FOXBORO -- Tim Tebow's completion percentage is 48.5 percent so far this season. That puts him squarely at 32nd in the NFL. If, as Bill Belichick so often says, a quarterback's accuracy is the most important attribute he can have in the passing game, Tebow would have to be downgraded as a thrower, right? Wrong. On Wednesday, the Patriots head coach stemmed a question about Tebow's inconsistent aim by breaking in with, "I don't agree with any of that. I think his passing is good. He was good in college, a very productive passer in college and he throws it well in this league. Throws it good short, throws it intermediate, throws it deep. He's got some very good throws, as good as anybody you want to put in there."Yeah. No. Not as good as anyone you want to put in there unless Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees were just on a plane that went down in the Andes. But there are elements thatat least mitigate Tebow's inaccuracy. One is his ability to run with the football. He's got 517 yards on 94 carries (5.5 average), so that at least somewhat offsets the facthe doesn't make gobs of yards on passing alone. The other element?He is third -- THIRD -- in the NFL infourth-quarter passing. Check this: Tebow is 96-for-198 overall, throwing for 1,290 yards and (a very impressive) 11 touchdowns and two picks. In the fourth quarter, he is 49 for 80 for 732 yards, six touchdowns and one pick. He is completing passes at 61.3 percent in the fourth quarter. His 55-for-118completion percentage (46 percent) for 558 yards (4.72 yards per attempt) in the first three quarters would get him hooked every time if he wasn't so damn effective late. Which has been the story of the NFL. Asked if Tebow can throw as well in the pocket as he does on the move, Belichick said, "He can hit 'em in the pocket, he can hit 'em out of the pocket, there's plenty of examples of both."
Robert Kraft doesn't seem all that concerned about the potential pitfalls of having an NFL franchise in Las Vegas.
The temptations found in that city, he says, can now be found around any dark corner of the Internet. That's part of the reason why he would be supportive of the Raiders if owner Mark Davis chose to move the team to Vegas from Oakland.
He explained his reasoning to NFL Media's Judy Battista at the league's annual spring meetings on Tuesday.
"I think we can put the discipline and controls in [for] whatever anyone might be worried about," Kraft said. "With the Internet and the age of the Internet and what's going on in today's world, it's so much different than when I came in 20 odd years ago. If you'd like to move there and they're supportive and Oakland doesn't do what they should do, I'm behind them."
The comments echoed what Kraft told USA Today earlier this week.
"I came into the league in ’94," Kraft said. "Back then, any exploration of that market was dismissed out of hand. I’m looking where we are today and thinking of the last 10 to 15 years, and the emergence of new media, with Google and Facebook and the like. We’re just living in a different world, technology-wise. The [sports gambling] risks in Vegas are no longer exclusive to Vegas. Whatever the risks, they are no greater [in Las Vegas] than playing a game in New Jersey."
Davis' hope to move the Raiders stems from an inability to get a deal done for a new stadium in Oakland.
"I have given my commitment to Las Vegas," Davis said this week, "and if they can get done what they're talking about doing, then we will go to Las Vegas."
Michael Holley, Jackie MacMullan, Brian Scalabrine, and Cedric Maxwell address this question from the TD Garden
Roger Goodell is doing that damn thing again down in North Carolina this afternoon.
The NFL commissioner -- who once could carry off a press conference with a breezy, in-command air -- came off like a carrot-topped armadillo talking to reporters at the end of the May owner’s meetings in Charlotte.
Defensive, clipped and disingenuous, a monotone-speaking Goodell was asked about Deflategate and Monday’s Congressional report that alleged the NFL had lobbyists trying to pressure concussion researchers into using NFL-approved doctors.
Asked about the appeal for a rehearing of Tom Brady’s case on Monday, Goodell said, “I respect the NFLPA’s ability to appeal if they choose to do that . . . I’m not really focused on that at all.”
Goodell did not answer the second part of the question, whether or not he’d keep Tom Brady off the field if the court case was unresolved.
The answer, one can only presume would be, “Abso-friggin-lutely.”
As for the Congressional report, Goodell had the gall to answer that he “didn’t see the report.”
He then went on to disagree with what was in the report -- meaning his initial response was less than candid.
A few more minutes of short answers and the show was over with nobody much the wiser than when he began.