If you want to go down that road, you should dissect the stats and determine how many of Tebow's fumbles were on running plays, and how many of them were on strip sacks or when he was scrambling.
losing 6 fumbles in 13 starts was not so crazy. Yeah you would like it to be 0 but it does not cancel out the fact he was the #1 red zone threat in the NFL does it? you cant just look at bad stats in a vacuum. Vick lost 7 Bradford lost 7 Flacco 6 as an example and if you tell me he played less games, well he also carried the ball much much more.
A fumble is a fumble no matter how it happens? Who cares how and why it happened. The fact is he fumbles quite a bit. He may not lose them all but he does put the ball on the ground.
In 14 Games Started Tebow had 14 fumbles (6 lost) I think thats the concern. Putting the ball on the ground 14 times in 14 games is a lot. Scum Newton also puts the ball on the ground a lot with 14 in 16 games (5 lost) but here in lies the difference. Tebow managed to do it with 125 less attempts 518 total pass/run attempts for Tebow and 643 for Scum. So fumbles per attempt is once per 37 attempts for Tebow and one every 46 attempts for scum. What I am saying is they both need to hold on to the freaking ball. Brady for example had 654 attempts and 6 fumbles (2 lost) thats one every 109 attempts. Sanchez in 580 attempts had 10 for a fumble every 58 attempts ..although he loses a disproportionate amount (8 lost) compared to the rest of the guys mentioned. Its not just the lost fumbles that cause the concern, its a lost down as typically a fumble isnt a positive net gain.
You talked about how they brought Tebow here for his running, no ?? Do you not see a difference in how a ball gets carried depending on whether a person is running to pick up yards, versus scrambling to buy time and throw a pass ? When a QB scrambles like that, they don't tuck the ball in like you do when you are running the ball. They don't focus on three points of contact. They hold the ball in their throwing hand so that they can pass whenever the find an open receiver. So no, all fumbles aren't the same when you are trying to analyze a guy's ability running the ball. You have to differentiate.
Those numbers fr Brady and Sanchez tell you less about the QB and more about the OLine's ability (or lack thereof) to protect the QB.
Tebow is not a good QB. Anybody with a brain that functions and eyes that can see 10ft in front of them can tell he is not a good NFL QB. What is there to really debate with that? He is an amazing athlete and good football player, but he is below average when talking about a QB's skill set.
7 of the 14 came on designed runs ( just read that somewhere but too lazy to track down link) not sure f that is good or bad but it is what it is
Stats are for losers. Ws and Ls are the only stat you need to worry about. As for TT, he is a winner, always has been.
Lets put it this way a running back would probably get benched. I sure hope he tightens that up the Jets need him to run the ball. He gets stripped sacked a lot because of his elongated throwing motion.
The first New England game is exactly the game I posted stats for, and Tim Tebow has never had a 17 point lead in his pro career thus far. You might want to re-check your numbers. The Broncos had a 9 point lead at the beginning of the second period, but proceeded to give up 27 unanswered points, mainly due to a Tebow fumble, and the fact that he couldnt move the chains. And yes, most of his passing yards did come in garbage time. He had 115 of his 194 yards passing in the 4th quarter after the game was completely out of reach, and the Pats already had their 3rd string defense in. You see, you are so blinded by your man crush that you dont actually look at how his games played out. You dont want to see that he only completed 6 passes in the first 3 quarters of the game. You dont want to see that he fumbled the ball twice. You dont want to see that his inability to convert 3rd downs keeps his exhausted defense on the field for ridiculous amounts of time. I dont give a shit about his 93 yards rushing (not 120, llike you said), because 45 of them were in garbage time as well. In reality, he had 48 yards rushing, and was 6/15 for 79 yards until the 4th quarter. So tell me again how I am manipulating the numbers, bud.
Sure, you're just getting them wrong. Not sure why it matters so much to you, but, here goes: He was 3-5 in the first quarter, got off to a good start and lead. 2-4 in the second quarter (so that's 5-9). 1-2 in the third quarter, so 6-11 thus far. So you're incorrect that he was 6-15 going into the fourth quarter. And you're incorrect that his passing numbers generally trended better once it got to "garbage time." He went 5-12 in the fourth quarter, including ending the blowout with 3 straight incompletions. So it was really just the opposite of what you said -- the "garbage time" hurt his completion percentage, so people like you could pounce on stats. When the game was in contention, he was completing more of his passes, not less. He did fumble. Fumbles are bad.
At no point was I talking about his completion percentage, as you can plainly see in the post that you decided to cherry pick a quote from. Tebow put up 115 of his 194 yards in garbage time, against the Pats' third string, after the game was completely out of reach. He managed a whopping 79 yards through the air, and a whopping 48 yards on the ground, in the first three quarters. So, no, it was exactly like I said. Edit: Not sure why I typed 6/15. That was a typo, and my bad. Fact remains that he completed 6 passes in the first 3 quarters of a the football game that CowboyFan seems to think was one of Tebow's best performances. His words: He was shit against New England both times, and against the Chargers.
I thought he looked pretty good in the early going against New England (regular season). Good mix of completing clutch passes for first downs. They were extending drives with passes. It was looking like the kind of balance they had needed (although still very run-oriented). It really was those three straight turnovers in the 2d half that derailed the game. You just can't do that against the Pats. The key is he doesn't always "stink for three quarters and then light it up." He had a very good first quarter against the Pats, by almost any measure. But if you think he looked bad in the first quarter against the Pats, no wonder you think he's terrible. That was some pretty good play there.
I'll admit, he was pretty sold in the first quarter. I also think that the play calling was fantastic, and everyone, especially our o-line, executed great. I was more referring to the rest of his performance. Having 6 completions and 48 yards on the ground through three quarters, plus soaking up a bunch of meaningless garbage time stats, apparently puts this up there as one of his best performances, per CowboyFan.
