NFL NEWS

by **rowshkex** » Sun 1/08/12 7:35 pm

I hate all this Tebow stuff, but if for no other reason, I wouldn't mind the Broncos winning if to just shove it down Harrison's throat.

by **The Rube** » Sun 1/08/12 7:37 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:
Chris83 wrote:Roethlismolester running away from the Denver "D" like they're the Midgeville, Georgia Police. Must have gotten a lap dance at halftime.

We get it, you hate Ben Roethlisberger. Give it a rest.

We get it, you hate the Tebow detractors, give it a rest. :wink:

by **Chris83** » Sun 1/08/12 7:37 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:
Chris83 wrote:Roethlismolester running away from the Denver "D" like they're the Midgeville, Georgia Police. Must have gotten a lap dance at halftime.

We get it, you hate Ben Roethlisberger. Give it a rest.

Nah, that's okay. Never said I hate him.

by **Chris83** » Sun 1/08/12 7:44 pm

Terrific pass for a TD! Tie game.

by **The Rube** » Sun 1/08/12 7:45 pm

<5 min left.....you know what time it is....

by **streakygopher** » Sun 1/08/12 7:46 pm

R'berger does Tebow better than Tebow does Tebow.

by **team22tank** » Sun 1/08/12 7:56 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:
Chris83 wrote:Roethlismolester running away from the Denver "D" like they're the Midgeville, Georgia Police. Must have gotten a lap dance at halftime.

We get it, you hate Ben Roethlisberger. Give it a rest.

He's just trying to keep an even keel for those who never shut up about Tebow.

by **Greyeagle** » Sun 1/08/12 7:57 pm

Playing the part of the Cleveland Browns: The Denver Broncos?
Could be....though Pitt was luck there.

by **The Rube** » Sun 1/08/12 7:58 pm

You can't make this game up. Un-be- :censored:

-lievable.

by **Chris83** » Sun 1/08/12 8:00 pm

The Rube wrote:You can't make this game up. Un-be- -lievable.

Hail Mary???

by **Greyeagle** » Sun 1/08/12 8:01 pm

Too bad they didn't try, a FG from Vail would have been a perfect ending.

by **Chris83** » Sun 1/08/12 8:01 pm

Chris83 wrote:
The Rube wrote:You can't make this game up. Un-be- -lievable.

Hail Mary???

Nope

by **The Rube** » Sun 1/08/12 8:02 pm

Denver will win. Football gods not please about Pit and the non-FG.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/08/12 8:03 pm

These new rules blow ass.

by **The Rube** » Sun 1/08/12 8:04 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:These new rules blow ass.

Agreed. Total abortion. Either go college OT rules, or keep sudden death.

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Sun 1/08/12 8:06 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:These new rules blow ass.

No doubt. The NFL, in its relentless pursuit of perfect, has destroyed great.

by **rowshkex** » Sun 1/08/12 8:06 pm

The Rube wrote:
dxmnkd316 wrote:These new rules blow ass.

Agreed. Total abortion. Either go college OT rules, or keep sudden death.

I'd rather have something closer to college than further away... Pure sudden death overtime is ridiculous in a possession-oriented game. In either case, I'd rather have college rules.

by **Greyeagle** » Sun 1/08/12 8:07 pm

Or the new rules don't matter!

by **Chris83** » Sun 1/08/12 8:07 pm

HOLY S**T!!!!!

by **g_manpucker** » Sun 1/08/12 8:08 pm

You can't write this s**t!!!

by **psych** » Sun 1/08/12 8:08 pm

I'll eat some crow about Tim Tebow losing respectability as a QB. Man, what a game.

by **CollegeHockeyAddict** » Sun 1/08/12 8:09 pm

The Steelers just got Tebowed.

by **team22tank** » Sun 1/08/12 8:10 pm

I don't get why both teams don't get at least one possesion?

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/08/12 8:10 pm

HOLY SH*T IS RIGHT!

by **psych** » Sun 1/08/12 8:10 pm

team22tank wrote:I don't get why both teams don't get at least one possesion?

