PDA

View Full Version : Website analyzying Tebow's passing plays from Sunday


ICON
12-23-2010, 09:30 PM
Found this on the other fan site

PART 1: http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/tebowetheus-unbound-part-1



Thanks ChristyL17 (http://forums.denverbroncos.com/member.php?u=374368)

jutang
12-23-2010, 10:17 PM
Thanks for the link.

McDman
12-23-2010, 10:20 PM
Nice. I wonder what he'll say about the td pass, it should've been intercepted.

Cool Breeze
12-23-2010, 10:23 PM
Interesting stuff -thanks!

Dr. Broncenstein
12-23-2010, 10:26 PM
I quit reading at "the dope."

Broncoman13
12-24-2010, 12:50 AM
Nice. I wonder what he'll say about the td pass, it should've been intercepted.

Meh, nice of you to overlook the one that he dropped right into Hall's bread basket that he proceeded to drop. Perfect throw!

maher_tyler
12-24-2010, 12:53 AM
I quit reading at "the dope."

I quite reading at the 2 "O's" in Google.

Broncoman13
12-24-2010, 01:29 AM
Alright, WTF is this 113 shiat?!? Personnel packages are call in double digits. A power formation for example would be called a 23, two RBs and three TEs. A typical passing down may be a 11 which would be 1 RB, 1 TE, and 3 WRs. You may also hear S11 which is the same personnel but the play would be out of the shotgun. Wildcat packages are generally just called Wildcat, but in reality they can be 32, 31, 30, or 22, 21, 20 if you have a ball handler that also happens to be your QB.

Anyhow, its hard to give that article a chance when he is throwing out shiat that heck obviously isn't familiar with... Or perhaps he did it for the less informed reader without having to go into personnel packages 101.???

TJ Johnson
12-24-2010, 01:49 AM
Icon, thanks for posting my story. Hello, Orangemane. Thought I would jump in an answer any question from these comments.

@Broncenstein: That's not literal, of course, unless your L. Taylor.

@McDMan: Agreed. Still, it was a good pass to the back of the end zone. I think Tebow's balls (geeze) are deceptive. They don't always look like they carry heat, but from what I saw, they are quite accurate. Of course, it's a very small sample size, granted. We'll know more after this week.

@ Broncoman: Ha! Well you are exactly right. I typically do that so that readers who don't mess around with packages understand them. We have some readers who are coaches and some who are just the most casual of fans, so I try to make it readable to even a Raiders fan, most of whom, are still getting a GED

Broncoman13
12-24-2010, 02:06 AM
Icon, thanks for posting my story. Hello, Orangemane. Thought I would jump in an answer any question from these comments.

@Broncenstein: That's not literal, of course, unless your L. Taylor.

@McDMan: Agreed. Still, it was a good pass to the back of the end zone. I think Tebow's balls (geeze) are deceptive. They don't always look like they carry heat, but from what I saw, they are quite accurate. Of course, it's a very small sample size, granted. We'll know more after this week.

@ Broncoman: Ha! Well you are exactly right. I typically do that so that readers who don't mess around with packages understand them. We have some readers who are coaches and some who are just the most casual of fans, so I try to make it readable to even a Raiders fan, most of whom, are still getting a GED

Okay, I feel better reading your breakdown. Kind of figured it was an attempt at simplifying for those that aren't as in to football at some of us. Carry on, didn't mean to be so authoritative with the comment.

Ps, I like the play art showing what was going on on the field. A lot of defenses try to disguise their coverages and often switch late on the play clock... Especially if you have a QB that isn't accustomed to switching his mindset in mid play.

lostknight
12-24-2010, 06:55 AM
I've really enjoyed your analysis, even if I have a quibble here and there.


@McDMan: Agreed. Still, it was a good pass to the back of the end zone. I think Tebow's balls (geeze) are deceptive. They don't always look like they carry heat, but from what I saw, they are quite accurate. Of course, it's a very small sample size, granted. We'll know more after this week.


It's actually consistent with what he did in college. I know I've seen almost that exact play with Harvin and Tebow at Florida. Difference was that Harvin didn't slip on the play like Lloyd did (and owned up to that on the radio).

I was watching Tebow at camp this year with long balls. When Orton threw it 30+ yards the receivers made two or three steps to adjust.When Quinn threw it, it was all over the damn field, and usually out of bounds. When Tebow threw it, it was to the exact same place every single time. It was impressive. His wind up really adds a lot of accuracy on long passes, as much of a liability as it is on short passes.

Even so, if your star receiver has a step on someone, and it's a long distance ball you go ahead and trust your receiver to keep it out of harms way. Orton's done it all season with Lloyd, and Tebow has too.


