Blog Entry

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

Posted on: February 21, 2012 2:28 pm
Edited on: February 21, 2012 5:04 pm
 
Quinn and Tebow: Not BFFs after all? (Getty Images)
By Will Brinson

Broncos quarterback Brady Quinn will be a free agent on March 13. While he didn't make our list of top free-agent quarterbacks (although he was honorable mention!), he'll likely end up landing a backup job somewhere for the 2012 season.

Just don't count on it being Denver, at least based on the quotes he gave Mike Silver for an oral history of Tebowmania in the latest issue of GQ.

"Early in the season, there was a game when Kyle [Orton] got hurt and the coaches were calling for me to go in, but Kyle got up and finished the game out," Quinn said. "So I was the second-string guy. Then, a few weeks later, they decided to put Tim in. I felt like the fans had a lot to do with that. Just 'cause they were chanting his name. There was a big calling for him. No, I didn't have any billboards. That would have been nice."


This is a harmless quote. You don't have to be a backup quarterback to want billboards pulling for you all over the town you live in.

But Quinn's comments took a different tone as his comments continued throughout the article.

"We've had a lot of, I guess, luck, to put it simply," Quinn said, recalling the Broncos memorable overtime win over the Bears.

Again, more or less harmless. Marion Barber running out of bounds and then fumbling is the definition of luck. It's not the greatest thing in the world to say about your (former?) teammates, especially if you want your job again in 2012, but it's not incendiary. But how do you feel about the way Tim acts off the field, Brady?

Latest NFL News, Notes

"If you look at it as a whole, there's a lot of things that just don't seem very humble to me," Quinn said. "When I get that opportunity, I'll continue to lead not necessarily by trying to get in front of the camera and praying but by praying with my teammates, you know?"

Annnnnnd ... scene. At least on Quinn's career with the Broncos. Remember, they shipped Kyle Orton out of town because he was going to be a pain in the locker room. And they already know what they've got in Quinn (read: a guy who can't beat out Tebow for the backup job).

The Broncos said they want to bring in two more quarterbacks to generate some competition, but they're unlikely to bring in (or back) anyone who might truly try and undermine Tebowmania in Denver. If you're coming out to Mile High, you've got buy into the idea that you're going to get pelted with foam crosses should you win the starting gig.

But maybe Quinn's comments in the magazine aren't as bad as represented. Quinn released a statement on Twitter Tuesday afternoon refuting the nature of his comments in Silver's article.

"The comments attributed to me in a recent magazine article are in NO WAY reflective of my opinion of Tim and the Broncos," Quinn tweeted. "Tim deserves a lot of credit for our success and I'm happy for him and what he accomplished. Most importantly, he is a great teammate. That interview was conducted three months ago, and the resulting story was a completely inaccurate portrayal of my comments.

"I have addressed my disappointment with the writer and have reached out to Tim to clear this up. I apologize to anyone who feels I was trying to take anything away from our Team's or Tim's success this season."

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @EyeOnNFL on Twitter, Like Us on Facebook, subscribe to our NFL newsletter, and while you're add it, add our RSS Feed.
Comments

Since: Jun 3, 2007
Posted on: February 23, 2012 8:31 am
 

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

@nmbronco1.... It's very funny how you can sit there and type this with a straight face. Tebow in it for self promotion? The media is all over him with any little thing he does, and if praying on the field garners a close-up video camera, why should Tebow have to stop doing what he does to please you non-faith fans? Also, if Tebow was about himself, why does he do so much and doesn't talk about it? You want an example? When the press released Quinn's statements about the Broncos and Tebow, Tebow didn't and hasn't made a comment about it yet. Do you know where he was? CBS hasn't made a story of it....yet. Tebow was taking a little girl named Presli Collins on a date to make her wish come true. You can read the story on Yahoo. What was so amazing about this story? Was it that this little girl has Neurofibromatosis-1,  an inherited tumor disorder? No... Was it that he didn't return shots on Quinn? No... I'll tell you what is amazing about this story: Read the article and you will find that nowhere in the story does Tebow make any comments himself!! You say that he is self promoting, so why would he not promote himself in this story of helping a child with a serious disease? I'm not a Tebower or fan of his, but I get tired of people like yourself who bash on bad stories of athletes, calling them thugs and all kind of names. BUT!!! When an athlete comes along that DOES SOME GOOD for humanity and is genuinely in it to help others, people like yourself take shots at him. SMH..... Colin Cowherd was right in that people don't want honesty and integrity, and they don't look for the truth; they look for stories they can pound on and talk badly about...... Sad people and a sad world for those who have nothing else to do than put down others, especially the ones making a different without thought of their own gain.....

