[DIVISIONAL]: Denver Broncos @ New England Patriots

[Warner2BruceTD]

I think Prater, McGahee and their defence should be insulted at this giant load of bullshit. The only thing that's true about the Broncos success is how well their entire team played during that stretch, that's what's true, saying it was because of Tebow is hilariously untrue.

Way too much credit for a guy who obviously is very inaccurate for a professional QB and experience is no justification for this level of inaccuracy. His decision making is slow because he was sacked (and fumbled) more than anyone. Look how long he was holding on to the football last night, he's slow out there.

Can he develop? Sure, I don't what into but I'm not here to predict the future. However the clear as day facts tell you he's behind the 8 ball to begin with as a pro QB.

Vince Young says "all he does is win" doesn't get you that far in this league.

This is not meant to be an insult, but you clearly have no grasp of how much Tebow changed the entire culture and performance of the team.

You seem to be another one of these guys who think the defense magically hit some switch when Tebow took over, and Tebow was just some lucky beneficiary of the defense "finally putting it together".

Wrong.

From earlier in the thread, in response to steeljake, another guy who doesn't understand why the defense seemingly got better overnight, since I assume nobody is reading through 20 pages or whatever:

But here's the thing, the defense didn't "just so happened to get better" when Tebow took over, it got better because Tebow took over.

The rushing attempts went up, the first downs went up, the time of possession went up, and the turnovers went down. The improved defense was largely a mirage. It was the same defense. They weren't constantly on the field anymore, and were no longer put behind the 8-ball all of the time by Orton's turnovers.

It was not a coincidence that the defense improved under Tebow, it was a direct result of Tebow and the new offensive system.

It's funny how some people want to say Prater or the RB's or the defense aren't getting enough credit, when the ONLY THING THAT CHANGED ABOUT THE TEAM WAS THE FUCKING QB! Yes, those players contributed to all of those wins. Of course. But the only player being discredited, ironically, is Tebow.

Tebow + the change in scheme is what took this team from 1-4 to the Divisional Round. Case closed, can not argue this, and if you do, you look like a total fool.

And again, anyone who cites completion percentage just doesn't get it, so I won't even bother with that. You can not compare the completion percentage of an option QB to people like Brees or Brady or Rogers or even Matt Ryan or Eli Manning or any other QB playing in a traditional pro scheme. If you don't understand why, you don't understand the game.

 

[ralaw]

The only thing the games against the Pats proved is that Tebow will be wildly inconsistent to the point where if his defense can't keep the score close the game will get out of hand.


For the most part Tebow's performance against the Pats was no different from what it has been all season. The only difference was that he was playing against a very motivated Tom Brady and his defense can't compete with that offense.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

The hypocrisy is :jhenbeatkwon:

Nope, not at all, turns out I was right on the money with Freeman. He can't play, and had a career year in 2010.

He will never repeat those numbers, and deep down you know it. Freeman stinks.

The difference here, is I dont know what Tebow is, because this is uncharted waters. All of you geeks saying he can't pass and can't run a conventional offense aren't really saying anything at all, because everybody knows that already. Who cares? It's a non point. lolTebow completion percentage means nothing.

The question, is can a team effectively run an option based, grind it out, ball control offense in 2012 and beyond? We don't know. If it can be done, Tebow has proven he can run that type of offense effectively, leading a 1-4 team two games from the SB doing so. Moving forward, who knows?

There is no hypocrisy, because I have never ever touted Tebow as a future star or guaranteed long term success. Go ahead and quote me saying that, and i'll never post again.

But i'll tell you what I did say. I said that Freeman had a career year that did not match his skill level, and that he would never repeat it. I said he was overrated. And so far, i'm right. I know that makes you mad, because you constantly bring it up in the chatbox and threads that have nothing to do with Freeman. You hitched your wagon to a bum. Take it like a man.

 

[ralaw]

The question, is can a team effectively run an option based, grind it out, ball control offense in 2012 and beyond? We don't know. If it can be done, Tebow has proven he can run that type of offense effectively, leading a 1-4 team two games from the SB doing so. Moving forward, who knows?

.

IMO it could work, but Tebow may not be the guy to see if it does. I can see it working in certain situations, but the QB running the offense still would have to have the ability to complete passes at a higher rate than Tebow.

IMO there were factors that worked in Tebow and Denver's favor that were often overlooked. They had success but I don't see it being sustained.

 

[NAHSTE]

The difference here, is I dont know what Tebow is, because this is uncharted waters.

I don't know how unchartered these waters really are though. You act as if this is the first time an NFL team has entrusted their offense to a run first QB and hoped for the best.

The question, is can a team effectively run an option based, grind it out, ball control offense in 2012 and beyond? We don't know. If it can be done, Tebow has proven he can run that type of offense effectively, leading a 1-4 team two games from the SB doing so. Moving forward, who knows?

