Tim Tebow: NFL Top 100 Including Tebow Is Just Another Popularity Contest
Even the biggest Tebow lovers would say that the inconsistent quarterback isn't the 95th-best player in the sport.
This was simply another popularity contest.
Sit back and ask yourself this question: Does Tebow really deserve to be on this list from a performance standpoint?
Maybe from an all-around standpoint of popularity, charity work and being a classic role model, but certainly not from being a football player.
I have often been a defender of Tebow because he receives criticism unlike few I have ever seen. I have always thought he could potentially be a starting quarterback in the future. This still may be true.
However, I have never seen so many ducks for passes, horrifically placed balls and somebody who can't read defenses. He translates to an awful display for about 55 minutes of the game.
I can't defend that. I also can't defend when people say he can't pass because he has proven to struggle in that area.
Should Tebow be in the NFL's Top 100 list?
Tebow finished the season with 1,729 yards passing and he started Week 5 against the Miami Dolphins. He was connecting on a 46.5 percent completion percentage clip last season while throwing 12 touchdowns to six interceptions.
Compare that to Tony Romo—who is four spots ahead of Tebow at No. 91—and the difference is astounding. Romo passed for 4,184 yards, 31 touchdowns and only 10 interceptions. His completion percentage was 66.3 percent.
Am I missing something?
The difference between those two quarterbacks is astronomical. It's almost a joke.
Cleveland Browns linebacker D'Qwell Jackson is No. 96, one spot behind Tebow. All Jackson did in 2011 was record 158 tackles and 3.5 sacks. There is no way Tebow should be ranked higher than one of the best linebackers in the NFL.
It's all because of the name on the back of the jersey.
Popularity reigns supreme in this world. It's an absolute joke.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?