DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Star Status of Anderson still up in the air.

FINALLY, a QB thread! Pretty sure this is the next 8 page "QB warzone" thread so come prepared but keep it civil.

http://blog.cleveland.com/sports/2008/02/star_status_of_qb_derek_anders.html

Star status of QB Derek Anderson is still up in the air
Posted by Bud Shaw February 03, 2008 17:49PM
Categories: Browns, Bud Shaw
Super Bowls aren't what they used to be for quarterbacks.

Trent Dilfer was let go after a Super Bowl win, Rex Grossman benched after a Super Bowl appearance.

So let's see. How much can an invitation to go miniature bowling at the Super Bowl be expected to do for Derek Anderson, spotted in Phoenix squeezing some star status out of his breakout year -- also known as the Browns' 10-6, non- playoff season.

Given what his representatives seem to be pursuing in contract talks with the Browns, it seems fitting Anderson's Super Bowl week itinerary also included acceptance of a fantasy league Sleeper of the Year award.

The separation of fact and fantasy drives many negotiations involving the premier position in football. Anderson's negotiations are no different.

Fantasy: Tom Brady is a sixth-round draft pick. Anderson is, too.

Fact: Who says Anderson isn't another Scott Mitchell, the 6-6 quarterback whose Detroit Lions got carried away after one terrific season (32 TDs, 12 interceptions) and showered him with a contract it regretted a year later.

Fantasy: Anderson's reps are said to be measuring him for Tony Romo money -- $30¤million guaranteed.

Fact: What makes Romo, still winless in the postseason, worth his salary?

Guaranteeing Anderson $30¤million based on one good half season and one mediocre finish doesn't make a shred of football sense.

Anderson's success didn't come while throwing to Darrin Chiaverini and Kevin Johnson while handing off to Travis Prentice and ducking for cover behind a colander of an offensive line.

It came throwing to Braylon Edwards, Kellen Winslow Jr. and Joe Jurevicius while watching Jamal Lewis romp behind one of the league's better offensive lines.

In a Super Bowl tour that included appearances, interviews and marketing opportunities, Anderson admitted a measure of disappointment in the Browns' initial contract offer of three years and somewhere between $15¤million and $20¤million.

So long as this is all part of the dance and Anderson knows he benefited from Rob Chudzinski's offense as much as or more than it benefited from him, the Browns shouldn't be too alarmed. But that's not clear yet.

Anderson told The Plain Dealer his people are on another level in what they think he deserves. (There you go, Vers, looking for what Anderson said, not a direct quote but it's there)

You might say another planet.

This is not unexpected. These are heady days for Anderson, a Pro Bowl alternate who began last season behind an incumbent (however shaky) and in front of a first-round draft choice.

But only half of that has changed. The Browns shouldn't willingly turn the job over to Brady Quinn, who looked good enough in brief appearances. But Quinn is strong enough leverage if the two sides can't reach a multi-year contract agreement and the Browns give Anderson the highest tender allowed.

A desperate suitor could sign Anderson to Romo money, forcing the Browns to match. Choosing not to step up and keep their quarterback would bring two draft choices -- a first-rounder and a third-rounder.

There are worse endings. The absolute worst would be overpaying for Anderson before they find out if it's the cockpit or the pilot that made the Browns' offense avoid the turbulence of seasons past.

bshaw@plaind.com, 216-999-5639

"Another level" doesn't mean that he is looking for Romo money. I believe that the biggest hold-up with the contract is the length. Also, these negotions are fairly new so they will go back and forth for a while, but if they re-sign him I would be willing to bet that it isn't as high as Romo's.

This writer is a bad writer. How do you state something as a fact, yet end it with a question mark? Fact: What makes Romo, still winless in the postseason, worth his salary? That is no more of a fact than any of the deadbate about who our QB will be next year, from either perspective on this board.

How is this a fact: Fact: Who says Anderson isn't another Scott Mitchell, the 6-6 quarterback whose Detroit Lions got carried away after one terrific season (32 TDs, 12 interceptions) and showered him with a contract it regretted a year later.

Other than the fact that Scott Mitchell did get a fat contract and the Lions regretted it, but the entire sentence started with 'who' which should have ended with another question mark. This again is not a fact. A possiblity of course, but not a fact that DA will be the same result as Scott Mitchell. He could, but to state it as fact, is to state as fact that the pats would win the SB because they beat the giants 5 weeks ago.

