I think it is obvious that when the defense plays well, their chances winning increase dramatically.
Here’s the issue.
Noboby complained on TV or in print that Orton shouldn’t start in the NFL. Nobody really started any threads about Orton. Why is that? Orton sucked. He was suckiest suck that ever sucked. He couldn’t rally his team around a steak dinner. He was 4-14 with Broncos, with *same team *that Tebow now leads. He sucked in Chicago too, that’s why they dealt him. He can’t win, despite his skills. I don’t know why. Maybe the boy just ain’t go any heart.
In walks Tim Tebow. Granted, he doesn’t have the skills that Orton has (and wasted). But the fans believe in him. And more importantly, the TEAM seems to believe in him. And they are winning. It’s that intangible quality called leadership.
Now, maybe the Broncs would be better served by a QB with conventional skills AND leadership qualities. They exist in the league. But they ain’t got that right now. So let’s let Tebow have a shot.
I put little to no stock in the idea that a QB’s “leadership” makes the defense better. Especially when that defense has veterans like Champ Bailey, Brian Dawkins, Elvis Dumervill, and DJ Williams. On offense, maybe those “intangibles” help a bit, but defense? Not so much. I really don’t think Champ is thinking “wow, I’ll really try now that Tebow is playing”, or that Dawkins is saying “well, I half assed it with Kyle in there, but NOW I’m really gonna play”.
I agree. Let Tebow have his shot, but don’t try and convince everybody the Broncos are winning solely because of him, they’re winning mostly because that defense is playing better.
Come to think of that, there aren’t a whole lot of those quarterbacks standing in the league at all. The Broncos’ division rivals Kansas City are starting Tyler Palko this week. Palko was cut by his UFL team. Now there’s a guy who doesn’t have conventional skills (or any skills, really) OR leadership qualities. I suppose spooje is right here: Tebow might not be a great or maybe even good quarterback, but how many good QBs are there who aren’t sitting on the sidelines?
You don’t think an individual’s attitude can affect a team?
I believe it can and does. Unfortunately, it is impossible to quantify. So we must agree to disagree.
I have said for years that where Terrel Owens goes, frustration follows. He is a man with enourmous skills and an attitude that will kill and chemistry that a team has. He is the Anti-Tebow. Kinda like Ryan Leaf, a can’t miss first round pick QB.
It was widely believed that Leaf would go far in the NFL. Leaf had the skills, but he had no heart and was not a leader. IMHO, above all else, the QB must be a leader.
I said I do. But generally only the guys that play most with that person. I don’t think a QB’s attitude has all that much effect on the defensive players. If he sucks, sure, it makes them frustrated, but I really don’t think the defense is playing harder because of who the QB is. These guys are professionals, the ones who need a rah rah leader to play at a high level generally don’t cut it.
I wouldn’t put his leadership as the main reason he failed, it was his head. Leaf was a frickin’ head case, who couldn’t grasp NFL defenses, didn’t put in the work necessary to develop, and was an all around douche. His lack of leadership was but one in a whole host of issues.
You know what I think makes a leader in the NFL. Winning. Winning solves problems in the locker room and winning makes the leader. Winning is what makes people call a guy a leader. There are dozens of “leaders” who lose, and dozens of non leaders who win. Joe Montana wasn’t the best liked guy in the locker room, but he got results and was the leader of the team.
I think the idea that Tim Tebow’s magical leadership has made the Broncos play better is a figment of an imagination that lives for movies like Bagger Vance, 300, and Braveheart. Sure, his charisma can help a bit on offense, but with the winning comes the leadership. If the Broncos defense regresses, I don’t think Tebow’s leadership will help much.
Ryan Leaf had a career completion percentage of 48. He had a 14/36 touchdown/interception ratio. This is a person who is quantifiably a terrible quarterback.
Terrell Owens’ teams had a record of 136-104 while he was on their roster. If you take out the first year and the last two years of his career, when he had a diminished role both on the field and off, the record was 120-72. Quantifiably, he’s a winner.
What I would like to see is an example of a terrible player whose teams consistently win because he’s a great leader. I don’t want to hear Tom Brady is a leader who coincidentally throws rockets and rainbows, I want a guy who throws it like Mike McMahon but wins games.
I do as well. Jim McMahon comes close to the description, but is also the perfect example of a roleplaying QB who succeeded because the rest of his team was a bunch of badasses who beat the living shit out of their opponents, NOT because he was some sort of intangible leader.
Or you seem to be saying that someone cannot be a leader without the win, that winning makes the leader. By that measure, Michael Vick is not a leader, nor Mark Sanchez or Phillip Rivers (at least this year), certainly not Sam Bradford or Cam Newton or Colt McCoy.
