The Tebow Zone

[Shelterdog]

So discussion of our third string quarterback doesn't pollute other threads, I thought it made some sense to have a Tebow-centric thread.
 
After watching the first game, I remain convinced that:
 
1.) Tebow isn't going to be an effective drop back passer for years if ever
2.) Tebow can do some nifty things on read option plays, draw plays and the like.
3.) The Pats think there's a real benefit to having a read-option QB, otherwise they wouldn't have installed all that read-option plays they ran Friday
4.) He's making the team because BB was aware of 1, 2, and 3 when he signed Tebow and dedicated practice and installation time to the  Tebow plays.
5.) Dobson and Tompkins look like great receivers for Tebow because of their physicality in both catching the ball and blocking downfield.
 
I'll also start my Tebow tracker to chart any Tebow-related Jimmy Fund bets people put up.
Regular Season Offensive Snaps: 0 ($25 by SD to Jimmy Fund if he hits 75, $25 by SN if he doesn't)
Non blowout regular season snaps where Tebow Replaces a Healthy Brady excluding blowouts including 2 point conversions (hereinafter "Tebow Electrifies Brady Only Watches" snaps or "T.E.B.O.W." snaps) : 0 ($25 by SD to Jimmy Fund if he hits 10, $25 by TheoShmeo if he doesn't)
 
 

 
I smell a Jimmy Fund bet.  $25 (or 372 internet points) that Tebow plays 75 or more offensive snaps this season (if you want we can pro rate it and exclude any end of season games where they bench Brady and aren't trying to win).
 
As an aside the Tebow stuff is interesting, and it's not because of Tebow--it would be interesting if they had Vince Young or Patrick White or any other spread option QB as their third QB and were reportedly running a bunch of pistol and option plays. It's also a discussion you can have in the abstract, where the question "how good is Thompkins" is going to get a lot better once we actually see the guy play.

 
 

Shelterdog, I'm not sure why you are making the leap that Tebow will be taking snaps away from Tom based on practice patterns (if you are).  Alternative explanations for Tebow's usage in early August could be (a) BB wants to evaluate him, (b) BB is attempting to inject an element of doubt into the minds of opposing coaches (and I view this as the least likely of the four I'm listing), (c) BB wants to give his defense the chance to play agaisnt a read option/running QB given the trends in the NFL and (d) BB wants to get Tebow ready in case Brady gets hurt (projectile vomit).
 
BB has shown that he's loathe to take Brady out of games and indeed Tom is still in there at the end of blow outs regularly (much to my chagrin, for that matter).  And there's the simple fact that Tom is the QB that he is and is not particularly deficient around the goal line or anywhere else.
 
I think the better bet would be tied to how many snaps Tebow takes away from a healthy Brady over the course of the season.  I'd bet $25 to the Jimmy Fund that the number will be less than 10. 

 
 

Do I win if Tebow gets cut? For the record, Tebow had 72 offensive snaps last year, so 75 seems like the right cut-off. The risk is if Brady gets hurt, in which case I think we would see some Tebow packages, but since the money goes to the JF anyway it's a good bet.
 
I think if you have a guy like Tebow (or Young, or White), you'd be crazy not to at least try the read option in practice. It doesn't sound like it's been a significant chunk of what they're doing. Tebow's in camp; maybe that's interesting in and of itself, but I don't see anything the Pats are doing that's very surprising given that Tebow's in camp in the first place.
 
BTW, minor point, but I haven't read anything about the Pats / Tebow practicing the pistol, just the read option.

 

[TheoShmeo]

Just to tidy up the parameters, our bet excludes snaps at the end of blow outs and includes 2-point conversions (though not direct snaps to Tebow when Brady is on the field and is standing in the QB position). 
 
In short, all snaps that Tebow takes that Brady would have taken in other years are included.
 
And I still think the number is going to be extremely low.

 

[Super Nomario]

1.) Tebow isn't going to be an effective drop back passer for years if ever

There's ineffective and then there's how Tebow looked Friday. I think the key is progress. If he still looks like this preseason game four, I think BB would be crazy to put him on the squad over someone like Ebner or Bolden who can play STs. If he's moving in the right direction, even if he still struggles somewhat, I can see him making the squad.
 

2.) Tebow can do some nifty things on read option plays, draw plays and the like.
3.) The Pats think there's a real benefit to having a read-option QB, otherwise they wouldn't have installed all that read-option plays they ran Friday
4.) He's making the team because BB was aware of 1, 2, and 3 when he signed Tebow and dedicated practice and installation time to the  Tebow plays.

I think you're overestimating how much work went into installing these read-option plays. Part of the advantage of the zone read is that you don't need a fat playbook because the quarterback reads the defense on the fly, and because built into the zone blocking scheme is some flexibility based on how the defense lines up. The OL isn't really doing much different than they would on a normal zone running play. The RB isn't either. The Pats did show some interesting formations (full-house pistol) but didn't do any crazy wrinkles (triple-option with a pitch man, actually handing it off to a WR in the backfield). The reports were that the Pats spent a little time two days in practice installing this stuff, and what I saw was consistent with that.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

I pray to Tebow that all thread participants burn in hell.

 

[lexrageorge]

I want to point out that we may not see a whole lot of meaningful Tebow snaps in preseason games. 
 
If the team does what's it's done the past, Brady will play until late in the 2nd quarter in Game 2, and roughly 3 quarters of Game 3.  Mallett's going to get the majority of the remaining snaps, for the reasons that have been mentioned many times here.  
 
Best chance for Tebow will likely be in Game 4.  However, he'll then be playing with and against the 2's and 3's that are trying to do their best to show what it takes to make the team.  It will be hard to read anything out of his performance unless he throws for 500 yards or does a Tony Eason Super Bowl XX impersonation (and even then...)
 
Tebow is on the team this season for the future, as it's unlikely they will have Mallett around next season.  I think a lot of the decision making will be how much Belichick and McDaniels think that Tebow could be useful in a read-option scheme next season.  If they think he can be, then he'll probably be around.  
 
I would add that there's the possibility of Tebow snaps occuring in Week 17 if the game is meaningless; those probably shouldn't count either (basically they belong in the blowout category).  My guess is that we'll see the direct snap play happen 2 or 3 times during the season, with maybe one of them being a 2 pointer.  Meaningful "Tebow replacing non-injured Brady" snaps will be 0.