Also, I didn't hear a direct quote that DA or his people want 'Romo money', it is implied that they want a lot more than was offered, but not 'Romo money'.

The negotiations basically just began, both sides have let slip what they are expecting to the media, as the 2/28 deadline draws closer we will see mroe of this and or a contract finalized, or finally the tender.

Quote:

---

Anderson told The Plain Dealer his people are on another level in what they think he deserves. (There you go, Vers, looking for what Anderson said, not a direct quote but it's there)

---

That's not what Anderson said. It's nothing more than the writer's interpretation of what Anderson said. If he had the quote to work with why did he not present the quote itself instead of taking it upon himself to interpret it?

Actually, the key to the "Anderson quote" is that it says "his people are on another level in what they think he deserves"

Furthermore, there are two things that the "quote" doesn't say...

1. It doesn't say that it's Anderson's opinion and that's what he wants.

2. It doesn't mention "Romo money" at all.


Most likely Anderson has no idea whatsoever what his worth is. Most likely he doesn't even bother himself with that, leaving it instead to his agents who have experience in these matters. He did say he was disappointed in the first offer and, as many have said, that is likely because a three year offer doesn't sound like the Browns are totally sold on his being the quarterback of the future.

That would be disappointing to anyone in his situation. But that in itself no way implies that DA personally is demanding Romo money.

The closest you can come to DA saying anything of the sort is the above quote, which is from the writer of this article who did not actually talk to DA. It's not an actual quote from DA himself. And even it states that DA was explaining "his people['s]" opinion. Not his own.

Personally I'd like to hear the actual quote from DA instead of someone telling me their interpretation of what he said. This is the second time we've been told in the media what DA said on this issue but neither of them actually quoted him.

And the problem I have with that is that sports journalists do the same thing you attempt to do. That is to try and make implacations from less than actual facts and pass it off as the truth while basing your opinions on the implication as though that had any merit.

It doesn't.

Savage has stated what he wants to do with DA, why he wants to do it that way and how it fits the plan for what is best for the Browns...

link to locked thread/story is mid-page

...but the actual quotes from Phil Savage get ignored while someone's condensed interpretations of what "Anderson said", along with, "sources close to the situation" and things that are "believed" to be true, (believed by who knows who btw), gets all your attention.

There's absolutely no reason you can't have the opinons that you have. I can understand your wanting to read between the lines in hopes of figuring out what is going on behind the scenes. Hell, we all do that.

The problem stems from when you put great faith in a few disassociated comments from the media who know no more about it than we do as they merely "believe" things and slyly interpret quotes instead of publishing them.

When you do that, and proclaim them and their meaning as factual because they make sense to you, expect to get called out on it. And you did it again in your very first post in your new thread. Even taking that opportunity to call out a member by name thinking you had the proof he was asking you for.

But you don't.

Something inside is telling me that you are more interested in the sensationalism of the story than you are in the actual facts. Something in the way you've been posting implies to me that facts themselves are not exciting enough for you. It's a bit like the conspiracy theorists but there is no conspiracy here to theorize, only an interesting subject to make more entertaining than it is.

That really appears to be your goal.

Finally, if you continue to post in this manner expect your new thread to turn into a piece of crap like the last one did. And that's a shame because the topic itself is a good one for discussion.

Discussion of the facts and the posibilities they contain.

Kinda seems like Anderson's head has gotten a little bit bigger than it should be, had the Browns not picked him up on the waiver wire from the Rat's he might never have even gotten the shot that he had. Now he's too good to sign a 3 year deal with the team that gave him every chance to show his talent not to mention that his core of Receiver's is probably one of the better trio's in the NFL and arguably one of the best Offensive Lines in the NFL.

If Anderson wants Tony Romo money he's nuts no team will give him that other than maybe Atlanta or Miami so if this is true about him i'd rather just see him go and us get a 1st and a 3rd in the draft which would have a bigger impact than keeping 2 starting QB's both with big heads wanting to be "THE" guy.

Here's a direct quote from DA form your own opinion but either way you look at it, it points to he wants to hit the lottery.



