Thread: The Case To Dump Anderson

DO NOT MESS WITH MY THREAD - you don't want to read this. Then get out!!!

Here are a few of the reasons the Browns should clear the way for Brady Quinn to be the starting quarterback next season by trading Anderson and getting as much as they can for him now while his value is at it’s peak.

How can you commit long-term to Anderson, who throws so many interceptions and makes poor decisions?

Anderson is what he is. The Ravens drafted him in the sixth-round and cut him when they have been looking for a quarterback for a long time. Anderson played well in 2007, but he showed in the second half of the season the knock on him. He sometimes forces passes when he shouldn’t and throws many interceptions.

How can you not trade Anderson if you can get a No. 1 and No. 3 for him now?

The Browns need help on defense and they could use those two picks to fortify the defense. If the Browns can’t sign him long term, they would be in a position of losing him and getting nothing for him.

How can you make a commitment to a guy when you have a blue-chip No. 1 quarterback already signed for four more years?

The Browns couldn’t decide between Charlie Frye or Anderson the whole off-season. That’s why they gave up their No. 1 draft choice in 2008 to draft Quinn.

How can you commit to Anderson when arguably, many quarterbacks (ok, maybe not Charlie Frye) could’ve put up big numbers in this offense, with the weapons and the offensive line the Browns have?

Anderson isn’t nearly as athletic as Quinn, who did it all at Notre Dame. Look how bad the Fighting Irish were this past season without Quinn. Anderson has a rocket arm, but he’s slow and looked as though he regressed as the season went on.

How can you not go to Quinn?

He was drafted to be the face of the franchise for the future. Anderson was just keeping the seat warm for a little while. He did very well, but as Phil Savage said the Browns have the weapons and the line around the quarterback for him to be successful. Quinn has everything that Anderson has.

LINK

I agree. It should be an easy choice for the Browns to let Anderson go and start the Brady Quinn era. I think Anderson is a product of having great talent around him. Put Quinn in the lineup and I think he'll really light it up.

Well, if Quinn doesn't demonstrate that he's the guy, they can't really go to him. I have no clue what is going on in Cleveland and if they think Quinn is the guy, but I will say, if they can get anything for Anderson, the time to do it is now. Personally, I don't think Quinn will cut it.

You're always just one tackle away from a back-up qb playing the rest of the season. Having two good qb's is really not a bad situation to be in. Anderson should remain the starter until the Golden Boy takes away the job.

Originally Posted by mclark

You're always just one tackle away from a back-up qb playing the rest of the season. Having two good qb's is really not a bad situation to be in. Anderson should remain the starter until the Golden Boy takes away the job.

Two quality QB's is a good thing, if you can afford it. However, you can only invest so much in a guy who will likely see limited playing time. Anderson will get a big contract from someone, I don't think it will be from Cleveland.

Anderson won games this year. Quinn isn't going to have the same success Anderson did this year. Play Anderson until he gives the BROWNS a reason not to play him.

I don't think there is any way the Browns would get a #1 pick for Anderson. MAYBE a #2, but they should get whatever they can for him now.

I think Quinn will be just fine there.

I doubt the Browns could get a first rounder for Derek Anderson. I mean, there are very few players in this league that could demand a number one pick that are much better than DA, although I do believe him to be a pretty good QB.

If the Browns want a real chance to make the playoffs this year they should stick with DA. If they want to forgo a true shot at the playoffs than deal DA and stick with Quinn.

These are the pro and cons with each situation in my opinion.

Pro for keeping Derek Anderson. Your team went 10-6 with him making plays for you all year with a terrible defense. Your offense will only get better as your line matures, and Derek Anderson will improve because this will be his second year starting.

Cons for keeping Derek Anderson. You guys gave up a lot to secure Quinn and apparently you believe in him. It will be very hard to not stick to your guns after all of that. Derek Anderson does have a decent shot of being a flash in the pan. It has happened in the past for many QBs, and it could happen for him now. The poor play of Anderson at the end of the year may signify that, or it could have been the collective heart of the Browns clamping up at the thought of the playoffs.


Pro for Starting Quinn. The man that you imagine as the franchise starting QB for your team gets to play sooner. He benefitted from a year of sitting on the bench which will help shorten the learning curve for him. This has worked well for QBs of good stature in the past (most recently McNair and Palmer).

Cons for starting Quinn. It is very rare that a young QB leads his team to the playoffs. With DA going into the season you know you have a shot at the playoffs. With Quinn this is doubtful. Young QBs get rattled and make dumb mistakes, barring a miracle season A La Big Ben's first year this will be the case.

QB is arguably the most important position in the game. I don't know the whole situation (salary cap etc.), but I think you've got to keep Anderson. He earned the starting spot this season, and until Quinn can take the job away there's no sense in "crowing him" yet. It'll only make Quinn that much better in the long run to earn the job.

I would love for the Chiefs to trade for Quinn. I doubt the Browns do.

I think the total collapse of Notre Dame football after he left could be a good arguement that he's a winner.

Originally Posted by DallasChief

I would love for the Chiefs to trade for Quinn. I doubt the Browns do.

I think the total collapse of Notre Dame football after he left could be a good arguement that he's a winner.

KC desperately needs a quarterback...

Originally Posted by MissouriBronc

KC desperately needs a quarterback...

I'll agree with that.


And a left tackle. A right tackle. A right guard. And a center.

Originally Posted by DallasChief

I'll agree with that.


And a left tackle. A right tackle. A right guard. And a center.

So...if you can get Anderson for a second-round pick, Jake Long with the first pick...there's a good foundation, right.

I mean, I have full confidence in Carl Peterson ******* that up, but I think they should at least try to do that...

Originally Posted by DallasChief

I would love for the Chiefs to trade for Quinn. I doubt the Browns do.

I think the total collapse of Notre Dame football after he left could be a good arguement that he's a winner.

I don't, the Failing, er fighting Irish also lost their RB, their receivers, a good chunk of their defense. They lost a huge chunk of their productive players......

Originally Posted by MissouriBronc

So...if you can get Anderson for a second-round pick, Jake Long with the first pick...there's a good foundation, right.

I mean, I have full confidence in Carl Peterson ******* that up, but I think they should at least try to do that...

If I buy into the idea that Anderson wasn't a one year wonder, then yes that would be a good foundation.

Is Anderson worth a second round pick? I haven't really watched many Browns games.