Monday, August 16, 2010

Broncos Tebow Debut: Analysis

The analysis is rolling in from last night's NFL debut of Tim Tebow against the Cincinnati Bengals. I will try to point to the best out there.

For starters, here is a tough-but-fair take from Yahoo's Doug Farrar -- an excellent analyst, by the way, for the must-read Shutdown Corner blog. The money quote is his kicker:
"The early results as I see them are that he's far more valuable in a situational role right now. His NFL future has a lot of work involved."
Per Farrar: The bad? The mechanics need a lot more development (which is something everyone knew already, right?). The good? Tebow could/should contribute in the red zone immediately.


  1. I think people assume because Tebow does things different than other QBs that he isn't a good QB or lacks talent or skill. I think it's actually the opposite. Tebow is just so talented that it allowed him to do things differently than other QBs.

    He could do things without taking the risks other QBs did because of his gifts.. for example.. he can sit in the pocket longer than other QBs because he knows he can take bigger hits.. he knows he can be conservative with where he throws the ball preventing interceptions but sometimes looking inaccurate. It all comes back to his competitiveness though. That competitive causes him to do things others wouldn't to ensure he is successful and wins.

  2. But Tebow's competitiveness makes him more efficient and productive in the long run.. in the process it looks like he is playing ugly football compared to other QBs...really ugly OR really entertaining depending on the person and how they look at it.

    I think this is why there are such divergent opinions on how well Tebow performed or how talented he is.

  3. "really ugly OR really entertaining depending on the person and how they look at it."


  4. Hi Brooke! I also have another theory about Tebow in the NFL.. I think his play in the NFL looks uglier and more entertaining at the same time because the NFL has so much better TV coverage too.

    Their camera work is RIGHT up in the action and they have a camera catching every angle imaginable. I wonder if that is just my imagination, or what, but it seems like they spend a lot more money on coverage than college.

    So you see how much punishment Tebow takes and dishes out and how athletic he is up close and personal which may be lost to the casual viewer if they aren't looking close.

  5. It's hard to say after only 1 game, esp a game that was done by the opposing team's broadcast group. There was actually 1 play of Tebow's where the Bengals camera crew left Tebow out of the camera frame! Also, IIRC, there was only 1 angle of that endzone catch that was ruled incomplete just before Tebow's rushing TD. To me, it looked complete, but I only remember seeing it from 1 angle, so it might not have been. If that had been CBS Sports' SEC crew, I can imagine that catch having about 3 angles. But, as I said, this was a local bunch doing the game, not a national network telecast. To me, that endzone hit Tebow took/gave looked esp brutal, simply b/c it was. 2 NFL-sized guys, instead of 2 college-sized guys. Ouch. I still have a hard time watching it.

  6. I thought it was just where Tebow was hit that was painful.

    But I saw like 10 different angles of that goal line hit and this is preseason.. but yeah.. I only remember one angle of that low catch in the end zone. Don't know why that is..

    But it just seems like you are much more in the action and up close in the NFL coverage.. to me college coverage is more from afar.. like look at Tebow's highlights on Youtube versus NFL highlights..

    Maybe my imagination though?