 

[Shelterdog]

 
 
Tebow is on the team this season for the future, as it's unlikely they will have Mallett around next season.  I think a lot of the decision making will be how much Belichick and McDaniels think that Tebow could be useful in a read-option scheme next season.  If they think he can be, then he'll probably be around.  

 
Mallett is under contract through the 2014 season so it seems quite likely that he will be here next year.

 

[bakahump]

1. Tebow is a Terrible Throwing Qb.  Like >75% of College QBs are better and some smaller but not insignificant amount of HS QBs are better at throwing.
2. Tebow is a REALLY GOOD Football player.  Like Winning a National Championship out of the SEC and a Heisman basically playing out of position good.
 
 
So that makes me wonder.....Why did no coach ever say "Hey .....you really suck at being a QB....BUT...you could be a hell of a [Whatever]."
 
How did someone who was so bad at one of the primary requirements of his Job still somehow succeed in often spectacular fashion?
 
There has to be something there....it just needs to be utilized correctly.  Are the Pats the right team to utilize it?  I would think not...but BB may have a different view and plan.
 
 
Lets assume that there is no Tebow Baggage. No Media Scrutiny. No expectations. No God and no Tebowing.
 
If you were a coach (HS/College/Pro) what would you do with Tebow?  Would you have converted him to LB/TE/FB  as a Freshman?  Would you have him run an Option and throw 6 times a game?  Would you continue to hope beyond reason that he could somehow learn to throw?
 
This is such an enigma to me.  How did he get here?  After looking "Competent" in College he has since in the pros looked downright bad throwing the ball.
 
Is he the Craig Hansen of Pro Football?  Did some one "coach" out what limited throwing ability he did possess?
 

*2006

Florida

SEC

FR

QB

22

33

66.7

358

10.8

12.5

5

1

201.7

*2007

Florida

SEC

SO

QB

234

350

66.9

3286

9.4

10.4

32

6

172.5

*2008

Florida

SEC

JR

QB

192

298

64.4

2746

9.2

10.6

30

4

172.4

*2009

Florida

SEC

SR

QB

213

314

67.8

2895

9.2

9.8

21

5

164.2

Passing Efficiency Rating
2007 NCAA 172.5 (2nd)
2007 SEC 172.5 (1st)
2008 NCAA 172.4 (4th)
2008 SEC 172.4 (1st)
2009 NCAA 164.2 (1st)
2009 SEC 164.2 (1st)
Career NCAA* 170.8 (2nd)
Career SEC** 170.8 (1st)
 
How does that just disappear?

 

[Reverend]

Tebow pass attempt total actually declined from 350 attempts in 13 games in 2007 to 298 attempts in 14 games in 2008. Of the 192 completions he threw in 2008, a whopping 74 of them went to Percy Harvin (40) and some guy named Hernandez (34).
 
Sanchez had a good record in college too. I don't follow college football, but it seems to me that the teams have become sufficiently unbalanced that teams need to rethink how they see the blue chip QBs--and I think they have or are in the process of doing so. There have been some really epic busts in the last decade--meanwhile, some less gaudy but more reliable guys have found success in the league.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

1. Tebow is a Terrible Throwing Qb.  Like >75% of College QBs are better and some smaller but not insignificant amount of HS QBs are better at throwing.
2. Tebow is a REALLY GOOD Football player.  Like Winning a National Championship out of the SEC and a Heisman basically playing out of position good.
 
 
So that makes me wonder.....Why did no coach ever say "Hey .....you really suck at being a QB....BUT...you could be a hell of a [Whatever]."
 
How did someone who was so bad at one of the primary requirements of his Job still somehow succeed in often spectacular fashion?
 
There has to be something there....it just needs to be utilized correctly.  Are the Pats the right team to utilize it?  I would think not...but BB may have a different view and plan.
 
 
Lets assume that there is no Tebow Baggage. No Media Scrutiny. No expectations. No God and no Tebowing.
 
If you were a coach (HS/College/Pro) what would you do with Tebow?  Would you have converted him to LB/TE/FB  as a Freshman?  Would you have him run an Option and throw 6 times a game?  Would you continue to hope beyond reason that he could somehow learn to throw?
 
 

 
Are you serious with this?  If you were his high school or college coach why would you do anything differently?  Tebow won two National Championships (and a Heisman) as QB of the Gators, and then got drafted in the first round of the NFL draft as a quarterback.  Urban Meyer would have been like the dumbest coach in the history of ever if he had tried to change his position.  It would not have benefitted the Gators, and there is no guarantee it would have benefited Tebow (hard to believe he would have been drafted higher, impossible to know if it would have led to a longer and more productive NFL career).
 
The interesting thing to ponder (and what is being discussed in various different threads) is what his pro coaches will do with him.
 
Edit:  Sorry if this is an overreaction to a "what would you do with Tebow" hypothetical.  I just think the answer as to why his HS and college coaches didn't change his position is so simple that it doesn't need to be asked.  He was tremendously successful at both levels playing QB.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

Passing Efficiency Rating
2007 NCAA 172.5 (2nd)
2007 SEC 172.5 (1st)
2008 NCAA 172.4 (4th)
2008 SEC 172.4 (1st)
2009 NCAA 164.2 (1st)
2009 SEC 164.2 (1st)
Career NCAA* 170.8 (2nd)
Career SEC** 170.8 (1st)
 
How does that just disappear?

Nothing disappeared. The college game is just different and many guys in many systems put up incredible statistics because all they need to do is make relatively easy throws with relatively easy reads. It happens all the time.

 

[lexrageorge]

High school and college football coaches are paid to win games now, not worry about the type of player someone will be when they hit the pros (which most never do anyway).  So HS and NCAA coaches play the guys in the position that puts the team in best position to win. 
 
As much as we cringe when we see Tebow throw, the reality is that he was probably in the top 0.1% of high school QB's during his time.  
 
In college, the game is vastly different from the NFL.  Prior Heisman winning QB's include Pat Sullivan, Charlie Ward, Gino Torretta, Ty Detmer, Andre Ware, Charlie Ward, Chris Weinke, Eric Crouch, Jason White, and, of course, Doug Flutie.  Since Roger Staubach, the next best Heisman winning QB is probably a jump ball between Vinny Testaverde  and Jim Plunkett (with the loser competing with Carson Palmer for 3rd).  Granted, recent draftees Sam Bradford, Cam Newton and RG3 may break this "Heisman Curse", but the point still stands.  Tebow would have very good company if he turns out to be a great college QB that flails in the pro game.

