PDA

View Full Version : CHFF compares QBs


3pac
03-25-2010, 01:50 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/kerry_byrne/03/22/tim.tebow/index.html

What do you all think?

yourfavestoner
03-25-2010, 02:07 PM
I think that statistics only tell a part of the story and anybody who uses them as the basis of an opinion is an idiot.

Interesting story, though. On that note, every QB from Hawaii or Texas Tech should have been a better prospect than the Mannings.

Clarkw267
03-25-2010, 02:08 PM
This is absolute garbage. Accuracy can't be measured by completion percentage alone, especially in a college spread system. Wouldn't that make Colt McCoy the most accurate QB prospect in history?

Also this doesn't take into account the windmill wind up and slowwww release. Tebow was great for what Urban Meyer did. The reality is he doesn't have the pasing tools to succeed in the pocket, and he won't be able to run effectively in the NFL. The chances he ever becomes an above average starting QB in the league, are pretty slim IMO.

San Diego Chicken
03-25-2010, 02:08 PM
Really poor analysis. Some of the draft material being put out there lately is utter garbage.

I actually think Tebow is sold short when it comes to his translatable passing skills to the NFL, but college stats are meaningless. Meaningless. Someone who had never watched any of those QB's could come up with the same conclusion.

It's pretty shocking how poor of a publication Sports Illustrated has become.

DiG
03-25-2010, 02:09 PM
Interesting story, though. On that note, every QB from Hawaii or Texas Tech should have been a better prospect than the Mannings.

you missed how all these guys were from the SEC

Clarkw267
03-25-2010, 02:29 PM
you missed how all these guys were from the SEC

Wow.... don't know how I also missed that.

Either way, the guy is comparing pocket passers from pro style offenses to a option spread guy.

The closest comparison out of that group I guess would have to be Couch given the offense he came out of. But still, not really a fair comparison.

If you want to compare Tebow to Josh Harris or Alex Smith go ahead and be my guest.

Addict
03-25-2010, 02:37 PM
"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics"
- Mark Twain

This proves nothing and it's more media sucking Timmy's nuts.

3pac
03-25-2010, 02:39 PM
Ok, I'm glad I'm not alone. I was originally going to bash the writer/article in the original post but I didn't want to get flamed in case people actually agreed with that crap.

I'm all for looking at statistics as a measuring tool, but as yourfavestoner so accurately put... IT'S ONLY PART OF THE STORY!!! Why else would Gram Harrell have gone in, what, the 6th round? Is he even still on a team?

I'm not simply anti-Tebow, but this article is a far cry from "evidence."

prock
03-25-2010, 02:46 PM
This article is ******* ********. Whoever wrote it should not be allowed a column. Just because you have a pen and a journalism degree doesn't mean you know **** about sports... This dude is just on Tebow's dick.

DiG
03-25-2010, 02:49 PM
ha wow you guys take this way too seriously. its the medias job to do this kind of stuff. these arent scouts or team execs. the media is paid to report and stir things up. they need to garner an audience and obviously he has gotten some of your attention...

no bare feet
03-25-2010, 02:50 PM
He brings up surrounding talent and does not mention Riley Cooper, Percy Harvin, Aaron Hernandez, Jeff Demps, Andre Caldwell, Louis Murphy or the constant 7 or 8 in the box defenses he faced.

prock
03-25-2010, 02:51 PM
ha wow you guys take this way too seriously. its the medias job to do this kind of stuff. these arent scouts or team execs. the media is paid to report and stir things up. they need to garner an audience and obviously he has gotten some of your attention...

There is a difference between positive attention and negative attention. I don't know why they would be trying to gain negative attention, that just loses them credibility.

Addict
03-25-2010, 02:52 PM
Ok, I'm glad I'm not alone. I was originally going to bash the writer/article in the original post but I didn't want to get flamed in case people actually agreed with that crap.

I'm all for looking at statistics as a measuring tool, but as yourfavestoner so accurately put... IT'S ONLY PART OF THE STORY!!! Why else would Gram Harrell have gone in, what, the 6th round? Is he even still on a team?

I'm not simply anti-Tebow, but this article is a far cry from "evidence."

Look up some of the great draft busts, do the math on them and you'll see some of them have very high career QB ratings.

Clarkw267
03-25-2010, 03:12 PM
ha wow you guys take this way too seriously. its the medias job to do this kind of stuff. these arent scouts or team execs. the media is paid to report and stir things up. they need to garner an audience and obviously he has gotten some of your attention...

Since when is it the media job so let some ill informed stooge write an article saying a player is the 2nd coming based on stats, and stats alone?? You can tell the author doesn't know a thing about the subject he is writing on.

