the media loves tebow. creepy stalker love
this may be of some local interest
the media loves tebow. creepy stalker love
He is excellent, but they went on to say that he is a top five all time cfb player.
He might be. I honestly think people hate on Tebow out of annoyance and ignore how truly great he is. All the praise is deserved, and I'd give my right nut to get him to transfer to Michigan.
It's the slightly smaller one.
Yea I see both yours and chitowns points but I feel that there are five players in the history of the game better than him. He definitely is top ten all time though.
I haven't sat down and tried to make a "list", so I have no clue. But it sounds plausible on the face of it, I guess is what I'm saying.
Well, since TT was not even the first best player this year or the second best player this year, how could he be the fifth best all time?
Because judging someone on their career is different than judging them on a single season. That would be like saying Brett Favre isn't a HOF QB because he wasn't good this year.
Further, I'd put his season over Sam Bradford's, and 2 championships to 0 would swing him over McCoy.
Golly gee, I didn't know that TT was solely responsible for 2 MNC!!!!!!
Thought it was a team sport.
TT stats do not justify any thing near top 5 QB of all time, let alone top 5 college player of all time.
Where did I say he was solely responsible for 2 national championships?(!!!)
What I said is that he was a contributor on a team that won one, and probably the largest cog in a team that won another.(!!!)
In another post in which you've attempted to have the same argument you pasted a list of this year's leaders in total passing yards to claim Tebow isn't one of the 30 best QB's in football. By that measure, your best college quarterback of all time is something named Tommy Chang. So lets find a better measure, shall we?
If you look at ESPN's archived stats, there are two players in the past 7 years who have been in the top 5 in passer efficiency more than once - Tim Tebow and Sam Bradford. Considering that up until last year, the NCAA all-time leader in pass efficiency was Ryan Dinwiddie with a 168.9. (both Tebow and Bradford are mid 170's), we can assume that no-one before that date had numbers as high. Passer efficiency calculation can be found here:
Passer efficiency takes into account TD/attempt, INT/attempt, Yards/attempt, and completion %. Sam Bradford's passer efficiency mark is slightly higher than Tebow's, but, as I've said ad nauseum, a large portion of Tebow's value is in his ability to run the ball (Tebow has over 1700 yards rushing, Bradford has 72).
So, Tebow is, currently, the #2 all-time passer in passer efficiency, and has 1630 more rushing yards and two more championships than the guy that is #1. And he has one more year to play. So, I guess that no stats justify him being a top 5 QB aside from Passer Efficiency, which is intended to be a catch-all of overall QB quality, in which he is the 2nd best all time.
OMG, you want to use a computer formula to determine the best college players of all time????
The stats I posted are the ones that exist. And, when you look at the record books, these are the stats that are used.
Everyone can (and does) have an opinion about best players.
What you said was that "sheer statistical weight" made it hard not to include TT. No such evidence exists.
BTW: 2006 TT: 22 Attempts, 33 Complete, 358 Yds (WOO, EEEEE)
MVP of 2006 BCS Championship Game -- Chris Leak
So, TT was a player for Florida in 2006. But, so were 100 or so other guys. That "contribution" is statistical nonsense.
He was also there primary short-yardage running back in 2006. That is a contribution, no matter how much you want to ignore it.
Regardless, you've said all you need to say about the level of scrutiny you want to bring to the conversation: you think Colt Brennan and Tommy Chang are the best QB's in college history. If you can't see the problem in assigning the title based on total passing yards, and ignoring the offensive systems in which the players play, there's no point in discussing it.
And, I know! I'm such a nerd for using a "formula" that involves such complicated math as division!
See, total passing yards EXISTS, man. It's real!
Your nerd forumla is made of leprechaun spleens and unicorn turds. It's not REAL, MAN! It's not in RECORD BOOKS (except for the ones that it is in...) !!!!
You are a disgrace to the profession.
Pass efficiency is measurement derived from a mathematical formula. You may utilize a computer to implement the formula and calculate the pass efficiency, but it is a mathematical formula, not a "computer formula."
If you are inferring that a mathematical formula cannot be used to determine a statistical measurement, may the engineering gods have mercy on your soul. Should I assume that a standard deviation is not a statistical measure of any kind? It's derived from a mathematical formula, and (gasp!) may be calculated using a computer.
And if you are inferring that pass efficiency statistics do not exist, the fact is, statistical measurements already exist for everything that has occurred. As an engineer, you should understand that mathematics is a naturally occurring phenomenon. It is something that is discovered, not created. Hence, statistics, as a mathematical measure, already exist, and pass efficiency stats in particular exist. They are calculated and maintained in the record books of the NCAA. See e.g.,: http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/stats/Stats_Manuals/Football/2008%20Footb...