 

[bakahump]

Nothing disappeared. The college game is just different and many guys in many systems put up incredible statistics because all they need to do is make relatively easy throws with relatively easy reads. It happens all the time.

 
This is the conclusion I also came too.....Which then begs the question.....is a similar system possible in NFL?   Can you have a system with easy reads and throws but is still complicated enough to confuse an NFL Defense?   Chip Kelly seems to think so.
 
Am I correct in believing that SEC defenses are the closest College equivalent of a NFL Defense?  If so...how comparable?
 
Did Denver come close to accomplishing this? (and yes I know that the Denver Defense deserves much of the credit for their success in'11....but how much did they tailor the offense for Tebow...and how (in)effective was it against NFL defenses)

Seriously I am not a "Tebow is greatest" Fan boy.....but there appears to be a special talent there that if utilized in the correct situation (See FLA and their success) is highly effective even when matched against very good athletes and Defenses (SEC).
 
Do I want to use the Patriots as the Lab for this experiment?  Not while Brady is upright, but it is an interesting idea....
 
Can you build a Team (and associated offensive Philosophy [ ie simplier reads and throws]) with Tebow as your QB....that could succeed in the NFL.  And if you can how radically different (personnel wise) would it need to be?
 
Is there any comparison between what Chip Kelly is trying to accomplish (in part by simplifying the offensive reads)  and the idea of building a Tebow-possible offense?

 

[dcmissle]

 
This is the conclusion I also came too.....Which then begs the question.....is a similar system possible in NFL?   Can you have a system with easy reads and throws but is still complicated enough to confuse an NFL Defense?   Chip Kelly seems to think so.
 
Am I correct in believing that SEC defenses are the closest College equivalent of a NFL Defense?  If so...how comparable?
 
Did Denver come close to accomplishing this? (and yes I know that the Denver Defense deserves much of the credit for their success in'11....but how much did they tailor the offense for Tebow...and how (in)effective was it against NFL defenses)
Seriously I am not a "Tebow is greatest" Fan boy.....but there appears to be a special talent there that if utilized in the correct situation (See FLA and their success) is highly effective even when matched against very good athletes and Defenses (SEC).
 
Do I want to use the Patriots as the Lab for this experiment?  Not while Brady is upright, but it is an interesting idea....
 
Can you build a Team (and associated offensive Philosophy [ ie simplier reads and throws]) with Tebow as your QB....that could succeed in the NFL.  And if you can how radically different (personnel wise) would it need to be?
 
Is there any comparison between what Chip Kelly is trying to accomplish (in part by simplifying the offensive reads)  and the idea of building a Tebow-possible offense?

 
My thoughts, in order:
 
1.  Kelly was brought in to create something new (in the NFL) in the ruins of a flawed and fading team.  Very different situation than N.E.'s.
 
Context aside, Vick is superior in this scheme, as a runner and certainly as a passer, to Tebow.  So too, obviously, are Wilson, Kap and RGIII.  Just because Kelly's doing it does not mean we should be doing it.
 
2.  Denver never came close.  Replay the ass kicking in the playoff game in Fox.  Denver proved that with a good defense against offensively challenged teams, you can hang around in games and get on a hot streak into the playoffs -- where you'll eventually get crushed by a team that isn't offensively challenged.
 
Soxfan has argued that Denver was never all-in on an offense dedicated to Tebow -- they didn't have the time and personnel.  My response is -- why would you want to try?  You have guys coming out of college doing the things that Tebow does well, better -- and the things that Tebow does not do so well, vastly better.
 
3.  Why the Pats would want in on this with this player at this time is entirely beyond me.  If I had not seen his posts on this subject in other threads, I would swear Shelter is clowning by opening this one -- and he may  be clowning.
 
 We have one of the greatest QBs in history in a touch-and-go situation with some promising young WRs who may -- or may not -- develop quickly, but who dearly need to for the team's sake given off-season losses and the situation with Gronk.  Why mess with this, even for a series? 
 
Why mess with it when the very most you can aspire to realistically during "Tebow time" is what Denver produced 2 years ago.  (There is a transitional period to a new team , but as Shelter noted, Tebow seems not to have gotten much better -- and Denver 2 years ago did not have crappy weapons).  Good teams eventually crush that product.
 
Indeed, it's probably more challenging now because teams can be expected to gear up in a serious way to meet read-option, the Pistol and everything else the other guys mentioned above did so successfully last year.  Defenses may not stop those guys, but they can be expected to make some substantial progress.  This does not bode well for Tebow.
 
Puzzling -- unless you assume Tebow's here in substantial part to take the Patriots defense to school on these things.  Then it matters less that your two-year-old prototype has been outclassed, so long as he provides some kind of approximation of what the other offenses will bring.
 
Nothing is determined until the final roster cut, and even that is not final.  I'm not playing in this pool until Tebow appears to be around for good, and not on the practice squad -- which may be the best place for him long term.

 

[Stitch01]

I don't think Tebow is practice squas eligible, this is his 4th seaso.

 

[bakahump]

I totally agree regarding the Pats and Tebow.  While Brady is here...I do not want a less effective player replacing him.
 
But I still have to ask.
 
In a vacuum....what would you do with Tebow?  Can he be successful as a QB (get to the Playoffs in the NFL) with out that elite Denver D?
 
Assume you have a clean slate with no press or "religious pressures".  He is just some dude who happened to be incredibly successful in College Football at playing a premium position in a premium league.
 
He is Edelman with a better pedigree.....So if Edelman has a use.....couldnt Tebow?
 
Or does he simply have NO PLACE at all in the NFL?  Is he (to bring up a name strangely similar) simply "Charlie Ward" with a much better "Story" and "PR Team" that got Tebow into the NFL on smoke and mirrors?
 
My take is I have a hard time getting rid of a "football player" who is so talented (even if that talent doesnt include playing QB in the traditional sense we are so accustomed to). It seems he must be useful in some capacity.

 

[Shelterdog]

 
3.  Why the Pats would want in on this with this player at this time is entirely beyond me.  If I had not seen his posts on this subject in other threads, I would swear Shelter is clowning by opening this one -- and he may  be clowning.
 