Asked if the three-year commitment from the Browns was a disappointment, Anderson said: "Yeah, uh, a little bit. But I'm not going to complain about it. But obviously our guys are on another . . . I'm just letting them kind of deal with it."

Your guys are on another level?

"Yeah. I'm not exactly sure the whole gist of it."

Everyone can stop with the "DA's Donkeys" and "Brady's Brats" and "pompous ass" that we had in yesterday's thread.

NOW.

Passan: Don't Sweat the Schedule

By Rich Passan
OBR Columnist
Posted Feb 3, 2008


Rich argues that neither Derek Anderson's accomplishments or fans optimism should be dismissed based on the team's schedule, supposed weak schedule in 2007 or tough schedule in 2008.


A byproduct of the hot button that is the Derek Anderson-Brady Quinn debate is now clearly in focus.

It might be boring at first, but rest assured it will pick up in interest and be riveting – OK, maybe not riveting, but certainly noteworthy – at its conclusion. It will require extreme patience because it involves statistics.

There is no better way to drag down a story than to load it with stats, so a calculated risk is being taken here.

One of the arguments buttressing the negative comments directed at Anderson was the Browns’ relatively easy schedule last season.

At the beginning of the 2007 season, it was noted how difficult the schedule was going to be. In 2006, the 16 teams on the Browns’ 2007 schedule (including two games against division opponents) compiled a record of 137-119. Six teams (if you include Baltimore twice) had winning records. And five others (if you include Cincinnati and Pittsburgh twice) had .500 records. Only five losing teams – two of them 7-9 – on the schedule.

As it turned out, the 137-119 teams of 2006 wound up 113-143 in 2007 with only three winning teams. Why? Because the 10-6 New York Jets of 2006 were 4-12 in 2007, the 6-10 Miami Dolphins were 1-15, the 8-8 St. Louis Rams were 3-13, the 7-9 San Francisco 49ers were 5-11 and the 26-6 Baltimore Ravens were 10-22.

Who knew?

Too many stats. I know. But hang in there.

“How many winning teams did (Anderson) beat?” railed the Quinn supporters. And then they answered the question. “One,” they said. And they were not incorrect. That team was the Seattle Seahawks.

What wasn’t mentioned was that on the 16-game schedule, the Browns played only three winning teams, unless you count both Pittsburgh games, in which case that’s four.

They lost to the New England Patriots – then again, who didn’t? – but were extremely competitive until a last-minute New England interception for a touchdown made the final score more lopsided than it really was.

The first Pittsburgh game was the well-known blowout that bought Charlie Frye a one-way ticket to Seattle and introduced Anderson as his successor. That game will be ignored for obvious reasons. But the second Steelers game will not.

That game would have wound up in the victory column with any kind of a decent performance by the defense in the second half. The Browns held a 21-9 halftime lead – the beneficiary of a long kickoff return by Joshua Cribbs and a Brodney Pool interception deep in Pittsburgh territory – and contained the Pittsburgh offense.

The defense, which held the Steelers to three first-half field goals, buckled in the second half as the Pittsburgh defense shut down the Cleveland offense. The offense, which carried the defense for most of the season, needed a clutch performance and didn’t get it.

So the argument that Anderson – not the Browns, just Anderson – beat just one winning team doesn’t resonate as one of the reasons to hasten his departure. It seems he gets credit for losing, but no credit for winning. Nothing new there.

More stats.

The Browns played 12 games against teams that wound up .500 or worse in 2007. And they won nine of those 12 games, splitting two games with .500 teams (Arizona and Houston).

The new season’s schedule reveals Browns opponents in 2007 compiled a record of 140-116, a three-game improvement over last season.

Gone is the weak AFC West, replaced by perhaps the best division in the National Football League, the AFC South. That division improved from 34-30 in 2006 to 42-22 this past season.

Gone is the NFC West, replaced by maybe the second-best division in the NFL, the NFC East. That division went from 32-32 in 2006 to 40-24 this past season.

On paper, yes, the 2008 schedule is quite a bit tougher than the 2007 schedule turned out to be. But does that mean once they start playing the games, everything will fall into place and the 140-116 of this past season will be repeated?

Not necessarily. Especially if you use this past season as an example of how much the statistical landscape of the NFL can change in just one season.

Who knew the Browns would improve from 4-12 to 10-6? That shocking development came from out of nowhere. What’s to say a team like Washington might not trail off in 2008 after losing its head coach?

