(06-21-2021, 01:04 PM)Race Bannon Wrote:

(06-21-2021, 10:47 AM)Mikey Wrote: Why does everyone who refuses to acknowledge the sketchiness of this whole ordeal think of him not as a TE, the position he worked out for and was signed, and also continues to get reps at in practice, but this homunculous "goal line specialist" position, like TLaw, Etienne, Shenault, or Robinson won't be able to get a yard and a half in a critical situation?

Because I don't think he's being brought in because of his ability to learn how to block or catch a tight end seam route.  I think he's being brought in because of what he can already do, what he's already good at.  But in order for that to be worth it, he has to hold down a roster position, and be able to competently back it up if called upon to do so.  (You can't be JUST a specialist).  

As for TLaw, Etienne, Shenault, or Robinson -- that's just a matter of "why not Player X instead of Player Y."  I think Tebow is better in short yardage than all four of those names.  But then, I think Tebow would be better than most players you can name in short yardage.  On the other hand, many here think Tebow is not even "good" by NFL standards at short yardage, much less better than any other player on any roster.  

For those people, it's a bit of cognitive dissonance -- because they have to choose one of the following options, as they are the only two options:  (1) Urban Meyer, new coach of the Jags, believes a player who is not even "good" could possibly help this team score, so therefore Urban Meyer is a dumb evaluator of talent; or (2) Urban Meyer is using a Jags roster spot to deliver a favor to a friend, which would be terrible.

If you open your mind to the possibility "Urban Meyer legitimately believes Tebow can help the team on the field in certain situations," it opens up the possibility that you've got a good coach and a good player.  And if it turns out not to be the case, trust Urban to cut Tebow.  

The game is a torment when you're rooting for a team but against a player, just so you can be right.  When it's the other way around, it's a much more pleasant enjoyment.

Let's think this through. In these hypothetical short yardage situations, where is Teebs lining up? Off tackle? Under Center? Half back?

If you are signing him to be a gimmick, that is fine. You've got a poor man's Taysom Hill. Expending the effort in passing drills is wasted effort if that's not the way the player is going to be used. Not only that, it takes away reps and time for the other players at that position away.

And yes, I'm asking why not player X instead of player Y. There's a critical difference in the likes of Etienne, Robinson, Shenault, etc - they are just as capable as Teebs, but they are all in their early 20's!

Are you honestly saying that the rest of our roster is THAT incapable in short yardage play that we had no other recourse but to pursue a washed out former star in his 30s?

Once again, I will remind you. I cheer for the laundry. I don't care who is wearing it. The team brings me enjoyment. Doesn't mean I can't deem a roster move pointless or detrimental.
My biggest criticism is that every justification every 'optimist' has offered regarding the signing is so easily debunked by what we already had in place, or the justification requires ignoring reality.

---