Tim Tebow - 8.17.21 Waived By Jacksonville (1 Viewer)

[SaintsInDome2006]

Tim Tebow is expected to be one-and-done with the Jets, and now that the potential landing spot in his hometown of Jacksonville is officially closed, the NFL may have seen the last of Tebow Mania.

Can he be done at the age of 25?“I think it could be over,” an NFL source said Thursday night. “He can go on with his life successfully without football.”

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/jets/myers-tebow-doesn-prayer-nfl-starting-gig-article-1.1238034#ixzz2HhmXcbEjI have some good things to say about Tebow and some bad things to say about Tebow, but he is absolutely, completely, totally, thoroughly 100% not capable of being a backup anywhere?Look at McElroy, man, he did better than Tebow would have done? These guys - all NFL backups - are better than Tebow?KafkaDevlinYatesHarnishGabbertJohn Parker WilsonRusty SmithTyrod TaylorGradkowskiZac RobinsonLeftwichHanieStanzieWhitehurstPryor (guy who runs around and can't hit a moving target)LeinertNick StephensPainter (!)Trent EdwardsMatt Blanchard (?)Joe Webb (explain that one)Bethel-ThompsonDominique DavisClausenAdam WeberLindleyTolzienAustin Davis (?)The Bills don't even have a backup on their depth chart.Bottom line is there is some weird political stuff that goes on in the NFL and no I don't mean the conservative/Christian thing. I mean marketing and egos, because clearly it's not all about football.Organizations don't want a guy who the fans will call for when their team stinks basically. No, they're rather have a backup who can't do jack-&^&$ when called upon, you know the backup QB that makes all FF players like to pick up the DST who is facing them that week.

 

[Sinn Fein]

I have some good things to say about Tebow and some bad things to say about Tebow, but he is absolutely, completely, totally, thoroughly 100% not capable of being a backup anywhere?

Bottom line is there is some weird political stuff that goes on in the NFL and no I don't mean the conservative/Christian thing. I mean marketing and egos, because clearly it's not all about football.

If you followed the Tebow story at all you know its much deeper than that. Tebow makes a terrible choice for almost all teams as a back-up QB - maybe the Redskins could use him.Tebow as a "standard" QB is awful - by all accounts a terrible, stand-in-the-pocket QB. He can not simply be a back-up QB to a "normal" NFL QB.

Tebow brings a circus with him everywhere he goes. Not completely his fault, but I think he does like the attention, and does nothing to discourage the tebowmaniacs. No team wants the added distraction of a back-up QB getting that much attention.

Theoretically - Tebow could be a starting QB, if the team was committed to changing its offense, and offensive personnel to play a college-style offense. It is not as simple as bringing in Tebow and saying you are going to run the run-option. You have to have the offensive line, and a commitment from the head coach and OC to run that style of play as you primary offense. Its hard switching gears mid-game or even mid-season.

Right now, it looks like no team is willing to make the commitment to Tebow that you would need to make to be successful. Jacksonville makes the most sense because they have the least to lose, but the new GM obviously does not want any part of Tebowmania. That could change, but if it does not, there are not that many places willing to make a wholesale change.

I could see Tebow in a few places, like GB or NE, behind an established starter, where they would be willing to draw up a few gimmick plays for Tebow to run - but even then its a stretch.

Now, if he wanted to switch positions, and become an H-Back, or TE, you might find some teams willing to take a look...

 

[az_prof]

The problem is that any team that takes a chance on Tebow will find themselves in the same situation as Elway/Fox or Tannenbaum/Ryan - which is to say that if they start him and he does well they are stuck with him as the starter until he completely flames out because the fans would be outraged if he went back to the bench after winning a game or two.

I don't get why that is a problem. If he wins, why would you want to put him on the bench?

I think John Elway and John Fox can answer that question better than I can. Tebow was winning for them, but it seemed they couldn't wait to get rid of him. They regarded him as a gimmick player that would shortly be figured out by the DCs they were facing and then would be unable to make the move to another QB without a backlash from Tebow supporters and the subsequent media circus over a QB controversy.