Ultimately, your counterpoints fail to address the sheer statistical weight argument. Sheer statistical weight is inherently premised on more than any one particular statistic. Your responses, on the other hand, attack only individual statistics (e.g., Tebow's 2006 stats, OR 2008 stats, OR number of MNC's), as opposed to the combined weight of those statistics. There is simply no way you can make a valid counterargument by attacking individual stats of individual years, when the original argument is looking at the stats in their entirety.
Seriously, you're embarrassing yourself.
but you statement
"...mathematics is a naturally occurring phenomenon. It is something that is discovered, not created..."
is not really correct. Mathematics are concepts. They occur in our thoughts, not out there in nature. Mathematics help us make relationships between things and events. Mathematics are created; calculus, say, only occurs in our thoughts, not out there in nature.
The thing I love most about Blogs is when people start talking something like "who the best QB is", and then we can all unleash our inner nerds and get into a huge pedantic argument about the nature of mathematics.
I'm not being snarky or dishonest - I love these moments.
I like the humor and off-topic stuff a lot, and I benefit from many of the posters knowledge of football, particularly recruiting (Tom VH) and technical stuff (GSimmons) that I am sorely clueless.
but I have to disagree. Just because one can conceive something, doesn't mean that it wasn't there all along. That is, conception does not necessarily equate with creation. In some cases, a concept is entirely new (e.g., an invention). In other cases, a concept is recognized, but was otherwise there all along. In that latter sense, I view mathematics are naturally occurring, even if they are ultimately realized as mental concepts. Of course, this discussion could go on and on about how closely mathematics relate to nature (I find fractal geometry to be very interesting, in this regard).
In any case, I respect your opinion, and I suppose it's debatable. At the very least, it is an interesting discussion, and I agree that mathematics are essentially tools to help us establish relationship. I just view the tools as a set of natural laws that are recognized as mathematical concepts, but the root still lies in nature. In that sense, I see mathematics as being a natural phenomenon. This is not to trivialize any of the work by mathematicians; they are by far among the smartest people I have known. I think we are just coming at this from very different directions, probably from having very different experiences.
And thanks for letting me get my inner nerd on. Much appreciated.
with me, my wife does it all the time.
We use models to better understand physical phenomena. Conceptual models (e.g., the Bohr atom, organic chemistry "mechanisms," etc.), computer models (e.g. weather, global climate) and mathematical. But these models are all concepts to allow us to make understand and predictions, but they are not to be confused with reality (which may or may not be "knowable" OMG, epistemology).
No doubt, mathematicians are some of the smartest people out there. And they indeed can be "out there."
Fractal Geometry! Wow, you must really know your mathematics. I got up to differential equations and was completely lost.
Sounds all too familiar.
Models are a tricky one. It's a good example, because there's such a close relation between software and mathematics. Believe me, there is plenty of discussion out there as to whether software and mathematics are in the same realm. But ultimately, I view the software routine as the creation (by no means an easy task, much of the time) and the mathematics behind it as an expression of logic being implemented by the software. But the mathematics are still an expression of knowledge about nature, IMO. For example, we know that models are often used to simulate naturally occurring phenomenon. I don't believe models would be accurate predictors of natural events if they were not built upon what we already know about nature, and that knowledge is expressed as mathematics.
Put is this way (and I don't mean to be condescending by using this example), take the equation we all learned at an early age: 2+2=4. Granted, at some point there had to be symbols created to effectively communicate this expression (e.g., the numbers, the plus sign, the equals sign), but the concept or logic itself was already known to have occurred in nature. That is, 2 of a thing in addition to another 2 of that thing resulted in 4 of that thing has been true since the beginning of time.
I think I'll just conclude by citing Morris Kline in the book "Mathematics and the Physical World" who wrote "In the beginning, God created mathematics and then created heaven and earth according to the laws of mathematics." Now I'm not intending to make this a theological discussion, but that phrase was used to summarize his belief that "... every abstraction that even the greatest mathematician has introduced is ultimately derived from and is therefore understood in terms of intuitively meaningful objects or phenomena." It is this belief that I subscribe to and why I conclude that mathematics is ultimately naturally occurring.
For the record, I do not even come close to understanding fractal geometry. I simply find it very interesting, and desire to learn more. It's relationship with nature is by far the most intriguing aspect that I've learned. I've always seen the strong connection between mathematics and nature, but never so much as with fractals.
Got your point. I'm not trying to hate on the kid because I would love to have him on our team but I see what your saying.
First I read the post about giving away a nut.
Then I immediately see a subject line that says "Yea, I see both yours and"
Awesome confluence of circumstance.