If a TD is scored on the 1st possession, game is over. :rules:

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Sun 1/08/12 8:11 pm

Can't throw a football. Can't play QB.

by **The Rube** » Sun 1/08/12 8:11 pm

by **team22tank** » Sun 1/08/12 8:12 pm

psych wrote:
team22tank wrote:I don't get why both teams don't get at least one possesion?

If a TD is scored on the 1st possession, game is over.

I know the rule, I just don't get it.

by **Chris83** » Sun 1/08/12 8:12 pm

What a fun game to watch. Whew!

by **psych** » Sun 1/08/12 8:13 pm

team22tank wrote:
psych wrote:
team22tank wrote:I don't get why both teams don't get at least one possesion?

If a TD is scored on the 1st possession, game is over.

I know the rule, I just don't get it.

I don't get why they changed from Sudden Death. Sudden Death < College football OT rules, IMO, but this new rule change < Sudden Death.

by **rowshkex** » Sun 1/08/12 8:14 pm

psych wrote:
team22tank wrote:
psych wrote:
team22tank wrote:I don't get why both teams don't get at least one possesion?

If a TD is scored on the 1st possession, game is over.

I know the rule, I just don't get it.

I don't get why they changed from Sudden Death. Sudden Death < College football OT rules, IMO, but this new rule change < Sudden Death.

How so? It brings it closer to college rules. Sudden death is completely illogical in a possession-based game.

by **psych** » Sun 1/08/12 8:16 pm

rowshkex wrote:
psych wrote:
team22tank wrote:
psych wrote:
team22tank wrote:I don't get why both teams don't get at least one possesion?

If a TD is scored on the 1st possession, game is over.

I know the rule, I just don't get it.

I don't get why they changed from Sudden Death. Sudden Death < College football OT rules, IMO, but this new rule change < Sudden Death.

How so? It brings it closer to college rules. Sudden death is completely illogical in a possession-based game.

True, but a TD on the 1st possession = game over is just stupid. Let the other team get a possession then. Why stop halfway? Either move it fully to college OT rules, or not at all.

by **st8ofhockey** » Sun 1/08/12 8:18 pm

rowshkex wrote:
psych wrote:
team22tank wrote:
psych wrote:
team22tank wrote:I don't get why both teams don't get at least one possesion?

If a TD is scored on the 1st possession, game is over.

I know the rule, I just don't get it.

I don't get why they changed from Sudden Death. Sudden Death < College football OT rules, IMO, but this new rule change < Sudden Death.

How so? It brings it closer to college rules. Sudden death is completely illogical in a possession-based game.

I'd argue it just places more responsibility on the defense to do their job. Their ability to control the ball becomes just as important as the offense. The new rules just seem incredibly ad-hoc, and far more illogical. "Ok, these are the rules... unless x and y happen; then if z happens, :censored:

it... back to sudden death rules anyway"

by **rowshkex** » Sun 1/08/12 8:27 pm

psych wrote:True, but a TD on the 1st possession = game over is just stupid. Let the other team get a possession then. Why stop halfway? Either move it fully to college OT rules, or not at all.

I agree, but just because you can't have all of it doesn't mean they shouldn't at least give SOME of it.

st8ofhockey wrote:I'd argue it just places more responsibility on the defense to do their job. Their ability to control the ball becomes just as important as the offense. The new rules just seem incredibly ad-hoc, and far more illogical. "Ok, these are the rules... unless x and y happen; then if z happens, it... back to sudden death rules anyway"

So you'd rather have NFL overtime rules than college overtime rules? It's not illogical--the illogical part is why they didn't go FULL college rules. I'd much rather have an OPPORTUNITY to have it like college rules instead of nothing at all.

The point is that forcing a team to play defense in sudden death overtime on a possession-oriented game by a COIN FLIP is unreasonable and unfair. Why not place EQUAL responsibility on BOTH defenses and BOTH offenses?