It appears the Denver brass made the right decision. I wonder how many of those Tebow supporters in Denver still want him

I don't think this is at all clear. They were 8-5 in games Tebow started last year, including one playoff win. They won more regular season games THIS year, but how do you know they wouldn't have won more if they had spent the off season developing Tebow and building the offense around him? For the sake of argument, let's assume the team was better this year than it would have been with Tebow, how many years does Denver have its franchise QB before it has to rebuild all over again? Ask the Vikings, who tried the same experiment with an aged HOF QB recently. Instead, they may have given up a franchise QB for the next 10 years in place of guy who may play a year or two (uncertain but he is old and all it takes is one good hit at his advanced age). If Denver doesn't win the SB this year or next, then they made the wrong decision because they already had a playoff team with Tebow.

 

[az_prof]

The problem is that any team that takes a chance on Tebow will find themselves in the same situation as Elway/Fox or Tannenbaum/Ryan - which is to say that if they start him and he does well they are stuck with him as the starter until he completely flames out because the fans would be outraged if he went back to the bench after winning a game or two.

I don't get why that is a problem. If he wins, why would you want to put him on the bench?

I think John Elway and John Fox can answer that question better than I can. Tebow was winning for them, but it seemed they couldn't wait to get rid of him. They regarded him as a gimmick player that would shortly be figured out by the DCs they were facing and then would be unable to make the move to another QB without a backlash from Tebow supporters and the subsequent media circus over a QB controversy.

I do not think it was that he was not figured out by the opposing DCs. He did not light the world on fire in Denver. He completed less than 50% of his passes and won probably three or four miracle games. Elway/Fox knew that could not be sustained.

By definition, NO ONE wins three or four "miracle games" in a season. A miracle game means a once in a lifetime or once in a season sort of luck. Statistically, you can't win the lottery three or four times in a row. So, either you say:a) he is better than you want to admit and won some games where the odds were against him because of some quality that we can't easily identify (leadership and will?).

or

b) he IS blessed by God and gets to win miracle games because of his piety (I don't think so....)

or

c) they weren't miracle wins; find some other explanation...but what?

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

There are some teams with really awful QB situations that would be better if they committed to the wildcat and brought Tebow in. If I were a team with a solid/good defense and no QB (Arizona, Cleveland, NYJ!) why not take a shot and win some games. Even if you don't think he's the long-term answer he'd make your team a lot better until you get the position sorted out.

 

[zDragon]

The problem is that any team that takes a chance on Tebow will find themselves in the same situation as Elway/Fox or Tannenbaum/Ryan - which is to say that if they start him and he does well they are stuck with him as the starter until he completely flames out because the fans would be outraged if he went back to the bench after winning a game or two.

I don't get why that is a problem. If he wins, why would you want to put him on the bench?

I think John Elway and John Fox can answer that question better than I can. Tebow was winning for them, but it seemed they couldn't wait to get rid of him. They regarded him as a gimmick player that would shortly be figured out by the DCs they were facing and then would be unable to make the move to another QB without a backlash from Tebow supporters and the subsequent media circus over a QB controversy.

I do not think it was that he was not figured out by the opposing DCs. He did not light the world on fire in Denver. He completed less than 50% of his passes and won probably three or four miracle games. Elway/Fox knew that could not be sustained.

By definition, NO ONE wins three or four "miracle games" in a season. A miracle game means a once in a lifetime or once in a season sort of luck. Statistically, you can't win the lottery three or four times in a row. So, either you say:a) he is better than you want to admit and won some games where the odds were against him because of some quality that we can't easily identify (leadership and will?).

or

b) he IS blessed by God and gets to win miracle games because of his piety (I don't think so....)

or

c) they weren't miracle wins; find some other explanation...but what?

Even with this being true he still needs to improve his passing or he is pretty much done as an NFL QB. I saw that some QB coaches thought they could help him. Tebow would be smart if he took them up on the offer this off-season.

