Rams to pursue Tebow?

[Shawnbb158]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/06/seahawks-not-expected-to-pursue-tebow/

Seahawks not expected to pursue Tebow
Posted by Mike Florio on April 6, 2013, 9:29 AM EDT

AP
With mobile quarterbacks suddenly drawing more interest than ever, as evidenced by Pat White’s return to the game after three years in exile, someone surely will want to add Tim Tebow to the depth chart, right?

For now, no one has shown interest in the man who remains a member of the Jets’ roster. And one team that currently has only two quarterbacks on the roster, Tebow isn’t likely to join the fray.

According to Danny O’Neil of the Seattle Times, the Seahawks don’t plan to pursue Tebow. More likely candidates to join Russell Wilson and Josh Portis are Seneca Wallace, Tyler Thigpen, Brady Quinn, and Matt Leinart.

Still, O’Neil writes that the Seahawks explored the possibility of acquiring Tebow. Other teams likely have, too. One major problem that comes with having Tebow on the depth chart is that, unless he’s the starting quarterback, his presence on the roster brings too many potential distractions.

One team to watch is the Rams, for two reasons. Last year, the Rams were expected to make a run at Tebow after a snag emerged in trade talks between the Broncos and Jets. Also, with 25 percent of the Rams’ schedule including the 49ers and Seahawks (along with games against the Titans and Panthers), it makes sense to have a mobile quarterback who can run the scout team.

Permalink 30 Comments Latest St

 

[libertadrocks]

Yeah, except Wilson and Kapp can actually throw. :lol:

Tebow only causes problems. I dont want any part of him. His supporters are irrational and wont give up until he is a full time starter in the NFL. QB controversies are never good, even if its only from a small proportion of the fan base.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Tebow only causes problems. I dont want any part of him. His supporters are irrational and wont give up until he is a full time starter in the NFL. QB controversies are never good, even if its only from a small proportion of the fan base.

Co-sign.

I want nothing to do with the circus that is Tim Tebow.

 

[MerlinJones]

Please, please, please (on out to infinity), do not let the Rams sign Tim Tebow.

Whatever positives he could theoretically bring to the team would be far outweighed by the headaches that would also accompany him.

 

[-X-]

Nonsense.


.


Sent via Tapatalk2.

 

[SunTzu.v.Camus]

TOTAL nonsense!

Tebow's a great kid...but they have him playing the wrong position.
He cannot throw in the NFL game.

He might be a good H-Back/TE/FB....but he's no QB.

 

[Ram Quixote]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/06/seahawks-not-expected-to-pursue-tebow/

Seahawks not expected to pursue Tebow
Posted by Mike Florio on April 6, 2013, 9:29 AM EDT

AP
With mobile quarterbacks suddenly drawing more interest than ever, as evidenced by Pat White’s return to the game after three years in exile, someone surely will want to add Tim Tebow to the depth chart, right?

For now, no one has shown interest in the man who remains a member of the Jets’ roster. And one team that currently has only two quarterbacks on the roster, Tebow isn’t likely to join the fray.

According to Danny O’Neil of the Seattle Times, the Seahawks don’t plan to pursue Tebow. More likely candidates to join Russell Wilson and Josh Portis are Seneca Wallace, Tyler Thigpen, Brady Quinn, and Matt Leinart.

Still, O’Neil writes that the Seahawks explored the possibility of acquiring Tebow. Other teams likely have, too. One major problem that comes with having Tebow on the depth chart is that, unless he’s the starting quarterback, his presence on the roster brings too many potential distractions.

One team to watch is the Rams, for two reasons. Last year,[hil]the Rams were expected to make a run at Tebow after a snag emerged in trade talks between the Broncos and Jets.[/hil] Also, with 25 percent of the Rams’ schedule including the 49ers and Seahawks (along with games against the Titans and Panthers), it makes sense to have a mobile quarterback who can run the scout team.

Really? Who expected that? :what:

 

[CGI_Ram]

Really? Who expected that? :what:

Exactly.

 

[brokeu91]

TOTAL nonsense!

Tebow's a great kid...but they have him playing the wrong position.
He cannot throw in the NFL game.

He might be a good H-Back/TE/FB....but he's no QB.

I think he might become a decent TE, but he's just not worth distraction. Let someone else deal with that circus.

 

[Playmaker]

I'll say this and you can all flame away on me. But with the current set of offensive personal, Tim Tebow would do better in this offense than Sam Bradford.

................................................................................................................................................

For those that have stuck around and want to hear me out without replying on the statement above let me explain.

The Rams Offensive personal is not that great. Most likely the Rams Offensive Personal will be a bunch of unproven players at RB and WR. This is not going to be a big play offense. This will be a grind it out offense. An 8-10 play-to-score offense. That means a lot of third downs. What would you rather have? Sam Bradford on 3rd and 4 with this group of players with his inability to move around to give his receivers time to make plays? Or would you rather have Tebow who can not only run the 4 yards to get the first down, but can make moves to give receivers time to get open?

Or down in the Red Zone where Bradford has played a little better in 2012 than he did in 2010 and 2011. You have the Tim Tebow run/pass option down there. I want a QB that can make plays consistently down there. If it's first and goal to go, I have confidence in Tebow's legs to get in the end zone more than I do Bradford's decision making at this time.

 

[-X-]

Nonsense x2.


.


Sent via Tapatalk2.

 

[Stranger]

I'll say this and you can all flame away on me. But with the current set of offensive personal, Tim Tebow would do better in this offense than Sam Bradford.

................................................................................................................................................

For those that have stuck around and want to hear me out without replying on the statement above let me explain.