DiG
03-25-2010, 03:15 PM
Since when is it the media job so let some ill informed stooge write an article saying a player is the 2nd coming based on stats, and stats alone??

since as long as media has been around.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/PageMill_Images/media_monkeys.jpg

Clarkw267
03-25-2010, 03:18 PM
since as long as media has been around.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/PageMill_Images/media_monkeys.jpg

Call me crazy.. a mag titled "Sports Illustrated" should probably try and get some writers that are knowledgeable and insightful about..... sports.

DiG
03-25-2010, 03:32 PM
Call me crazy.. a mag titled "Sports Illustrated" should probably try and get some writers that are knowledgeable and insightful about..... sports.

he laid out the facts in a detailed manor to support his thoughts. just because we dont agree with him doesnt mean we have the right to crucify him for his opinion. if he made a blank statement without making any attempt to justify his view than that would be a different situation.

BuddyCHRIST
03-25-2010, 04:03 PM
Bad article, there's a reason scouts are wary of guys coming from spread offenses. Its because they bloat numbers, especially things like completion percentage. Your going to complete a high number of passes when you go 4/5 wide and have multiple guys running drag routes. There's a reason the spread offense is taking over CFB, because its so successful at this level, even against SEC SPEEDZ.

If you like Tebow as a prospect, fine, but its not because he's an accurate passer. And his completion percentage doesn't mean a whole lot of jack.

I really can't believe this guy just completely ignores the style of offense Tebow comes from, compared to the others listed. And says blind statements like "He was easily a better passer than Peyton Manning."

PickedOffTwice
03-25-2010, 04:10 PM
There is a difference between positive attention and negative attention. I don't know why they would be trying to gain negative attention, that just loses them credibility.

In fact there isn't.

Also, the article was well written. It is a good piece of journalism that many of us wouldn't be able to produce. The point of the article, though, was entire BS. But that's a different story, which is my point.

I bet you could find an equal number of college QBs with awesome stats that got picked low or didn't get picked at all. Colt Brennan or Omar Jacobs for example off the top of my head. And thus "prove" that Tebow, or anybody for that matter, shouldn't be picked high at all. Stats don't tell the whole story. Not even half of it.

Clever decision by SI, to disable the comments feature for that article, lol.

prock
03-25-2010, 04:23 PM
In fact there isn't.

Also, the article was well written. It is a good piece of journalism that many of us wouldn't be able to produce. The point of the article, though, was entire BS. But that's a different story, which is my point.

I bet you could find an equal number of college QBs with awesome stats that got picked low or didn't get picked at all. Colt Brennan or Omar Jacobs for example off the top of my head. And thus "prove" that Tebow, or anybody for that matter, shouldn't be picked high at all. Stats don't tell the whole story. Not even half of it.

Clever decision by SI, to disable the comments feature for that article, lol.

What do you mean in fact there isn't? This is an analytical piece. Just because you put forth statistics doesn't mean the article or the point he is trying to make is fact.

Prowler
03-25-2010, 04:26 PM
Cold Hard Facts should get a warm hard slap to the face

meaningless stats. sure his statistics look impressive. this has nothing to do with actually evaluating him as a quarterback.

The glittering genius of the Cold, Hard Football Facts is that we admire only numbers and productivity.
We put little stock in a player's pedigree. And we put even less stock in the "pundits" and their outdated weapon of choice, the opinion.

.....so this guy's job is to not even think or analyze? he just has to copy and paste stats all day? he is a slave to these stats.

he also loses points with this

However, in the gamble that is the NFL draft, we'll roll the dice on the proven and unmatched passing talent of Tebow rather than on the sorry track record of pro football talent evaluators.

who is gambling?(cue al davis comments) seriously, these days only a couple of teams are actually still horrible at drafting.

PickedOffTwice
03-25-2010, 04:28 PM
What do you mean in fact there isn't? This is an analytical piece. Just because you put forth statistics doesn't mean the article or the point he is trying to make is fact.

In fact there isn't a difference between positive and negative attention. That's why cbssports.com has Greg Doyel and Mike Freeman on the frontpage every day.

The article itself is BS. Read what I wrote.

3pac
03-25-2010, 04:29 PM
Cold Hard Facts should get a warm hard slap to the face

meaningless stats. sure his statistics look impressive. this has nothing to do with actually evaluating him as a quarterback.



.....so this guy's job is to not even think or analyze? he just has to copy and paste stats all day? he is a slave to these stats.