 

[teamramrod]

Denard Robinson called,Being a WR is apparently pretty coolPeace

 

[Buffaloes]

Organizations don't want a guy who the fans will call for when their team stinks basically. No, they're rather have a backup who can't do jack-&^&$ when called upon, you know the backup QB that makes all FF players like to pick up the DST who is facing them that week.

risk/rewardis it worth the circus to bring a backup QB into the fold? Especially when the backup QB requires a unique offence in order to be effective? It's an incessant and complete distraction--this has been proven w/ 2 different teams now. I'm sure every team could use a player like TT as a wild card player similar to Brad Smith, but not when it's a total distraction for everyone involved with the franchise from the owner all the way down to the casual fan. It's not all TT's fault, I don't think I've ever seen a following like his in sports.I'm not bagging on the guy. Like I said, he'd be an asset even if he was just an inside-the-10-yard-line option. But teams have to weigh whether that's worth all the other stuff

 

[ICON211]

The problem is that any team that takes a chance on Tebow will find themselves in the same situation as Elway/Fox or Tannenbaum/Ryan - which is to say that if they start him and he does well they are stuck with him as the starter until he completely flames out because the fans would be outraged if he went back to the bench after winning a game or two.

I don't get why that is a problem. If he wins, why would you want to put him on the bench?

I think John Elway and John Fox can answer that question better than I can. Tebow was winning for them, but it seemed they couldn't wait to get rid of him. They regarded him as a gimmick player that would shortly be figured out by the DCs they were facing and then would be unable to make the move to another QB without a backlash from Tebow supporters and the subsequent media circus over a QB controversy.

It appears the Denver brass made the right decision. I wonder how many of those Tebow supporters in Denver still want him

I don't think this is at all clear. They were 8-5 in games Tebow started last year, including one playoff win. They won more regular season games THIS year, but how do you know they wouldn't have won more if they had spent the off season developing Tebow and building the offense around him? For the sake of argument, let's assume the team was better this year than it would have been with Tebow, how many years does Denver have its franchise QB before it has to rebuild all over again? Ask the Vikings, who tried the same experiment with an aged HOF QB recently. Instead, they may have given up a franchise QB for the next 10 years in place of guy who may play a year or two (uncertain but he is old and all it takes is one good hit at his advanced age). If Denver doesn't win the SB this year or next, then they made the wrong decision because they already had a playoff team with Tebow.

A franchise QB that was passed over for Greg McElroy and not one team in the league thinks can be a starter?

 

[ICON211]

The problem is that any team that takes a chance on Tebow will find themselves in the same situation as Elway/Fox or Tannenbaum/Ryan - which is to say that if they start him and he does well they are stuck with him as the starter until he completely flames out because the fans would be outraged if he went back to the bench after winning a game or two.

I don't get why that is a problem. If he wins, why would you want to put him on the bench?

I think John Elway and John Fox can answer that question better than I can. Tebow was winning for them, but it seemed they couldn't wait to get rid of him. They regarded him as a gimmick player that would shortly be figured out by the DCs they were facing and then would be unable to make the move to another QB without a backlash from Tebow supporters and the subsequent media circus over a QB controversy.

I do not think it was that he was not figured out by the opposing DCs. He did not light the world on fire in Denver. He completed less than 50% of his passes and won probably three or four miracle games. Elway/Fox knew that could not be sustained.

By definition, NO ONE wins three or four "miracle games" in a season. A miracle game means a once in a lifetime or once in a season sort of luck. Statistically, you can't win the lottery three or four times in a row. So, either you say:a) he is better than you want to admit and won some games where the odds were against him because of some quality that we can't easily identify (leadership and will?).

or

b) he IS blessed by God and gets to win miracle games because of his piety (I don't think so....)

or

c) they weren't miracle wins; find some other explanation...but what?

In those wins they had to come back in ridiculous fashion largely because he was inept for 3+ quarters.

 

[Abraham]

Coaches aren't dumb. They see that the nfl is ruled by pocket passers. Committing to tebow as a short term answer simply delays addressing the long term, which is what they aspire to. No one wants to make the playoffs once a decade; they want a Brady or Rodgers that makes them competitive for a decade.

 

[RBM]

There are some teams with really awful QB situations that would be better if they committed to the wildcat and brought Tebow in. If I were a team with a solid/good defense and no QB (Arizona, Cleveland, NYJ!) why not take a shot and win some games. Even if you don't think he's the long-term answer he'd make your team a lot better until you get the position sorted out.