I think history has proven that you eventually need to provide some threat with the pass. Vince Young and Michael Vick were able to have early success because when nobody was open, they could pull it down and run. Then teams instituted the "mush rush" on them, and were telling DEs to wait back and contain instead of rushing balls to the wall up field, and that's when the weaknesses in their passing games became glaring.

Giving Tebow all day to pass is the best strategy you can employ right now. Drop 7 in coverage, collapse the middle of the pocket with your tackles and have your contain guys just kind of tread water and stay at home. Currently, Tebow is not good enough to consistently make a team pay for that defensive tactic. It's what ended up "solving" run-first QBs like Vick and Young too. At some point you have to be multidimensional or you will be adjusted to.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

IMO it could work, but Tebow may not be the guy to see if it does. I can see it working in certain situations, but the QB running the offense still would have to have the ability to complete passes at a higher rate than Tebow.

IMO there were factors that worked in Tebow and Denver's favor that were often overlooked. They had success but I don't see it being sustained.

But here is the rub...

If you had a Tebow clone, with the same power running ability, same drive, same leadership ability, same everything, but was far more accurate, they would just run a conventional offense with that QB.

Tebow really is the litmus test, because nobody is going to run this offense with a QB who has the ability to beat you through the air. No NFL team is going to expose the highest paid player on the team to 20+ hits per game if they don't have to.

 

[Bear Pand]

The league is already figuring it out. After starting 7-1, Broncos finished 1-4 with that one win coming against a team that went against the gameplan.

Every now and then a team will find some neat gimmick and go on run. Won't be sustained unless he learns how to throw.

 

[NAHSTE]

But here is the rub...

If you had a Tebow clone, with the same power running ability, same drive, same leadership ability, same everything, but was far more accurate,

Go on ...​

 

[Buzzman]

Vince Young took a 0-6 Titans team to 8-8. Doesn't mean hes good. Hell he didn't even make the playoffs because he didn't play in the worst division in football.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

I don't know how unchartered these waters really are though. You act as if this is the first time an NFL team has entrusted their offense to a run first QB and hoped for the best.

I don't want to go in circles again, but I disagree.

I haven't seen this type offense run..ever. Other teams used packages and incorporated some option stuff, but Denver went with it full steam ahead.

I think history has proven that you eventually need to provide some threat with the pass. Vince Young and Michael Vick were able to have early success because when nobody was open, they could pull it down and run. Then teams instituted the "mush rush" on them, and were telling DEs to wait back and contain instead of rushing balls to the wall up field, and that's when the weaknesses in their passing games became glaring.

Giving Tebow all day to pass is the best strategy you can employ right now. Drop 7 in coverage, collapse the middle of the pocket with your tackles and have your contain guys just kind of tread water and stay at home. Currently, Tebow is not good enough to consistently make a team pay for that defensive tactic. It's what ended up "solving" run-first QBs like Vick and Young too. At some point you have to be multidimensional or you will be adjusted to.

None of this is untrue, but again, Tebow is not pulling the ball down and scrambling.

Forget last night. It was a blowout, it happens, and it was not indicative of what Denver wants to do on offense due to the score. Let's talk about what Denver does when they are effective and controlling the game.

What Denver wants to do, is run the ball 40-50 times, control the clock, and limit turnovers. And they want to do this using a read option attack, with up to 6 different ball carriers in a given game. I have not seen that combination used in the NFL to this extent ever before.

You can not defend that the same way you defend Vick or Young, who exploit collapsed pockets and over aggressive DE's on broken plays. Yes, you can defend Tebow that way when he falls behind, and is forced to pass, but that's a different situation entirely.

This is what we know. We know if the Broncos keep games close, Tebow has the ability to win them late. We know that turnovers will KILL this strategy. We know that completion percentage is irrelevant, as there is no correlation to high/low = win/loss in this scheme. We know that Denver is dead if they fall behind, because they are not built to score a lot of points, score quickly, or pass the ball effectively.

Can an NFL team run a read option, with a guy like Tebow, and win enough close games to offset the sure fire blowouts that will most definitely occur? That is what we don't know. The answer is probably no. This year, it worked. To me, Fox is coach of the year for going all in and making it work. That team was dead in the water, going nowhere.

 

[Bear Pand]

We know that completion percentage is irrelevant, as there is no correlation to high/low = win/loss in this scheme. We know that Denver is dead if they fall behind, because they are not built to score a lot of points, score quickly, or pass the ball effectively.

Yeah this is why things like completion percentage are relevant.

 

[NAHSTE]

I don't want to go in circles again, but I disagree.

I haven't seen this type offense run..ever. Other teams used packages and incorporated some option stuff, but Denver went with it full steam ahead.

I was obviously too young but didn't that crazy bastard Lou Holtz try to run the wishbone with the Jets?

