Bracie Smathers said:
They do if they earn the right. DA earned the right to be named starter and its because he had 1st Pro Bowl alternate production in his first year starting. The Browns GM stated the facts and you did try to use poor examples or other GMs using false bravado with bad QBs in tenuous starting positions as examples and I took my jab at Tavius Jackson for obvious reasons so you could get a dose of your own medicine. I'm sick of the DA jabs with people with various agendas so if you feel you have a legit case then make one and don't cherry pick or scoff. DA earned the right to be named starter based on his production.
Get over yourself.I
like Derek Anderson and I agree that he's earned the right to fight for a starting gig
somewhere - just like every QB in the league not named Brady or Manning has to. But the Browns owe him, or any other player for that matter,
absolutely nothing. It's Savage's job to make the team as good as it can be both in the short term AND the long term. And if that means trading Anderson because Quinn can do the job and it improves the team in other areas, then he will do it. If it means keeping Anderson, he will do it.
The fact is, however that Anderson had a QB rating of 66.6 in December which was
down from a respectable 81.5 in November, which was
down from an outrageous 104.2 in October. For those of you scoring at home, that's a bad trend and suggests the possibility that as teams gained film study on him that he really was just an average QB.
Stop with the Anderson man-crush for just one second and understand what I'm saying. Savage saying that Anderson is the starter at this point in the year is designed for one reason - to drive up the value to see who may bite with an outrageous offer. I'm sure he saw how San Diego was left holding an empty bag when Drew Brees left and he doesn't want to make the same mistake.