 
It's supposed to be a fun thread (and hopefully serves to keep other threads from getting derailed) but I'm not clowning: I honestly believe BB signed Tebow thinking (1) Tebow would make the team and (2) that he'd play Tebow some (relatively small) number of snaps instead of Brady because the read-option is a pretty potent weapon. (I also think BB is thinking about what he's going to do if Brady gets hurt and tag teaming Mallett and Tebow until one firmly establishs himself is reasonably appealling as well).

 

[dcmissle]

 
It's supposed to be a fun thread (and hopefully serves to keep other threads from getting derailed) but I'm not clowning: I honestly believe BB signed Tebow thinking (1) Tebow would make the team and (2) that he'd play Tebow some (relatively small) number of snaps instead of Brady because the read-option is a pretty potent weapon. (I also think BB is thinking about what he's going to do if Brady gets hurt and tag teaming Mallett and Tebow until one firmly establishs himself is reasonably appealling as well).

 
If, as Stitch noted, Tebow is not practice squad eligible, I think it is more probable and maybe highly likely that Tebow makes the roster.
 
The tag team with Mallet occurred to me too.  That is sensible, but a precious roster spot being awarded on the presumption of injury would mark a depature from recent history.
 
But if they want to explore these conceptsoffensively  -- and the interest seems obvious, want to practice against them defensively, and have no practice squad options, then I'm not inclined to challenge where we appear to be going.

 

[soxfan121]

 
It's supposed to be a fun thread (and hopefully serves to keep other threads from getting derailed) but I'm not clowning: I honestly believe BB signed Tebow thinking (1) Tebow would make the team and (2) that he'd play Tebow some (relatively small) number of snaps instead of Brady because the read-option is a pretty potent weapon. (I also think BB is thinking about what he's going to do if Brady gets hurt and tag teaming Mallett and Tebow until one firmly establishs himself is reasonably appealling as well).

 
I'm taking this one step further: BB loves football history generally and the Naval Academy's football program specifically. He learned the game through the offensive and defensive concepts from that era and it pervades his thinking today. It's why the Patriots defense still tends to favor players with size and gap responsibility tendencies and seems to be geared toward stopping the run. The re-emergence of the Pistol, spread option and the Wildcat makes BB's inner child happy. The man loves the Wishbone and don't ever forget it. 
 
Additionally, the Patriots seem to have "loves football" as a near-equally rated scouting category to "physical ability". Tebow, though he has performance problems, grades out as a perfect teammate/practice player. Who doesn't like working with an eager, nice, willing-to-do-anything at maximum effort teammate? 
 
Combine these factors and Tebow makes the team as the scout team QB. Mallet is the in-game backup. And if Brady gets hurt it will depend on the matchup as to who plays. The Patriots could very easily become a power option running offense. What's Eric Kettani up to these days? And they'd probably be good enough to win the division if they had to do it all season. The OL, TE and RB groups are very good run units and could carry this team, if necessary. 

 

[Super Nomario]

 
I'm taking this one step further: BB loves football history generally and the Naval Academy's football program specifically. He learned the game through the offensive and defensive concepts from that era and it pervades his thinking today. It's why the Patriots defense still tends to favor players with size and gap responsibility tendencies and seems to be geared toward stopping the run. The re-emergence of the Pistol, spread option and the Wildcat makes BB's inner child happy. The man loves the Wishbone and don't ever forget it. 
 
Additionally, the Patriots seem to have "loves football" as a near-equally rated scouting category to "physical ability". Tebow, though he has performance problems, grades out as a perfect teammate/practice player. Who doesn't like working with an eager, nice, willing-to-do-anything at maximum effort teammate? 

I think this is all 100% spot-on. I read Blood, Sweat, and Chalk a few months ago and Belichick was quoted as saying he views Urban Meyer's read-option system not as a new thing but as a modern perfection of the single-wing offense that dominated the first half of the 20th century. And QB is the one position where Belichick has seen fit to use a veteran with plus intangibles and limited on-field value - remember Flutie and Testaverde? I still think Tebow's chances of making the roster are less than 50/50, but I think he does intrigue Belichick.

 

[Stitch01]

Does anyone else sign Tebow if the Pats cut him given the lack of interest?  He'd make a really nice shadow roster piece as scout team QB during read-option weeks, not so much when trying to practice against QBs that can complete forward passes.  He's never going to develop as a passer, so its not like having him on and off the squad is going to hinder development. 
 
If the answer to that is no, Id guess we're going to see Tebow taking snaps somewhere most every week or he's going to get cut.  Hard to keep a guy on the 53 with no gameday value, even as an insurance policy.

 

[dcmissle]

 
 
Additionally, the Patriots seem to have "loves football" as a near-equally rated scouting category to "physical ability". Tebow, though he has performance problems, grades out as a perfect teammate/practice player. Who doesn't like working with an eager, nice, willing-to-do-anything at maximum effort teammate? 
 
 

 
 
Add this to the list as well.  I know they have veteran leadership in Brady, Vince and others.  They also have a former teammate facing a murden rap, and a current teammate involved in court proceedings that will loom very big later this month.
 
The guy is a breathing advertisement for this is how you work hard, prepare meticulously, put team first and keep your nose clean.

 

[Saints Rest]

I totally agree regarding the Pats and Tebow.  While Brady is here...I do not want a less effective player replacing him.
 
But I still have to ask.
 
In a vacuum....what would you do with Tebow?  Can he be successful as a QB (get to the Playoffs in the NFL) with out that elite Denver D?
 
Assume you have a clean slate with no press or "religious pressures".  He is just some dude who happened to be incredibly successful in College Football at playing a premium position in a premium league.
 
He is Edelman with a better pedigree.....So if Edelman has a use.....couldnt Tebow?
 
Or does he simply have NO PLACE at all in the NFL?  Is he (to bring up a name strangely similar) simply "Charlie Ward" with a much better "Story" and "PR Team" that got Tebow into the NFL on smoke and mirrors?
 
My take is I have a hard time getting rid of a "football player" who is so talented (even if that talent doesnt include playing QB in the traditional sense we are so accustomed to). It seems he must be useful in some capacity.

