Derek Anderson or Brady Quinn?
Posted by Jason Lisk on November 28, 2007
The Cleveland Browns are going to face some decisions in the off-season at quarterback. They traded their 2008 first round pick to move up and draft Brady Quinn at #22 overall last year. Derek Anderson, who lost a coin flip with Charlie Frye in the pre-season, came in and started, presumably to just warm the spot until Quinn was ready, when Frye predictably faltered.
But then something happened--Anderson has been very good. And he is only 24 years old. But the other thing is that he is a restricted free agent. This means that the Browns can make a tender offer at different levels--presumably they would make the highest tender offer of 2.35 million, which is still very cheap for a starting quarterback. But then Anderson would be free to try to negotiate a deal with another team, and if another team signed him to an offer sheet, the Browns would have to either match, or let him go in exchange for a first and third round pick in next year's draft. So before you read further, play along at home, and see what your gut reaction is to the following two questions:
1. Who is more likely to have the better NFL career from this point forward, Derek Anderson or Brady Quinn?
2. If you were an NFL franchise in need of a starting quarterback, would you trade a first and third round pick for Derek Anderson?
The Cleveland front office and coaching staff will have to consider these questions entering next season. Who to go with, the hot young local kid, drafted in the first round, for whom you gave up a first rounder in 2008? Or the guy who you didn't start over Charlie Frye in the season opener? How they choose to answer this question may decide the course of the franchise for the next five years, or more.
As I see it, the Browns have four options to consider:
1. Be proactive and sign Anderson to a longer term deal, thus keeping him from becoming a restricted free agent in the first place. The risk is obvious--if he is a one hit wonder, you pay for years. The benefit is that the deal is probably a lot smaller than it would be a year later, and he is guaranteed to stay. Obviously, this move would insure Anderson as the starter in the next few years.
2. Tender the highest offer (1st and 3rd), and hope no one else signs him to an offer sheet for that compensation, in which case you have a cheap starter for the next season to compete with Quinn. If someone does sign the offer sheet, let him go, take the draft picks, and go with Brady Quinn as the starter.
3. Make the tender offer, but match any offer sheet, and let the league set the market price. The problem here, as we have seen in recent deals, is that teams can sign restricted free agents to deals that skirt the lines, with poison pill clauses, and make it difficult to match.
4. Franchise Anderson. This means you are going to pay a lot of money for one season, but not have a long term commitment. The downside is the large cap charge for next season, the benefit is that you are not committed to Anderson, can go into next season with him at starter, but evaluating both, and can push off the decision long term, until after the 2008 season. At that point, you can either sign Anderson to a long term deal, or let him go and start Quinn.
Now, I'll try to answer these questions looking at history. The answer is not as simple as saying that a first rounder is likely to be more successful than a late round pick (which is certainly true, as a general statement). Brady Quinn has not played any significant minutes, so his relevant comparables are all similarly drafted quarterbacks, before they played a snap in the NFL.
That is not true of Derek Anderson. His comparables, in light of his performance as a starter, even in less than a full season, no longer include the multitude of later round quarterbacks who never played any significant amount of time in the league. His comparables also do not include guys like Kyle Orton or Billy Joe Hobert.
So, here's what I did for each. For Quinn, I used all quarterbacks drafted in the first 30 picks, except for the first overall picks, since 1978. This also includes the supplemental first round picks. That is a total of fifty-one players drafted before this season. If you think Quinn is not the typical 22nd overall pick, because he should have gone top ten, and the Browns paid a premium for him--fine. Turns out, it doesn't really matter that much between being an early first and later first round pick, so long as we exclude the first overalls. And I don't think we can reasonably argue that Quinn should be viewed as a first overall pick prospect.
