Tebow vs Cutler (1 Viewer)

[TimTebow]

Can't believe the poll is this close. I don't envy Elway's position. He knows he doesn't have an NFL-caliber QB in Tebow yet what can you do given the results? He best have a good plan B going into next season - I just can't see this good fortune lasting.

Tebow and it isn't even close. Cutler is a loser. He is a whiner. He is not a leader. QB is about more than a strong arm. We are starting to see in Tebow's game how those intangibles really do matter.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Tebow won't be a starting QB on a team in the playoffs, that's a promise.

Promises. Promises. Tebow wins. Bears lose. What else is new?

Yeah Tebow is the man, beating the Bears in overtime without Cutler/Forte. He really is something

 

[FavreCo]

The Tebow. He's on a winning team, selling tickets, making the franchise $. Possible Christmas bonus for the GM.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Tebow won't be a starting QB on a team in the playoffs, that's a promise.

Promises. Promises. Tebow wins. Bears lose. What else is new?

Yeah Tebow is the man, beating the Bears in overtime without Cutler/Forte. He really is something

Tebow just laid out and punked your team and all you can do it make excuses? Pathetic.

Punked? Is that what you call a 68.3 QB rating and a 5.9 YPA. Take off the glasses

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Tebow won't be a starting QB on a team in the playoffs, that's a promise.

Promises. Promises. Tebow wins. Bears lose. What else is new?

Yeah Tebow is the man, beating the Bears in overtime without Cutler/Forte. He really is something

Tebow just laid out and punked your team and all you can do it make excuses? Pathetic.

Punked? Is that what you call a 68.3 QB rating and a 5.9 YPA. Take off the glasses

Scoreboard: Broncos 13, Bears 10

The team you cheer for won, congrats. What are you ten?This is a Tebow vs Cutler thread. Tebow sucked in the game, period.

 

[squistion]

Tebow won't be a starting QB on a team in the playoffs, that's a promise.

Promises. Promises. Tebow wins. Bears lose. What else is new?

Yeah Tebow is the man, beating the Bears in overtime without Cutler/Forte. He really is something

Tebow just laid out and punked your team and all you can do it make excuses? Pathetic.

Punked? Is that what you call a 68.3 QB rating and a 5.9 YPA. Take off the glasses

Scoreboard: Broncos 13, Bears 10

The team you cheer for won, congrats. What are you ten?This is a Tebow vs Cutler thread. Tebow sucked in the game, period.

Some of us have a different interpretation of events.

 

[shnikies]

Tebow won't be a starting QB on a team in the playoffs, that's a promise.

Promises. Promises. Tebow wins. Bears lose. What else is new?

Yeah Tebow is the man, beating the Bears in overtime without Cutler/Forte. He really is something

Tebow just laid out and punked your team and all you can do it make excuses? Pathetic.

Punked? Is that what you call a 68.3 QB rating and a 5.9 YPA. Take off the glasses

Scoreboard: Broncos 13, Bears 10

The team you cheer for won, congrats. What are you ten?This is a Tebow vs Cutler thread. Tebow sucked in the game, period.

Tebow sucked? No. Your team sucked. Tebow completed 18 of his final 21 passes and won the game. You see, Tebow is a WINNER and he will always be a winner. Cutler is a loser. He always has been and always will be.Any questions?

Cutler didn't play in the game. I don't see how he is a "loser"? Anybody that would rather have Tebow than Cutler either didn't watch Cutler play this year or is a complete fool. I do like Tebow but he isn't in the same stratosphere as Cutler.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Cutler is a loser. He is a whiner. He is not a leader. QB is about more than a strong arm.

Sure. Do you even watch football? FYI, since the start of last season, the Bears are 18-9 in games that Cutler has started and finished; 1-3 in games he has not played. There ya go.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Tebow won't be a starting QB on a team in the playoffs, that's a promise.

Promises. Promises. Tebow wins. Bears lose. What else is new?

Yeah Tebow is the man, beating the Bears in overtime without Cutler/Forte. He really is something

Tebow just laid out and punked your team and all you can do it make excuses? Pathetic.

Punked? Is that what you call a 68.3 QB rating and a 5.9 YPA. Take off the glasses

Scoreboard: Broncos 13, Bears 10

The team you cheer for won, congrats. What are you ten?This is a Tebow vs Cutler thread. Tebow sucked in the game, period.

Tebow sucked? No. Your team sucked. Tebow completed 18 of his final 21 passes and won the game. You see, Tebow is a WINNER and he will always be a winner. Cutler is a loser. He always has been and always will be.Any questions?

Cutler didn't play in the game. I don't see how he is a "loser"? Anybody that would rather have Tebow than Cutler either didn't watch Cutler play this year or is a complete fool. I do like Tebow but he isn't in the same stratosphere as Cutler.

I've learned recently to not fight with immature people.Teams that you cheer for doesn't mean you have a clouded judgement. The Bears played average yesterday and have much room for improvement. But somehow that means tebow is amazing

 

[Naramie]

Tebow won't be a starting QB on a team in the playoffs, that's a promise.

Promises. Promises. Tebow wins. Bears lose. What else is new?

Yeah Tebow is the man, beating the Bears in overtime without Cutler/Forte. He really is something

Yeah because Cutler/Forte are star players on the Bears defense.

 

[Naramie]

I don't get why people HATE Tebow so much, yeah he gets alot of hype. But he's BEATING professional football teams with a college offense. Look who he's throwing to, look who he has running the ball, nobody worth a damn. It ridiculous.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

I don't get why people HATE Tebow so much, yeah he gets alot of hype. But he's BEATING professional football teams with a college offense. Look who he's throwing to, look who he has running the ball, nobody worth a damn. It ridiculous.

1) I'm realistic. I'm a QB coach for the last 6 years and can see so many flaws in his game. Short arms, low release point, long release, inaccurate throws, erratic/spontaneous play, doesn't read defenses well, poor feet, doesn't throw on time, not a good feel in the pocket, and doesn't throw deep well. Running QB's that are inaccurate never last long term. Vince Young had a nice stretch. Michael Vick had a nice run last year. I was a big fan of Tebow in college and i'm a christian. I've seen his documentary in High School(it's on youtube) really good if you have time to watch it.I don't get why people aren't praising Matt Prater. 59 yarder to send it to overtime and then a 51 yarder to win.2) Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas are easily better WR's than Minnesota/Chicago/Tennessee/Washington/Jacksonville/49ers/Browns/Seattle/Rams.

 

[az_prof]

I don't get why people HATE Tebow so much, yeah he gets alot of hype. But he's BEATING professional football teams with a college offense. Look who he's throwing to, look who he has running the ball, nobody worth a damn. It ridiculous.

1) I'm realistic. I'm a QB coach for the last 6 years and can see so many flaws in his game. Short arms, low release point, long release, inaccurate throws, erratic/spontaneous play, doesn't read defenses well, poor feet, doesn't throw on time, not a good feel in the pocket, and doesn't throw deep well. Running QB's that are inaccurate never last long term. Vince Young had a nice stretch. Michael Vick had a nice run last year. I was a big fan of Tebow in college and i'm a christian. I've seen his documentary in High School(it's on youtube) really good if you have time to watch it.I don't get why people aren't praising Matt Prater. 59 yarder to send it to overtime and then a 51 yarder to win.2) Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas are easily better WR's than Minnesota/Chicago/Tennessee/Washington/Jacksonville/49ers/Browns/Seattle/Rams.