 
Baka,
 
My take is that when you take away the "Story" and "PR Team" from Tebow, you are left with yet another example, such as Charlie Ward to name one, of a college QB who excelled in college and failed in the pros.  I think most college star have a "Story" and "PR Team" -- the difference is that Tebow's story also touched not only on what dcmissile referred to --
 

 
 
Add this to the list as well.  I know they have veteran leadership in Brady, Vince and others.  They also have a former teammate facing a murden rap, and a current teammate involved in court proceedings that will loom very big later this month.
 
The guy is a breathing advertisement for this is how you work hard, prepare meticulously, put team first and keep your nose clean.

which could apply to almost any team (Pats, Jets, many college programs), but also on the Christian Right.  Not only was Tebow a "breathing advertisement for this is how you work hard, prepare meticulously, put team first and keep your nose clean" but he was also a "good Christian."  And I think that combo made his story especially compelling/appealing.
 
I also believe, as much as I wish it weren't true, that Tebow's skin color added to his "story."  He was A Great White Hope, playing a position (running QB) that had become primarily a black position, ironinc when you consider how much BS so many great black QB's had to go thru to even be allowed to play QB.
 
Frankly, I don't think he brings much to an NFL field, but I am not surprised that his "story" has had such traction.  Did anyone else notice the huge roar that went up from the crowd at Lincoln Field when Tebow came on the field on Friday night?  This guy is wildly popular.  But that doesn't make him a good NFL QB.  Just as being a great NCAA QB (and make no mistake, he WAS a GREAT college QB) doesn't make him a good NFL QB.  And in that regard, he is no different than many, many others before him.

 

[Granite Sox]

There's also a more simple explanation from Reiss and Coach Bill:
 
http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/9562714/bill-belichick-explains-where-tim-tebow-fits-in
 
It may be as straightforward as identifying what (if any) special skills the 53rd man on the roster has and seeing if they can be maximized.  The logic Coach Bill applies here suggests Tebow's Special Purpose has a value > than Special Teamer #12...

 

[Super Nomario]

There's also a more simple explanation from Reiss and Coach Bill:
 
http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/9562714/bill-belichick-explains-where-tim-tebow-fits-in
 
It may be as straightforward as identifying what (if any) special skills the 53rd man on the roster has and seeing if they can be maximized.  The logic Coach Bill applies here suggests Tebow's Special Purpose has a value > than Special Teamer #12...

Well, no. It means Tebow's Special Purpose MIGHT have a value greater than a primarily-special-teams guy. I'd imagine they are still evaluating that. I'm not sure why folks are interpreting Tebow's presence as a near-guarantee that he's going to make the roster.

 

[Shelterdog]

Well, no. It means Tebow's Special Purpose MIGHT have a value greater than a primarily-special-teams guy. I'd imagine they are still evaluating that. I'm not sure why folks are interpreting Tebow's presence as a near-guarantee that he's going to make the roster.

 
It's pretty simple: people think that you wouldn't bring in the Tebow circus if you weren't serious about keeping him and that you wouldn't waste time installing running QB stuff if you weren't serious about keeping him. Those reasons might not be compelling to you but that's the thinking others are using.

 

[Super Nomario]

 
It's pretty simple: people think that you wouldn't bring in the Tebow circus if you weren't serious about keeping him and that you wouldn't waste time installing running QB stuff if you weren't serious about keeping him. Those reasons might not be compelling to you but that's the thinking others are using.

I mostly disagree on both these points (I don't think Belichick cares about the circus at all, and anyway it goes away if they cut Tebow, and I don't think they spent much time installing running QB stuff), but I do agree that they are serious about keeping Tebow. The problem is that they are serious about keeping a lot of guys. I think they're serious about keeping Nate Ebner and Brandon Bolden and Ras-I Dowling and Jake Bequette and Steve Beauharnais and Niko Koutouvides and Steve Gregory and Daniel Fells, etc. ... but they're not all going to make the team. I'm not naive enough to think the number of guys who have a real shot of making the roster is 90, but it's definitely more than 53. Tebow's in that group, certainly, but I have trouble elevating him into that group of 40 or so "definitely on the squad" guys based on what we've seen so far.

 

[Reverend]

I mostly disagree on both these points (I don't think Belichick cares about the circus at all, and anyway it goes away if they cut Tebow, and I don't think they spent much time installing running QB stuff), but I do agree that they are serious about keeping Tebow. The problem is that they are serious about keeping a lot of guys. I think they're serious about keeping Nate Ebner and Brandon Bolden and Ras-I Dowling and Jake Bequette and Steve Beauharnais and Niko Koutouvides and Steve Gregory and Daniel Fells, etc. ... but they're not all going to make the team. I'm not naive enough to think the number of guys who have a real shot of making the roster is 90, but it's definitely more than 53. Tebow's in that group, certainly, but I have trouble elevating him into that group of 40 or so "definitely on the squad" guys based on what we've seen so far.

 
Well, this is where this stuff becomes fascinating, yes? Trying to figure out why they might be serious about keeping Tebow.
 
I totally agree with ShelterDog's well stated premise--I don't think Belichick is always correct, but like SD, I have a bedrock belief that he always has reasons for what he does, by which I mean football reasons (not, like, Raiders or Jets make the news crap). But I can't even figure out what it might be here--I see several of the theories expounded as plausible (e.g. to play around with option stuff simply because it's becoming part of the NFL game), but none of them convincing.
 
I don't get it. Fascinating.

 

[Super Nomario]

 
Well, this is where this stuff becomes fascinating, yes? Trying to figure out why they might be serious about keeping Tebow.
 
I totally agree with ShelterDog's well stated premise--I don't think Belichick is always correct, but like SD, I have a bedrock belief that he always has reasons for what he does, by which I mean football reasons (not, like, Raiders or Jets make the news crap). But I can't even figure out what it might be here--I see several of the theories expounded as plausible (e.g. to play around with option stuff simply because it's becoming part of the NFL game), but none of them convincing.
 
I don't get it. Fascinating.

I think Tebow is like Jose Iglesias. He has special strengths (Tebow's running ability and toughness / leadership / intangibles; Iglesias' glove) and crippling fundamental weaknesses (Tebow's throwing / reads; Iglesias' power / bat). The weaknesses are a problem, but the strengths mean you don't have to fix the weaknesses entirely to be useful. Ryan Mallett as a 55% passer is not an NFL player. Tebow as a 55% passer is probably a top-20 QB. You don't have to make Tebow Tom Brady, you just have to make him adequate. I'm skeptical he can get there (and Friday was certainly not a point in his favor), but I'm not heart-broken they dumped Mike Kafka to take a look.