I'd actually buy this. If he stays, he has a solid shot at winning 2 Championships as a starter (contributing to a third), and winning two Heismans. That's nearly unheard of.
the guy won 2 national championships, (only 1 as the starter) won a heisman in his sophmore year, finalist junior year...
thank god we kicked his ass.
i'm on this guys side
Isn't it awesome to know that winged helmets cause him to wake up in cold sweats yet Buckeyes are still just chocolate peanut-butter treats to him?
I was basically numb to all the Tebow-sucking by the end of the pre-game, but that one did happen to stand out. Also standing out: I got a laugh out of the "John 3:16" on Tebow's eye-black. I think he might secretly be the Rainbow Man.
Did you know the Rainbow Man is serving a life sentence for kidnapping? Google him
I kinda hope Tebow does not think he's the second coming of him!!
Everyone had the Bible verses on their eye things this year. Pryor's was the best... Philippians 3:14.
"I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in the name of Christ Jesus"
When I play racquetball, I put verses on my wristbands.
"Yet she increased her prostitution, remembering the days of her youth when she engaged in prostitution in the land of Egypt. She lusted after their genitals as large as those of donkeys, and their seminal emission was as strong as that of stallions"
We put that on my grandmothers headstone.
Edit: For the skeptical amongst you, that actually is what the verse says.
I didn't know you were a theologian Brodie.
Catholic school through 5th grade, really stuck with me for some reason.
I must've had the opposite experience. Catholic school k-12, and I think the only Bible verse I remember is John 3:16, and I don't even remember the exact wording.
Was it the nuns and their rulers, perhaps?
Fr. Brodie, I went to Catholic school from Kindergarten through a few years of college (before transfer to an evil public school) and I don't remember half the shit you seem to spew.
I actually didn't care one way or another about Tebow until this game. I found myself routing against him due to the pathetic amount of sappy man love the announcers were spewing. Seriously, I had to shut off the sound when they started talking about him living in orphanages and working with lepers and how you just become a better person by being in his presence. I think I just threw up a little thinking about it.
love the fact we(UofM) crushed him and his friends. Oh dont look to far the rest of you are not that good.
Ah well, if you idiots want to talk about crushing...
Troy Smith ring a bell?
Go suck on his tits in Baltimore suckers.
if you're going to attempt to troll, you have at least be good at it. if you're going to try to trash talk about a backup NFL QB...just no...at least try one of OSU's starting NFL quarterba...oh wait
I think I can make it a bit more appropriate for football. "And the Football god so loved Florida, he gave his only begotten man child of a son, that whoever believes in the spread offense shall not lose, but kick the shit out of everyone but Michigan and Houston Nutt."
Congrats to Timmah, he's one helluva ballplayer, and congrats to Urban Meyer, who somehow has 2 bcs titles, neither of which in his lone undefeated season. Hope to see them next year playing the Maize n Blue, because wherever they are will be a pretty good destination.
I became a better person last night just because I hugged my tv every time there was a Tebow closeup. This morning, I walked to work bare foot and in my bathrobe, and did not get cold. Then I cured a police officer of his dementia. Then I gave my Tebowtestimony to the other people in the cell. I now shit marble and piss wine. Not that cheap box wine stuff either. The good stuff. I said thank you to that nice nurse who gave me a shot. Tebow protects me everywhere I go now. I am always safe. Nighty night everyone.
Amen!!!! (get the humor?)
No. I don't.
Well, I get the reference. But I don't get the humor. Possibly because there isn't any.
I hope your computer explodes.
I actually don't mind the Tebow stuff. I mean, yes, it's incredibly tiresome and pedantic. But by all accounts, he is a really good kid - he's smart, he does incredible amounts of charitable work, and he's a phenomenal player. I'm not a religious person at all but he is one of few public people I can think of that doesn't just use their faith as a PR campaign - he talks about it, and he lives what he talks about every day. So, if they're going to worship someone, at least they're directing it at a good person. It's when you turn on Notre Dame football and start seeing paeans to Charlie Weis when I start getting sick.
I will be the first to admit, I am jealous of the kid. As someone who is trying to get into medical school I would kill for his charity and community service work on my resume. Damn I am selfish.
I used to not mind all the praise for Tebow. He is certainly a great football player and an even better person, but it has just gone too far. Everything that goes right for Florida is because of Tebow and he can do no wrong, and hasn't done anything wrong in his life. All the hyperbole and Bronco Nagurski comments from Danielson have conditioned me to scoff at any and all slurping of Tebow.
Oh, and I'm going with 2 Kings 6:29:
"So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son."
He wasn't being serious when he said that, he was just making a little joke about Tebow's appearance of perfection.
nothing but net.
Tebow in college football is the shaq in the nba in his prime. You cant stop him, you can only slow him down.
He killed it!