The New York Giants are having a magical season, but there is no guarantee they can repeat in 2008. That’s what makes stories like this so much fun. You cannot predict the future based solely on the past. You can try, but at your own risk.

The Browns, for example, should be better this coming season. At least on paper.

That’s what Browns fans said following the 2002 season when the club finished 9-7, qualified for the playoffs and came within a dropped pass by Dennis Northcutt in Pittsburgh of advancing to the second round.

The 2003 season looked so promising. Who could have forecasted the nose dive that would ensue?

It started with a quarterback controversy (sound familiar?), was exacerbated by an economic roster purge and wound up a disastrous 5-11, slowly paving the way for the departure of Butch Davis the following season.

So despite what the schedule for 2008 says, do not take it seriously at this time. Too many unknown factors could skew the picture between now and when the games are played.

Who knows? By then, Brady Quinn might be the opening-day quarterback.


http://cle.scout.com/2/725839.html

Last season going in we were forcast to have the 4th tuffest schedule in the NFL, it turned out not to be the case. I said it before thinking the Browns will come out losers because we had a weak schedule in 2007 is premature, it could come to pass that the teams we play next season will fall on their collective faces as well. As long as the Browns aren't one of the teams that falls on their face I am OK with the teams we play falling on theirs..

Last seasons schedule turned out to be just what the Dr. ordered, it allowed the Browns to gain confidence in themselfs, and this upcoming season might look tuffer, but it could actually turn out to be no tuffer then this season was. At the end of the day you don't get to pick your schedule you only get to play it.

The QB controversy is in full swing just check out this board as your proof. I think BQ will be the opening day QB, because I believe he is the future direction of this franchise, but I will not be disappointed if DA is the starter, I think he did a great job, and I think he can improve. Doesn't make me right though, I can live with whomever RAC thinks should be the starter, and I will defend the decision whenever people start ripping his choice. At this juncture MO is that it's important to support the team thru good and bad, and that especially holds true for the QB, whomever that happens to be???

JMHO

Brown to the Bone

j/c

Here is what I think.

Phil Savage is the master of the smokescreen.

I would bet that he really wants to see the "negotiations" make it look like he thinks DA is all that...BUT...darn...we just couldn't come to terms. HOWEVER, we were soooooo close on $$$, but the length just didn't work for us. See...we think he is worth it, but we have this other guy. So...if YOU think DA is worth it, you are not alone...we agree with you. Just didn't work for us given our BQ situation.

So...we'll just have to tender him at the deadline and try and get something done after that.

Yea right.

All this smokescreen is designed to get someone to bite...and he will take less than the 1 and 3 that the tender calls for.

I think he is playing this perfectly. The fact that we are all getting pissed at eachother proves that point.

I love being in the driver's seat here.

We will get a couple of good picks for DA and the BQ era will begin.

You heard it here first...well, first after time # 1,000,000,000.

Quote:

---

I love being in the driver's seat here.

---

There is no doubt we have the upper hand, with him being a RFA and knowing that BQ is in the wings.

Quote:

---

We will get a couple of good picks for DA and the BQ era will begin.

---

Don't bet the farm on that.....we may end up dealing him for one 2nd rounder. Or two thirds. Or a 3rd and two 5ths.

Don't bet that the 1st and 3rd will fall into our lap.....that has only happened once in 15 years......

I asked this in another thread but didn't get an answer as the DEADBATE was going on too strong.

Does anyone think that other teams have allready contacted Andersons Camp or Savage and hinted at interest?

Can they do that legally by NFL rules?

I just think that if other teams have put fliers out there that could really affect both camps.

Just curious and if anyone could answer I would appreciate it.

Thats what he said Shep

Quote:

---

All this smokescreen is designed to get someone to bite...and he will take less than the 1 and 3 that the tender calls for.

---

I tend to agree on this viewpoint. Phil seems to have a handle on how to blow that smoke just right. He might be able to fleece a team this offseason, and i bet it involves DA. He's expendable enough, and worth enough to pull something our way for once! Not saying it'll be a 1st and 3rd, but we'll definitely see a return on one of our investments this offseason.

Quote:

---

Thats what he said Shep

---

By golly he did. I got stuck on the wording of "couple of good picks" and had it in my craw that he meant 1st and 3rd even though he said otherwise.