 

[Super Nomario]

I think you're overestimating how much work went into installing these read-option plays. Part of the advantage of the zone read is that you don't need a fat playbook because the quarterback reads the defense on the fly, and because built into the zone blocking scheme is some flexibility based on how the defense lines up. The OL isn't really doing much different than they would on a normal zone running play. The RB isn't either. The Pats did show some interesting formations (full-house pistol) but didn't do any crazy wrinkles (triple-option with a pitch man, actually handing it off to a WR in the backfield). The reports were that the Pats spent a little time two days in practice installing this stuff, and what I saw was consistent with that.

A great article today that reinforces this point (written by Ben Muth, ex-Stanford LT who also writes for FO): http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2013/8/12/4613948/rg3-mike-shanahan-washington-redskins-2013-schedule-offense
 

It’s inside zone. Yeah, there’s the threat of the quarterback running, but the blocking is just inside zone. Teams may run it a little less if they’re worried about injury issues from the quarterback. But there is no magic elixir that defensive coordinators are going to come up with to stop it, because it’s just inside zone with one less guy to block. Offenses have had success running inside zone since at least the '80s and the zone read is, once again, inside zone. Again: it’s inside zone, and inside zone works. ...
 
Nine of the Redskins are running the exact same play I diagrammed from 2011.

Bill Belichick made the exact point in an interview today: http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4746634/rutgers-reunion-in-foxborough
 

I wouldn't say it's all exactly the same, but there is certainly a lot of carry-over. There are only so many blocking schemes you can have. We're not trying to revolutionize the game or anything.

 

[Reverend]

I think Tebow is like Jose Iglesias. He has special strengths (Tebow's running ability and toughness / leadership / intangibles; Iglesias' glove) and crippling fundamental weaknesses (Tebow's throwing / reads; Iglesias' power / bat). The weaknesses are a problem, but the strengths mean you don't have to fix the weaknesses entirely to be useful. Ryan Mallett as a 55% passer is not an NFL player. Tebow as a 55% passer is probably a top-20 QB. You don't have to make Tebow Tom Brady, you just have to make him adequate. I'm skeptical he can get there (and Friday was certainly not a point in his favor), but I'm not heart-broken they dumped Mike Kafka to take a look.

 
Interesting. Another question, then: was he really the best person out there for whatever experiment Mad Scientist Belichick is running? Cost would be a consideration, I suppose, in assessing possibilities for playing with a running QB. Or do you think it's more just a "Bring Players to Camp and See What Happens" kind of thing as others have suggested?

 

[Super Nomario]

 
Interesting. Another question, then: was he really the best person out there for whatever experiment Mad Scientist Belichick is running? Cost would be a consideration, I suppose, in assessing possibilities for playing with a running QB. Or do you think it's more just a "Bring Players to Camp and See What Happens" kind of thing as others have suggested?

Well, perusing the NFL transaction log, the next QBs signed after 6/11 (when Tebow signed) were Tarvaris Jackson, Nathan Enderle, Alex Tanney, and Vince Young. Plus Kafka, who the Pats cut for Tebow. You can argue for some of those guys, but it's hard to argue signing Tebow is stupid relative to those moves.

 

[Reverend]

That certainly scans.

 

[snowmanny]

High school and college football coaches are paid to win games now, not worry about the type of player someone will be when they hit the pros (which most never do anyway).  So HS and
NCAA coaches play the guys in the position that puts the team in best position to win. 
 
As much as we cringe when we see Tebow throw, the reality is that he was probably in the
top 0.1% of high school QB's during his time.  
 
In college, the game is vastly different from the NFL.  Prior Heisman winning QB's include Pat Sullivan, Charlie Ward, Gino Torretta, Ty
Detmer, Andre Ware, Charlie Ward, Chris Weinke, Eric Crouch, Jason White, and, of course, Doug Flutie.  Since Roger Staubach, the next best Heisman winning QB is probably a jump ball between Vinny Testaverde  and Jim Plunkett (with the loser competing with Carson
Palmer for 3rd).  Granted, recent draftees Sam Bradford, Cam Newton and RG3 may break this "Heisman Curse", but the point still stands.  Tebow would have very good company if he turns out to be a great college QB that flails in the pro game.

You're point is dead on, but I am surprised that Flutie got lumped in with that first group. I'd take his pro career over Palmer's and it's not close.

 

[lexrageorge]

You're point is dead on, but I am surprised that Flutie got lumped in with that first group. I'd take his pro career over Palmer's and it's not close.

Palmer has put up decent numbers for several bad teams.  And his career passing rating of 86.2 is 10 better than Flutie.  Flutie, in his best year, sported an 87.4 rating, and that year he started only 10 games while leading Buffalo to the playoffs. Granted, if you include the CFL, then it's a different story. 
 
Plus, Tebow causes a similar reaction among his adherents and detractors as Flutie did around here.  A college superstar, who's game didn't exactly translate to the NFL.  During his stints with New England and Buffalo, he was inconsistent, but the team seemed to win when he played.  As a result, some fans loved him, and those same fans hated it when the coaches always went back to their "old standby" QB, benching Flutie in the process.  Meanwhile, others hated the fact that a 5'9" QB got any playing time at all (although very few of those folks could be found here in New England).
 
Of course, the difference this time is that there is no question whatsoever regarding the incumbent QB.  The argument as to whether he will occupy the 53rd roster spot as 3rd string QB and play more than 5 meaningful snaps this season is unlikely to get quite as lively as the Flutie vs. Eason or the Flutie vs. Rob Johnson debates.

 

[dcmissle]

Interesting comparison, Flutie & Tebow.
 
That a 5'9" QB could succeed in today's NFL would seem almost totally out of the question -- until you realize that Wilson probably isn't much taller, though has a better skill set across the board.
 
Part of me can't help thinking that Flutie was the object of discrimination based on stature that might not be as deep seated if he came out today.  Memory is too faded to have an opinion on whether he got a fair shot.

 

[wutang112878]

My biggest problem with Tebow is the player he knocks off the final and game day rosters.  On the 53rd front, keeping Tebow probably means we have to dump a decent player to depth at some roster crunch spots.  We might have to dump Washington, Boldin, wouldnt have the luxury of keeping a 4th TE for added depth until Gronk comes back, or could leave us with 5 WRs. 
 