Stupidity and out of control egos on coaches. Does anyone really think Ryan/Sparano/Tannenbaum are capable of properly evaluating a qb? And then there are a lot of guys whose ego will not allow them to change their offense to one that suits Tebow. I hope he at least changes position so he can continue to play in the league. He would make a great FB.

 

[RBM]

Absolutely ridiculous that a guy like Ryan Lindley got multiple starts this year, but Tebow couldn't.

 

[Joe Summer]

By definition, NO ONE wins three or four "miracle games" in a season. A miracle game means a once in a lifetime or once in a season sort of luck.

By whose definition? Yours?

 

[squistion]

By definition, NO ONE wins three or four "miracle games" in a season. A miracle game means a once in a lifetime or once in a season sort of luck.

By whose definition? Yours?

By most people, except those who apparently consider miracle games a common, regular and almost every week occurrence.

 

[RBM]

By definition, NO ONE wins three or four "miracle games" in a season. A miracle game means a once in a lifetime or once in a season sort of luck.

By whose definition? Yours?

By most people, except those who apparently consider miracle games a common, regular and almost every week occurrence.

When every other qb that's ever played does it....it's a great comeback. When Tebow does it, it's a miracle.

 

[ICON211]

By definition, NO ONE wins three or four "miracle games" in a season. A miracle game means a once in a lifetime or once in a season sort of luck.

By whose definition? Yours?

By most people, except those who apparently consider miracle games a common, regular and almost every week occurrence.

When every other qb that's ever played does it....it's a great comeback. When Tebow does it, it's a miracle.

Bottom line is that no team thinks they can win on a consistent basis with a QB that can not even complete 50% of his passes.

 

[ICON211]

Absolutely ridiculous that a guy like Ryan Lindley got multiple starts this year, but Tebow couldn't.

Might be ridiculous that Lindley got multiple starts, but it has nothing to do with Tebow.

 

[CalBear]

Coaches aren't dumb. They see that the nfl is ruled by pocket passers. Committing to tebow as a short term answer simply delays addressing the long term, which is what they aspire to. No one wants to make the playoffs once a decade; they want a Brady or Rodgers that makes them competitive for a decade.

Yeah, except Rodgers isn't a pocket passer; he throws on the run a lot, and averages nearly 60 rushing attempts per year. It is entirely possible to be a mobile passer and to dominate the NFL.That doesn't mean Tebow can do it, of course.

 

[Csonka4life]

Coaches aren't dumb. They see that the nfl is ruled by pocket passers. Committing to tebow as a short term answer simply delays addressing the long term, which is what they aspire to. No one wants to make the playoffs once a decade; they want a Brady or Rodgers that makes them competitive for a decade.

Yeah, except Rodgers isn't a pocket passer; he throws on the run a lot, and averages nearly 60 rushing attempts per year. It is entirely possible to be a mobile passer and to dominate the NFL.That doesn't mean Tebow can do it, of course.

Tebow never had a system that fit him in Denver and the play calling was too predictable. But what do supporters see in him? I see a guy who can't hit the broadside of the barn 50 percent of the time and can't throw on the run at all for a mobile qb. He's either a rumbling power back ie Lindel White or a 1987 replacement qb.

 

[Buffaloes]

Tebow never had a system that fit him in Denver

that's incorrect. in fact, they changed the entire offence midseason just to accomodate TT. I don't remember seeing a team do anything like that. the playcalling may have been predictable in many games, but when the blueprint is to mask a QB's passing deficiencies by playing ball control o, stout defence, and shortening the game, predictability can happen. I'm pretty sure most people (including the Steelers) didn't see the 1st play of OT coming, though. That play was set up by a game and season worth of predictable runs on 1st down.

 

[lod01]

Zipping this #### up. It's over and good riddance.

 

[Stinger Ray]

Coaches aren't dumb. They see that the nfl is ruled by pocket passers. Committing to tebow as a short term answer simply delays addressing the long term, which is what they aspire to. No one wants to make the playoffs once a decade; they want a Brady or Rodgers that makes them competitive for a decade.

Yeah, except Rodgers isn't a pocket passer; he throws on the run a lot, and averages nearly 60 rushing attempts per year. It is entirely possible to be a mobile passer and to dominate the NFL.That doesn't mean Tebow can do it, of course.

Rodgers isn't a pocket passer?