For Anderson, it was a little more difficult. If you define his breakout narrowly, then you get very few comparables. For example, here is the exclusive list of all non-first round picks who had a "passing value added" (I discussed my methodology for computing that here) of +500 or more in the first season they threw 150 or more pass attempts, at age 25 or younger:
Boomer Esiason
Marc Bulger
Dave Krieg
Charlie Batch
Brett Favre
Tom Brady
Right now, Anderson is easily on pace to finish second on this list behind Esiason. When I wrote about finding the next Brady or Bulger, I didn't even have the foresight to evaluate Derek Anderson, as he was seemingly buried behind the incumbent, Charlie Frye, and the future, Brady Quinn. Yet here they both turn up as two of his best comparables.
But with only six comparables, I loosened up the requirements. I settled on a "breakout" season of +400 passing value added. I moved the age requirement to age 26, and I didn't require that the "breakout" occur in the first season in which the player got 150+ pass attempts, just some time by age 26. Even with this, the list of comparables is only 26 players. But I felt going any lower than this on my definition of a breakout would bring in guys who never really had a good season, and not be fair comparables for what we are trying to answer, and going with older players, which would bring in Warner, Green, and Moon, among others, wasn't fair either.
As it turns out, in looking at my list of comparables and dissecting it any number of ways, the "Derek Andersons" dominate the "Brady Quinns" in virtually every measure, except for number of opportunities to continue to fail. Here is the complete list of Derek Anderson comparables, sorted by value added in their breakout season, age, and number of prior 150+ attempt seasons before the breakout:
player value age prev.150+ =============================================== Drew Brees +1194 25 2 Boomer Esiason +1104 24 0 Brian Griese +1085 25 1 Mark Brunell +983 26 1 Tony Romo +890 26 0 Joe Montana +872 25 1 Gus Frerotte +822 25 1 Don Majkowski +813 25 1 Jay Schroeder +742 25 1 Craig Erickson +713 25 1 Neil Lomax +682 26 2 Marc Bulger +669 25 0 Dave Krieg +658 25 0 Charlie Batch +564 24 0 Brett Favre +561 23 0 Randall Cunningham +527 24 1 Neil O'Donnell +506 26 1 Tom Brady +501 24 0 Eric Hipple +484 24 0 Tony Banks +471 24 1 Elvis Grbac +446 25 0 Rodney Peete +443 24 1 Jeff Blake +420 24 0 Scott Mitchell +415 25 0 Aaron Brooks +403 24 0 =====================================================
[NOTE: Through week 11, Anderson is on pace for approximately +1010 passing value added, which would place him between Griese and Brunell. Matt Schaub would also qualify for this list, at age 26, on pace for +728 passing value added through week 11].
The primary reason that the "Derek Andersons" dominate the "Brady Quinns" is because there are far fewer complete flukes from the former, compared to complete busts from the latter. Excluding Romo, whose breakout was last year, only 8% (2/25) of the "Andersons" started (i.e., threw 150+ pass attempts) in two or fewer seasons after their breakout--Craig Erickson and Jeff Kemp. Excluding the first rounders still playing who have yet to get to 3 starting seasons, 37% (17/46) of the "Quinns" started 2 or fewer seasons in their careers.
Of the players who reached at least three starting seasons, slightly over half (12 of 23) of the "Andersons" would post at least three more seasons of at least 400+ passing value added. The "Quinns" posted a similar rate, at 14 of 29. So, after the complete busts were removed, the "Quinns" and "Andersons" were about even in terms of number of consistent starters.
But what about the stars, and the really big seasons? 57% of the "Andersons" who started three or more seasons after their breakout posted at least one 1000+ passing value season. 45% of the "Quinns" who started three or more seasons posted at least one 1000+ passing value added season.
Even excluding the busts who were not given more than a couple of opportunities, the "Quinns" also had alot more poor starting seasons than the "Andersons". Of those that started three or more seasons, 13 (45%) of the "Quinns" were above +400 passing value added in 25% or fewer of their starting seasons. In other words, alot of the "Quinns" have lingered around to put up alot of mediocre to bad seasons, with the poster boys being the likes of Harrington, Mirer, and Dilfer. 6 (26%) of the "Andersons" were above +400 passing value added in 25% or fewer of their starting seasons.