The whole concept of all-or-nothing here is like you asking for a piece of a candy bar from a friend, but refusing it when the friend won't give you the whole candy bar. Personally, I'd rather have a small corner of it.

by **Dances With Gophers** » Sun 1/08/12 8:27 pm

psych wrote:
team22tank wrote:I don't get why both teams don't get at least one possesion?

If a TD is scored on the 1st possession, game is over.

Correct.

We'll refer to the team that receives the opening kickoff as Team A, and the other team will be Team B:

•If Team A scores a touchdown with its initial possession, Team A wins.
•If Team A kicks a field goal with its initial possession, Team B will get one possession to answer that score. If Team B scores a touchdown on the answering possession, Team B wins. If Team B fails to score on its answering possession, Team A wins. If Team B kicks a field goal on its answering possession, Team B will kick off and the next team to score wins the game.
•If Team A does not score on the initial possession of overtime, the first team to score wins the game.
There are plenty of other scenarios, including safeties, onside kicks, blocked punts and all that fun stuff, but if you understand what a possession constitutes, you probably understand all of those scenarios, too.

The idea behind the modified overtime is to prevent a team from winning the coin toss, taking the initial possession of overtime and kicking a game-winning field goal to move on to the next round or win the Super Bowl. And since the NFL's overtime system has been the subject of so much banter in recent years, it's promising that the league made some steps toward correcting it.

by **st8ofhockey** » Sun 1/08/12 8:35 pm

rowshkex wrote:
psych wrote:True, but a TD on the 1st possession = game over is just stupid. Let the other team get a possession then. Why stop halfway? Either move it fully to college OT rules, or not at all.

I agree, but just because you can't have all of it doesn't mean they shouldn't at least give SOME of it.

st8ofhockey wrote:I'd argue it just places more responsibility on the defense to do their job. Their ability to control the ball becomes just as important as the offense. The new rules just seem incredibly ad-hoc, and far more illogical. "Ok, these are the rules... unless x and y happen; then if z happens, it... back to sudden death rules anyway"

So you'd rather have NFL overtime rules than college overtime rules? It's not illogical--the illogical part is why they didn't go FULL college rules. I'd much rather have an OPPORTUNITY to have it like college rules instead of nothing at all.

The point is that forcing a team to play defense in sudden death overtime on a possession-oriented game by a COIN FLIP is unreasonable and unfair. Why not place EQUAL responsibility on BOTH defenses and BOTH offenses?

The whole concept of all-or-nothing here is like you asking for a piece of a candy bar from a friend, but refusing it when the friend won't give you the whole candy bar. Personally, I'd rather have a small corner of it.

I'd rather have sudden death than the in-between bastage that's currently in place. What the NFL effectively said is, "sure, we can split this candy bar... unless your half has the almond in it." It's like they arbitrarily assigned a set of unique conditions to make it "different', but that isn't synonymous with "better". What we saw tonight (in action, not premise) was no closer to college rules than the previous system.

by **Kelor** » Sun 1/08/12 8:42 pm

So you want the NFL to start having bowl games? :biggrin2:

by **frozen4champs** » Sun 1/08/12 8:43 pm

Great, another week of 24/7 Tebow mania on ESPN....

by **Hammy** » Sun 1/08/12 9:06 pm

frozen4champs wrote:Great, another week of 24/7 Tebow mania on ESPN....

Exactly what I saw thinking. I'm sure he's a good guy but I have grown to loathe anything relating to him.

Fortunately, I barely watch ESPN.

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Sun 1/08/12 9:07 pm

Do people still watch ESPN? Interesting.

by **Hammy** » Sun 1/08/12 9:08 pm

Bushwood Gopher wrote:Do people still watch ESPN? Interesting.

I just edited my post... I realized I barely watch ESPN now. :lol:

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/08/12 9:10 pm

I still don't get the hate.

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Sun 1/08/12 9:11 pm

Hammy wrote:
Bushwood Gopher wrote:Do people still watch ESPN? Interesting.

I just edited my post... I realized I barely watch ESPN now.