The Rams Offensive personal is not that great. Most likely the Rams Offensive Personal will be a bunch of unproven players at RB and WR. This is not going to be a big play offense. This will be a grind it out offense. An 8-10 play-to-score offense. That means a lot of third downs. What would you rather have? Sam Bradford on 3rd and 4 with this group of players with his inability to move around to give his receivers time to make plays? Or would you rather have Tebow who can not only run the 4 yards to get the first down, but can make moves to give receivers time to get open?

Or down in the Red Zone where Bradford has played a little better in 2012 than he did in 2010 and 2011. You have the Tim Tebow run/pass option down there. I want a QB that can make plays consistently down there. If it's first and goal to go, I have confidence in Tebow's legs to get in the end zone more than I do Bradford's decision making at this time.

I'd rather have Bradford on 3rd and 4, and in just about every other scenario.

 

[Ramhusker]

I'll say this and you can all flame away on me. But with the current set of offensive personal, Tim Tebow would do better in this offense than Sam Bradford.

................................................................................................................................................

For those that have stuck around and want to hear me out without replying on the statement above let me explain.

The Rams Offensive personal is not that great. Most likely the Rams Offensive Personal will be a bunch of unproven players at RB and WR. This is not going to be a big play offense. This will be a grind it out offense. An 8-10 play-to-score offense. That means a lot of third downs. What would you rather have? Sam Bradford on 3rd and 4 with this group of players with his inability to move around to give his receivers time to make plays? Or would you rather have Tebow who can not only run the 4 yards to get the first down, but can make moves to give receivers time to get open?

Or down in the Red Zone where Bradford has played a little better in 2012 than he did in 2010 and 2011. You have the Tim Tebow run/pass option down there. I want a QB that can make plays consistently down there. If it's first and goal to go, I have confidence in Tebow's legs to get in the end zone more than I do Bradford's decision making at this time.

I'd say Bradford moves pretty good for a pocket passer. He just chooses to chunk it more because he can actually throw a football. Tebow is more in my league when it comes to tossing the rock!

 

[bluecoconuts]

No to Tebow, ever. He's not a good QB, he's awful. The only reason why he looked halfway decent, at times, was because Denver's defense and his receivers doing all the work. He's just awful.

Sam Bradford is plenty mobile. He's also smart enough to know that a QB is paid to make plays with his arm.

I also don't buy that this is not a big play offense. Why? Because we had a rookie set a record for consecutive games 50+ yard receptions. Does this mean that we're going to be going for the home run play constantly? Of course not, that's stupid. But we have the ability to hit those plays. We also will need a QB who can make quick plays, quick reads and the get the ball out and to the receiver fast. Sam Bradford does this as good or better than most QB's in the league, certainly far better than Tebow. Tebow has horrid accuracy, and his wind up is really slow, he gets almost no zip. Al Harris said that Bradford put more velocity on the ball than anyone else he's seen, I take his word for it... Bradford was also considered one of the most 'clutch' QB's last year, you don't do that without converting big third and 4th downs in crunch time. We don't need Tebow, his play wouldn't help us because he's a shitty QB, and the distraction is disastrous. Keep him far away from this team.

 

[LesBaker]

I have never understood the controversy portion. It's driven by imbeciles in the media and devoted fanbois who can't see the fact that he cannot play QB in the NFL. Players and coaches can see right through it and I can't see how he is a distraction when everyone knows he ain't gonna be the starter.

His agent better get a long distance plan that includes calls to Canada. :bign:

 

[…..]

I'll say this and you can all flame away on me. But with the current set of offensive personal, Tim Tebow would do better in this offense than Sam Bradford.

................................................................................................................................................

For those that have stuck around and want to hear me out without replying on the statement above let me explain.

The Rams Offensive personal is not that great. Most likely the Rams Offensive Personal will be a bunch of unproven players at RB and WR. This is not going to be a big play offense. This will be a grind it out offense. An 8-10 play-to-score offense. That means a lot of third downs. What would you rather have? Sam Bradford on 3rd and 4 with this group of players with his inability to move around to give his receivers time to make plays? Or would you rather have Tebow who can not only run the 4 yards to get the first down, but can make moves to give receivers time to get open?

Or down in the Red Zone where Bradford has played a little better in 2012 than he did in 2010 and 2011. You have the Tim Tebow run/pass option down there. I want a QB that can make plays consistently down there. If it's first and goal to go, I have confidence in Tebow's legs to get in the end zone more than I do Bradford's decision making at this time.

Sam needs to improve on 3rd and short...I'll give you that. But if it were my job on the line, I'd error on the side of Sam and the offense improving this year.

A Tim Tebow"ish" type player would suffice for the red zone idea, but not for managing and matriculating the ball down the field.

and I agree with bluecoconuts....it is not set in stone that we cant hit the homerun with this offense. there is big play potential with our current personel. we'll add even more help I believe.

 

[-X-]

Also, with 25 percent of the Rams’ schedule including the 49ers and Seahawks (along with games against the Titans and Panthers), it makes sense to have a mobile quarterback who can run the scout team.

That's the only part of the original article that makes any sense. However, it's possible to do that without investing in the distraction that's Tim Tebow. I mean, we can always go sign Thaddeus Lewis away from the Browns and accomplish the same thing.

We talkin' bout practice. :yeh:

 

[Rabid Ram]

I am def not into tebow the fans he brings along aka bandwagon fans I dont want period.

 

[rickrawk]

I'm not a big stats guy. Never have been, but I know there are plenty of you here.
Anybody know what Tebow's winning percentage is as a starting QB?

GO RAMS!!!!

 

[-X-]

I'm not a big stats guy. Never have been, but I know there are plenty of you here.
Anybody know what Tebow's winning percentage is as a starting QB?

GO RAMS!!!!

57%

In 2011 it was 64%. Which was more than 26 other QBs.