 

[az_prof]

The problem is that any team that takes a chance on Tebow will find themselves in the same situation as Elway/Fox or Tannenbaum/Ryan - which is to say that if they start him and he does well they are stuck with him as the starter until he completely flames out because the fans would be outraged if he went back to the bench after winning a game or two.

I don't get why that is a problem. If he wins, why would you want to put him on the bench?

I think John Elway and John Fox can answer that question better than I can. Tebow was winning for them, but it seemed they couldn't wait to get rid of him. They regarded him as a gimmick player that would shortly be figured out by the DCs they were facing and then would be unable to make the move to another QB without a backlash from Tebow supporters and the subsequent media circus over a QB controversy.

I do not think it was that he was not figured out by the opposing DCs. He did not light the world on fire in Denver. He completed less than 50% of his passes and won probably three or four miracle games. Elway/Fox knew that could not be sustained.

By definition, NO ONE wins three or four "miracle games" in a season. A miracle game means a once in a lifetime or once in a season sort of luck. Statistically, you can't win the lottery three or four times in a row. So, either you say:a) he is better than you want to admit and won some games where the odds were against him because of some quality that we can't easily identify (leadership and will?).

or

b) he IS blessed by God and gets to win miracle games because of his piety (I don't think so....)

or

c) they weren't miracle wins; find some other explanation...but what?

In those wins they had to come back in ridiculous fashion largely because he was inept for 3+ quarters.

So, Peyton threw two INTs, one for a TD and the other set up the game winning FG. Can we all agree that Denver didn't win by virtue of miracles last year and in spite of Tebow? They were no better this year than with Tebow, getting no farther in the playoffs. Pretty funny if you ask me.

 

[az_prof]

Tebow never had a system that fit him in Denver

that's incorrect. in fact, they changed the entire offence midseason just to accomodate TT. I don't remember seeing a team do anything like that. the playcalling may have been predictable in many games, but when the blueprint is to mask a QB's passing deficiencies by playing ball control o, stout defence, and shortening the game, predictability can happen. I'm pretty sure most people (including the Steelers) didn't see the 1st play of OT coming, though. That play was set up by a game and season worth of predictable runs on 1st down.

It was built on the fly and the first couple of games it was very basic. Had they worked on one all off season with Tebow as the starter it would have been much more complex and successful by the playoffs.

 

[CalBear]

Coaches aren't dumb. They see that the nfl is ruled by pocket passers. Committing to tebow as a short term answer simply delays addressing the long term, which is what they aspire to. No one wants to make the playoffs once a decade; they want a Brady or Rodgers that makes them competitive for a decade.

Yeah, except Rodgers isn't a pocket passer; he throws on the run a lot, and averages nearly 60 rushing attempts per year. It is entirely possible to be a mobile passer and to dominate the NFL.That doesn't mean Tebow can do it, of course.

Rodgers isn't a pocket passer?

Tom Brady and Peyton Manning are pocket passers. Aaron Rodgers runs twice as often as they do, and completes twice as many passes outside the pocket as they do. He's a mobile QB.

 

[shader]

Take that Elway

 

[Hoss Style]

The problem is that any team that takes a chance on Tebow will find themselves in the same situation as Elway/Fox or Tannenbaum/Ryan - which is to say that if they start him and he does well they are stuck with him as the starter until he completely flames out because the fans would be outraged if he went back to the bench after winning a game or two.

I don't get why that is a problem. If he wins, why would you want to put him on the bench?

I think John Elway and John Fox can answer that question better than I can. Tebow was winning for them, but it seemed they couldn't wait to get rid of him. They regarded him as a gimmick player that would shortly be figured out by the DCs they were facing and then would be unable to make the move to another QB without a backlash from Tebow supporters and the subsequent media circus over a QB controversy.

I do not think it was that he was not figured out by the opposing DCs. He did not light the world on fire in Denver. He completed less than 50% of his passes and won probably three or four miracle games. Elway/Fox knew that could not be sustained.

By definition, NO ONE wins three or four "miracle games" in a season. A miracle game means a once in a lifetime or once in a season sort of luck. Statistically, you can't win the lottery three or four times in a row. So, either you say:a) he is better than you want to admit and won some games where the odds were against him because of some quality that we can't easily identify (leadership and will?).

or

b) he IS blessed by God and gets to win miracle games because of his piety (I don't think so....)

or

c) they weren't miracle wins; find some other explanation...but what?