No offense, but this styck about passing style is really getting old. There are a lot of ways to throw the ball. Philip Rivers has an unorthodox throwing motion but he has become successful as a passer. I would rather have Harvin and Schiancoe than Denver's receivers. Also, Chicagos are far more experienced and equaly skilled. Tennesse is about even. Washington? sure. Jacksonville? sure. 49ers? No way. Give me SFs TEs and Crabtree anyday. Browns? Meh. It's a wash. Seattle? Sure. Rams? Not when they are healthy.As for Prater, he deserves praise too. But he did miss a makeable FG earlier in the game that would have made that 59er unnecessary--or it would have won the game without need for OT.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

I don't get why people HATE Tebow so much, yeah he gets alot of hype. But he's BEATING professional football teams with a college offense. Look who he's throwing to, look who he has running the ball, nobody worth a damn. It ridiculous.

1) I'm realistic. I'm a QB coach for the last 6 years and can see so many flaws in his game. Short arms, low release point, long release, inaccurate throws, erratic/spontaneous play, doesn't read defenses well, poor feet, doesn't throw on time, not a good feel in the pocket, and doesn't throw deep well. Running QB's that are inaccurate never last long term. Vince Young had a nice stretch. Michael Vick had a nice run last year. I was a big fan of Tebow in college and i'm a christian. I've seen his documentary in High School(it's on youtube) really good if you have time to watch it.I don't get why people aren't praising Matt Prater. 59 yarder to send it to overtime and then a 51 yarder to win.2) Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas are easily better WR's than Minnesota/Chicago/Tennessee/Washington/Jacksonville/49ers/Browns/Seattle/Rams.

I agree with about half of your list, but his pocket awareness and deep throwing ability are strengths in his game. I also think his accuracy is largely a function of reading and anticipating defenses, and will progress as he gets more experience. He's always going to have a low, long release but improved anticipation and ability to function out of the pocket will always mitigate that somewhat. As for running/inaccurate QBs not lasting, there are plenty of examples of QBs struggling with accuracy early and developing with time. Donovan McNabb and Steve Young are two off the top of my head.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

I don't get why people HATE Tebow so much, yeah he gets alot of hype. But he's BEATING professional football teams with a college offense. Look who he's throwing to, look who he has running the ball, nobody worth a damn. It ridiculous.

1) I'm realistic. I'm a QB coach for the last 6 years and can see so many flaws in his game. Short arms, low release point, long release, inaccurate throws, erratic/spontaneous play, doesn't read defenses well, poor feet, doesn't throw on time, not a good feel in the pocket, and doesn't throw deep well. Running QB's that are inaccurate never last long term. Vince Young had a nice stretch. Michael Vick had a nice run last year. I was a big fan of Tebow in college and i'm a christian. I've seen his documentary in High School(it's on youtube) really good if you have time to watch it.I don't get why people aren't praising Matt Prater. 59 yarder to send it to overtime and then a 51 yarder to win.2) Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas are easily better WR's than Minnesota/Chicago/Tennessee/Washington/Jacksonville/49ers/Browns/Seattle/Rams.

I agree with about half of your list, but his pocket awareness and deep throwing ability are strengths in his game. I also think his accuracy is largely a function of reading and anticipating defenses, and will progress as he gets more experience. He's always going to have a low, long release but improved anticipation and ability to function out of the pocket will always mitigate that somewhat. As for running/inaccurate QBs not lasting, there are plenty of examples of QBs struggling with accuracy early and developing with time. Donovan McNabb and Steve Young are two off the top of my head.

I saw some plays where he had poor pocket awareness, maybe outliers. Deep ball accuracy needs to improve IMO, although he has an okay arm.The anticipation and accuracy stuff may develop over time, however it may not as well. It can't be assumed.Donovan McNabb never became an accurate QB. Steve Young went from the worst franchise in NFL History at the time to the best, so I assume that helped out too haha.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

I don't get why people HATE Tebow so much, yeah he gets alot of hype. But he's BEATING professional football teams with a college offense. Look who he's throwing to, look who he has running the ball, nobody worth a damn. It ridiculous.

1) I'm realistic. I'm a QB coach for the last 6 years and can see so many flaws in his game. Short arms, low release point, long release, inaccurate throws, erratic/spontaneous play, doesn't read defenses well, poor feet, doesn't throw on time, not a good feel in the pocket, and doesn't throw deep well. Running QB's that are inaccurate never last long term. Vince Young had a nice stretch. Michael Vick had a nice run last year. I was a big fan of Tebow in college and i'm a christian. I've seen his documentary in High School(it's on youtube) really good if you have time to watch it.I don't get why people aren't praising Matt Prater. 59 yarder to send it to overtime and then a 51 yarder to win.2) Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas are easily better WR's than Minnesota/Chicago/Tennessee/Washington/Jacksonville/49ers/Browns/Seattle/Rams.

I agree with about half of your list, but his pocket awareness and deep throwing ability are strengths in his game. I also think his accuracy is largely a function of reading and anticipating defenses, and will progress as he gets more experience. He's always going to have a low, long release but improved anticipation and ability to function out of the pocket will always mitigate that somewhat. As for running/inaccurate QBs not lasting, there are plenty of examples of QBs struggling with accuracy early and developing with time. Donovan McNabb and Steve Young are two off the top of my head.

I saw some plays where he had poor pocket awareness, maybe outliers. Deep ball accuracy needs to improve IMO, although he has an okay arm.The anticipation and accuracy stuff may develop over time, however it may not as well. It can't be assumed.Donovan McNabb never became an accurate QB. Steve Young went from the worst franchise in NFL History at the time to the best, so I assume that helped out too haha.

Young only completed 53.5% of his passes over 6 starts around 170 attempts his first two seasons in San Francisco also. I agree on premise, however, that a QB will look better as the offense improves around him and the Broncos have plenty of room for growth at the skill position. As for McNabb, he may never have been an "accurate" QB but still managed a 59% career completion percentage with a peak of 64%. That's after a rookie season below 50%. Eli Manning is another QB that faced questions about his accuracy after a rookie season completing only 48%, and was consistently below 60% for his first few years. Based on what we've seen this year, I feel pretty comfortable that Tebow can get up to that 60% mark as he gains more experience.

 

[TwinTurbo]

I don't get why people HATE Tebow so much, yeah he gets alot of hype. But he's BEATING professional football teams with a college offense. Look who he's throwing to, look who he has running the ball, nobody worth a damn. It ridiculous.

1) I'm realistic. I'm a QB coach for the last 6 years and can see so many flaws in his game. Short arms, low release point, long release, inaccurate throws, erratic/spontaneous play, doesn't read defenses well, poor feet, doesn't throw on time, not a good feel in the pocket, and doesn't throw deep well. Running QB's that are inaccurate never last long term. Vince Young had a nice stretch. Michael Vick had a nice run last year. I was a big fan of Tebow in college and i'm a christian. I've seen his documentary in High School(it's on youtube) really good if you have time to watch it.I don't get why people aren't praising Matt Prater. 59 yarder to send it to overtime and then a 51 yarder to win.2) Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas are easily better WR's than Minnesota/Chicago/Tennessee/Washington/Jacksonville/49ers/Browns/Seattle/Rams.

I agree with about half of your list, but his pocket awareness and deep throwing ability are strengths in his game. I also think his accuracy is largely a function of reading and anticipating defenses, and will progress as he gets more experience. He's always going to have a low, long release but improved anticipation and ability to function out of the pocket will always mitigate that somewhat. As for running/inaccurate QBs not lasting, there are plenty of examples of QBs struggling with accuracy early and developing with time. Donovan McNabb and Steve Young are two off the top of my head.

