Team Speed Kills: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: SEC Basketball at the Half

Tim Tebow's "Slow" Release

One of the major complaints about Tim Tebow by those who say he won't make it in the NFL is that he has a slow release. This critique is related to the charge that he has poor mechanics.

I am not a trained coach, but I believe I can show you at least what armchair NFL GMs see in him that causes the real scouts to fret. I will compare him to Sam Bradford, a guy who was said to be a surefire top-five pick in the draft if he had come out.

All times that I quote here came from studying the national title game frame-by-frame in Avidemux. It's not as precise as professional video gear, but it's close enough for these purposes and any error will be consistent throughout.

Here is a sequence showing Bradford's throwing motion. Pay close attention to the second frame, as that is where the biggest difference between the two guys comes from.

bradford1bradford2bradford3bradford4

Bradford has a compact throwing motion, which is what NFL scouts are looking for.

In the first frame, he is holding the ball in the classic quarterback stance. Frame two shows the farthest out his arm goes in his windup. You can see that the ball is close to his body and his arm is about at a right angle.

The final two frames finish out his motion. This throw, which is representative of his standard throws, takes about 467 milliseconds to complete.

Here is a sequence of Tebow's motion.

tebow1tebow2tebow3tebow4

In the first frame, Tebow is in the same starting position as Bradford was in. The second frame shows a very different story however. The ball is far away from his body, and his arm is almost fully extended.

The final two frames finish out his motion. This was the most extreme example of Tebow's long windup I could find, and it took 734 milliseconds to complete. That time is 267 milliseconds longer than Bradford's throw.

Not every one of Tebow's throws take this long, but it illustrates the perils of having a longer motion. Even moreso in the NFL than in college, a fraction of a second can be the difference between a catch and a tipped ball, and a tipped ball and an interception. The throw above was Tebow's first interception of the national title game, a pass that was picked off by a safety reading his eyes and jumping in front of a receiver.

As I said though, this was the longest delivery I could find for him. I chose it because it makes for the clearest pictures. To find out a rough approximation of how much longer Tebow's motion is than Bradford's is, I took a sample of ten normal passes apiece and timed their motions. I did not include passes where the players were being hit, throwing on the run, or shovel passes.

I found that Tebow's average time across the ten passes was 557 milliseconds, with all but one pass taking a half second or more. Bradford's average release was 487 milliseconds, with the most common time being 467 milliseconds. The difference in average was not great at just 70 milliseconds.

As I said though, my ability to time their motions is not exact, and certainly Bradford's motion looks a lot quicker than Tebow's does. Tebow has a habit of bringing the ball down near his waist during his windup, while Bradford generally brings the ball straight back from his neutral stance.

Simple physics says it takes more time to move an object along a longer path, so Tebow's release is labeled "slow." It is not a huge difference, but just think back to Michael Crabtree's catch that beat Texas. If the ball came a tenth of a second later, the defensive back coming to help may have gotten a finger on it.

Florida's new quarterbacks coach Scot Loeffler has been working with Tebow this spring to shorten up the motion. He is also working on getting Tebow to have a "10 o'clock release point," as opposed to the sidearm-like delivery you can kind of see in his fourth frame. Bradford's fourth frame shows what I would assume to be a 2 o'clock release point (since he's right handed and Tebow's a southpaw).

Tim Tebow is one of the most driven people I've ever seen though, so the effort will be there. He has almost a full year from today to prove to the Mel Kipers of the world that he can be something other than an H-back in the pros. Shortening up his delivery and fixing his release point will go a long way to that end.

1 recs  |  Comment 20 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Great work.

Slightly OT, but can someone explain the difference between an HBack and a halfback? Maybe I played too much Madden, but I was under the impression that someone like Forte, Payton, or Sayers (Bears homerism) is a halfback, while someone like Alstott is a fullback. And then in the spread option, there is sometimes a wideback, who lines up behind where a TE would line up.

by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Apr 16, 2009 9:19 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The H in H-back stands for hybrid as it is a position that’s a hybrid between a fullback and tight end. The classic place for an H-back to be in Urban Meyer’s offense, for instance, is standing directly behind and between the offensive guard and tackle closer to the line of scrimmage than the shotgun QB. From there the H-back either blocks like a fullback on a running play or pass blocks or runs a route like a tight end on a pass play. H-backs sometimes line up as or go in motion to become a slot receiver.