ESPN to me is like the National Enquirer of sports. A whole lot of noise and most of it irrelevant!

by **Hammy** » Sun 1/08/12 9:14 pm

Bushwood Gopher wrote:ESPN to me is like the National Enquirer of sports. A whole lot of noise and most of it irrelevant!

I used to watch it a lot in the days of Olbermann, Patrick, etc. These days? I could give a crap less. Especially with how lousy their hockey coverage is. I can't stand the NFL stuff any longer either.

by **Armadillo** » Sun 1/08/12 9:28 pm

Boy, that Tebow's a real piece of crap, isn't he?

If the Broncos somehow beat the Pats, the Mayans will have been 11 months off.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/08/12 9:30 pm

Armadillo wrote:Boy, that Tebow's a real piece of crap, isn't he?

If the Broncos somehow beat the Pats, the Mayans will have been 11 months off.

Not bad for, what, 3,000 years ago?

by **Armadillo** » Sun 1/08/12 9:47 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:
Armadillo wrote:Boy, that Tebow's a real piece of crap, isn't he?

If the Broncos somehow beat the Pats, the Mayans will have been 11 months off.

Not bad for, what, 3,000 years ago?

Also, there's no way they could have forseen the awesome power of TEBOW.

by **jallengarry** » Sun 1/08/12 10:52 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:I still don't get the hate.

Agreed. I mean..it get it on a number of levels...but then I don't. Has made for some intriguing football, even when it wasn't traditionally "pretty" football.

by **The Rube** » Sun 1/08/12 10:54 pm

jallengarry wrote:
dxmnkd316 wrote:I still don't get the hate.

Agreed. I mean..it get it on a number of levels...but then I don't. Has made for some intriguing football, even when it wasn't traditionally "pretty" football.

And I don't get the love. I mean, I do, but then I don't. It's entertaining for sure.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/08/12 11:04 pm

Who cares if it's pretty? Winning ugly > losing pretty

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Sun 1/08/12 11:07 pm

I love how its never even discussed how below average Tebow's receivers are as a group. He outplayed Roethlisberger tonight (yes, I know he was hurt) and Antonio Brown would be Denver's best receiver.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/08/12 11:08 pm

Bushwood Gopher wrote:I love how its never even discussed how below average Tebow's receivers are as a group. He outplayed Roethlisberger tonight (yes, I know he was hurt) and Antonio Brown would be Denver's best receiver.

Who?

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Sun 1/08/12 11:09 pm

dxmnkd316 wrote:
Bushwood Gopher wrote:I love how its never even discussed how below average Tebow's receivers are as a group. He outplayed Roethlisberger tonight (yes, I know he was hurt) and Antonio Brown would be Denver's best receiver.

Who?

Poorly worded. Pittsburgh's Antonio Brown would be Denver's best receiver. He's 2nd behind Mike Wallace on Pitt's team.

by **Dances With Gophers** » Sun 1/08/12 11:18 pm

I just learned that Tebow was born in Makati City (Philippines). No wonder why I love the guy - MABUHAY TEBOW!!! :dance:

by **jallengarry** » Sun 1/08/12 11:20 pm

Many people either love and hate him for basically the same reasons...mostly related to their views on God and quarterbacking...which can be equally fervent issues for certain crowds..lol. Then there are those on both sides...like many here I think...that don't love or hate him but are just responding to what they see as excessive hoopla (too much hype vs. too much hate). One could dislike both of those and just be disinterested....but if you're a football fan, it's hard to avoid what's happening. Thus...the middle grounders are sort of left to make a value judgement about, "how do I want to respond?" ...tear a guy down cause he's unjustly worshiped or defend him because he's unjustly persecuted? None of us are perfect for sure, so I try (often failing) to avoid worrying about people being unjustly worshiped unless they have really done something I despise. Winning football games and doing it with class just doesn't make me that mad...even if I believed it was being done with lack of skill or excessive luck. Now...if he had just knocked my team out of the playoffs, or if he was from North Dakota or something I might feel differently.