In those wins they had to come back in ridiculous fashion largely because he was inept for 3+ quarters.

So, Peyton threw two INTs, one for a TD and the other set up the game winning FG. Can we all agree that Denver didn't win by virtue of miracles last year and in spite of Tebow? They were no better this year than with Tebow, getting no farther in the playoffs. Pretty funny if you ask me.

Either you don't watch football or are so blinded by your fury to prove that Tebow was a good QB last year that you believe your statement above of "They were no better this year than with Tebow".Now, I could go toe to toe with you on this - listing each win from last year - many of which could be considered "miracle" wins. You might argue the use of the word "miracle" to derail the obvious, so lets just say that an extremely improbable series of events took place last year to give Denver the opportunity to win more than a few games. Furthermore, many of those events had nothing to do with Tebow, even though he might of capitalized on them - he didn't actually create them. Then I could go on and show how his horrendous play in most of those games was the reason Denver needed those "miracles" to happen in the first place.

But why would I do this when pretty much everyone here already knows this save a few with blinders on? It would be easy to prove and futile in its results. You'd still believe.

So go on believing. Myself - I am not anti- nor pro-Tebow. I think he'd have done better than Sanchez this year and should have started. I don't think either of the two are starter quality QBs in this league. I'd take Tebow over Sanchez, though. Maybe an offense could be created where throwing the ball was almost a nonexistant factor in the gameplan and Tebow would flourish, but I see no evidence that this would work in the NFL. I could be wrong.

 

[Two Deep]

Tim Tebow He throws more like a girl than a girl does. Anybody still pimping "The Tebow" has lost all credability in regards to their football knowledge.

 

[squistion]

Tim Tebow He throws more like a girl than a girl does. Anybody still pimping "The Tebow" has lost all credability in regards to their football knowledge.

Perhaps you are right - but, personally, I respect the opinion more of someone who can correctly spell "credibility" and is able to make a point without using six emoticons.

 

[RBM]

Tim Tebow He throws more like a girl than a girl does. Anybody still pimping "The Tebow" has lost all credability in regards to their football knowledge.

This is big time analysis folks.

 

[Two Deep]

Tim Tebow He throws more like a girl than a girl does. Anybody still pimping "The Tebow" has lost all credability in regards to their football knowledge.

Perhaps you are right - but, personally, I respect the opinion more of someone who can correctly spell "credibility" and is able to make a point without using six emoticons.

Is that all you got ####wanger.

 

[squistion]

Tim Tebow He throws more like a girl than a girl does. Anybody still pimping "The Tebow" has lost all credability in regards to their football knowledge.

Perhaps you are right - but, personally, I respect the opinion more of someone who can correctly spell "credibility" and is able to make a point without using six emoticons.

Is that all you got ####wanger.

Nope, I also have this gem of irony from the other Tebow thread...

idiot might be a bit strong but the dummy keeps passing up on hot chicks. he can't be to bright.

 

[lod01]

One helluva run for one of the greatest threads this board will ever see. The skeptics absolutely nailed it, while that Schnikes guy and the other tebowners totally wiffed.

Posted 22 April 2010 - 10:46 PM

Some of the sharks saw this developing

If not I'm pretty sure Denver will be interested in Tebow.

Tebow ended up in the right hands and will be a stud for years. I feel like it's just become the popular thing to say: "He's not an NFL quarterback". They'll be a lot of crow eating and I'm pretty sure it won't be happening in this thread. Tebow's got winner written all over him. Denver has a bright future.

Zipping this #### up. It's over and good riddance.

Posted 12 January 2013 - 06:40 PM

 

[ICON211]

The problem is that any team that takes a chance on Tebow will find themselves in the same situation as Elway/Fox or Tannenbaum/Ryan - which is to say that if they start him and he does well they are stuck with him as the starter until he completely flames out because the fans would be outraged if he went back to the bench after winning a game or two.

I don't get why that is a problem. If he wins, why would you want to put him on the bench?