None of those are going to be all-pros but all of them can certainly help this year, can certainly be active on the 46 man game day roster and could be significant special teams contributors.  With all the question marks around Tebow, I just dont see how he adds more value to the roster than keeping him forces us to deduct off of it.

 

[simplyeric]

I wonder if there's another slightly abstract reason for BB's interest in Tebow: the very nature of his 'mediocrity'.
Over the years, BB has had some brilliant diamonds to play with (Brady, Moss...). But a lot of what he does suggests that he has more of a plug-and-play mentality. He doesn't bother with 'feature RB's' but instead just rotated them through.
The prevailing notion is that QB is a position where you need a real feature player, but maybe BB sees that this doesn't have to be the case, and is exploring the notion of 'replaceable qb's'.

Total conjecture of course. I still think they'll end up trying to convert him to TE LB work (hey Tim, seriously we gave you every opportunity to develop this season...you and I both know its not going to happen at QB... So lets start talking tight end....)

 

[wutang112878]

The prevailing notion is that QB is a position where you need a real feature player, but maybe BB sees that this doesn't have to be the case, and is exploring the notion of 'replaceable qb's'.

 

 
I dont think your theory is that far fetched, but isnt Tebow a pretty poor test subject?  With Tebow you change QBs but you also have to change systems, and he is now running an offense that your team doesnt practice that often, and the skill position players you put around him were designed for your regular system....  It just seems there are too many variables in play.  Whereas the Cassel expirement or a Mallet experiment would be a better indicator, what would a QB who is very similar to Brady who can, for the most part, operate within this system do in comparison to Brady

 

[Saints Rest]

 
I dont think your theory is that far fetched, but isnt Tebow a pretty poor test subject?  With Tebow you change QBs but you also have to change systems, and he is now running an offense that your team doesnt practice that often, and the skill position players you put around him were designed for your regular system....  It just seems there are too many variables in play.  Whereas the Cassel expirement or a Mallet experiment would be a better indicator, what would a QB who is very similar to Brady who can, for the most part, operate within this system do in comparison to Brady

I wonder if BB is considering the possibility (whose probability likely increases with every season) that TB will be injured and out for an extended period.  In such an awful situation, maybe BB figures that having two distinctly differnt QB's allows him to game plan for any given opponent:  facing an opponent weak against the pass -- play Mallett; playing against someone weak against the run -- go with Tebow and the read-option.  
 
I say this based on the fact that others much more football-savvy than I say that the read-option offense doesn't require a huge amount of prep for.  My theory is that it would be game-specific, not situation specific, so the team would have a full week to prepare.  

In a way, the theory that simplyeric suggests isn't that much different than the way some other backups are activated or not depending on the gameplan.  

 

[bakahump]

The recent "its really not that different....we are not reinventing the game...."   makes me think BB really does think of him as the backup.
 
With the Patriots I think many of us (myself included) have come to decide that "It worked really freaking well this way....this is really the only way it will work really freaking well".
 
Many of us are convinced that for Tebow to succeed they have to change the Offense radically from the Brady version we see now.
 
What if we are wrong and its not as radical we think....at least as not different as we think....bear with me.
 
What if BB believes that by tweaking the offense he can make Tebow very effective as a QB?  Maybe he saw FLAs success in the SEC and thinks "why not in the NFL?"
 
Now Tweaking is a relative term.  While we are focused on the timing and accuracy of the passing game and saying "its impossible for Tebow to recreate that" (which it is....) BB may be focusing on the Personnel and Blocking philosophy and saying "Tebow thrived in an offense predicated on a Dynamic Slot Reciever (Harvin)and an athletic TE (Hernandez) who took short passes and used THEIR ability to get YAC.
 
He really had neither in Denver.  Eric Decker was not in the top 50 in YAC (290yds) in 2012  despite 85  catches in a career year and Manning throwing to him (3.41 YAC per catch). Daniel Fells also does not really equate to the the Gronk/Hernandez Mold.
 
For comparison Lloyd (who we all know caught the ball and simply dropped to the ground) had 2.59 YACs last year.  Welker had 5.94, Gronk had 5.74 and Hernandez had 4.50.
 
Hmm where have we seen YACs being an important part of the offense before...(WW 2012, 2011, Gronk 2011, AH 2010, Bubble and RB Screens)?  What if instead of BB looking at Brady as a Cause.....he is looking at the Effect that the YAC would have on a Tebow led passing attack? Now a "short passing attack" has some teeth due to the YAC ability of your receivers.
 
Additionally building your team around TEs (including Hernandez at the time of Tebows signing) adds physically superior blockers replacing Speedier less physical WRs. Superior blockers who can transition to Large Target receivers are probably the exact things Tebow needs to be successful both running and passing. Which do you think would be better used by Tebow?  A guy who runs deep 16 yards and gets open.....but cannot get the ball due to Tebows accuracy issues?  Or a Blocker who can spring him for 4 additional yards when Tebow runs or who can take a 6 yard pass for an additional 10 YAC when Tebow throws.
 
The fact that our TEs were also very adept at blocking and Receiving and can get those YAC is what could make Tebow work.
 
 
 
Basically a sum of the parts situation.  Tebow works because he has talent around him that utilize his strengths and minimize his weaknesses.  Brady works because he maximizes the talent around him and allows you to minimizes their weaknesses. The flip side of the same coin.  Both make their team better.....Brady is a Cause....Tebow is a portion.  Some things that Help Tebow (the blocking by his TEs when he runs) are basically "wasted" by Brady.  (ok Wasted is a strong word....but I hope you get the point.)
 
Tebows size may also be a consideration.  While less dynamic then say RGIII or Russell Wilson (and maybe Kaepernick who is tall...but lanky) Tebow may be able to withstand the Punishment that a running QB will be subjected to.
 
Finally We have talked about the "queen of the Chessboard offense" with Gronk and Hernandez.  The Crux of it being that it allowed flexibility that kept a Defense guessing. Might an extension of that be by Using your QB as the RB and QB (say from the shotgun/Pistol) your adding another blocker/Receiver that allows even more flexibility to the offensive and further stresses the defense?
 
You can claim that Tebow is not accurate enough to carry off the "QB" portion of that scenario...yet he did exactly that at Fla completing 65+% of his passes.
 
