3) "We've gone as far as we can with Anderson" argument, and its corrolary, the "Quinn has more upside" argument. History does not bear this out at all. Question: if I could give you Jim Harbaugh's career in place of Brady Quinn, would you take it? In other words, over/under, is Quinn going to be better than Harbaugh? Harbaugh was an above average, non-first overall, first round drafted quarterback. Half of the first rounders (excluding the #1 overalls) drafted between 1970-2001 never threw for 15,000 yards in their careers. As for the upside, we don't know what Quinn is capable of, but the opinions seem to be he has a different skill set, more accurate, heady, less arm. If that is true, then Anderson has the greater upside. The sometimes dumb gunslinger QB's who throw for a high TD rate early in their career, accompanied by an above average INT rate, and an average comp %, have a higher upside than those that complete a decent amount, throw for an average to low TD rate, and avoid interceptions. Comp % is the one area where new QB's improve the most--not all do, but its where the biggest jumps occur.
4) "The DA we saw over the last 4 weeks is the true DA" argument. Focusing, and placing greater weight, on the recent is a normal and understandable human response. I think all games are evidence of the true DA, not just cherry picked selections. But, is it true that young QB's who regress or decline in the second of half of a debut season are worse going forward than those that appear to be getting better? I can't find strong evidence of that. In fact, most of the recent young breakouts actually did regress in the second half of their first season starting. Anderson is not even the biggest regresser, though he did have the most td passes in the first 8, so he had more room to do so. Eli (14td,5int first 8, 9/12 last 8), Bulger (13 ints last 8) and Aaron Brooks (16 ints last 8!) all had much worse second halves compared to the first halves. Brady, McNair, Roethlisberger, Brees, and Griese were also playing worse and the league was catching up to them. Romo was too, though by my method, he was actually about equal. Others who stayed the same from first 8 to last 8 were Brunell, McNabb, Vick and Rivers. The only improvers were Culpepper, Pennington, and Palmer. I don't have game by game data earlier than 1995, but I can say that, while a quarterback at 27 years old is typically better than he was at 24 years old, it is not a smooth process, where every 4-6 games is better than the previous. Guys like Favre (24 interceptions) and Brees regressed in year two, after solid first seasons starting.