I'll modify an old saying here. A quarterback in hand is worth two in the draft. Knowing that a lesser regarded quarterback has had a successful season early in his career (which rarely happens) swings the odds in favor of the quarterback who has actually shown something on the field, rather than the higher end prospect with potential.
As to my first question, who is more likely to have the better career, the answer is Anderson based on history. At this point, there is still a good chance Quinn simply does not have what it takes to be a starter, in which case Anderson is the correct answer by default. Even if Quinn does end up starting, the first rounders are no more likely to put up big seasons, or be a long term starter. Anderson is only 24 years old, so his upside is about the same as Quinn's right now, if not a little higher, with far less downside.
As for my second question, which may have seemed laughable, I think for much the same reason, Anderson would be worth a first and third round pick based on history. I guess this depends on how you view the value of the first round pick. If you are confident that you will nail the first round pick and draft like Bill Polian or Belichek/Pioli, then you wouldn't trade it. But then again, you wouldn't be looking for a quarterback in the first place. History would suggest that Anderson is worth far more than a non-first overall first round draft pick, if you were going to use that draft pick on a quarterback. Sure, he might be the next Scott Mitchell, Elvis Grbac or Gus Frerotte, but if you keep the pick, you have an even better chance of getting the next Mirer, Marinovich, McNown, Malone, McGwire or Maddox. If I were a team in need of a quarterback for next season, I would at least have to have my director of pro scouting reviewing every pass Anderson threw this year, to see if he was worth the first and third round picks, if the Browns did not franchise or sign him to a longer deal.
Conversely, the Browns know far more than others about the progress of Quinn versus Anderson in practice. If they are confident that Quinn can duplicate the success of Anderson, then they can accept a first and a third and let him go. But if they are not, it would be a huge error to make a 24 year old quarterback available.
November 28th, 2007 at 9:22 am
I haven't been terribly impressed by Derek Anderson (58% completion) and would be inclined to take choice #2, but you make a good case for keeping him.
It's interesting that the top "Derek Anderson" guy is Drew Brees, who was in a similar situation. It's certainly early, but it's starting to look like the Chargers made the wrong choice there.
Another question: if the Browns keep Anderson, what do they do with Quinn? He'd be an awfully well-paid backup, but how much could the Browns get for him in a trade, considering they would be telling the rest of the NFL that they're giving up on a guy that they once thought was the QB of the future?
November 28th, 2007 at 10:21 am
They should keep both Derek & Brady!
November 28th, 2007 at 10:32 am
I wonder about context.
Derek Anderson is throwing to Braylon Edwards and Kellen Winslow, and if he continues to throw to Braylon Edwards and Kellen Winslow in future seasons, he'll probably continue to produce. If next season he ends up on a team with bad receivers (say, the Vikings), I would expect a major drop in production. Meanwhile, if Brady Quinn throws to Braylon Edwards and Kellen Winslow next season, he may end up very productive.
That's an obvious point, of course. But it's also something that the Browns and any team attempting to acquire Anderson need to consider.
November 28th, 2007 at 10:47 am
History would suggest that Anderson is worth far more than a non-first overall first round draft pick, if you were going to use that draft pick on a quarterback. Sure, he might be the next Scott Mitchell, Elvis Grbac or Gus Frerotte, but if you keep the pick, you have an even better chance of getting the next Mirer, Marinovich, McNown, Malone, McGwire or Maddox.
Sounds like a simple solution. Draft a QB yourself, but just make sure his last name doesn't start with "M".
November 28th, 2007 at 10:51 am
How long did it take you to get it together after coming up with that list of comparables?
Amazing list.
November 28th, 2007 at 10:54 am
Like PV, I've also been very interested in the Browns' QB situation. True, the quality of receivers (and offensive line) will play a part in any QB's numbers. But I will offer up a few counters:
1) If Winslow and Edwards are so great, why couldn't Charlie Frye hit them?