Here's the link:

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/02/

20/girl-with-debilitating-disorder-

gets-birthday-surprise-from-tim-teb

ow/



Since: Jan 2, 2007
Posted on: February 23, 2012 6:57 am
 

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

The truth is, Brady Quinn's remarks jibe well with how an unbiased fan would have to look at Tebow.  Quinn, who himself went to the Catholic university Notre Dame, got to see close up just how much Tim Tebow made an overt show of whatever his "religious" beliefs might be.  To me and many other fans, Tebow, Tebowners, and the entire "Tebowmania" phenomena are all sickening, and Tebow is racking up a lot of big bucks based upon his unique style of self promotion fueled by a conscious effort to make himself to appear "houlier than thou".  Quinn probably regrets the comments, most likely taken out of context, but that does not make them any less honest or valid.



Since: Dec 5, 2007
Posted on: February 23, 2012 2:16 am
 

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment


"Look man, I want to be on your side here."

I'm not really tying to take a side in the argument, I'm just saying the argument itself is flawed and unsolvable. It's like saying 'Here is an unsolvable math problem, and now I'm going to solve it.' Well, didn't I just say it was unsolvable? When you use the word God, it's like a greater than sign in math. Everything on that other side won't fit on the lesser than side, that's just the nature of it. God, by definition is generally accepted as 'beyond man', therefore our understanding and definition of existence might not apply, or apply in a way that exceeds our current understanding. It creates in itself an unproveable question for mankind at this point in time.
"If one is never taught the text, or hear about Jesus, than they can not have Faith that Jesus is the Son of God, the existence of heaven and hell...and so on and so on."

But people worshiped dieties long before Jesus or even the Old Testament Jehovah. It could be put forward that the curiosity that inspires questioning of, and might eventually lead to worship of 'Gods' is as natural to the human condition as the need to be around other people or to wear clothes when we are. You could use the same basic lines when talking about a black hole, or about love. Can you show me a black hole? No. (unless you know my ex) Why do we think they exist? Because of the seeming effect they have on other things like light travelling past, an effect which can be shown. Can someone show you God? I don't think so, but they can show you numerous examples of how God has influenced their life or decisions, and those changed path of their life, or caused them to help others, etc. I'm assuming most of us love our Moms and or kids. But can you show me that love? You can't hold it in your hand and show it to me, but you can show me things you've done that show how you feel, or changes you've made in the path of your life because you loved someone more. Like working 2 jobs to get your kids through school. It's the same with many things that our human existence can't quite put into concrete terms. God, Love, Loyalty, etc.. Hate on the other hand seems pretty easy to show and prove the existence of. Life's funny sometimes huh? Cool