Well said. Honestly, I usually like CHFF but I don't know what's going on with them when it comes to this piece. As others have said, plenty of CFB QBs have had great stats that panned out into nothing. I'm sure Colt Brennan's college stats are way better than Peyton Manning's.......does that make him "easily a better passer" like how he proclaims Tebow is??? Please....

prock
03-25-2010, 04:31 PM
In fact there isn't a difference between positive and negative attention. That's why cbssports.com has Greg Doyel and Mike Freeman on the frontpage every day.

The article itself is BS. Read what I wrote.

I know what you wrote. But this article is BS, not fact, so there is a difference between positive and negative attention. Just because it contains fact doesn't make it fact.

PickedOffTwice
03-25-2010, 04:37 PM
I know what you wrote. But this article is BS, not fact, so there is a difference between positive and negative attention. Just because it contains fact doesn't make it fact.

That is a non sequitur.

I did not once say that the article is "fact". It is an opinion piece. I even stated that the point of this article is entire BS. Where are you going with this?

3pac
03-25-2010, 04:38 PM
I know what you wrote. But this article is BS, not fact, so there is a difference between positive and negative attention. Just because it contains fact doesn't make it fact.

Agreed, especially since his argument is inconsistent and he doesn't even address numerous counter examples.

Addict
03-25-2010, 04:38 PM
Ryan Leaf had a 105.0 rating season his final year. I guess that means he's better than all those first round picks too. Heck he's better than Peyton!

Let me repeat: Ryan Leaf's NFL QB rating was higher than Peyton's the year before he got drafted. This article is full of it.

[ /discussion]

King Carls 5 Year Plan
03-25-2010, 04:48 PM
I'm going to get blasted for this because it seems like alot of people, outside of the media, don't like/want/care (pick your poison) about Tim Tebow. I like the kid. He is a winner. He is a great leader on and off the field. I don't care that he's religous. He doesn't seem to push it on his teammates or fans.

Put in the right situation with time to develope and learn, under good coaching and a good NFL starter, Tebow could become a decent QB. He has a work ethic and the "want to" needed to become a really good NFL player.

Tell me you wouldn't rather have him instead of J. Russell or Trent Edwards? Then think back to some of the poor QBs that have had to start games recently because of injuries or any number of happenings: Kyle Boller, Brodie Croyle, Daunte Culpepper, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Charlie Fyre, Shaun Hill, Josh Johnson, Byron Leftwich and Keith Null. All of those QBs had at least 1 start in '09. I would take Tebow before any of them.

Call me crazy, but Tebow seems like a work in progress, but everything is there for him to become a good NFL QB. At least you know he's going to work hard for it. Plus, it's never a bad idea to have a higher power rooting for your team, right?

3pac
03-25-2010, 04:50 PM
I'm going to get blasted for this because it seems like alot of people, outside of the media, don't like/want/care (pick your poison) about Tim Tebow. I like the kid. He is a winner. He is a great leader on and off the field. I don't care that he's religous. He doesn't seem to push it on his teammates or fans.

Put in the right situation with time to develope and learn, under good coaching and a good NFL starter, Tebow could become a decent QB. He has a work ethic and the "want to" needed to become a really good NFL player.

Tell me you wouldn't rather have him instead of J. Russell or Trent Edwards? Then think back to some of the poor QBs that have had to start games recently because of injuries or any number of happenings: Kyle Boller, Brodie Croyle, Daunte Culpepper, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Charlie Fyre, Shaun Hill, Josh Johnson, Byron Leftwich and Keith Null. All of those QBs had at least 1 start in '09. I would take Tebow before any of them.

Call me crazy, but Tebow seems like a work in progress, but everything is there for him to become a good NFL QB. At least you know he's going to work hard for it. Plus, it's never a bad idea to have a higher power rooting for your team, right?

Well yeah I'd rather have Tim Tebow than Kyle Boller, but I'd rather get punched in the face than have Kyle Boller too.

yourfavestoner
03-25-2010, 04:58 PM
I'm going to get blasted for this because it seems like alot of people, outside of the media, don't like/want/care (pick your poison) about Tim Tebow. I like the kid. He is a winner. He is a great leader on and off the field. I don't care that he's religous. He doesn't seem to push it on his teammates or fans.

Put in the right situation with time to develope and learn, under good coaching and a good NFL starter, Tebow could become a decent QB. He has a work ethic and the "want to" needed to become a really good NFL player.

Tell me you wouldn't rather have him instead of J. Russell or Trent Edwards? Then think back to some of the poor QBs that have had to start games recently because of injuries or any number of happenings: Kyle Boller, Brodie Croyle, Daunte Culpepper, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Charlie Fyre, Shaun Hill, Josh Johnson, Byron Leftwich and Keith Null. All of those QBs had at least 1 start in '09. I would take Tebow before any of them.