I saw some plays where he had poor pocket awareness, maybe outliers. Deep ball accuracy needs to improve IMO, although he has an okay arm.The anticipation and accuracy stuff may develop over time, however it may not as well. It can't be assumed.Donovan McNabb never became an accurate QB. Steve Young went from the worst franchise in NFL History at the time to the best, so I assume that helped out too haha.

Young only completed 53.5% of his passes over 6 starts around 170 attempts his first two seasons in San Francisco also. I agree on premise, however, that a QB will look better as the offense improves around him and the Broncos have plenty of room for growth at the skill position. As for McNabb, he may never have been an "accurate" QB but still managed a 59% career completion percentage with a peak of 64%. That's after a rookie season below 50%. Eli Manning is another QB that faced questions about his accuracy after a rookie season completing only 48%, and was consistently below 60% for his first few years. Based on what we've seen this year, I feel pretty comfortable that Tebow can get up to that 60% mark as he gains more experience.

For McNabb, that peak of 64% came when TO was on the Eagles. It would be interesting to see how Tebow would progress with an elite WR or TE like Gronk/Gates/Graham. I didn't think Tebow would succeed in the NFL although I wanted him to, but he's clearly proving a lot of critics wrong. The bottom line is that there aren't enough good QBs for every team to have one and there never will be. A guy like Tebow is obviously not an elite passer but he offers a different way to still win and his passing skills may improve over time along with the addition of better weapons. He's proving he was worthy of a first round pick which seemed almost ridiculous at the time.

 

[Warrior]

I don't get why people HATE Tebow so much, yeah he gets alot of hype. But he's BEATING professional football teams with a college offense. Look who he's throwing to, look who he has running the ball, nobody worth a damn. It ridiculous.

1) I'm realistic. I'm a QB coach for the last 6 years and can see so many flaws in his game. Short arms, low release point, long release, inaccurate throws, erratic/spontaneous play, doesn't read defenses well, poor feet, doesn't throw on time, not a good feel in the pocket, and doesn't throw deep well. Running QB's that are inaccurate never last long term. Vince Young had a nice stretch. Michael Vick had a nice run last year. I was a big fan of Tebow in college and i'm a christian. I've seen his documentary in High School(it's on youtube) really good if you have time to watch it.

I don't get why people aren't praising Matt Prater. 59 yarder to send it to overtime and then a 51 yarder to win.

2) Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas are easily better WR's than Minnesota/Chicago/Tennessee/Washington/Jacksonville/49ers/Browns/Seattle/Rams.

Tebow is defying all of his critics...all of which used the same criteria as you appear to when judging NFL QB's. You ignore many of the traits which are actually the most important, leading to a 7-1 record. It might be time for you to find a new line of work.And if you really think Thomas/Decker are 'easily better' than Percy Harvin, Santana Moss, Michael Crabtree, Sidney Rice, Brandon Lloyd, you should probably take off the 'Tebow jealousy' glasses...they look awful.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

I don't get why people HATE Tebow so much, yeah he gets alot of hype. But he's BEATING professional football teams with a college offense. Look who he's throwing to, look who he has running the ball, nobody worth a damn. It ridiculous.

1) I'm realistic. I'm a QB coach for the last 6 years and can see so many flaws in his game. Short arms, low release point, long release, inaccurate throws, erratic/spontaneous play, doesn't read defenses well, poor feet, doesn't throw on time, not a good feel in the pocket, and doesn't throw deep well. Running QB's that are inaccurate never last long term. Vince Young had a nice stretch. Michael Vick had a nice run last year. I was a big fan of Tebow in college and i'm a christian. I've seen his documentary in High School(it's on youtube) really good if you have time to watch it.

I don't get why people aren't praising Matt Prater. 59 yarder to send it to overtime and then a 51 yarder to win.

2) Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas are easily better WR's than Minnesota/Chicago/Tennessee/Washington/Jacksonville/49ers/Browns/Seattle/Rams.

Tebow is defying all of his critics...all of which used the same criteria as you appear to when judging NFL QB's. You ignore many of the traits which are actually the most important, leading to a 7-1 record. It might be time for you to find a new line of work.And if you really think Thomas/Decker are 'easily better' than Percy Harvin, Santana Moss, Michael Crabtree, Sidney Rice, Brandon Lloyd, you should probably take off the 'Tebow jealousy' glasses...they look awful.

Tebow is defying or the Broncos team is carrying him? It takes an entire team to win. The Broncos D has made huge plays to win these games: see fumble recovery in OT vs CHI, see INT in OT vs MINN, see fumble recovery vs Phillip Rivers late in the game, see the pick 6 vs NYJ to tie the game late in the 3rd.

Matt Prater has kicked 3 game tying FG's with under 2 minutes to go(SD 1:34 left, CHI :03 left, MINN 1:33 left).

Matt Prater has kicked 1 game winning FG at the end of regulation(MINN).

Matt Prater has kicked 3 game winning FG's in overtime(SD, CHI, MIA).

New line of work My career coaching record is 60-21.

 

[moleculo]

I don't get why people HATE Tebow so much, yeah he gets alot of hype. But he's BEATING professional football teams with a college offense. Look who he's throwing to, look who he has running the ball, nobody worth a damn. It ridiculous.

1) I'm realistic. I'm a QB coach for the last 6 years and can see so many flaws in his game. Short arms, low release point, long release, inaccurate throws, erratic/spontaneous play, doesn't read defenses well, poor feet, doesn't throw on time, not a good feel in the pocket, and doesn't throw deep well. Running QB's that are inaccurate never last long term. Vince Young had a nice stretch. Michael Vick had a nice run last year. I was a big fan of Tebow in college and i'm a christian. I've seen his documentary in High School(it's on youtube) really good if you have time to watch it.

I don't get why people aren't praising Matt Prater. 59 yarder to send it to overtime and then a 51 yarder to win.

2) Eric Decker and Demaryius Thomas are easily better WR's than Minnesota/Chicago/Tennessee/Washington/Jacksonville/49ers/Browns/Seattle/Rams.

Tebow is defying all of his critics...all of which used the same criteria as you appear to when judging NFL QB's. You ignore many of the traits which are actually the most important, leading to a 7-1 record. It might be time for you to find a new line of work.And if you really think Thomas/Decker are 'easily better' than Percy Harvin, Santana Moss, Michael Crabtree, Sidney Rice, Brandon Lloyd, you should probably take off the 'Tebow jealousy' glasses...they look awful.

Tebow is defying or the Broncos team is carrying him? It takes an entire team to win. The Broncos D has made huge plays to win these games: see fumble recovery in OT vs CHI, see INT in OT vs MINN, see fumble recovery vs Phillip Rivers late in the game, see the pick 6 vs NYJ to tie the game late in the 3rd.

Matt Prater has kicked 3 game tying FG's with under 2 minutes to go(SD 1:34 left, CHI :03 left, MINN 1:33 left).

Matt Prater has kicked 1 game winning FG at the end of regulation(MINN).

Matt Prater has kicked 3 game winning FG's in overtime(SD, CHI, MIA).

New line of work My career coaching record is 60-21.

lol...i think your team is carrying you.

 

[One More Rep]

Cutler for sure

 

[AmosMoses]

63.55% of the people that voted in this thread have yet to be converted.