Also, the Falcons ran an exclusive zone read scheme (exactly like the McGahee-Tebow mesh play we see 20 times a game) for the first two games of 2006. Even though they were leading the NFL in rushing and started out 2-0, shitfuck Greg Knapp eventually went back the atrocities of Michael Vick attempting to run a west coast offense. Eventually a 6-2 start turned into an 8-8 finish, which probably would have happened had we stuck to the zone read or not.

Pretty sure the Titans were running a lot of zone read with a young VY as well, so that play has at least been a building block of an NFL offense before. The wrinkles that come off of it like the WR options and stuff are largely new, but it's not like the fundamental concepts are unheard of. We've been seeing this stuff seep upward from high school and college for 5-10 years now. Zone read is the hottest play in high school football, I'd guess 75% of teams are running it in some variation, and that started around the time I was graduating in '04 (coincidentally when Young was dominating with it at Texas).

None of this is untrue, but again, Tebow is not pulling the ball down and scrambling.

But designed runs were a major part of Vick's game as well. I know he's of slighter build than Tebow, which might extend the shelf life this has to some degree, but it is still a relatively easy offense to defend over the long term if there is no threat of a pass. The reason it's successful is because it adds a blocker at the point of attack. But that math equation can easily be balanced out once the high safety realizes he doesn't need to do his job anymore. Unless Tebow can consistently keep the back 7 honest, it's gonna be tough to have the numbers advantage one gains from the extra ball carier for much longer.

Forget last night. It was a blowout, it happens, and it was not indicative of what Denver wants to do on offense due to the score. Let's talk about what Denver does when they are effective and controlling the game.

Ok. Let's also talk about what other one dimensional offenses like Baltimore or Atlanta or San Francisco do when they are effective and controlling the game. Let's only focus on what teams do well and never highlight their deficiencies.

What Denver wants to do, is run the ball 40-50 times, control the clock, and limit turnovers. And they want to do this using a read option attack, with up to 6 different ball carriers in a given game. I have not seen that combination used in the NFL to this extent ever before.

I think this is hyperbole. Running the ball and avoiding turnovers is hardly revolutionary. And as I've provided examples for, neither is a read option scheme. Atlanta and Tennessee used it exclusively in full games or stretches of games and it eventually yielded diminishing returns.

This is what we know. We know if the Broncos keep games close, Tebow has the ability to win them late.

Well, yeah. Obviously keeping games close is a winning strategy for all teams. If the Chiefs keep things close, Matt Cassel can win them late. If the Jets keep things close, Mark Sanchez can win them late. And so on and so forth. While stealing a few wins every season is nice, it's not exactly a sustainable strategy. "Let's just get behind and hope we pull it out. It worked last time." Not exactly a repeatable skill.

Can an NFL team run a read option, with a guy like Tebow, and win enough close games to offset the sure fire blowouts that will most definitely occur? That is what we don't know. The answer is probably no.

I'd say it's definitely no, and you just provided all of the reasons why:

We know that turnovers will KILL this strategy ... We know that Denver is dead if they fall behind, because they are not built to score a lot of points, score quickly, or pass the ball effectively.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Yeah this is why things like completion percentage are relevant.

sigh.

Tim Tebow runs for 6 yards on a designed keeper on first down.

Drew Brees throws a pass in the flat to Sproles on first down.

It's 2nd and 4 for both teams.

Completion% means next to nothing in Denver's scheme. Denver won games where Tebow completed 30%, and lost games where he completed 50%-60%.

There were games where Tebow ran the ball 20 times. Many of those runs simply replaced passes and achieved the same objective.

I can't take the completion percentage angle seriously. I just can't. Some of the other mouth breathers on this site I can ignore, but I know you are smarter than this. Everybody knows he struggles to pass the ball consistently, why do you think they are running this scheme to begin with??

 

[ram29jackson]

a guy 2 years in isnt going to be a great passer anyway unless he's some Manning/prodigy. He's right on schedule as a learning QB and done more in 7 games than M Lienhart has in a career

 

[Buzzman]

but Matt Leinart sucks.

 

[ram29jackson]

but Matt Leinart sucks.

thats the point..99% of the QBs who have ever played the game have done less then Tebow did this year alone. So obviously Tebow does not suck

 

[NAHSTE]

a guy 2 years in isnt going to be a great passer anyway

sup?

 

[ram29jackson]

sup?

we've already been through this. Unless you are a 12 year old moron you realize people being really good early on is the exception and not the rule.

 

[NAHSTE]

we've already been threw this. Unless you are a 12 year old moron you realize people being really good early on is the exception and not the rule.

I'll take "Things Tebow did not do well yesterday for 1000," Alex.

:troll:

 

[trojan49er]

Lets see...I'll jump in on the guys who have done well their second year in the league
Peyton Manning
Matt Ryan
Joe Flacco (although he was a bit overrated imo)
Carson Palmer
Roethliswhatsit
Andy Dalton (granted its only been a year)
Cam Newton (^this)
Drew Brees
Eli Manning
Donovan McNabb

These guys all say hi