Call me crazy, but Tebow seems like a work in progress, but everything is there for him to become a good NFL QB. At least you know he's going to work hard for it. Plus, it's never a bad idea to have a higher power rooting for your team, right?

This is how I feel.

Let's face it guys, there's never been a prospect quite like Tebow. He's got an unconventional skill set and comes from an unconventional offense. But, like King Carl just said, the talent is there, waiting to be tapped.

I've been saying this a lot recently, the problem with people on here is that they simply assume that whatever a player is now is what he'll be for the rest of his career. They're all about the "NFL ready" bandwagon and fail to realize that the draft is NOT about instant impact, but the acquisition of young talent. Period. You don't draft a guy if you think he's as good as he's ever going to be, you draft him because you think you can develop him into something BETTER. That's why scouts care so much about ceilings and still don't give a rat's ass about floors. But the people on here haven't figured that out yet.

King Carls 5 Year Plan
03-25-2010, 05:05 PM
Well yeah I'd rather have Tim Tebow than Kyle Boller, but I'd rather get punched in the face than have Kyle Boller too.

I literally laughed out loud. Being punched in the face is better than having Kyle Boller as your QB!! That's fantastic.

prock
03-25-2010, 05:27 PM
That is a non sequitur.

I did not once say that the article is "fact". It is an opinion piece. I even stated that the point of this article is entire BS. Where are you going with this?

I said that there is nothing fact about it. You said that there isn't a difference between positive and negative attention when it comes to fact. So obviously, you think this article is fact, otherwise it would have been a 100%, completely irrelevant post on your part. So I said just because the article contains facts, doesn't make it fact. Therefore, your point is still irrelevant. So, to answer your question about where I am going with this, is your post was completely meaningless, irrelevant, and not worth posting at all.

mario
03-25-2010, 05:39 PM
I don't like the articles/writers that defend their point of view justifyind it with more and more statistics as the main point.

WCH
03-26-2010, 02:56 PM
You guys do understand that CHFF is a statistics-oriented site, right? Their bread and butter is defending their stance with statistics.

yourfavestoner
03-26-2010, 02:59 PM
You guys do understand that CHFF is a statistics-oriented site, right? Their bread and butter is defending their stance with statistics.

It works better for their NFL analysis, where there is a far smaller sample size of players and schemes and playing styles are much more similar across the board. College football varies so widely with the amount of teams, talent levels, and schematic differences that strict statistical comparisons are just not comprehensive enough to tell the entire story.

wicket
03-26-2010, 03:04 PM
if you want such a comparison that makes some sense check the walterfootball bit on jimmy clausen, that compared players in a relatively normal manor, this bit was just flat out stupid (cuz disregarding system wouldve led to colt brennan and graham harrel to be #1 picks)

Prowler
03-26-2010, 03:45 PM
We are mindless robots from the future. By our calculations Tim Tebow = Greatest Quarterback Ever. Any other result does not compute....does not compute....does not compute....

SKim172
03-26-2010, 03:59 PM
You guys do understand that CHFF is a statistics-oriented site, right? Their bread and butter is defending their stance with statistics.

And statistically-speaking, these statistics have been statistically a very poor statistic indicator of future talent. Statistics.

The first thing you ever learn in a stats course - statistics don't lie, but the conclusions you can draw from them sure as hell do. Based on completion percentage, Rob Johnson was the best QB the Bills ever had. Tell that to Buffalo fans, see how they react.

Theoretically, even you could put up the highest completion percentage of all NCAA history. Just shovel pass to your running back on every play and your completion percentage will soar. Unfortunately, the NFL draft evaluators will not look favorably on your underhanded throwing mechanics or your college offense.

This is a complete BS basis for his opinion, and the guy knows it. It's not even well-written - it makes errors on multiple technical points, for one, and fails as a persuasive piece. Basically, this amounts to one tenuous piece of statistic data around jammed into a tirade against Tebow critics and unmitigated superlatives for Tebow. There's very little logic or cohesion - it's nothing more than one guy yelling about how anyone who doesn't like Tebow is "obsessed with trivia," "overlooking irrefutable fact," "weak," and "confused."

(That first point, BTW, is clear misunderstanding of what "trivia" defines. If anything, he's the one who's caught up a small meaningless piece of knowledge and ignoring a larger picture.)

In essence, this guy's article is nothing more than a forum post from some rabid Tebow fan, but with spellcheck.

keylime_5
03-26-2010, 04:24 PM
comparing stats between college QBs is a complete fallacy. College stats are skewed by level of competition, sorrounding talent level, offensive scheme, injuries, etc. Urban Meyer's offense is a lot easier to have a high completion percentage than most. Colt McCoy had a 70% completion pct. b/c he threw dink and dunk passes almost exclusively in that shotgun spread.