 

[tdmills]

Jay Cutler stats over the last 3 years:

779 of 1301 (60%) 9259 yards 63 TD 49 INT 460 Rush yards 3 TD

Record 25-18(1 playoff win)

Averages per year(assuming he misses the rest of the year, missing 7 games total in 3 years)

260 of 434 3086 yards 21 TD 16 INT 153 rush yards 1 TD

Record 8-6

 

[az_prof]

I don't know where it fits into this discussion, but I heard on the radio last night that Tebow has more fourth quarter TD passes than anyone else in the NFL. I was shocked.Tim Tebow just exudes confidence and fearlessness (without being cocky) that rubs off on the rest of the team. To me that is playing a greater role than any of his mediocre physical attributes. The dude is freakin' mystical

Exactly. It isn't God making him or the team win. But the confidence he has and the positive attitude he has rubs off on other people. That makes everyone more confident. People make more mistakes when they are feeling stress or when they feel like someone is going to yell at them for making a mistake. Leadership--something Cutler does not have.Leadership alone won't get it done. But Tebow is not nearly as bad a passer as people like to pretend. And he is getting better. Cutler? Cutler is what he is. A guy who will have a big game and then a guy who will throw a bunch of INTs and have a bad game. And if he has two or three, look out, because then he turns pouty and things go downhill.

 

[grateful zed]

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y59/TDRyan2/tebow_Pray5NoTween.gif

 

[Ghost Rider]

Leadership--something Cutler does not have.Leadership alone won't get it done. But Tebow is not nearly as bad a passer as people like to pretend. And he is getting better. Cutler? Cutler is what he is. A guy who will have a big game and then a guy who will throw a bunch of INTs and have a bad game. And if he has two or three, look out, because then he turns pouty and things go downhill.

You continue to demonstrate your lack of knowledge. You really ought to try watching a game sometime. Cutler is tied for 9th in the NFL this season in Interception Percentage. His Int Pct. this year, an all-time low for him, is 2.2, which is the same as Tom Brady. But by all means, please continue talking #### about something you have obviously have no clue about.

 

[glumpy]

oooooooh getting emotional here. Same as all Tebow threads. I'm a Cutler fan and had him on my fantasy squads at least 2/3 of his pro career, but after 4 years I'm ready to try a Tebow. Cutler tends to self destruct. Tebow's an unknown to this point (notwithstanding the fanatics) but he's got potential. If I've got to make the choice today I'll go with teh potential instead of the known.

 

[glumpy]

oooooooh getting emotional here. Same as all Tebow threads. I'm a Cutler fan and had him on my fantasy squads at least 2/3 of his pro career, but after 4 years I'm ready to try a Tebow. Cutler tends to self destruct. Tebow's an unknown to this point (notwithstanding the fanatics) but he's got potential. If I've got to make the choice today I'll go with teh potential instead of the known.

ETA: They're probably close.

 

[az_prof]

Leadership--something Cutler does not have.Leadership alone won't get it done. But Tebow is not nearly as bad a passer as people like to pretend. And he is getting better. Cutler? Cutler is what he is. A guy who will have a big game and then a guy who will throw a bunch of INTs and have a bad game. And if he has two or three, look out, because then he turns pouty and things go downhill.

You continue to demonstrate your lack of knowledge. You really ought to try watching a game sometime. Cutler is tied for 9th in the NFL this season in Interception Percentage. His Int Pct. this year, an all-time low for him, is 2.2, which is the same as Tom Brady. But by all means, please continue talking #### about something you have obviously have no clue about.

Tebow: TD/INT ratio = 16/5 Cutler: TD/INT ratio =117/86Tebow has 3 times as many TD throws as INTs. Cutler has closer to 1.5 TDs to INTs.Turnovers are killers. And as for watching games, I have seen Cutler's snot-nosed, whiney looking face after he throws an INT and blames someone else many times.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Leadership--something Cutler does not have.

Leadership alone won't get it done. But Tebow is not nearly as bad a passer as people like to pretend. And he is getting better. Cutler? Cutler is what he is. A guy who will have a big game and then a guy who will throw a bunch of INTs and have a bad game. And if he has two or three, look out, because then he turns pouty and things go downhill.

You continue to demonstrate your lack of knowledge. You really ought to try watching a game sometime. Cutler is tied for 9th in the NFL this season in Interception Percentage. His Int Pct. this year, an all-time low for him, is 2.2, which is the same as Tom Brady.

But by all means, please continue talking #### about something you have obviously have no clue about.

Tebow: TD/INT ratio = 16/5 Cutler: TD/INT ratio =117/86

Tebow has 3 times as many TD throws as INTs. Cutler has closer to 1.5 TDs to INTs.

Turnovers are killers. And as for watching games, I have seen Cutler's snot-nosed, whiney looking face after he throws an INT and blames someone else many times.

So you can read his mind?Please tell us other things Pro Athletes are thinking...

 

[Ghost Rider]

Leadership--something Cutler does not have.

Leadership alone won't get it done. But Tebow is not nearly as bad a passer as people like to pretend. And he is getting better. Cutler? Cutler is what he is. A guy who will have a big game and then a guy who will throw a bunch of INTs and have a bad game. And if he has two or three, look out, because then he turns pouty and things go downhill.

You continue to demonstrate your lack of knowledge. You really ought to try watching a game sometime. Cutler is tied for 9th in the NFL this season in Interception Percentage. His Int Pct. this year, an all-time low for him, is 2.2, which is the same as Tom Brady.

But by all means, please continue talking #### about something you have obviously have no clue about.

Tebow: TD/INT ratio = 16/5 Cutler: TD/INT ratio =117/86

Tebow has 3 times as many TD throws as INTs. Cutler has closer to 1.5 TDs to INTs.

Turnovers are killers. And as for watching games, I have seen Cutler's snot-nosed, whiney looking face after he throws an INT and blames someone else many times.

Okay, but that doesn't make what you said earlier (I bolded it) true at all. That is what I was addressing. Cutler did a great job this year of keeping his turnovers low; in fact, they are way down compared to his previous years, but if you want to cling to the past, have at it. As for blaming others for his INTs, whatever you say.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Hard to imagine Tebow letting a little thing like a thumb injury keep him out of the playoffs.

Tebow will never make the playoffs so he won't have to worry about it.

kind of harsh for one game out from the playoffs

Tebow won't be a starting QB on a team in the playoffs, that's a promise.

The Broncos stink and have no business being in the playoffs. What a sorry state of affairs in the AFC West.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Cutler and it's not even close.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Still Cutler, and by a country mile.

Is every Tebow thread that was ever created going to get bumped tonight? Jesus. I mean, Tebow.

 

[FavreCo]

Still Cutler, and by a country mile. Is every Tebow thread that was ever created going to get bumped tonight? Jesus. I mean, Tebow.

I think you should start a 'The Official Tebow MVP' thread. I don't think there is an official one yet. You could be the proud owner.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Bronco Jesus > Pass the Vodkas

 

[az_prof]

I am still with Tebow. Bottom line is that Tebow is a winner and Cutler is a whiner. Whiners do not become SB champions.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

I am still with Tebow. Bottom line is that Tebow is a winner and Cutler is a whine-o. Whine-os do not become SB champions.

Fixed

 

[Synesthesia]

I'll take the one who isn't likely to pout his way out of town if things aren't going his way. Pretty easy decision, really.

We don't know how Tebow would have handled his coach trying to replace him coming off a season where he led the league's second sixteenth best offense.

fixed for you. As soon as yards gained count on the scoreboard (instead of points), I'll concede that cutler has led an above average offense.In terms of scoring, no cutler-led-team has ever finished better than 16th.