I think John Elway and John Fox can answer that question better than I can. Tebow was winning for them, but it seemed they couldn't wait to get rid of him. They regarded him as a gimmick player that would shortly be figured out by the DCs they were facing and then would be unable to make the move to another QB without a backlash from Tebow supporters and the subsequent media circus over a QB controversy.

I do not think it was that he was not figured out by the opposing DCs. He did not light the world on fire in Denver. He completed less than 50% of his passes and won probably three or four miracle games. Elway/Fox knew that could not be sustained.

By definition, NO ONE wins three or four "miracle games" in a season. A miracle game means a once in a lifetime or once in a season sort of luck. Statistically, you can't win the lottery three or four times in a row. So, either you say:a) he is better than you want to admit and won some games where the odds were against him because of some quality that we can't easily identify (leadership and will?).

or

b) he IS blessed by God and gets to win miracle games because of his piety (I don't think so....)

or

c) they weren't miracle wins; find some other explanation...but what?

In those wins they had to come back in ridiculous fashion largely because he was inept for 3+ quarters.

So, Peyton threw two INTs, one for a TD and the other set up the game winning FG. Can we all agree that Denver didn't win by virtue of miracles last year and in spite of Tebow? They were no better this year than with Tebow, getting no farther in the playoffs. Pretty funny if you ask me.

How does what happened on Saturday factor into how Denver won games last year? And while they did not get further they were a better team this year. Its really not even debatable.

 

[QuizGuy66]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/tim-tebow-still-training--says-he-hasn-t-given-up-on-nfl-career-191355334.html

-QG

 

[QuizGuy66]

http://www.nj.com/eagles/index.ssf/2015/03/eagles_working_out_tim_tebow_per_report.html

-QG

 

[QuizGuy66]

The Philaelphia Tebeagles

-QG

 

[QuizGuy66]

Another article:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/03/16/he-is-risen-eagles-bring-tim-tebow-in-for-a-workout/

-QG

 

[Bri]

Sanchez saw the worst of him, Bradford saw the best of him years n years ago. That's gotta seem odd for Tebow.

How'd he do against Chip in college?

Tebow was there last year wasn't he? Since supposedly he's been altering/improving his game, why not return to show Kelly what he's got if he is in fact improved?

 

[Bri]

here 2013

http://www.nj.com/eagles/index.ssf/2013/04/tim_tebow_to_eagles.html

 

[sports_fan]

I think he could still play in the NFL. Just not at QB.

 

[Papa John's]

Geesh ... Chip is really going all out with the "I'm not drafting Marcus smoke screen".

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Schefter: Eagles 'not planning' to sign Tebow

looks like it's safe to cut him in dynasty

 

[TebowCo]

Schefter: Eagles 'not planning' to sign Tebow

looks like it's safe to cut him in dynasty

Incorrect. Still a hold.

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

NBC Washington's Dianna Marie Russini reports there's an "80 percent chance" the Eagles will sign free agent Tim Tebow if they can trade Matt Barkley.

ESPN's Chris Mortensen has reported the Eagles are trying to trade Barkley for a "late" pick, something Russini confirms. If football czar Chip Kelly has serious eyes for Tebow, it's unclear why he wouldn't just release Barkley and his $592,500 salary. He must genuinely believe there's a market for Barkley's services. We find it rather hard to believe. There will undoubtedly be more Tebow updates as the week rolls on.

Related: Eagles

Source: Dianna Marie Russini on Twitter
Mar 17 - 6:50 PM

 

[Faust]

Eagles' Chip Kelly has always been a fan of Tim Tebow

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld take:

Eagles football czar Chip Kelly says the team was just doing its "homework" with last week's workout of Tim Tebow.

"We bring in a lot of players for private workouts, it's just he's the one that everyone keeps talking about," Kelly said. Reports had suggested Tebow could end up in Philly if the team moved No. 3 quarterback Matt Barkley, but it doesn't appear likely at this time. More than likely, Tebow will spend 2015 working for the SEC Network.

Related: Eagles

Source: philadelphiaeagles.com
Mar 23 - 2:32 PM

 

[Faust]

Sources: QB Tim Tebow to join Eagles

 

[Faust]

Tim Tebow to sign with Philadelphia Eagles