2) Sidney Rice isn't Braylon Edwards, but he's showing some pretty good playmaking ability for a first-year player. Wade has good hands, and Shiancoe's been a mild surprise, so I'm starting to think the receivers aren't (and maybe never really were) the problem. They're still below average as a unit, but now that T-Jack isn't throwing every other pass five yards out of bounds, the passing game has been looking reasonably good.
3) He's gotta be better than Jackson. Unfortunately, Childress seems to be slavishly devoted to the kid. Let's hope that's just a public stance, meant to preserve Jackson's ego.
I'd definitely trade a 1st and a 3rd for Anderson, but I'd also be interested in listening to offers for Quinn, if he was available. When the Vikings picked Adrian Peterson in the draft, I was a little disappointed they didn't take Quinn. Imagine if they had both...
November 28th, 2007 at 11:01 am
I'd franchise Anderson, but it's not my money.
Then, I'd re-evaluate after 2008 and figure out what to do. If Anderson plays like this again, then I probably try to deal Quinn. If Anderson becomes average in 2008, then the right choice might be to give Anderson another short contract.
There are too many times that having a quality backup QB is necessary, so it won't hurt to have Quinn on the bench.
Did you intentionally choose a bunch of "M" quarterbacks as examples of busts? I'm not sure if Tommy Maddox deserves to be lumped in with the others. He was never given the chance to fail. He had less than 200 combined pass attempts in his first 4 seasons, and then left the NFL. When he was finally given an opportunity in Pittsburgh, he played decently. Steeler fans like to bash Maddox, but he wasn't that bad for them.
November 28th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
I, too, think that Anderson is overrated and that it's the talent around him that's making him look better than he is.
It's a good point raised by an earlier post, that asks why Charlie Frye looked so bad, throwing to the same guys. I'd answer that Frye is just terrible, and doesn't have that instinct or, perhaps, courage, to play the position.
Anderson does, though I think he projects to be around a below-average level to average-level starting QB, or very good backup. And he has some "upside" -- if his decision-making and accuracy improve, he can be very productive.
November 28th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
Sign Anderson long term & trade Quinn. I think you've found something - that a single good season from an unheralded QB is a very strong sign of a great career - of value. Chicago & NYG are the obvious takers, but there are always plenty of teams that think they'd be good if they just had a better QB.
November 28th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
1. Browns should already be talking to Anderson's agent about an extension, at least to find out what type of contract he might want.
2. Look at giving him a 2 yr. extension in the 10 mil total range, or say 6 mil in base salary and some fairly easy to reach incentives. This way you can cut bait if he turns out to be a one year wonder. If you can't get an extension, you must sign him to the highest tender and plan to match most anything.
3. Comment #3 about WR's on teams looking to trade for him is spot on.
4. Presumably Anderson gets almost all 1st team reps with Edwards/Winslow/et al. Makes it a little harder for Quinn to have as much success with them next yr. vs. Anderson who has already proven to have a great rapport with them.
5. Not having seen the Browns, I would think that he is somewhat of a team leader and well-liked and respected in the locker room. What kind of a message does it send if you let him go without a fight?
6. My guess is you could trade Quinn a little easier than Anderson (Matt Schaub syndrome). That's what I would do, but NOT this offseason--keep him for one more year--a la San Diego.
November 28th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
Re: #6 of my previous post--except SD traded the older, breakout guy--still kind of early to tell if they made the right choice. Looks like it might be a wash when it's all said and done, although as a Saints fan I'm glad we got Brees instead of Culpepper.
November 28th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
I think I'd try and make a deal to get some sweet draft picks from a desperate team for Anderson and go with Quinn.
The guy played a few games last year, was throwing to Edwards/Winslow/Jurevicius, and the offense still stunk. Now you can blame part of it on Anderson being very inexperienced. You can certainly say he's better this year with some more experience. But I think what's really changed Cleveland's offense is the offensive line, one of the best in the league now. He has great protection to throw to those big weapons (who are also mostly young guys getting better w/exp).