Seriously?Let's play a game. Imagine two teams. One team scores on an INT return, scores again on a punt return, and starts 2 other drives inside the other team's 20 thanks to turnovers and returns (both drives result in field goals). The other team starts every drive inside its own 20, averages 60 yards per drive, but only punches it into the end zone once, makes one field goal, and sees its kicker miss two chip shots. The first team puts up 86 yards of offense. The second team puts up 482 yards of offense. Which team has a better offense?

Ranking an offense entirely by points is as ludicrous as ranking them entirely by yards- perhaps even more so. In 2008, Denver had the worst starting field position in the NFL by a substantial margin. Its defense forced the fewest takeaways per drive in the league, and gave up the second most yards per drive to boot (meaning other offenses were consistently able to pin Denver deep). Their special teams were one of the 3 worst units in the league. And, oh yeah, they lost their top 6 (count them- SIX) running backs during the course of the season. Despite these handicaps, Jay Cutler QB'd an offense that ranked 1st in the NFL in yards per drive and 9th in the NFL in points per drive. That was a legitimate top 5 offense that only failed to put up top-5 scoring totals because it was saddled with three of the biggest anchors I've ever seen (brutal defense, brutal special teams, brutal injury luck at RB). Anyone on earth could have seen that if they'd stopped grinding that axe long enough to actually watch the games.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I am still with Tebow. Bottom line is that Tebow is a winner and Cutler is a whiner. Whiners do not become SB champions.

The Bears are 17-8 in the last two seasons when Cutler starts; they are 2-5 when he does not start. And considering how much two-time Super Bowl champion James Harrison whines about the big, bad NFL picking on him, your other comment doesn't make a lot of sense.

 

[moleculo]

I'll take the one who isn't likely to pout his way out of town if things aren't going his way. Pretty easy decision, really.

We don't know how Tebow would have handled his coach trying to replace him coming off a season where he led the league's second sixteenth best offense.

fixed for you. As soon as yards gained count on the scoreboard (instead of points), I'll concede that cutler has led an above average offense.In terms of scoring, no cutler-led-team has ever finished better than 16th.

Seriously?Let's play a game. Imagine two teams. One team scores on an INT return, scores again on a punt return, and starts 2 other drives inside the other team's 20 thanks to turnovers and returns (both drives result in field goals). The other team starts every drive inside its own 20, averages 60 yards per drive, but only punches it into the end zone once, makes one field goal, and sees its kicker miss two chip shots. The first team puts up 86 yards of offense. The second team puts up 482 yards of offense. Which team has a better offense?

Ranking an offense entirely by points is as ludicrous as ranking them entirely by yards- perhaps even more so. In 2008, Denver had the worst starting field position in the NFL by a substantial margin. Its defense forced the fewest takeaways per drive in the league, and gave up the second most yards per drive to boot (meaning other offenses were consistently able to pin Denver deep). Their special teams were one of the 3 worst units in the league. And, oh yeah, they lost their top 6 (count them- SIX) running backs during the course of the season. Despite these handicaps, Jay Cutler QB'd an offense that ranked 1st in the NFL in yards per drive and 9th in the NFL in points per drive. That was a legitimate top 5 offense that only failed to put up top-5 scoring totals because it was saddled with three of the biggest anchors I've ever seen (brutal defense, brutal special teams, brutal injury luck at RB). Anyone on earth could have seen that if they'd stopped grinding that axe long enough to actually watch the games.

Seriously. the team that can punch the ball in the end-zone is a better offense. I could be mistaken, but when pro-football-reference says the Broncos offense was ranked 16th in scoring, I don't think they are accounting for d/st scores. I don't think your little parable is very accurate. The 2008 Broncos were a team that was great at moving the chains but struggled in the red-zone. I appreciate the history lesson of what happened in 2008, but I'll challenge you to dig a little deeper. That Bronco team was a game away from clinching in week 15: win one of their last three games, and they would have been in the playoffs.

Week 15 vs Carolina: Carolina was an averagish D...12th in points, 18th in yards. Denver managed 10 points, during a 6 game stretch where Carolina surrendered an average of 29. cutler went 21/33, 171, 1 TD, 1 int. In the second half, Denver wen 3 and out on 3 out of 5 possessions. Where was the top 5 O now?

Week 16 was Buffalo. The Bills were an average D, certainly something that an alleged top 5 O shouldn't struggle to score against. cutler went 25/45 for 359 yards, no TD and one int. that one int was in the end-zone and would have tied the game. On the Broncos final possession, they drove the ball to the 20, and then went 4 and out.

Week 17, Denver lost 52-21 to SD. I'd hope that a top 5 O could have put up more than 21 points against a Charger D ranked 15 in points and 25th in yards, or even 31st against the pass. cutler was 22/49, 349 yards, 1 TD, 2 int. 52 points in an important game...that's what a legitimate top 5 offense can do (SD ranked #2).

When you have a team that puts up yards but not points, that says to me that they struggle with TD's, and is probably indicative of a poor running game, which is what that season was. But when push came to shove, the O was not good enough to keep up with a terrible defense. 16th ranked offense, and that's the bottom line.

*note: the above commentary is about the futility of the 2008 Broncos only. I will agree that had cutler remained healthy, the 2011 Bears likely would have been better than 16th in terms of scoring, which invalidates my previous comment from Jan 7 of last year. I'll still take the QB that won't pout his way out of town when things get rough though.

 

[Synesthesia]

Seriously. the team that can punch the ball in the end-zone is a better offense. I could be mistaken, but when pro-football-reference says the Broncos offense was ranked 16th in scoring, I don't think they are accounting for d/st scores. I don't think your little parable is very accurate. The 2008 Broncos were a team that was great at moving the chains but struggled in the red-zone.

I appreciate the history lesson of what happened in 2008, but I'll challenge you to dig a little deeper. That Bronco team was a game away from clinching in week 15: win one of their last three games, and they would have been in the playoffs.

Week 15 vs Carolina: Carolina was an averagish D...12th in points, 18th in yards. Denver managed 10 points, during a 6 game stretch where Carolina surrendered an average of 29. cutler went 21/33, 171, 1 TD, 1 int. In the second half, Denver wen 3 and out on 3 out of 5 possessions. Where was the top 5 O now?

Week 16 was Buffalo. The Bills were an average D, certainly something that an alleged top 5 O shouldn't struggle to score against. cutler went 25/45 for 359 yards, no TD and one int. that one int was in the end-zone and would have tied the game. On the Broncos final possession, they drove the ball to the 20, and then went 4 and out.

Week 17, Denver lost 52-21 to SD. I'd hope that a top 5 O could have put up more than 21 points against a Charger D ranked 15 in points and 25th in yards, or even 31st against the pass. cutler was 22/49, 349 yards, 1 TD, 2 int. 52 points in an important game...that's what a legitimate top 5 offense can do (SD ranked #2).

When you have a team that puts up yards but not points, that says to me that they struggle with TD's, and is probably indicative of a poor running game, which is what that season was. But when push came to shove, the O was not good enough to keep up with a terrible defense. 16th ranked offense, and that's the bottom line.

*note: the above commentary is about the futility of the 2008 Broncos only. I will agree that had cutler remained healthy, the 2011 Bears likely would have been better than 16th in terms of scoring, which invalidates my previous comment from Jan 7 of last year. I'll still take the QB that won't pout his way out of town when things get rough though.