That's my reason for not loving, but finding myself subtly rooting for him.

I've found it more pleasurable because it allows me to watch and say ...."Damn that was one of the ugliest balls I've ever seen", "winning with like 3 completed passes, wtf?", etc. ....AND ALSO..."Damn that JUST happened, this kid has something, his stat line today was impressive", etc....

by **The Rube** » Sun 1/08/12 11:24 pm

jallengarry wrote:Many people either love and hate him for basically the same reasons...mostly related to their views on God and quarterbacking...which can be equally fervent issues for certain crowds..lol. Then there are those on both sides...like many here I think...that don't love or hate him but are just responding to what they see as excessive hoopla (too much hype vs. too much hate). One could dislike both of those and just be disinterested....but if you're a football fan, it's hard to avoid what's happening. Thus...the middle grounders are sort of left to make a value judgement about, "how do I want to respond?" ...tear a guy down cause he's unjustly worshiped or defend him because he's unjustly persecuted? None of us are perfect for sure, so I try (often failing) to avoid worrying about people being unjustly worshiped unless they have really done something I despise. Winning football games and doing it with class just doesn't make me that mad...even if I believed it was being done with lack of skill or excessive luck. Now...if he had just knocked my team out of the playoffs, or if he was from North Dakota or something I might feel differently. That's my reason for not loving, but finding myself subtly rooting for him.

I've found it more pleasurable because it allows me to watch and say ...."Damn that was one of the ugliest passes I've ever seen, winning with like 3 completed pass wtf?, etc. ....AND ALSO..."Damn that JUST happened, this kid has something, his stat line today was impressive, etc....

I'm still torn, in relation to your post. He's a crappy QB, so I want to expose him as such to the Fan Club. However, he just wins, and it's tearing apart the media, because he's not good enough to win games like this. It's chaos. I love it. I love this circus.

The NFL has to be loving it for these same reasons. It makes no sense, but it works. At this point, go Tebow. Make a mockery of everything. As the meme says, "Some men just want to watch the world burn."

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/08/12 11:27 pm

Bushwood Gopher wrote:
dxmnkd316 wrote:
Bushwood Gopher wrote:I love how its never even discussed how below average Tebow's receivers are as a group. He outplayed Roethlisberger tonight (yes, I know he was hurt) and Antonio Brown would be Denver's best receiver.

Who?

Poorly worded. Pittsburgh's Antonio Brown would be Denver's best receiver. He's 2nd behind Mike Wallace on Pitt's team.

I know, I was just joking around. He isn't exactly a household name.

by **dxmnkd316** » Sun 1/08/12 11:33 pm

I just see him as the ultimate underdog story. Everyone is telling him he can't do it and he just keeps on winning. It's awesome.

(Maybe underdog isn't quite the right word but whatever.)

by **Snowcool08** » Mon 1/09/12 12:45 am

dxmnkd316 wrote:
Bushwood Gopher wrote:
dxmnkd316 wrote:
Bushwood Gopher wrote:I love how its never even discussed how below average Tebow's receivers are as a group. He outplayed Roethlisberger tonight (yes, I know he was hurt) and Antonio Brown would be Denver's best receiver.

Who?

Poorly worded. Pittsburgh's Antonio Brown would be Denver's best receiver. He's 2nd behind Mike Wallace on Pitt's team.

I know, I was just joking around. He isn't exactly a household name.

Don't play fantasy football much? I'm seriously considering keeping Brown for next year at $10 in a $200 cap league. He has potential.

by **dxmnkd316** » Mon 1/09/12 7:49 am

I said he's not a household name. Of course most people who play fantasy football would know him.

by **gopher6** » Mon 1/09/12 9:06 am

Chille has a interview today in Tampa for head coach position :ahhh:

by **davescharf** » Mon 1/09/12 9:29 am

dxmnkd316 wrote:I said he's not a household name. Of course most people who play fantasy football would know him.

Someone won a FFB championship in large part because of Antonio Brown and Victor Cruz being waiver wire pickups a few weeks before they had their breakout games.

