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.

Since: Aug 30, 2007
Posted on: February 22, 2012 10:06 pm

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

Surely someone that's figured out if God exists has written a paper worthy of publication somewhere. But hey, lets just get practical. Since you've figured out the biggest question in the history of mankind, go ahead and tell us who's gonna win the NCAA tournament this year. 
I have underlined it for you, your answer. It is only a question to those that refuse to accept the answer they have chosen to believe. Either by logic, emotion, or spiritual movement. Christians know that a god, their god, son of jesus, exists. They have all kinds of proof that is logical to them and even have a fancy book detailing his sons exploits a couple millenia ago. To atheists, they have all kinds of proof as well including string theory, relativity, expanding knowledge of the universe, and the disproval through facts and discovery of the god I just mentioned earlier and a host of others (like Zeus). That is what they know. Now both can be set about logically with facts, dates, artifacts deductive reasoning to make a very cohesive and compelling argument for the both of them but it really comes down to what side of the question you come down on. Either it, he, her, god exists or doesn't. You come to this conclusions through deduction either way, do you not? So, yes you can deduce a gods existence or not because it all comes down to belief anyway. How ou got to that belief is for the most of us deduction through their own logic. Capiche? Get it now. Plato?

Since: Dec 5, 2007
Posted on: February 22, 2012 9:48 pm

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

Ok pimpslapped, prepare to live up to your name. Deductive reasoning works like this. If person A is a member of group 1, and all members of group one are women, then I can deduce that person A is a woman. That's high school level psychology, not philosophy, but nice try dropput. Now show me how this kind of thinking can be used to prove Zeus doesn't exist. You have no evidence either way. Nothing to work with other that what you can't show or prove. That forever leaves this in the realm of the hypothetical, or supposed, or theoretical, however you want to categorize it. You haven't figrued out anything other than a basic statement taking one side in an already ongoing debate. If you did, the world would stand up and take notice of the guy that figrured out an answer to the question that mankind has been asking since he first heard thunder and looked up at the stars. I must have missed the CNN headline about the guy on the sports boards that figured out the meaning of life.
  You are calling me out based on some lame insult about community college, when all I was saying that the argument itself is a circular trap, left open ended by the language that we use. But you claim to have figured it all out. So tell us where you got your masters, or doctorate degree in philosophy and religious studies. Surely you must have a BA in the field right? Tell us your thoughts on the works of Plato, or Thomas Aquinis, or Dante, or Niche. Surely someone that's figured out if God exists has written a paper worthy of publication somewhere. But hey, lets just get practical. Since you've figured out the biggest question in the history of mankind, go ahead and tell us who's gonna win the NCAA tournament this year. I mean, in the grand scheme of things, it should be easier to figure out right? All the evidence, players, coaches, records, etc. is right there in front of you. Surely if you can figure out if God exists or doesn't with no evidence, you can tell us all with the same certainty who's gonna win a simple college basketball tournament right? Should be no big thing for your big brain. Hey, in fact, go bet all you have on who you think will win. I mean a guy that can figure out God can surely clean up in Vegas with a few simple bets right? I mean you're pretty much betting your soul on what you 'think' you know, it shouldn't be a chicken wing to bet your house on it too right? When you strike it rich be sure and send us a post card from your suite at the Bellagio. And yes, you can borrow my shades for when you lay out by the pool. Cool

Since: Aug 30, 2007
Posted on: February 22, 2012 9:29 pm

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

 Deductive reasoning can't be used to prove or disprove the existence of God, in the Christian sense, Zeus, Shiva, Satan, or any of those figures.
Really, I can deduce that Zeus does not exist. de*duce- 1. To reach (a conclusion) by reasoning. God is an ever changing individualistic definition. Your definition only has that meaning to you. So, through my logic, I can deduce that your god, in the christian sense, and in the classical greek sense zeus, does not exist. Thats why this argument has existed since the beginning of reason. Logic is not agreed upon. Shouldn't have dropped out of your community college philosophy class. Cool Emoticons are for tools by the ay. 

Since: Sep 7, 2006
Posted on: February 22, 2012 9:18 pm

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

I get what you are saying, but the belief or disbelief in God is unequivocally based on historical evidence handed down over centuries.  One can't believe in God, if he has never heard of God.  Those who don't believe in God, have used evidence presented and found arguments for God's existence unconvincing.

You're attempting to make a futile argument about proving or disproving the existence of an immortal deity.  The existence can't be proven but the facts that support the existence of the immortal can be contested or supported.

Since: Aug 30, 2007
Posted on: February 22, 2012 9:17 pm

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

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. 