I must have missed the memo where a team could only be a top 5 offense if it performed like a top 5 offense in absolutely every game in the season. No, you're absolutely right, a poor offensive showing against Carolina completely disqualifies them from "top 5 offense" status. Top 5 offenses never have bad games.Or here's a thought- instead of pointing out a couple of highly anecdotal data points, how about we go back once again to the fact that the 2008 Broncos were DEAD LAST (32nd out of 32) in takeaways), DEAD LAST (32nd out of 32) in starting field position, almost last (31st out of 32) in points allowed per drive, almost last (31st out of 32) in yards allowed per drive, and a bottom-5 special teams unit... and in spite of all of that, the Broncos offense ranked 1st in the NFL in yards per drive, 9th in the NFL in points per drive, and 9th in the NFL in TDs per drive.

Of course, if you really want to play the anecdotal data point game, we could go that route, too. You mentioned Denver struggled on offense in weeks 15, 16, and 17. Who was their starting RB during those three games? Oh yeah, it was their 6th string RB, a guy who was flipping burgers in October and starting for the Broncos in November, a guy so bad he has never made another NFL roster since. Do you think perhaps the fact that Denver had already lost Michael Pittman, Selvin Young, Andre Hall, Peyton Hillis, and Ryan Torain for the season might have played in to the fact that the offense struggled? Or the fact that the guy carrying the rock in December didn't even have a playbook until November? What do you think the typical offense might do if forced to start its SIXTH STRING RUNNINGBACK for an extended period of time? Just how difficult do you think it would be for a QB to make a top-5 offense out of a team whose leading rusher had 343 yards... for the entire season?

Also, I feel like this myopic focus on points to the exclusion of all else is especially silly because yards are intrinsically valuable in and of themselves. An offense that gets 30 yards on every drive is better than an offense that gets 0 yards on every drive, even if both offenses score the exact same number of points... because the first offense leaves its defense with better field position. I forget the coach at the moment, but I once read a head coach who said he considers any drive that nets two first downs to be a successful offensive drive, because those two first downs are all it takes to flip field position and win the field position battle. Any metric for rating an offense that completely ignores the yards it puts up is a fatally flawed metric.

 

[moleculo]

Seriously. the team that can punch the ball in the end-zone is a better offense. I could be mistaken, but when pro-football-reference says the Broncos offense was ranked 16th in scoring, I don't think they are accounting for d/st scores. I don't think your little parable is very accurate. The 2008 Broncos were a team that was great at moving the chains but struggled in the red-zone.

I appreciate the history lesson of what happened in 2008, but I'll challenge you to dig a little deeper. That Bronco team was a game away from clinching in week 15: win one of their last three games, and they would have been in the playoffs.

Week 15 vs Carolina: Carolina was an averagish D...12th in points, 18th in yards. Denver managed 10 points, during a 6 game stretch where Carolina surrendered an average of 29. cutler went 21/33, 171, 1 TD, 1 int. In the second half, Denver wen 3 and out on 3 out of 5 possessions. Where was the top 5 O now?

Week 16 was Buffalo. The Bills were an average D, certainly something that an alleged top 5 O shouldn't struggle to score against. cutler went 25/45 for 359 yards, no TD and one int. that one int was in the end-zone and would have tied the game. On the Broncos final possession, they drove the ball to the 20, and then went 4 and out.

Week 17, Denver lost 52-21 to SD. I'd hope that a top 5 O could have put up more than 21 points against a Charger D ranked 15 in points and 25th in yards, or even 31st against the pass. cutler was 22/49, 349 yards, 1 TD, 2 int. 52 points in an important game...that's what a legitimate top 5 offense can do (SD ranked #2).

When you have a team that puts up yards but not points, that says to me that they struggle with TD's, and is probably indicative of a poor running game, which is what that season was. But when push came to shove, the O was not good enough to keep up with a terrible defense. 16th ranked offense, and that's the bottom line.

*note: the above commentary is about the futility of the 2008 Broncos only. I will agree that had cutler remained healthy, the 2011 Bears likely would have been better than 16th in terms of scoring, which invalidates my previous comment from Jan 7 of last year. I'll still take the QB that won't pout his way out of town when things get rough though.

I must have missed the memo where a team could only be a top 5 offense if it performed like a top 5 offense in absolutely every game in the season. No, you're absolutely right, a poor offensive showing against Carolina completely disqualifies them from "top 5 offense" status. Top 5 offenses never have bad games.Or here's a thought- instead of pointing out a couple of highly anecdotal data points, how about we go back once again to the fact that the 2008 Broncos were DEAD LAST (32nd out of 32) in takeaways), DEAD LAST (32nd out of 32) in starting field position, almost last (31st out of 32) in points allowed per drive, almost last (31st out of 32) in yards allowed per drive, and a bottom-5 special teams unit... and in spite of all of that, the Broncos offense ranked 1st in the NFL in yards per drive, 9th in the NFL in points per drive, and 9th in the NFL in TDs per drive.

Of course, if you really want to play the anecdotal data point game, we could go that route, too. You mentioned Denver struggled on offense in weeks 15, 16, and 17. Who was their starting RB during those three games? Oh yeah, it was their 6th string RB, a guy who was flipping burgers in October and starting for the Broncos in November, a guy so bad he has never made another NFL roster since. Do you think perhaps the fact that Denver had already lost Michael Pittman, Selvin Young, Andre Hall, Peyton Hillis, and Ryan Torain for the season might have played in to the fact that the offense struggled? Or the fact that the guy carrying the rock in December didn't even have a playbook until November? What do you think the typical offense might do if forced to start its SIXTH STRING RUNNINGBACK for an extended period of time? Just how difficult do you think it would be for a QB to make a top-5 offense out of a team whose leading rusher had 343 yards... for the entire season?

Also, I feel like this myopic focus on points to the exclusion of all else is especially silly because yards are intrinsically valuable in and of themselves. An offense that gets 30 yards on every drive is better than an offense that gets 0 yards on every drive, even if both offenses score the exact same number of points... because the first offense leaves its defense with better field position. I forget the coach at the moment, but I once read a head coach who said he considers any drive that nets two first downs to be a successful offensive drive, because those two first downs are all it takes to flip field position and win the field position battle. Any metric for rating an offense that completely ignores the yards it puts up is a fatally flawed metric.

just so we are clear - what are you trying to argue here? Are you trying to claim that yards are more important than points, or that the 2008 Broncos had a top 5 offense? I'm cool with deconstructing each one, but neither is really germane to the whole cutler v. Tebow debate. The former might be worth another thread, the latter is pretty ridiculous to continue.

 

[Synesthesia]

just so we are clear - what are you trying to argue here? Are you trying to claim that yards are more important than points, or that the 2008 Broncos had a top 5 offense? I'm cool with deconstructing each one, but neither is really germane to the whole cutler v. Tebow debate. The former might be worth another thread, the latter is pretty ridiculous to continue.

Disagreeing with someone who says yards are unimportant is not the same as saying yards are more important than points. Both yards and points are important in terms of measuring a unit's effectiveness.I'm arguing that Denver had a top 5 offense in 2008. I'm making this argument in response to your (ludicrous) claim that Cutler helmed the 16th best offense in 2008. I feel this is germane to the Cutler vs. Tebow debate because it seems that a major reason you're selecting Tebow over Cutler is because Cutler has never QB'd an elite offense. I find that reason to be demonstrably false, and have been in the process of doing just that- demonstrating it to be false.

2008 Denver Broncos- 32nd in starting field position, 32nd in takeaways, decimated by injury, and yet still 1st in yards per drive, 9th in points per drive. Elite offense, almost entirely on the strength of Cutler's arm. Period.

 

[moleculo]

just so we are clear - what are you trying to argue here? Are you trying to claim that yards are more important than points, or that the 2008 Broncos had a top 5 offense? I'm cool with deconstructing each one, but neither is really germane to the whole cutler v. Tebow debate. The former might be worth another thread, the latter is pretty ridiculous to continue.