So I really could care less whether Tebow sucks or not as a QB, but you do have remember now that he has 1 more playoff win as a QB than Matt Ryan. In a league where it's "win or else" I just find that as interesting.

Kind of reminds me of the Chad Roberg = 2 and Zach Parise = 0 national championships thing people were doing around here.

by **sunbone** » Mon 1/09/12 10:12 am

Tebow threw some nice deep balls yesterday for a change. Of course he still threw some awful end over end lame ducks and didn't complete 50% of his passes. But his TEAM beat a banged up average Pittsburgh team at home so that won't stop the true believers from saying he is the next Johnny Unitas. He will get destroyed in New England and 2 seconds after the game Elway will start his search for a new starting quarterback.

by **Dances With Gophers** » Mon 1/09/12 10:26 am

sunbone wrote:Tebow threw some nice deep balls yesterday for a change. Of course he still threw some awful end over end lame ducks and didn't complete 50% of his passes. But his TEAM beat a banged up average Pittsburgh team at home so that won't stop the true believers from saying he is the next Johnny Unitas. He will get destroyed in New England and 2 seconds after the game Elway will start his search for a new starting quarterback.

How many of his incomplete passes hit receivers literally right between the numbers?

Tebow and Co. will beat the Patriots. God is on his side = SUPER BOWL BOUND, BABY!!! :dance:

The Denver Broncos’ playoff win over the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sunday night was unlikely enough, but Tim Tebow’s passing yardage — the Christian quarterback threw 316 yards — sent commentators over the edge. The Associated Press reported that he also averaged 31.6 yards per completion. The religious connotations to John 3:16, a famous Bible verse, were too much for many to chalk up to chance.

For the true believers, it was no coincidence.

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Mon 1/09/12 10:42 am

sunbone wrote:Tebow threw some nice deep balls yesterday for a change. Of course he still threw some awful end over end lame ducks and didn't complete 50% of his passes. But his TEAM beat a banged up average Pittsburgh team at home so that won't stop the true believers from saying he is the next Johnny Unitas. He will get destroyed in New England and 2 seconds after the game Elway will start his search for a new starting quarterback.

The change was that they opened up the playbook downfield for him. Probably had 3 or 4 drops on easy completions, too. If a 12 win Pitt team is average then the only above average teams in the league are GB, SF, NO and NE.

No chance he's not their QB now. I predict his career arc will be very similar to Vick's--he will tread water as a passer for the first two or three years of his career. And then once he gets his mechanics & footwork down he will be Top 10 at his position.

by **sunbone** » Mon 1/09/12 11:00 am

Bushwood Gopher wrote:
sunbone wrote:Tebow threw some nice deep balls yesterday for a change. Of course he still threw some awful end over end lame ducks and didn't complete 50% of his passes. But his TEAM beat a banged up average Pittsburgh team at home so that won't stop the true believers from saying he is the next Johnny Unitas. He will get destroyed in New England and 2 seconds after the game Elway will start his search for a new starting quarterback.

The change was that they opened up the playbook downfield for him. Probably had 3 or 4 drops on easy completions, too. If a 12 win Pitt team is average then the only above average teams in the league are GB, SF, NO and NE.

No chance he's not their QB now. I predict his career arc will be very similar to Vick's--he will tread water as a passer for the first two or three years of his career. And then once he gets his mechanics & footwork down he will be Top 10 at his position.

So you are predicting that Tebow is going to prison?

Once he gets his mechanics and his footwork down? I guess if he completely changed his footwork and mechanics now he might eventually be a competent backup. Watch Elway in the booth when he does his Luis Tiant windup and launches another end over end quacker. I wouldn't be surprised if Elway has Rick Spielman on speed dial wanting to trade up for that pick and get a QB. And Top 10 Bushwood? This kid reminds me of a way overhyped version of Bobby Douglass.

by **Dances With Gophers** » Mon 1/09/12 11:36 am

Tim Tebow is the most famous white bronco since OJ's.

by **dxmnkd316** » Mon 1/09/12 12:02 pm

Now that's hilarious.

by **Bushwood Gopher** » Mon 1/09/12 3:01 pm

sunbone wrote:
Bushwood Gopher wrote:
sunbone wrote:Tebow threw some nice deep balls yesterday for a change. Of course he still threw some awful end over end lame ducks and didn't complete 50% of his passes. But his TEAM beat a banged up average Pittsburgh team at home so that won't stop the true believers from saying he is the next Johnny Unitas. He will get destroyed in New England and 2 seconds after the game Elway will start his search for a new starting quarterback.