Somebody help me get this egg off my face.....

May as well throw this other article from yesterday on here as well, as the other thread got locked soon after I posted it there:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SUNDAY SPECIAL: Wiggle room needed with QBs

With Quinn in wings, Browns won't sign Anderson to long deal

Sunday, February 3, 2008
BY Todd Porter
REPOSITORY SPORTS WRITER



Browns quarterback Derek Anderson found himself in the middle of all the Super Bowl hype. Because of the season Anderson had — he could land in the Pro Bowl if Tom Brady pulls out — he was in Phoenix as a product pitchman.

Anderson indicated in an television interview he would like a six-year contract in Cleveland. It is clear that Anderson's representatives are using Tony Romo's six-year deal as a starting point.

The Browns are not going to give Anderson six years. Five? Maybe. Four? Likely.

Cleveland's first offer to Anderson was for three years, around $18 million. Romo got six years with $30 million guaranteed. So depending on how much of the $18 million is guaranteed, Cleveland is in the ballpark but only willing to go about half the term.

General Manager Phil Savage did shed some light on the team's approach during a talk at The Chapel in Marlboro, where he was the guest of Pastor Joel Cochran.

The Browns have two options with Anderson, a restricted free agent. They can sign him to a long-term deal or high-tender him a one-year contract for about $2.56 million. Anderson is then free to negotiate with other teams, and the Browns could match any offer or let him sign and receive first- and third-round draft picks as compensation.

"Another option is ... a real contract ... anywhere from two years to seven years," Savage said. "Something long enough to keep him on the Browns, but short enough so that we're not taking the soul and competitiveness away from Brady Quinn.

"We have two quarterbacks under 25. That's rare in the NFL. We're trying to prolong trying to have to make a decision and choose a fork in the road with either Derek or Brady Quinn."

Savage is right, from the team's perspective. Based on where Cleveland's offense is and the kind of season Anderson had, Cleveland can't afford to hitch its wagon to either quarterback. It has to let the competition play out. Savage thinks Anderson's 2007 season was only a start.

"He's only scratched the surface of what he can be," Savage said. "People are more familiar with Brady than Derek. Derek is not chopped liver. He was Mr. Football and Mr. Basketball in Oregon. ... We're hoping to keep both."

LEWIS IS ANOTHER STORY

Savage tried his best not to exude praise on free-agent running back Jamal Lewis, but he couldn't help himself. Lewis, only 28, proved he still has something left. He likened Cleveland's first offer to Lewis to a tennis serve.

"We served the ball and probably didn't get it over the net. It was by design, I guess," Savage said. "They'll hit one back to us, and we'll go back and forth some of the next few weeks."

Savage said Lewis told him and others in the team's complex that he wants to finish his career in Cleveland. The team needed the toughness Lewis brought.

"When we went to play the Steelers ... Jamal walked in there with his chin up and looked them eyeball to eyeball," Savage said. "The Browns, for a whole, when you start off like they did, sometimes you shrivel up when it's tough. I felt like Jamal gave us a demeanor we needed."

Savage said a deal probably wouldn't get done until a minute before free agency begins.

College/HS stuff removed from article

Quote:

---

As for PS talking to other teams I am pretty certain he has. At this point PS publicly at least has said he intends to go into next season with DA and BQ, then he adds the well someone could make us a offer that would be hard to not look at?? From PS point of view tho he can talk to anybody he wants too as it regards DA, but as time goes by the price will come up from what teams may or may not have offered for DA to this point. Bet the house though PS has fielded offers.

---

I doubt that he has, because he would be dumb to have done so, and other teams would be dumb to offer anything at this point.

The Browns have until March 1st to make a tender offer. Why would another team make a bid on DA without the knowledge that they may be able to get him for less if he is tendered lower? And why would we entertain offers while in the midst of attempting to negotiate a long term deal?