“Halfback” is nowadays used interchangeably with running back and tailback. I have never heard the term “wideback.”

by Year2 on Apr 16, 2009 10:46 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Is a wideback the same as a wingback?

In the single wing pioneered by former Georgia coach Pop Warner, the offense lined up in an unbalanced line by shifting an off-side guard or tackle to the strong side. One of the halfbacks was aligned with the strong-side end. Because this placed the players in the shape of a wing, the halfback lined up just behind the end was called the “wingback.”

In the single wing, the snap from center typically went to a tailback or fullback and the quarterback was used primarily as a blocking back. Through the use of pulling guards and double teams, the single wing allowed a squad to establish a strong running game behind a lead blocker. The wingback also could be used to run pass routes, as well. Based upon bs.uf15bosox9bears23’s description, I think a wideback (“who lines up behind where a TE would line up”) is the same thing as a wingback.

As a Georgia fan, I have no love for Tim Tebow, and, as a college football fan, I agree with the guy who said the N.F.L. draft was like carousel from “Logan’s Run,” in which guys who’ve reached a certain age are taken up into the light and never seen or heard from again. That said, this is one of the dumber criticisms out there. If something like this is coachable—-and it certainly ought to be—-why not take a player of proven talent and determination, and get him to work with an N.F.L. quarterbacks coach who can improve his mechanics?

If we grant for the sake of argument the proposition that Sam Bradford and Tim Tebow are approximately equally good college quarterbacks (and an argument certainly could be made that Tebow is the better of the two), and they have achieved at comparable levels despite Tebow’s inferior throwing motion, wouldn’t a competent N.F.L. coach who has faith in his assistants want to draft Tebow over Bradford, secure in the knowledge that Bradford’s mechanics already are pretty good (and, thus, are less apt to improve), whereas Tebow’s mechanics need work (and, therefore, he has room to get even better)? If you’re an N.F.L. coach, you’re confident of your ability to coach, and you have been given the choice between two equally good young players at the same position, wouldn’t you pick the one who is most likely to be improved by coaching? Wouldn’t that guy be the better bet to be the better quarterback three years down the road?

Don’t get me wrong . . . after all the media love for Tebow (of which the Thom Brenneman preposterousness is but an exaggerated, but by no means unrepresentative, example), I’d be more than happy to see the guy turn out to be the next Ryan Leaf so we can quit hearing about him already, but, from a neutral standpoint, I can’t see why anyone who believes in his ability to coach wouldn’t pick Tebow over Bradford.

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on Apr 17, 2009 7:37 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

After a brief Google search, I think you’re right about wideback/wingback. I’m not all that familiar with single wing/wing-T football, so thanks for filling in there.

I see what you’re saying about Tebow and Bradford, but it seems a lot of the time to me that NFL teams generally aren’t that interested in talent development. They seem to want mostly finished products with the capacity to learn their schemes and who will grow through experience and time in the weight room. That’s especially true of high draft picks because of the size of the investment; they don’t want to pay a guy $10 million a year to work on footwork and throwing mechanics in practice and hold a clipboard on Sundays.

When an NFL player doesn’t pan out, no one ever blames the coaches (who sometimes do fail in player development). It’s that he didn’t work hard enough, or couldn’t pick up the scheme, or that he just wasn’t cut out for it. I mean, take David Carr. He seemed bright and talented enough, but cut rate coaching on an expansion team and being sacked repeatedly behind a Swiss cheese offensive line for five years ruined his development.