I think a better measure would be how much better they play with him than without him. By either measure, Tebow is a leader and Orton is not.
Yep. He could develop into a good leader. As long as he wins. If he starts losing consistently, or continues to play poorly, I seriously doubt his charisma and “leadership” will count for much.
As a general statement, yes. Guys who win are considered leaders, guys who lose won’t be for long. It’s the winning that makes people consider you a good leader.
And, again, the defense isn’t playing better and having these good games simply because Tebow is the starting QB. Some QB’s can certainly make those guys on offense around them better, but I’m just not buying the idea that a defense plays better because Tebow is in there.
Jim McMahon was a statistically successful quarterback, when he was healthy. Course, he only had 5 seasons out of 15 in which he started more than 10 games.
Only if you look at Win/Loss record, which is what many of us in this thread are saying is a ridiculous and stupid thing to look at when evaluating one player. Every other metric says he was adequately average. He had a career 58% completion record, 78.2 QB rating (for whatever that’s worth), and a 100/87 TD/INT ratio. None of those scream out “statistically successful” by any stretch. What they do say is that when your team defensively punishes every opponent they face, your QB isn’t a huge liability that you need to worry about.
Pfft, whatever. The '85 Bears offense needed to account for 2 point in the playoffs that year to win the Superbowl. You know what that takes? Leadership!
Except, as has been pointed out to you before, the Broncos were 4 - 14 with Kyle Orton as the starter, 1 - 4 with him as a starter this year, and 5 - 3 with Tebow as the starter, 4 - 1 with him as a starter this year.
The amount of hate Tebow garners is incredible. You would think the guy has been sucking it up for years. He’s started a grand total of eight games, has put up much better stats than some highly regarding QB’s put up in their first eight starts and has actually won more of his games. Some of you guys need to chill out.
Tebow’s schtick may have worked in College, but he can’t make in the NFL. So he won’t get drafted. And if he does, it’ll be in a late round.
What a waste of a 1st round pick. He cannot lead an NFL team to victory.
One victory, that’s a fluke.
Yeah, he’s rattled off a few 4th quarter comebacks to win, but those teams he beat sucked. I mean the Jets were Superbowl contenders the last two years, but they suck this year.
Plus the defense is starting to play better. It’s an accident that their improved play coincides with Tebow starting, ya know…because he stinks and it will soon be clear to everyone.
The only metric he will be evaluated on is if he has a good career, a career deserving a #1 pick. If he wins consistently for a decade, or wins a Superbowl, or puts up really gaudy numbers, or a mixture of the three then he will be considered good to great. That is pretty much the standard for every quarterback who has ever played the game.
And, as I’ve pointed out, in those games that the Broncos won, the defense has been one of the best scoring defenses in the league. If you want to give Tebow credit for that defensive improvement and schedule of weaker teams, I can’t stop you. But I’m quite comfortable with relying on the stats and watching him play, and you can rely on amorphous “leadership” and “he just wins”.
[Quote=OMG]
The amount of hate Tebow garners is incredible. You would think the guy has been sucking it up for years. He’s started a grand total of eight games, has put up much better stats than some highly regarding QB’s put up in their first eight starts and has actually won more of his games. Some of you guys need to chill out.
[/QUOTE]
I’ll give you the benefit if the doubt and assume that you’re lax in your reading rather than deliberately misleading, because I’ve repeatedly said, in this very thread and others, that I like Tebow as a person, I think he’s a good kid, and I want him to find success. This need for people to portray anyone who doubts Tebow’s skills and abilities to succeed in the NFL as “Tebow haters” is just plain ignorant
I’d hope, for the sake of Broncos fans, that the coaches are looking a little deeper than this (it’s not exactly a huge sample size). Clearly the defense has improved (or they’re playing weak offenses). How much of this is from Tebow? If he’s leaving the opponents with poorer field position, that’s some of it (and the lack of turnovers has to really contribute to this). That he inspires the defense to play better, I find unconvincing.
The Broncos are scoring less per game under Tebow.
It seems to come down to an improved defense and a QB who’s such a crappy passer that the coaches don’t let him. Really, this isn’t a ringing endorsement for Tebow. I don’t see the success as all that sustainable.
they do get more yardage under Tebow, so it isn’t exactly cut and dried that he can’t move the ball. If you can move the ball similar yards and avoid turnovers that wreck your field position, thats not a bad tradeoff.
If Tebow is nothing more than a crappy passer, you could slot Orton in there, let him throw 8 times a game and win. Tebow has running skills to offset his poor passing. Whether it’s enough remains to be seen, but I think it’s a hoot to have an honestly different guy at QB.