Again i have no expectations that BB will replace Brady as the QB of the NE Patriots......nor do I think he should.....However I am beginning to think that having him as the back up is not a terrible idea.  With a "Matt Cassell Tweak" (use his strengths, minimize his weaknesses)  to the play book BB may well believe that he can be a very effective NFL QB...albeit in a completely different way then the "Brady mold".  Exactly BECAUSE of the composition of this team.
 
Ironically we have one of the greatest pocket passers of all times and a team built for the worst.
Or
It may say alot about BBs managemet skills that he could have an effective team with one of the greatest Throwing QBs of all times......or one of the worst.

 

[soxfan121]

So...about my tagline...
 
Doesn't baka deserve it more? 

 

[Stitch01]

Additionally building your team around TEs (including Hernandez at the time of Tebows signing) adds physically superior blockers replacing Speedier less physical WRs. Superior blockers who can transition to Large Target receivers are probably the exact things Tebow needs to be successful both running and passing. Which do you think would be better used by Tebow? A guy who runs deep 16 yards and gets open.....but cannot get the ball due to Tebows accuracy issues? Or a Blocker who can spring him for 4 additional yards when Tebow runs or who can take a 6 yard pass for an additional 10 YAC when Tebow throws.
 

 
Tebow cant throw accurately enough and cant make good/quick enough decisions to get guys YAC. The best receivers for him are guys that can go make a play in single coverage against a deep ball.
 
If Tebow has to play, the Pats will run something that looks very, very different from their regular offense.  Tebow running the read option with the Pats personnel might be better than Mike Kafka or some other retread trying to run the normal offense as a plan C, I'll buy that.

 

[RhaegarTharen]

Tebow, whether he makes the roster for 2013 or not, could also be Belichick's first experiment into the Patriots: After Brady research.  Brady isn't going to be around forever, and it's pretty obvious that the whole offensive systems will have to be reworked at that point, barring BB finding another diamond in the rough QB who can make instant reads like Brady at the line and adjust on the fly with pinpoint accuracy.
 
I mean - if they can get some traction running plays (even if it's in practice or preseason) with Tebow running a read-option system - shouldn't they be able to do the same with some future QB with better throwing skills?  I don't think they'd draft a stud prospect ala Cam Newton or RGIII - but maybe they're interested in looking for a Kaepernick or Wilson in the later rounds in the next couple drafts.  Belichick's experiments with Tebow now could simply be him (or McDaniels) paving the way for the Post Brady era by having a successor (and revamped system) in mind ahead of time.

 

[simplyeric]

 
I dont think your theory is that far fetched, but isnt Tebow a pretty poor test subject?  With Tebow you change QBs but you also have to change systems, and he is now running an offense that your team doesnt practice that often, and the skill position players you put around him were designed for your regular system....  It just seems there are too many variables in play.  Whereas the Cassel expirement or a Mallet experiment would be a better indicator, what would a QB who is very similar to Brady who can, for the most part, operate within this system do in comparison to Brady

I'm talking about the 'After Brady' years, which could be literally any time (injury). Maybe he's looking at what he'll want or try to do with his 'next team' and that he knows he'll never have another Tom Brady and that he might think that 'the replaceable QB' is the future (or a future).

Again, I'm just thinkin'.

Edit: sleepyjose spelled out what I was kindof thinking... I should have refreshed!

 

[Shelterdog]

Man this board is really going to go nuts when Mallett is inactive and Tebow is the game day backup QB (on the theory that Tebow's positive value as a game day active QB in the 98% of games where Brady is fine outweighs Tebow's horrendous negative value relative to Mallett in the 2% of games where Brady gets injured).

 

[Stitch01]

With the way the NFL has evolved and is continuing to evolve, "the replaceable QB" is not a direction teams are going to be headed.
 
Furthermore, Tebow is a horrible candidate to have as a replaceable QB.  His skill set is super unique.

 

[Reverend]

With the way the NFL has evolved and is continuing to evolve, "the replaceable QB" is not a direction teams are going to be headed.
 
Furthermore, Tebow is a horrible candidate to have as a replaceable QB.  His skill set is super unique.

 
No kidding. Brady's $13.8m cap hit suggests that Belichick doesn't think QBs are replaceable either.

 

[Shelterdog]

 
No kidding. Brady's $13.8m cap hit suggests that Belichick doesn't think QBs are replaceable either.

 
The economics of the QB position have changed a lot though.  Would you rather have Flacco or Geno Smith and $110 million in cap space? If you're the Bengals or 49ers and you're not allowed to extend Dalton/Kapernick until the end of 2013 (a year from free agency for those two) do you bite the bullet on a $12-18 million a year extension or do you hope to catch lightning in a bottle (especially knowing that your 24 year old running threat isn't going to be a running threat a couple years down the road)?  The difference between the market price for a league average  QB and what you pay a draft pick is getting to be so large that you could imagine a team saying fuck paying Schaub millions, I'm going to try and find Tannenhill or Russell Wilson.

 

[simplyeric]

It's QB-by-committee time!!!

 

[bakahump]

 
Tebow cant throw accurately enough and cant make good/quick enough decisions to get guys YAC. The best receivers for him are guys that can go make a play in single coverage against a deep ball.

Stitch,
 
How was he a 65%+ accuracy at Florida when his main targets where a Slot Receiver and a TE?  And dont tell me its "competition".  The argument now isnt "Competition".....its "He just cant throw".   Every scouting report and his 4 years at FLA all indicate he CAN throw....albeit...only in a certain parameters. (Short Throws and Very long throws....terrible at intermediate stuff).
 
And no.....I am definitely not a Tebow apologist or zealot.
 
I do however believe that BB does things for a reason.  A specific reason.  Because it helps (or potentially) helps the team win.  It isnt ego...it isnt to show up  Ryan or the Jets.  If he has brought a player in....ANY Player....its because he feels that IF UTILIZED CORRECTLY they will help him win.
 
Like many of you i thought that utilization would be as a TE or Hback or FB.  As ALL evidence is that its as a QB.....well.....there you go.
 
I dont want to get in a pissing contest with anyone over Tebow....but I was trying to figure out how he might help the Patriots win.
 
This isnt either....Brady Rulz  or  Tebow  Rulz.. Which for some reason it has become for many people.
 
Its simply "in what scenario Might BB be thinking that Tebow can help?"