You put a lot out there to get Quinn, he should be your guy. Unless Anderson does something really incredible the rest of the season (like a great postseason), you plan for the future w/Quinn. Anderson's near the top in interceptions and completing under 60% of his passes in a ridiculous comp. % season (24 QB's over 60%, 16 over 63%), so it's not all gravy so far.
Brady Quinn ran a Patriot-ish pro-style offense, completed over 60% in college and started a lot of games. He should be at least as good (just not this year obviously).
November 28th, 2007 at 11:33 pm
A couple of the comments have suggested that it's Edwards and Winslow who are making Anderson look good. Are you sure it isn't the other way around? Edwards and Winslow are both having the best seasons of their young careers, and I'll bet a big part of the reason is Anderson throwing to them instead of Frye (in addition to an improved O-Line and another year of experience under their belts).
I say keep Anderson and trade Quinn.
November 29th, 2007 at 8:24 am
I'd offer Anderson the highest tender or second highest tender and take the pick(s) offered. At least get a 1st rounder out of it from a QB deficient team, which could help them elsewhere. i wouldn't want to walk away empty handed like the Chargers did after the brees-rivers decision. Quinn showed good accuracy and mobility in college. I think it comes down to what is the potential value of the drafted players vs. the potential drop in value of QB play?
November 29th, 2007 at 9:16 am
Phil Savage seems to be leaning towards #2 as well:
Phil Savage holds all the cards in the poker game that involves the careers of quarterbacks Derek Anderson and Brady Quinn, and the immediate future of the Browns.
On Wednesday, the Browns' general manager laid one of them down.
For the first time publicly, Savage said he is leaning toward giv ing restricted free agent An derson the high est contract ten der after the season.
The tender of $2.562 million would guarantee the Browns first- and third-round draft choices if a QB-hungry team offered Anderson a long-term contract to be its starter.
http://blog.cleveland.com/sports/2007/11/savage_may_give_anderson_high.html
November 29th, 2007 at 10:13 am
Brady Quinn need not worry. He will get his opportunity. The only player to get totally screwed in a similar position is Aaron Rodgers who is in the unenviable position of playing behind Brett Favre. (I haven't heard any Favre retirement talk this year.)
November 29th, 2007 at 11:10 am
Anderson's age and size make me think Cleveland should keep him. He's got a ton of potential.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:32 am
the O-line. It's always the O-line. That's where the improvement has been this year. Also, if you watch a game with Anderson, you see that of the incomplete passes, gotta be about 40-50% are drops. on the bad side, the other half are so off the mark, you wonder if Charlie Frye stepped in under center again. But then, two plays later, he will make the fastest most accurate passes you have ever seen. Check out the touchdowns from the Texans game.
I'd say keep him for next year, whatever the cost. Quinn should compete for the starting job with him, and then management can decide. If you have an expensive backup, you have an expensive backup. So what. Teams spend millions on injured players every year. At least they'd be healthy.
They are both very young guys. Experience with the same personnel will only help everyone.
November 29th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Say what you will about Brady Quinn but remember that the Irish aren't doing nearly as well since he left. Also you have to hand it to Savage because he saw that Derek had talent and never gave up on him.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
Lots of good comments. I'll just add this. I don't think that all the other breakouts on Anderson's list of comparables played with bums on offense, while Anderson is playing with five future hall of famers. Is having a significantly improved offensive line with Thomas, Steinbach, and Shaffer moving to RT a factor? yes. Are Edwards and Winslow factors? yes. But is some of it Anderson? yes.
Did Trent Green benefit from playing behind Roaf et al, and with Holmes and Gonzalez? undoubtedly. Did Warner benefit from playing with the greatest show on turf? yes. But would Tony Banks have won the SuperBowl in 1999 and been MVP? N. O. !!
The question of whether Anderson's counting stats would be worse in Minnesota than in Cleveland, given the passing game supporting cast (which I would say it would be) is different than the question of whether Anderson would upgrade the quarterback play in Minnesota and be worth a first and third.
