Big Disclaimer: In case it’s not clear to you I don’t write about sports. I don’t generally care enough. But occasionally certain sports stories are incredibly interesting to me, and certain arguments against Tebow really fascinate me. I’m not someone who pretends to know a lot about football, and I’m not trying to refute all arguments against him, just one in particular that I find incredibly strange in the grand scheme of things. So take this as a “lay” person’s (as in, not an avid follower of sports, and someone who is really only interested in the human interest side and commentary of sports, not actual stats) take on this particular player.
PS- I was going to aggregate a list of links for some of the points I make, but honestly, there’s so many that it’s too difficult to find the ones that are best, so you can google (Bing) on your own…
An alternate title to this post is why I agree with Skip Bayless. “all he does is win!” It’s true, Tim Tebow in the end helps his team WIN! Has he made mistakes? Sure. Should young quarterbacks be watching him to emulate things like accuracy and form? Maybe not. Should they be watching him in order to emulate the way he handles himself professionally in the media and also for an example of leadership, discipline, and hard work? I would say yes. Is he the only one responsible for the Broncos win? Absolutely not (and he’s the first to admit that). But is he an important part of their win? I would say yes (and I’m not the only one to say that…).
There’s lots of arguments against Tebow. He’s too caught up in this Jesus thing (most of you know, I disagree with this, but this is something that people are saying). Everyone’s talking about Tebow when it’s really many other players who are making up for his faults. If he’s so great why can’t he do well in the 1st half of the game?
I’m not going to argue about any of that.
What I don’t understand is the people who are saying that you can’t say he’s a great football player or a great quarterback because his throw is ugly or because he doesn’t play “good” football. And the reason I don’t get that is because I thought “good” football was all about winning.
And also because Tim Tebow is not a ballerina.
My point is, I actually understand that argument. As a dancer (and I think most dancers would agree with me) it’s always frustrating to see someone who’s not technically brilliant, but who is treated as such and performs way better than they technically are. I should admit, there are many exceptions to this. I have many friends who are fabulous performers who are constantly working HARD to improve many things that they are lacking in the technique department (and with some forms of dance, particularly ballet, sometimes you are just born in such a way that you can’t physically do what’s asked, but you keep working toward it anyway… a nightmare for a perfectionist, which most ballet students are…) and I LOVE watching them. And I myself had many great performances and strengths in spite of my many many flaws. And I know I got kind of a free pass on some of my flaws (bad turnout, improper alignment) for some of my outstanding qualities (natural ability to turn, naturally beautiful feet, slightly hyperextended legs, etc.).
But it is frustrating to see someone perhaps praised very early on (which applies to Tebow) when they still have many flaws. Or when you feel their flaws are overlooked completely for the couple of things they do really well. It is really annoying to me, for example, when a dancer is praised for her high extension (translation: getting her leg really high) when I know that she’s only able to do that by allowing her body to get completely out of alignment, or that she depends on high extension and can’t do anything else. It’s frustrating to watch a dancer do 10 pirouettes (translation: turn 10 times consecutively on one leg) when I can tell that the only way they are accomplishing that only by doing something really weird and not technically correct with their body. And yet, a lot of us are willing to “cheat” onstage for the benefit of a performance. But the idea is that eventually you’re working to correct the way you cheat, you don’t celebrate the cheating, it’s a means to an end that you eventually correct. And that’s why there are some great dancers in the world and then there are the LEGENDS!
So I get the argument. I sympathize with the argument. But the thing is, this is a SPORT. Not an ART! Tim Tebow is NOT a ballerina!
To me, the main difference between a sport and an art is that an art needs to have some sort of aesthetic value, but also needs a marriage between both technique and performance (this is primarily speaking about performing arts…). The results are primarily measured qualitatively. Sport on the other hand is all about performance and competition and is typically measured quantitatively. Technique is important, but only as a means to an end. But in a lot of ways, art is ALL about the means.
So if the argument is that Tim Tebow is not a good football player because he’s not technically great, then the inverse of the argument is that he could be great technically great but not actually win… and that would be fine if we all just enjoyed watching the beauty of the game (which I guess some people do), but we don’t care how good a QB’s pass is if they LOSE.
So fine, if you want to argue that he’s not a technically good playey/QB that’s fine… and I might even agree with you. But since we’re talking about a sport, I’d say that really doesn’t matter.
Since all he does is WIN!
What do you think about Tim Tebow?