Since: Dec 5, 2007
Posted on: February 22, 2012 8:53 pm

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

"Furthermore, I respect people that have used their brain and deduced that God doesn't exist or etc"

Then you Sir, are an idiot. Deductive reasoning can't be used to prove or disprove the existence of God, in the Christian sense, Zeus, Shiva, Satan, or any of those figures. It's in the nature of the idea of 'God' that the proving or disproving thereof is beyond man's ken. It'd be like a cat trying to explain football. When you say God, you are talking about something(one) that is greater than the 'mortal' existence we are in now, and therefore wouldn't be able to be understood by us. I'm not saying one way or the other, I'm saying the language is a trap. As soon as you say 'God', you're opening the argument to potentially anything, some of which is greater than man's understanding, or rules, and therefore dooming yourself not to be able to explain it. No proof of something isn't proof of it's non-existence. There were times we couldn't prove there were planets around other stars. Doesn't mean they didn't exist. There were times we couldn't prove germs caused illnesses. But they did. People used to think the world was flat, but it was proven not to be. So what people think based on what we can prove or show is always changing. And again, lack of evidence works both ways, you can't prove something exists without any evidence, or disprove exists without any either. No evidence either way is no evidence. You are just left to wonder. Cool

Since: Sep 7, 2006
Posted on: February 22, 2012 6:29 pm

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

Newt, Who did I use as an example of a zealot or fringe personality? Pat Robertson? He is a revered man and looked up to in most evangelical circles is he not? All those listed were, at some point. What is your definition of zealot? Does Tebow fit this definition?
Again, with the Newt thing.  Feel free to ignore that I already pointed out that I hated him.  I'll be voting for Romney by the way. Religion has no place in politics.

Tebow is a zealot. No dispute.  But he's unnecessarily been labeled as a fringe personality which has not been intentional.  What you're doing is making sweeping generalizations based on flawed deductive logic.  So and So was an evangelical, so and so was hypocrite, therefore it should be assumed that Evangelicals are hypocrites until proven otherwise.  You aren't treating individuals as individuals, you're clumping them and taking the most intentionally polarizing figures and making them the face of Evangelical Christianity.

The practice of Christianity is extremely variable.  I get why people doubt the foundation of the religion.  Furthermore, I respect people that have used their brain and deduced that God doesn't exist or etc.  But to judge a guy just because of the way he believes he should act and then complain about the judgemental approach of Christians is highly hypocritical.  The commentary on Tebow has been taken to personal levels that are completely cruel, unfair and unjustifiable.

Tebow did not learn directly from any of the religious figures that you reference below.  He may not even agree with many of their stances.  Yet, you clump him in with crazy people like Ted Haggard just to prove your point that Evangelical Christianity is hypocritical by it's nature.

Since: Oct 12, 2010
Posted on: February 22, 2012 6:10 pm

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

I have no problem with Quinn's comments about Tebow being arrogant in his praise of God.  In fact, I think he's right.  Until Tebow says on national television in an interview that he is uncomfortable with the word "Tebowing" then he will forever be arrogant in how he approaches his prayer on the field.  Should the act of prayer or praise to God be associated with one person's name?  The media may have used his name to describe the act of prayer, however Tebow is in the spotlight enough to simply say "I do not feel comfortable with the use of the term 'Tebowing.'  I do not feel that my name should be used to describe a spiritual act that we all perform in our own way."  To be fair, maybe he hasn't thought of that...but I'm a 21 year old who does not practice Christianity devoutly, and yet when I do pray (like for my mother's good health given her terminal illness) and when others pray for people (again I have had many pray for my mom) I do not believe that that act should be synonomous with the name of a professional football player, especially since people practice spiritual guidance in their own way.  Until he comes out publically and respectfully asks that the media discontinue the use of this term for the reasons I mention Tim Tebow shows that he has an ego and that he is not humble in the way he practices his faith.

Since: Jun 10, 2008
Posted on: February 22, 2012 5:47 pm

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

Not to over simplify but, it seems to me that Tim Tebow is humble in his own reality. That reality, the world stage, just happens to be much more grandiose than your average person. It's difficult to project the appearance of being humble while obliging the countless requests of the world's media. He had this kind of media appeal long before he got to the NFL. I've seen nothing to indicate that he is not a sincerely humble young man, albeit in the constant limelight.

Since: Dec 5, 2007
Posted on: February 22, 2012 5:25 pm

Quinn backtracks on Tebow 'humble' comment

One of the main messages in the Bible is that we should treat others the way we want to be treated. I guess you're doing that. Now I see why everyone treats you like the joke you are
"Should of known I shouldn't stimulate a conversation over religion or Tebow during the day when most sane people are working. Funny how all the beaters are available to post at ALL hours of the day."

So I posted once, at 1:01 pm just after lunch, and in the 4 hours since then you've posted 7 times and about 3 full pages worth of your crap. I guess you were right about the sane part huh? Feel free to make a comment about a Mexican stealing your job at White Castle.

"How many other players, in the history of NFL football, has CBS (or any other network) have been given a weekly tracker like the "Tebow Tracker" that appeared on CBS?  None."

Well for one thing there was no 'Marino Tracker' because there was no or back then, Ditto for Joe Montana. And secondly, There was however a tracker for breaking Marino's record this year by some guy that's also a QB, and I do remember a countdown until Vick played again, but I'm not sure which of the two sites it was on. Nice haitin' fail though. Feel free to try again, as you seem to have nothing else to contribute. Cool

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