Tim Tebow: Don't Expect Jets to Keep Polarizing QB
He said, via Manish Mehta of the New York Daily News:
Mornhinweg on Tebow: "He would be taking reps at QB... the man can play football. So how do you utilize him will certainly be the key"— Manish Mehta(@MMehtaNYDN) March 11, 2013
Folks, all the Jets are trying to do is bump up Tebow's trade value. They are trying to get something for him instead of outright releasing him.
Unfortunately, Mornhinweg's bluff won't work. He's like that rookie on the poker table who goes "all in" when everybody can see the cards in his hand...and he doesn't even have a pair.
Everybody knows who Tebow is: He's a quarterback who has little to no accuracy. Sure, he may have value in other roles (running back, tight end, hybrid, special teams), but he hasn't proven anything in those roles and nobody's going to give up anything for him.
Are the Jets bluffing?
The reality is, the Jets could have increased Tebow's trade value by placing him in those roles last season, but they were too stubborn to give into the pressure surrounding the organization. They would have rather locked Tebow in a dark room than let him see the light of day on the football field.
Now, New York has become the victim of its own bullheaded nature. The Jets were so desperate to convince everyone that Tebow was worthless on the football field (for fear of making Sanchez look bad, perhaps) that they did, indeed, convince everyone that Tebow was worthless on the football field.
It's not all about the Jets' true feelings about Tebow as a football player, though. Teams around the league also know that the last thing the Jets want to do is keep Tebow for another year and watch the drama unfold once again. The fact that a franchise that was attempting to stabilize brought the polarizing quarterback aboard last year is laughable in itself.
Teams won't bite on New York's bluff. The franchise may as well save itself more embarrassment and let Tebow go.
Sometimes it seems as if the Jets are trying to embarrass themselves as much and for as long as possible.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?