Timmy Ice Tebow...

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

thats probably the worst comparison I've ever heard! this is the fucl<ing NFL, the polar opposite of claiming ranks. At least DrugS Zenyatta comparison made some sense.

3 of the teams he beat are in playoff contention! So no, that arguement is pure bullshit.

It might not be the best comparison but it's a lot closer than you are giving it credit for.

Basically you are calling people haters because they are looking at things critically. What is wrong with analyzing who they beat? What is wrong with mentioning they were life and death (at home) to beat a Bears team without their QB and star RB? Isn't that what we're supposed to do? That's what we do when handicapping. We look past the obvious stuff (they are winning, Timmy is the bestest!!!) to see why and how.

As I mentioned previously it reminds me a lot of the KC Chiefs last year. If I recall there was even some talk for Cassel for MVP on here. They beat up on bad teams, got beat by the better teams and then were exposed as frauds in the playoffs.

They are winning, which is something they were not doing without him. Of course, without him they were losing to Green Bay and San Diego (when they were good), so maybe that had more to do with it. He's played his way to at least being their QB next year and we'll be able to get a better read on just what he can and can't do.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

It might not be the best comparison but it's a lot closer than you are giving it credit for.

Basically you are calling people haters because they are looking at things critically. What is wrong with analyzing who they beat? What is wrong with mentioning they were life and death (at home) to beat a Bears team without their QB and star RB? Isn't that what we're supposed to do? That's what we do when handicapping. We look past the obvious stuff (they are winning, Timmy is the bestest!!!) to see why and how.

As I mentioned previously it reminds me a lot of the KC Chiefs last year. If I recall there was even some talk for Cassel for MVP on here. They beat up on bad teams, got beat by the better teams and then were exposed as frauds in the playoffs.

They are winning, which is something they were not doing without him. Of course, without him they were losing to Green Bay and San Diego (when they were good), so maybe that had more to do with it. He's played his way to at least being their QB next year and we'll be able to get a better read on just what he can and can't do.

this is fair enough.. and you could be on to something comparing the broncos to the chiefs. I just love teams that have great defenses though. and the broncos have a great defense. That will keep them in most games.

The thing about the competitions is that he's won 7 games. Including against the Jets, Oakland, Bears, the same Chargers team they lost to earlier in the year. They aren't playing a bunch of **** teams. These teams might not be having their best years ever, but they are far from crappy teams.

If he was 2-1, had beat the colts and the jags and lost like they did to Detriot, than I would give that opinion some credibility. Its just not the case.

Before every game it seems like the "haters" think there is no way the broncos can win. and they do. then the "haters" say "oh, they were missing so and so". According to this board.. there was no way on earth the broncos could be the jets. but they still did. I just feel the competition arguement has zero credibility.

Go ahead and argue his throwing motion and completion percentage and accuracy all you want. at least they would be valid.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

The thing about the competitions is that he's won 7 games. Including against the Jets, Oakland, Bears, the same Chargers team they lost to earlier in the year. They aren't playing a bunch of **** teams. These teams might not be having their best years ever, but they are far from crappy teams.

They beat the Jets, but I'll be the first to admit this is not the same Jets of last year. The Jets also handed them the game, but for arguments sake, that was a good team they beat.

They beat an Oakland team with a QB that was on his couch watching Family Guy 2 weeks earlier. Oakland is 7-6 playing in that terrible division and 3-4 since losing their QB. They aren't a good team.

The Bears were playing without Forte and Cutler when the Tebow's beat them. They were 7-3 with Cutler and are now 0-3 without him.

When the Tebow's beat the Chargers, the Chargers were in the midst of a 6 game losing streak. But, they aren't as bad as their record indicates, although with that mush coach maybe they are.

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Before every game it seems like the "haters" think there is no way the broncos can win. and they do. then the "haters" say "oh, they were missing so and so". According to this board.. there was no way on earth the broncos could be the jets. but they still did. I just feel the competition arguement has zero credibility.

Go ahead and argue his throwing motion and completion percentage and accuracy all you want. at least they would be valid.

I don't really recall anyone saying the Broncos can't win. And if trying to look at games a little more critically than "Timmy is da bestest. They win and he's da best." makes me a hater, so be it.