Since: Sep 7, 2006
Posted on: February 23, 2012 12:50 am
 

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

It's like this. Say I throw out a statement like "Duke is never going to win another men's basketball championship." Can I prove it? No. But can you prove they will? No. It's an intangible future event. Sure, most people would think that Duke, being a top program, will eventually win another title, but they can't prove they will, because if you could prove they will, you'd also be able to prove when, and that can't be done. You can't show some stats or future players names and say "this is why Duke will win it all in 2016, or 2032. It's impossible to do now. Just the same as I couldn't 'prove' they won't win it. It's just that until they do, I'm right.
  So a year goes by, and Duke doesn't win the title. Was I right? Not for all time, just for that year, because they still might win one. Was I wrong? No, because until they do, I still might be right, even though it wouldn't be proven for several hundred years or until college basketball is disbanded. Then 2, and 3, and 4 years go by. Nothing about being right or wrong changes, the argument is just extended year to year until real proof arrives, i.e. Duke winning a title.
  The same goes for God. Some say one way, some the other, but until something happens, existence of can't be 'proved' one way or the other. That's why religious leaders refer to it as a 'matter of faith'. The egyptians worshiped Ra. They don't anymore, does that mean Ra doesn't exist? Or did then but doesn't anymore? No, there's still nothing to go on. That's the nature of the word 'God or gods'. They were made to describe that which is beyond our existence or ability to show proof of. And until God shows up, which of course would prove God existed, all you can do is go year to year without any more proof one way or the other than you had the year before. It's a trap I tell ya
Look man, I want to be on your side here.  I go to Church and all but this isn't convincing for one reason.  The belief in God, or in this case, Jesus as the Son of God is based on historical recollections of Jesus' Life.  There is a degree of logic required because one has to read the text and make a decision of whether the biblical text is an accurate, trustworthy source.  You can't get away from that.  Faith has to be based on some form of understanding.  If one is never taught the text, or hear about Jesus, than they can not have Faith that Jesus is the Son of God, the existence of heaven and hell...and so on and so on.  I mean did you just magically become faithful just because, or did you learn that you needed to become faithful.  I'm in the camp of those who holds a degree of faith, but a degree of skepticism.  I would love to stop being skeptical, which is why I always support the Christian cause, but without someone explaining why I shouldn't be a skeptic, it's extremely difficult to get away from that thought process.



Since: Sep 7, 2006
Posted on: February 23, 2012 12:40 am
 

P S

la2r, (okay, I'll stop with the Newt), the main difference between evangeblical christianity and your run of the mill middle of the road christian is presentation of their faith. We, I, think of evangelical christianity as being more hypocritical because it is more in your face than your average catholic, by design. I don't view any christian any different than any other, they all believe in the same basic principles. Evangelicals just put themselves out there to be judged, criticized, and held accountable because that is generally how they define themselves. You would be hard pressed to meet an evangelical or born again christian for the first time an not know it within the first couple minutes. And thats fine if that the way you want to live your life but accept the drawbacks and stigma that come with it. Liken it to homosexuality. If that is your lifestyle and your sexuality, thats fine and wouldn't judge you any different than anyone else. But if you define yourself by your sexuality, are flamboyant, announce that you are gay within the first couple minutes of introductions, I and everyone else is going to treat you a little differently right of the bat. Thats the price of defining yourself by your religion, or your sexuality in this case. So, in Tebows case, I don't compare or draw comparisons to him with any of those that previously listed or lump him in with them. He is an individual. But he does define himself by his faith, and that draws a bit more scrutiny than the average athlete would draw. So, like I said before, he put himself in this situation. He had a choice to paint bible verses on his face, to "Tebow", or begin and end press conferences with our lord and savior jesus christ. I agree that a lot of the criticism has been malicious, lacked perspective, and have nothing to do with his profession. He should be judged by his actions which so far have been very respectable. Thats my opinion. But how he presents himself with all the rehearsed evangelical rhetoric, draws the ire and raises alarms of those that have experienced the phony evangelicals of those before him.
I would agree with your general assessment of the why.  But you've stated within that he's been respectful and hasn't acted phony.  And if he is been respectful and genuine, than why would he deserve criticism on a personal level.  This is almost like Occupy Wall Street to me.  It's like people are picking the wrong target.  Why not attack the people that are giving him this platform and media attention and not the man himself.  It's polarizing journalism bias.  That is the culprit.  Not Tim Tebow.