The change was that they opened up the playbook downfield for him. Probably had 3 or 4 drops on easy completions, too. If a 12 win Pitt team is average then the only above average teams in the league are GB, SF, NO and NE.

No chance he's not their QB now. I predict his career arc will be very similar to Vick's--he will tread water as a passer for the first two or three years of his career. And then once he gets his mechanics & footwork down he will be Top 10 at his position.

So you are predicting that Tebow is going to prison? Once he gets his mechanics and his footwork down? I guess if he completely changed his footwork and mechanics now he might eventually be a competent backup. Watch Elway in the booth when he does his Luis Tiant windup and launches another end over end quacker. I wouldn't be surprised if Elway has Rick Spielman on speed dial wanting to trade up for that pick and get a QB. And Top 10 Bushwood? This kid reminds me of a way overhyped version of Bobby Douglass.

See, you crack me up even when we disagree. :wink:

I got a good chuckle out of that Luis Tiant reference and the "end over end quacker." :lol:

I think he thrives on being underestimated. And I believe his drive to get better will be what makes it so. Either way, it's going to be fun watching it all unfold.

by **sunbone** » Mon 1/09/12 6:09 pm

Bushwood Gopher wrote: See, you crack me up even when we disagree. I got a good chuckle out of that Luis Tiant reference and the "end over end quacker."

I think he thrives on being underestimated. And I believe his drive to get better will be what makes it so. Either way, it's going to be fun watching it all unfold.

Well at least somebody gets my obscure references!

It is interesting. I admit I watch his games just to cheer against him, which I rarely do for anybody.

by **The Rube** » Mon 1/09/12 11:03 pm

davescharf wrote:
dxmnkd316 wrote:I said he's not a household name. Of course most people who play fantasy football would know him.

Someone won a FFB championship in large part because of Antonio Brown and Victor Cruz being waiver wire pickups a few weeks before they had their breakout games.

So I really could care less whether Tebow sucks or not as a QB, but you do have remember now that he has 1 more playoff win as a QB than Matt Ryan. In a league where it's "win or else" I just find that as interesting.

Kind of reminds me of the Chad Roberg = 2 and Zach Parise = 0 national championships thing people were doing around here.

And I say to people who say he's a great QB because all he does is win:

Trent Dilfer is therefore a better QB than Marino and Kelly. More rings. :wink:

But, screw it. I want to see the Denver Tebows to win it all. Just to watch the circus that will be the aftermath.

by **Armadillo** » Mon 1/09/12 11:07 pm

The Rube wrote:But, screw it. I want to see the Denver Tebows to win it all. Just to watch the circus that will be the aftermath.

Make sure you say hi to these guys as they roll on through:

by **The Rube** » Mon 1/09/12 11:21 pm

Armadillo wrote:
The Rube wrote:But, screw it. I want to see the Denver Tebows to win it all. Just to watch the circus that will be the aftermath.

Make sure you say hi to these guys as they roll on through:

I know those guys pretty well. They're having dinner with me on Saturday. :lol:

by **dryfly** » Tue 1/10/12 10:43 pm

Armadillo wrote:
The Rube wrote:But, screw it. I want to see the Denver Tebows to win it all. Just to watch the circus that will be the aftermath.

Make sure you say hi to these guys as they roll on through:

I hear they throw one helluva post victory riot...

by **Chris83** » Tue 1/10/12 11:02 pm

Oops, sorry. Wrong Horsemen.

Who is online