible for Tim Tebow to be a good NFL quarterback. He is the football equivalent of the pitcher who throw 80-mph junk; it’ll fool college kids but NFL players and defensive coordinators will continue to kill him.
I present to you Chris “Disco”* Hayes!
I know, I know - he never got the call-up.
*He’s called “Disco” because he pitches in the 70s.
I looked up Greg Maddux’s stats because I remember him being a guy without a power fastball. I thought he might be an exception to the rule but it looks like you are right. In his prime he was throwing high 80’s to barely into the 90’s. Kind of a side track for this thread but something I have been thinking about lately, is how much a power arm is glorified in baseball. I was born in 84, and when we played baseball as kids we always pretended to be Nolan Ryan, or Roger Clemens, nobody ever grabbed the ball and said “I’m Gregg Maddux today”. Even though he won 4 straight Cy Youngs with a insanely low era.
@NFL_STATS recently tweeted this picture.
Basically it is saying that in the last 25 years, there have been 16 different QBs win the Heisman.
Only one of them has ever won a NFL Playoff game.
Yep, Tim Tebow.
I think our point is that he’s never going to win another one.
It is interesting, though, how few Heisman-winning QBs are REALLY successful. Even before those 16, there ain’t many.
It’s not just Heisman winners. MANY quarterbacks who’ve won NCAA championships haven’t even been drafted, while others were taken in very late rounds or shifted to other positions. Just off the top of my head, I can think of James Street, Rex Kern, Tommy Frazier, Tony Rice, John Shaffer, Tee Martin, Tom Clements, Josh Heupel, Matt Mauck, Craig Krenzel, Jay Barker…
Tim Tebow is FAR from the only championship caliber college quarterback who hasn’t had the tools to make it at the next level. Tebow and almost all of the aforementioned guys were MUCH better college quarterbacks than Tom Brady. But Brady had the talent to be a successful pro. Tebow and Co. didn’t.
You have to go back to Staubach to find someone who was consistently really good. Since him (and not counting Newton and RGIII, who are off to a good start but who knows), the best are Jim Plunkett, Carson Palmer, and Vinny Testaverde.
Sure there is. Brian Shouse, who last pitched in 2009.
It’s not just quarterbacks- until 1985, there were NO Heisman winners in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. OJ Simpson and Roger Staubach were both inducted in 1985.
A lot of stellar Heisman winning running backs never amounted to much in the pros, either: John Cappeletti, Archie Griffin, Charles White, Mike Rozier, Rashaan Salaam, Ron Dayne…