Anyway, I understand what you’re saying about Tebowmania. Sometimes it grates on me and I am a Florida fan. I just have to shake my head sometimes. And if he doesn’t pan out in the NFL, I expect to see a backlash even larger than the one against Matt Leinart. I think a lot of people, like you, are just plain tired of hearing about the guy.

by Year2 on Apr 17, 2009 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sometimes potential seems to matter a great deal, sometimes not at all – it’s one of the unfathomable mysteries of the draft, and really has to be parsed case by case, both in terms of the individual player and the requirements and preferences of particular teams. I mean, look at Freeman (my favourite whipping boy this draft, it seems) – he was as close to a bust in college as you can be without actually crossing the line, but from the beginning of the process this year he’s been talked up as a top-15 (even top-10) pick, because he looks like a ‘prototypical’ NFL QB. And maybe he will turn into a fine QB at the pro level – but anyone who drafts him is doing it strictly on potential. (The same is true, of varying degrees, of any ‘workout warrior.’)

On the large scale it might actually be cyclical, at least within positions. NFL teams are notorious for copying the last Super Bowl winner en masse; if X wins the title with a raw but freakishly athletic rookie defensive end who hits QBs like a cruise missile, in the next draft there will be a run on raw and freakishly athletic ends. (Something similar happens in the NBA – earlier this decade potential trumped everything, and what seemed like dozens of high picks were blown on random 7-footers who immediately sank from sight. Then the pendulum swung back, and currently polish and demonstrated achievement appear more desirable.)

by peachy rex on Apr 17, 2009 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Herein lies the problem:

“Wouldn’t that guy be the better bet to be the better quarterback three years down the road?”

Ask Jim Mora not-Jr. — whose firing this Falcons fan fully supported — how three years works out in the NFL. You can go from division winner to “former head coach.” I agree with you that in any sane, rational world, you pick the guy that will work out down the road. (This is where the NFL suffers most from not having a developmental league, where they can hide these guys for a while and give them a chance to grow.) But this is the NFL, and two bad years — or fewer, if you work for Al Davis — is more than enough to get you a pink slip.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Apr 18, 2009 4:09 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

One other question:

With replay, it’s easy to gauge QB passing motion speed from the time the QB starts his delivery to the time the ball is released. Something that is obviously similar but may be significantly different is the length of time between the moment when defenders recognize the passing motion and the time the ball is released.

In those second frames, for example, Tebow’s overall stance is much, much wider and more open than Bradford’s. It’s not just his arm position that’s different; he’s leaning back, his feet are wider, and his shoulders are rotated well beyond parallel with his feet. Even if you’re looking at a 100 ms difference in the start-to-finish time, does a defense recognize that open throwing motion faster, perhaps gaining something on the order of another 50 ms?

If so, then pump fakes would also work much better with the Bradford-like “compact” delivery; the later latent recognition time would allow the QB to progress farther along his reads while the defense is still reacting because the defense was “late to the party”. It’s a tiny, tiny difference if it exists; I just don’t know if it’s a real factor or not.

It’d be hard to get a handle on that, short of asking the defensive players and taking the time to quantify reaction times on really high frame-rate replay. (Not that any of us have access to that, much as we’d be willing to do the analysis for free…)

The reason I suspect this is because I grew up a Broncos fan in a Broncos media market. I remember a special on John Elway’s throwing mechanics where they discussed his “ball slap”. (For a while, the difference between his pump fake and his real throw is that he would slap the ball with his free hand prior to the real throw.) The tell in his delivery was glaringly obvious and everybody knew it, but it didn’t matter because the recognition was too slow. Every defensive player (mostly linemen from other teams) they had on the show said that, by the time you saw the tell, it was too late. Unless they were already in the act of going for a block, the ball would be past them.

by Hooper on Apr 17, 2009 11:26 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

This is actually not the best play to judge Tebow’s footwork and stance. He had moved a little bit to his left first, then was coming back to his right when he made this throw. It wasn’t a simple drop back and pass play because he was under some duress from the OU defensive line. I kind of cheated in that way, but as I said, I was looking for the clearest pictures.

You make a lot of good points, but honestly I don’t know how much defenders look at the minutiae of a quarterback’s motion. I know they are taught to read the eyes, and they must read the motion or else pump fakes wouldn’t work. Other than obvious stuff like watching a defensive back break or a defensive lineman putting his hands up, I don’t know how we’d go about measuring defenders’ reaction times to a throwing motion.