Since: Aug 30, 2007
Posted on: February 22, 2012 10:31 pm
 

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

 
Have fun sonny. 
Sonny and emoticons? And a UK fan? Are you a Beverly Hillbilly? Cool



Since: Aug 30, 2007
Posted on: February 22, 2012 10:28 pm
 

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

No. It's an intangible future event. 
Deduction that leads to belief isn't fortune telling or clairavoyance about who will will the NCAA championship in the future. Get a little deeper than college ball here buddy. This is your argument.

 The same goes for God. Some say one way, some the other, but until something happens, existence of can't be 'proved' one way or the other. That's why religious leaders refer to it as a 'matter of faith'. The egyptians worshiped Ra. They don't anymore, does that mean Ra doesn't exist? Or did then but doesn't anymore? No, there's still nothing to go on. That's the nature of the word 'God or gods'. They were made to describe that which is beyond our existence or ability to show proof of. And until God shows up, which of course would prove God existed, all you can do is go year to year without any more proof one way or the other than you had the year before. It's a trap I tell ya.
So we are just waiting on god to reveal him-herself and if he/it/her never does we can't say that it/he/isn't still there but what, hiding? I'm just waiting for a unicorn to walk down the street or a T-Rex to walk through my back yard. Can I deduct through reasoning that this won't happen? Or should I just wait on it ans say "You can't say that it won't happen some day!" ?? And yeah, I can say that Ra doesn't exist based on the Egyptians characteristics, accounts,  and description of him. 

 and ps.. I'd like a link to some of those 'God artifacts' when you get a chance.. 
Email the catholic church. Or for that matter and the reason we are both on here, Tim Tebow. He could point you in the right direction. 



Since: Dec 5, 2007
Posted on: February 22, 2012 10:14 pm
 

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

"Should of known I shouldn't stimulate a conversation over religion or Tebow during the day when most sane people are working.."

And I should have known better than to try to have an intelligent discussion of ideas with you.

Oops, almost forgot. Wouldn't want you to be blinded by your glaring jackoffedness.

Funny how people tend to try insult others with what they're most familiar with. Have fun sonny. Someday maybe you'll grow up a little. But I think the world will be waiting a long time for proof of that too. Cool



Since: Dec 5, 2007
Posted on: February 22, 2012 10:09 pm
 

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

It's like this. Say I throw out a statement like "Duke is never going to win another men's basketball championship." Can I prove it? No. But can you prove they will? No. It's an intangible future event. Sure, most people would think that Duke, being a top program, will eventually win another title, but they can't prove they will, because if you could prove they will, you'd also be able to prove when, and that can't be done. You can't show some stats or future players names and say "this is why Duke will win it all in 2016, or 2032. It's impossible to do now. Just the same as I couldn't 'prove' they won't win it. It's just that until they do, I'm right.
  So a year goes by, and Duke doesn't win the title. Was I right? Not for all time, just for that year, because they still might win one. Was I wrong? No, because until they do, I still might be right, even though it wouldn't be proven for several hundred years or until college basketball is disbanded. Then 2, and 3, and 4 years go by. Nothing about being right or wrong changes, the argument is just extended year to year until real proof arrives, i.e. Duke winning a title.
  The same goes for God. Some say one way, some the other, but until something happens, existence of can't be 'proved' one way or the other. That's why religious leaders refer to it as a 'matter of faith'. The egyptians worshiped Ra. They don't anymore, does that mean Ra doesn't exist? Or did then but doesn't anymore? No, there's still nothing to go on. That's the nature of the word 'God or gods'. They were made to describe that which is beyond our existence or ability to show proof of. And until God shows up, which of course would prove God existed, all you can do is go year to year without any more proof one way or the other than you had the year before. It's a trap I tell ya. Cool

and ps.. I'd like a link to some of those 'God artifacts' when you get a chance..



Since: Aug 30, 2007
Posted on: February 22, 2012 10:08 pm
 

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

Oops, almost forgot. Wouldn't want you to be blinded by your glaring jackoffedness. Cool 


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com