Disagreeing with someone who says yards are unimportant is not the same as saying yards are more important than points. Both yards and points are important in terms of measuring a unit's effectiveness.

In a short run, points are kind of a random event. They come on groups of 7, which is rather dis-continuous; and they are impacted by lots of variables. Especially in the FF world - Jerome Bettis used to have stat lines with 5 yards rushing and 3 TD's; he was the goal line back, where Fast Willie Parker did most of the heavy lifting between the 20's. Here, FWP was more valuable because yards were more consistent than points, Bettis was just as likely to not get the TD, whereas FWP would always get yards. Point I'm trying to make here is that in the FF world, we over-emphasize yards because we are used to comparing small samples - a single players game or season. However, in a long run and dealing with macro levels (i.e. a whole team), yardage is simply an unnecessary surrogate for points. Over a span of 16 games, and considering the impact of all players on a team, why not look at points directly?

The only reason yards are meaningful in the first place is that the more yards you have, the higher probability that you will score points. Again, over the course of a whole season, points are the much more important statistic.

No one ever won a game because they out gained their opponent, whereas every single game in the history of the NFL was decided by who scored the most points. Nothing else matters in the NFL outside of scoring points. Frankly, I'm shocked this is even questioned; it should be self-evident.

I'm arguing that Denver had a top 5 offense in 2008. I'm making this argument in response to your (ludicrous) claim that Cutler helmed the 16th best offense in 2008. I feel this is germane to the Cutler vs. Tebow debate because it seems that a major reason you're selecting Tebow over Cutler is because Cutler has never QB'd an elite offense. I find that reason to be demonstrably false, and have been in the process of doing just that- demonstrating it to be false.

2008 Denver Broncos- 32nd in starting field position, 32nd in takeaways, decimated by injury, and yet still 1st in yards per drive, 9th in points per drive. Elite offense, almost entirely on the strength of Cutler's arm. Period.

Well then, I don't know what to tell you. I was a cutler fan back before he pouted his way out of town. I watched every snap of that 2008 season, and I can tell you that the 2008 Broncos was not a dominant offense. My eyeballs said so, and the meaningful stats say so. They consistently fell flat on their faces time and time again, including a 3 game flop to end the season.If you want to say that they were ineffective in converting yards to stats because of the running game, or because the D was so terrible or because special teams sucked, I won't argue, but those have no bearing on the fact that the Denver O was mediocre at best.

If you want to separate things further and say that the Bronco passing O was top 5, I'll give you that. but you can't look at how bad the running game was* and tell me that this unbalanced offense was significantly better than average. In fact, it astounds me when you tell me how bad the running game was* (and make the excuse about injuries), but still consider this O to be dominant. It just doesn't make sense. Great passing game and terrible running game average out to mediocre offense**. That's what a close inspection of data suggests should happen, that's what purely subjective observations says happened, and that's what the points ranking says happened.

If you want to give cutler a pass for all of the RB injuries, that's your prerogative. The facts remain though that this team was woefully inadequate in terms of punching it in and lighting the scoreboard.

Let me ask you this - why was a team that led the league in yards per drive only 16th in scoring? How do you rationalize that?

eta:

* running game wasn't bad. Very good ypa, very low attempts was a result of cycling through backs through games. cutler was in the unenvious position of trying to do it all w/ no rushing support at all for several games, and that really skewed the numbers.

** except for Arizona - top passing O, terrible rushing O, but scored TD's and was a top offense despite horrible balance.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

All the best teams can score points without getting yards

 

[Synesthesia]

In a short run, points are kind of a random event. They come on groups of 7, which is rather dis-continuous; and they are impacted by lots of variables. Especially in the FF world - Jerome Bettis used to have stat lines with 5 yards rushing and 3 TD's; he was the goal line back, where Fast Willie Parker did most of the heavy lifting between the 20's. Here, FWP was more valuable because yards were more consistent than points, Bettis was just as likely to not get the TD, whereas FWP would always get yards. Point I'm trying to make here is that in the FF world, we over-emphasize yards because we are used to comparing small samples - a single players game or season.

However, in a long run and dealing with macro levels (i.e. a whole team), yardage is simply an unnecessary surrogate for points. Over a span of 16 games, and considering the impact of all players on a team, why not look at points directly?

The only reason yards are meaningful in the first place is that the more yards you have, the higher probability that you will score points. Again, over the course of a whole season, points are the much more important statistic.

No one ever won a game because they out gained their opponent, whereas every single game in the history of the NFL was decided by who scored the most points. Nothing else matters in the NFL outside of scoring points. Frankly, I'm shocked this is even questioned; it should be self-evident.

If points were the sole and direct purview of the offense, your argument would hold slightly more weight. As it stands, defenses can score points. Special teams can score points. Most damning, however, is that points scored shows a strong positive correlation with starting field position. Unless and until you can explain to me how an offense can be responsible for its own starting field position, you cannot claim that the offense is solely responsible for points scored. And if the offense isn't solely responsible for points scored, suddenly points scored becomes a poor metric for measuring offensive efficiency. Say what you want about using yards to measure offensive efficiency, but at least yards gained is almost entirely independent of the quality of a team's defense or special teams. Points... are not, to say the very least.Of course, there is an explanation for how an offense can impact its own starting field position. Unfortunately for you, that explanation requires that we use the word "yards". You see, an offense that routinely gets a lot of yards will routinely pin the other team deep. An offense that routinely pins the other team deep will have a much stronger tendency to get the ball back in better field position. Moreover, an offense that routinely pins the opposition deep will help the defense out and dramatically reduce the number of points the defense allows over the season.

If you want to say that they were ineffective in converting yards to stats because of the running game, or because the D was so terrible or because special teams sucked, I won't argue, but those have no bearing on the fact that the Denver O was mediocre at best.

If you want to separate things further and say that the Bronco passing O was top 5, I'll give you that. but you can't look at how bad the running game was* and tell me that this unbalanced offense was significantly better than average. In fact, it astounds me when you tell me how bad the running game was* (and make the excuse about injuries), but still consider this O to be dominant. It just doesn't make sense. Great passing game and terrible running game average out to mediocre offense**. That's what a close inspection of data suggests should happen, that's what purely subjective observations says happened, and that's what the points ranking says happened.

If you want to give cutler a pass for all of the RB injuries, that's your prerogative. The facts remain though that this team was woefully inadequate in terms of punching it in and lighting the scoreboard.

Let me ask you this - why was a team that led the league in yards per drive only 16th in scoring? How do you rationalize that?

eta:

* running game wasn't bad. Very good ypa, very low attempts was a result of cycling through backs through games. cutler was in the unenvious position of trying to do it all w/ no rushing support at all for several games, and that really skewed the numbers.

** except for Arizona - top passing O, terrible rushing O, but scored TD's and was a top offense despite horrible balance.

You have a funny definition of mediocre. 1st in yards per drive is 100th percentile. 9th in points per drive is 74th percentile. By the two biggest measures of offensive success, Denver was well above mediocre.As for how I rationalize a team ranking 1st in yards per drive and 16th in total points... that's an easy one. You're comparing apples and oranges. "1st in yards per drive" is a rate stat, while "16th in scoring" is a raw value. Denver ranked 30th out of 32 in number of offensive drives. Read that last sentence a couple more times. You might want to reconsider the advisability of relying on raw scoring stats in light of it. For instance, the team that finished one spot ahead of Denver in total points was Chicago. Denver had 164 drives that season. Chicago had 198. Do you really want to make the argument that Chicago was the better offense? It's like in basketball- you can't just compare raw scoring numbers, you have to compare pace-adjusted scoring numbers, otherwise even the worst 6-seconds-or-less team in the league will look better than even the best halfcourt offense team.