@ Broncoman: Ha! Well you are exactly right. I typically do that so that readers who don't mess around with packages understand them. We have some readers who are coaches and some who are just the most casual of fans, so I try to make it readable to even a Raiders fan, most of whom, are still getting a GED

You might have to go to single digits on that one.

Hulamau
12-24-2010, 07:31 AM
Found this on the other fan site

PART 1: http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/tebowetheus-unbound-part-1



Thanks ChristyL17 (http://forums.denverbroncos.com/member.php?u=374368)

These guys have way too much time on their hands..

Dr. Broncenstein
12-24-2010, 08:28 AM
Oh wait, you mean to tell me "the dope" isn't a direct reference to illicit drug use?? I was about to call the fuzz.

Jason in LA
12-24-2010, 09:47 AM
Alright, WTF is this 113 shiat?!? Personnel packages are call in double digits. A power formation for example would be called a 23, two RBs and three TEs. A typical passing down may be a 11 which would be 1 RB, 1 TE, and 3 WRs. You may also hear S11 which is the same personnel but the play would be out of the shotgun. Wildcat packages are generally just called Wildcat, but in reality they can be 32, 31, 30, or 22, 21, 20 if you have a ball handler that also happens to be your QB.

Anyhow, its hard to give that article a chance when he is throwing out shiat that heck obviously isn't familiar with... Or perhaps he did it for the less informed reader without having to go into personnel packages 101.???

Well, it could be what TJ said, or it could be that different teams and coaches use slightly different language. I'd say that the writer is probably using his own terms because I doubt he has the Broncos playbook. Maybe the writer coaches somewhere and those are terms that they use.

I wouldn't discredit the entire article over formation language. I'd say that's nit picking.

CEH
12-24-2010, 09:55 AM
Well, it could be what TJ said, or it could be that different teams and coaches use slightly different language. I'd say that the writer is probably using his own terms because I doubt he has the Broncos playbook. Maybe the writer coaches somewhere and those are terms that they use.

I wouldn't discredit the entire article over formation language. I'd say that's nit picking.

TJ is the writer.

Jesterhole
12-24-2010, 10:48 AM
I thought it was a great breakdown. Can't wait for the rest.

Broncoman13
12-24-2010, 10:56 AM
Well, it could be what TJ said, or it could be that different teams and coaches use slightly different language. I'd say that the writer is probably using his own terms because I doubt he has the Broncos playbook. Maybe the writer coaches somewhere and those are terms that they use.

I wouldn't discredit the entire article over formation language. I'd say that's nit picking.

Nah personnel packages/groupings is standard language. I doubt any team in the NFL refers to their packages in different terms. You have a huge degree of variance in play call language, but not groupings.

Boobs McGee
12-24-2010, 11:00 AM
great breakdown tj, thanks so much for takin the time to do this! Looking forward to the next installment

Jay3
12-24-2010, 01:32 PM
That series of articles was awesome. I now walk around during the day wondering if anything else has been posted.

You've set the bar high. I want that level of detail on every Tebow throw from here on out!

By the way, Jaws more or less agrees with your analysis. He said it on Mike and Mike this morning.

(I don't mean he referred to your analysis. Just sounded the same).

Mr. Elway
12-24-2010, 01:45 PM
Great read, thanks for posting it up.

Jason in LA
12-24-2010, 04:14 PM
TJ is the writer.

I skimmed through his post so I missed that line.

Bronco Yoda
12-24-2010, 04:38 PM
Thx to the OP. That must have taken some time. Appreciate it, I do.

listopencil
12-25-2010, 01:50 AM
http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/the-playbook-abides-tebowetheus-unbound-part-2


http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/the-playbook-abides-tebowetheus-unbound-part-3


http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/the-playbook-abides-tebowetheus-unbound-part-4

dsmoot
12-25-2010, 05:46 AM
Alright, WTF is this 113 shiat?!? Personnel packages are call in double digits. A power formation for example would be called a 23, two RBs and three TEs. A typical passing down may be a 11 which would be 1 RB, 1 TE, and 3 WRs. You may also hear S11 which is the same personnel but the play would be out of the shotgun. Wildcat packages are generally just called Wildcat, but in reality they can be 32, 31, 30, or 22, 21, 20 if you have a ball handler that also happens to be your QB.

Anyhow, its hard to give that article a chance when he is throwing out shiat that heck obviously isn't familiar with... Or perhaps he did it for the less informed reader without having to go into personnel packages 101.???

Very much of an over reaction. It is very easy to give credibility when you are tripping over the small stuff. Although the analysis may not be in a common format, it is explained well which is all that counts. Your response seems to be more about you than the point being made.