Anderson's numbers are most certainly benefiting from the supporting cast's maturation. But is there a guarantee Quinn can produce those same numbers? no.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
1st, look at the fact that we (the Browns) don't have a 1st round this season, so first and foremost, you kinda have to look and see if there is someone out there that you may really want, but you also haven't seen Brady in a real time evaluation.
For me consistency would be what I would go for. The browns haven't had the same starter for more than 1 season since Couch. therefore I would edge towards Keeping Anderson, and there isn't a Players in this upcoming draft that I would reach for, without giving up more than What we gave up.
Quinn does have plenty of upside, but just isn't proven. I wouldn't be looking to off him just yet. See what comes. Consitency, and moving foward is what is to come of the Browns.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:59 pm
It is interesting that those who feel Anderson isn't that good and the reason he is successful is because of his surrounding cast. Looking at other QB's having good seasons seem to have the same situation, Brady, Romo and Manning to name a few. The offensive line is supposed to block, receivers are suppose to catch, running backs are suppose to pick up extra yards at contact and the QB is suppose to throw the pass where his receivers catch it and no one else. 22 td's passing and 3 running(?) seem to show he is doing better than most QB's in the NFL and for a team that hasn't had one for years. This kid, 24 years old, isn't a fluke in fact with that gun and his ability to lead the offense they need to sign him to a Romo contract and anyone thinking they can lowball him is dreaming. This kid is a hot commodity with a long term future.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Heck, show us the +passing value of all the QBs since 1978, including the #1s in their first season of starting.
I bet fewer 5 or 10 guys could match Anderson. Who in their right mind would dump a guy who has had one of the best seasons for a first time starter in the past 30 years for an untested rookie?
Quinn is a cheap back-up as a #22 draft pick, there’s no reason for the Browns to dump his salary. The only reason San Diego dropped Brees was because Rivers was a very expensive top 5 draftee. The Browns can sign Anderson to a 4 or 5 year deal. They can always trade one or the other later if the league really thinks both are good. I personally doubt Quinn ever becomes the permanent starter in Cleveland.
His best bet is to hope Anderson gets hurt for a few games and he can play well in relief. Then, cash in like AJ Feeley, Matt Schaub, or Scott Mitchell did when they got their chances. Right now, no team will pay picks for Quinn. He’s stuck on the pines in Cleveland for the foreseeable future.
November 29th, 2007 at 6:25 pm
A pro franchise that builds on pieces that are working good gets better. A pro franchise that lets it's diamonds slip away sees it's prospects slip away. At this point in time Cleveland should keep DA. See how he does next year and draft/sign FA's for the porous D. Two years later the Browns should be in fine position to challenge for another 5 or so years.
On the other hand, all the D in the world won't overcome the time it takes to season Brady up for 2 or 3 years and we all see how the Browns D does, which is to say it is sporadic. Cleveland's record crashes and burns with BQ at the helm and who knows how long until the ship is righted?
Price-wise it would likely be better to match anyone else's offer as opposed to franchising DA. If someone knew how well DA would work out, he'd be getting 1st round money and he should get Tony Romo money now. Anything under $60 million for a contract would be a bargain for a quality young starting QB. DA will wind up being a good deal price-wise for Cleveland and stays in Browntown is how I see it going down.
Now can someone can Romeo Crennel?
November 30th, 2007 at 12:27 am
We have glaring needs at defensive line and RB, no 1st round pick and a very low 2ed. Two fine young QBs are a luxury that we simply can't afford. Trade either Quinn or Anderson for whoever fetches the most. Lots of good young QBs comming into the draft this year. However, if we don't make a move this year we could wind up with nothing for Anderson after next year unless we franshise him then. If Anderson excells again next year pony up or franshise him.
December 1st, 2007 at 11:20 am
If I was a betting man, and you know I am; I'd bet my life on it that Derek Anderson can never replicate a season like this again. He will never come anywhere close. I am alright with letting him finish what he started. I think you dance with the girl that's brought you to the dance at this point. But the minute that the Browns are eliminated--if it's not the AFC Championship or Superbowl, I want there to be an open battle for the QB position; at which case I think Quinn wins in a landslide. Remember, this is the same Anderson who was nearly cut from the Browns and the same Anderson who couldn't show the organization that he was better than Charlie Frye.
