Tim Tebow Denies Latest New York Jets Trade Rumors
Tebow on postseason trade request report: "It's about as true as me living in Hoboken."— Steve Serby (@NYPost_Serby) September 14, 2012
The denial comes after Gary Myers of the New York Daily News reported that an NFL source speculated Tebow would look to bolt the New York Jets in response to being relegated to backup status behind Mark Sanchez. Citing Tebow's well-documented hyper-competitive nature, the source pointed out that Tebow's desire to start could motivate a trade request out of the Big Apple:
At the end of the year, I think he will express those concerns to the Jets. He will want to move on. The one thing about Tebow is he is the quintessential team player. He would never do anything that is going to undermine the team. But he’s football-aholic. It’s in his blood.
Sanchez did his best to eliminate any chance of a quarterback controversy by throwing for three touchdowns in the Jets' 48-28 rout of the Buffalo Bills and appears to be entrenched as the starter for the foreseeable future.
Tebow, who came to New York amid much fanfare, saw limited action in the season opener, carrying the ball five times for 11 yards with no pass attempts.
For now, the quarterback controversy seems to be put to rest and Tebow seems content to fulfill his duties as the backup quarterback and occasional runner out of the Wildcat formation.
However, as the NFL source that spoke with Myers points out, Tebow is the ultimate team player; if he were to want a trade, it's unlikely that he would make it public, as that would serve as a distraction for the organization.
Depending upon Sanchez's play throughout the season, this is a situation to keep an eye on, as teams such as the Jacksonville Jaguars were interested in his services when the Broncos looked to trade him this offseason.
Be sure to stay tuned to Bleacher Report if anything more develops from the situation.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?