I know that, besides delivery and release point, Loeffler has been working with Tebow on footwork and using his legs as a part of his passing motion (instead of it being all arm). The Florida receivers say there’s a world of difference already after just a couple weeks of spring practice. I’m very interested to see how far he’ll have come by the fall.

by Year2 on Apr 17, 2009 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fair enough.

I hope you revisit this sometime mid- to late-fall then. That’ll be about the time the talk about draft position really starts warming back up, and you’ll have a good opportunity for good footage from several games.

by Hooper on Apr 17, 2009 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

BTW, thanks for breaking this down.

Rec’d, and will be linked on RTT very shortly.

by Hooper on Apr 17, 2009 11:28 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Form Versus Results

There are many very successful athletes (not just in football) who do things “wrong” from a style standpoint yet are very effective. You would never deliberately teach someone the throwing style of Bernie Kosar or the hitting style of Ichiro, but the production speaks much more loudly than the form. There isn’t just one “right” way to play quarterback, whether it’s Pop Warner or the NFL.

If I were drafting next year, I’d definitely take Tebow over Bradford. As a Bama fan stuck in Oklahoma, I’ve had to endure the worship of both. But Tebow’s performance against good defenses is far superior to Bradford’s…and he’s seen a lot more of them. I would be shocked if Bradford has any significant pro success.

by Watchman on Apr 17, 2009 12:28 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I’m very interested to see what Bradford does this year without his monstrous offensive line from the last two years. I think he’ll end up being fine in the pros, but he had a tremendous advantage playing behind all that beef in his first two years.

I don’t think with Tebow it’s a case of doing it differently but still being fine in the end. As I mentioned in the piece and in another comment, Scot Loeffler has been working with him on getting his motion, delivery, footwork, and body motion the “right” way and everyone, from his backup John Brantley to his receivers, say they can see a world of difference.

There will always be a place for the unconventional ones, but the “right way” is right for a reason. Often it’s that way because it reduces the stress on the body. For instance, Brantley says his arm no longer feels fatigue after every practice by doing the same new things that Loeffler is teaching Tebow to do. There’s nothing inherently wrong with teaching someone to do things the “right” way.

by Year2 on Apr 17, 2009 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

This is one of the great wild cards of 2009, in my mind

Does tweaking Tebow’s delivery make him better, or does giving him too much to think about take something away.

If it takes something away, that could be the only real chink in Florida’s armor. If it makes him better — well, quite frankly (and I hate to say crap like this, but I will), I’m not sure there’s a team in college football that can beat Florida, even if they have an off day.

Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.

by cocknfire on Apr 18, 2009 4:10 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

The defense will make up for pretty much anything this year, and if last year was any indication, Tebow will be back to his old gunslinging self by midseason.

by Year2 on Apr 18, 2009 11:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

You forget . . .

. . . I’m picking Florida as my preseason No. 1. That guarantees that they won’t win the national title. (See: Michigan 2007, Georgia 2008.)

Also, we’re talking about a program that hasn’t had an undefeated season since 1911. The Gators may win the conference title and the national championship, but they’ll drop one along the way to someone they shouldn’t. (See: Syracuse 1991, Auburn 2006, Ole Miss 2008, Mississippi State too often to count.)

Go 'Dawgs!

by T Kyle King on Apr 19, 2009 8:35 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Great analysis!

Surreal to be Teal

by Surteal on Apr 28, 2009 11:00 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the SEC
Start posting on Team Speed Kills »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Brantley_small
Seantrel Henderson Helps Lane Kiffin do it again!
Gator-f__custom__small
Boise State's Wilcox to Tennessee as DC
Small
Brian Kelly's Final Coaches' Poll Ballot
Brantley_small
Cincinnati vs Georgia Tech In The BCS Title Game?
Bear-bryant_small
Looking forward to seeing "The Blind Side"
2003_helmet_small
UGA not the first Bulldog mascot to die of heart attack.
Me_as_a_simpson_small
My Ranking (11/16/09)
Script_small
SEC overrated??

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Gabalogo2_small cocknfire

Gator-f__custom__small Year2

Authors

14563741_small JCCW Jerry

Ff_130051_s_small froberts

Official Partner of CBS Sports