December 3rd, 2007 at 1:19 am
He practically handed Arizona the game today with those early turnovers. Let's not crown his ass yet.
Tennessee is now tied w/Cleveland at 7-5 for that 2nd wild card slot. Though the schedule favors Cleveland, it won't matter if Anderson's going to turn it over like he did today.
And Braylon Edwards made another ridiculous TD play (that probably shouldn't have been a TD)
December 4th, 2007 at 2:31 am
We have been losing for ten years almost and we draft a quaterback from Norte Dame who lost all his big games and failed under pressuere. And we get a no name guy who yes turened this team around. I do not believe if Quinn had been in that we would have this record. IS quinn talented, yes but i'll take a guy whose lucky and comes through in the end over a first round pick anyday.I have been a anderson supporter since the 30yd run vs. Kansas City last year. we are WINNING. and in the playoff hunt. If you don't remember the last quaterback to take us into the playoffs was Kelly Holcomb a noname, over Tim couch first round pick. could Anderson fail with another team sure. But he can play good with ares so I would sign him in a heartbeat try him again nexted year. If he fails give Quinn the shot. you can't boot Anderson out with one kind of bad game. No one even talked about Mannings 6 int. Or the fact that Anderson is looking alittle bit like a young Tom Brady. And who Professinals are saying has great fundimentals.Plus I don't care if hes famous or good looking hes winning. SCOTT complained of are record slipping to 7-5 who an the hell thought we could be 7-5 in the first place.Anderson has got us there.Yeah the recivers made plays on the ball. But the ball was put were only they could get it.
December 5th, 2007 at 12:46 am
For more arguments for Derek Anderson go to NFL. com look at Tom Brady's first year starting and see if his numbers are better than Anderson's. And if Anderson's numbers are better at this point already and he has a fourth quater Tom Brady instinct what do we have to look forward to?
December 14th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
TWO great QB prospects is a nice luxury to have. This is a great write-up examining past history to determine future likelihood of success.
However, these are just probabilities and no one can guarantee anything. Savage has got a huge choice ahead of him in the offseason, so lets hope we can get a look at Quinn in the coming weeks.
Who knows? Maybe the Browns can clinch a playoff spot this weekend after beating up the Bills, and rest DA in favor of Quinn in the last few games. (not start him, but at least get a couple snaps)
December 15th, 2007 at 12:06 am
Many people seem to be mentioning that Anderson is "over-rated" and that he didn't shine last year.
It is not as if the browns are going to give away the ENTIRE offense. He's playing well with his teammates. What surer sign of success. If anything, the browns offense could be better next year. LeCharles Bentley could return and the O-line can go from above average to juggernaut.
Of course, Jamal Lewis will likely be gone, but is that enough to throw away a quarterback whose having the best browns year since the 1980's?
Quinn has the value of his name, and his high powered madison avenue agents. Chicago should be breaking down the door to trade for Quinn. I'd much rather have chicago's one and three for Quinn, an unproven commodity, than to have a one and three for a QB who has the browns on the cusp of the playoffs in game 13.
How good could Quinn *possibly* be to blow it all up and start over?
Am I really to believe that Quinn puts the browns over the steelers twice this year? Or they would have won the Pats game? It's Andersons fault the browns lost to Arizona?
December 20th, 2007 at 8:57 pm
The last four sentences of the previous post hit the nail on the head. Obviously, it wasn't Anderson's fault the Browns lost to Arizona. He made an excellent throw, a heroic throw really, on the last play of the game, that was nullified by grossly incompetent officiating. He's been making that kind of throw all season.
December 10th, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Derek Anderson should obviously start. He is a Pro Bowl quarterback and Brady Quinn hasn't shown anything yet. I say do whayever it takes to make sure Derek Anderson doesn't hit the free agent market anytime soon.