So all I have to "rationalize" is how a team that ranked 1st in yards per drive ranked 9th in points per drive, and that's an easy one. The 1st in yards per drive ranking was slightly inflated by the brutally poor starting field position (longer fields = more opportunities to gain yards), while the 9th in points per drive ranking was heavily depressed by the brutally poor starting field position (remember, there's a strong positive correlation between starting field position and points scored). Bad special teams, terrible defense, and no takeaways means that Denver faced more long fields than anyone else in the league. Denver did a remarkable job of overcoming that handicap, but even a great offense can only do so much. Given the correlation between starting field position and points scored, for Denver to rank 32nd in the former and 9th in the latter suggests that they were a very large offensive outlier.

Or perhaps we could simplify this whole debate. Are you familiar with Football Outsiders? There's a complete list of their stats and a rundown of their methodologies available here, but the short version is they log every play and compare it against the league average, adjusting for situation and quality of defense faced. They then calculate just how much above (or below) average a unit is. Think of them as per-play metrics on steroids. Their ranking for the 2008 Denver Broncos? 2nd, just a 10th of a percentage off of first place. I'd call that pretty dominant. And I'd pin the vast majority of that dominance on Cutler, whose mobility allowed Denver to suffer the fewest sacks in the league despite ranking middle of the pack in terms of hurries allowed (meaning rushers were getting past the line, but Cutler was getting rid of it before they got to him), and who QB'd a team with the worst RBs in the NFL. Cutler proved his mettle that season. He proved that he's capable of being the triggerman (and primary contributor) on a dominant NFL offense. I'm a Tim Tebow fan, but what has he proven? Denver was 26th in yards per drive and 27th in points per drive this season. I can use the old eyeball test, too, and there's absolutely no comparison. I'd describe this year's offense as timely, but otherwise punchless. I'd describe the 2008 offense as dominant. And given a choice between QBs, as much as I like Tim Tebow, I'd choose the latter.

 

[moleculo]

Whatever. I'm obviously not going to convince you, and I don't care to continue. The 2008 Broncos were ultimately irrelevant and this discussion isn't worth the bytes of data all ready spent. You win. If you want to think that an 8-8 team that couldn't score when it had to had an elite offense, I say go for it.

I'm done with this thread anyways; I've said my peace. I no longer have a strong animosity towards cutler. He is still a whiny #####, but ragging on him feels too much like defending McDaniels, and that's something that I haven't wanted to do for a long time.

This is a time for me to be happy because my QB has lead my team to a playoff game vs the #1 defense... That's what I prefer to be thinking about; not the failures and ineptitude of 3 years ago.

 

[az_prof]

just so we are clear - what are you trying to argue here? Are you trying to claim that yards are more important than points, or that the 2008 Broncos had a top 5 offense? I'm cool with deconstructing each one, but neither is really germane to the whole cutler v. Tebow debate. The former might be worth another thread, the latter is pretty ridiculous to continue.

Disagreeing with someone who says yards are unimportant is not the same as saying yards are more important than points. Both yards and points are important in terms of measuring a unit's effectiveness.

In a short run, points are kind of a random event. They come on groups of 7, which is rather dis-continuous; and they are impacted by lots of variables. Especially in the FF world - Jerome Bettis used to have stat lines with 5 yards rushing and 3 TD's; he was the goal line back, where Fast Willie Parker did most of the heavy lifting between the 20's. Here, FWP was more valuable because yards were more consistent than points, Bettis was just as likely to not get the TD, whereas FWP would always get yards. Point I'm trying to make here is that in the FF world, we over-emphasize yards because we are used to comparing small samples - a single players game or season. However, in a long run and dealing with macro levels (i.e. a whole team), yardage is simply an unnecessary surrogate for points. Over a span of 16 games, and considering the impact of all players on a team, why not look at points directly?

The only reason yards are meaningful in the first place is that the more yards you have, the higher probability that you will score points. Again, over the course of a whole season, points are the much more important statistic.

No one ever won a game because they out gained their opponent, whereas every single game in the history of the NFL was decided by who scored the most points. Nothing else matters in the NFL outside of scoring points. Frankly, I'm shocked this is even questioned; it should be self-evident.

I'm arguing that Denver had a top 5 offense in 2008. I'm making this argument in response to your (ludicrous) claim that Cutler helmed the 16th best offense in 2008. I feel this is germane to the Cutler vs. Tebow debate because it seems that a major reason you're selecting Tebow over Cutler is because Cutler has never QB'd an elite offense. I find that reason to be demonstrably false, and have been in the process of doing just that- demonstrating it to be false.

2008 Denver Broncos- 32nd in starting field position, 32nd in takeaways, decimated by injury, and yet still 1st in yards per drive, 9th in points per drive. Elite offense, almost entirely on the strength of Cutler's arm. Period.

Well then, I don't know what to tell you. I was a cutler fan back before he pouted his way out of town. I watched every snap of that 2008 season, and I can tell you that the 2008 Broncos was not a dominant offense. My eyeballs said so, and the meaningful stats say so. They consistently fell flat on their faces time and time again, including a 3 game flop to end the season.If you want to say that they were ineffective in converting yards to stats because of the running game, or because the D was so terrible or because special teams sucked, I won't argue, but those have no bearing on the fact that the Denver O was mediocre at best.

If you want to separate things further and say that the Bronco passing O was top 5, I'll give you that. but you can't look at how bad the running game was* and tell me that this unbalanced offense was significantly better than average. In fact, it astounds me when you tell me how bad the running game was* (and make the excuse about injuries), but still consider this O to be dominant. It just doesn't make sense. Great passing game and terrible running game average out to mediocre offense**. That's what a close inspection of data suggests should happen, that's what purely subjective observations says happened, and that's what the points ranking says happened.

If you want to give cutler a pass for all of the RB injuries, that's your prerogative. The facts remain though that this team was woefully inadequate in terms of punching it in and lighting the scoreboard.

Let me ask you this - why was a team that led the league in yards per drive only 16th in scoring? How do you rationalize that?

eta:

* running game wasn't bad. Very good ypa, very low attempts was a result of cycling through backs through games. cutler was in the unenvious position of trying to do it all w/ no rushing support at all for several games, and that really skewed the numbers.

** except for Arizona - top passing O, terrible rushing O, but scored TD's and was a top offense despite horrible balance.

You both have a point. Yards do matter. Points matter more. Points could be scored by the D/ST. But in most cases, points are scored by offense.When the offense gains yards but doesn't score TDs, the fault for that must be borne by the QB in part. He is the on field leader of the offense. If the team has yards, but doesn't score TDs, they are either turning the ball over or settling for FGs in the RZ. Again, the QB bears a significant amount of responsibility for both of those types of failure.

I still maintain that Cutler's attitude is a big negative. You can't be a leader if you are prone to blame others and pout. People will not rally around you. People will not trust you. That lack of trust and confidence will lead them to make mistakes in critical situations.

A leader inspires confidence and optimism. Confidence and optimism cannot make up for a lack of talent; but assuming the talent is close, it can be the difference in a close game.

 

[FavreCo]

All the best teams can score points without getting yards

And with that one, we better add 'your best teams are not always your good teams'....or is it 'your good teams are not always your best teams'. I can never keep that gem straight.