There are different tender levels.....each comes with a different form of compensation:

For Restricted Free Agents with three Accrued Seasons (Capped Years):

(1) Right of First Refusal: one year player contract with paragraph 5 salary of at least $721,600 for the 2006 League Year, $850,000 for the 2007 League Year, $927,000 for the 2008 League Year, $1,010,000 for the 2009 League Year, $1,101,000 for the 2010 League Year, $1,200,000 for the 2011 League Year, or $1,308,000 for the 2012 League Year, as applicable;

(2) Right of First Refusal and Draft Selection at Player’s Original Draft Round: one year Player Contract with a paragraph 5 salary of at least (a) the amount set forth in Subsection (b)(i)(1) above, or (b) 110% of the player’s prior year’s paragraph 5 salary, whichever is greater, in addition, if option (b) applies, all other terms of the player’s prior year contract are carried forward unchanged (this subsection is subject to the rules of Subsection (c) below);

(3) Right of First Refusal, One Second Round Draft Selection: one year Player Contract with a paragraph 5 salary of at least (a) $1,300,000 in the 2007 League Year, $1,417,000 in the 2008 League Year, $1,545,000 in the 2009 League Year, $1,684,000 in the 2010 League Year, $1,835,000 in the 2011 League Year, or $2,000,000 in the 2012 League Year, as applicable, or (b) 110% of the player’s prior year’s paragraph 5 salary, whichever is greater, in addition, if option (b) applies, all other terms of the player’s prior year contract are carried forward unchanged;

(4) Right of First Refusal and One First Round Draft Selection: one year Player Contract with a paragraph 5 salary of at least (a) $1,573,000 for the 2006 League Year, $1,850,000 for the 2007 League Year, $2,017,000 for the 2008 League Year, $2,198,000 for the 2009 League Year, $2,396,000 for the 2010 League Year, $2,611,000 for the 2011 League Year, or $2,846,000 for the 2012 League Year, as applicable, or (b) 110% of the player’s prior year’s paragraph 5 salary, whichever is greater, in addition, if option (b) applies, all other terms of the player’s prior year contract are carried forward unchanged.

(5) Right of First Refusal, One First Round Draft Selection, and One Third Round Draft Selection: one year Player Contract with a Paragraph 5 Salary of at least (a) $2,096,600 for the 2006 League Year, $2,350,000 for the 2007 League Year, $2,562,000 for the 2008 League Year, $2,792,000 for the 2009 League Year, $3,043,000 for the 2010 League Year, $3,317,000 for the 2011 League Year, or $3,616,000 for the 2012 League Year, as applicable, or (b) 110% of the player’s prior year’s Paragraph 5 Salary, whichever is greater, in addition, if option (b) applies, all other terms of the player’s prior year contract are carried forward unchanged.


Once we offer DA one of these tenders, then another team can make an offer sheet based on that tender. We have 7 days to either match the offer or let him go to that team for the compensation provided by the tender level. There can only be one offer sheet on the table at a time, so it's not like once we make a tender there will be 5 teams with offers out there that the Browns and DA can mull over.

Once the tender is made, then we will know what we are dealing with in terms of possibilities of getting compensation for DA.

Or you can tender a RFA and trade him without any other team signing an offer sheet.

"Furthermore, there are two things that the "quote" doesn't say...
1. It doesn't say that it's Anderson's opinion and that's what he wants.
2. It doesn't mention "Romo money" at all."

1. It says "His People" - they represent him - the fact that he recognizes them as "HIS people" I guess we can ASSume they speak for him in this matter. Not uncommon at all...same with BQ in his holdout - HIS people handled the negotiations.

2. Not in that one liner...but it was implied earlier that "HIS people" were looking to get around Romo Money or possibly the Romo Guarantee. Which again is an ASSumption - but not out of the norm. I'm sure Savage is willing to move up a little in some things he offered and I'm sure DA's People are willing to move down a little from what they state as their starting point. That is not unusual either.

As for facts...of course the writer didn't present any, that comes as no surprise, just another Bozo...wait a fact presented was some Fantasy League award.

One thing that is apparent is they are far apart - too far to negotiate off of one another's offer to find some happy medium.

JMHO

Save all the BS about right to 1st refusal. Teams know the Browns have 2 QB's and that they may be willing to part company with him. PS has let it be known that the Browns will tender DA at a 1 and a 3, thats not me making stuff up that has been put out there and I heard it straight from the horses mouth. That said teams can hope to get DA cheeper but it's not likely to happen. If I were to bet right now and I would be willing to bet anything you like the Browns will in fact tender DA at a 1 and 3, that to me goes without saying. From there the only remaining question is will DA sign a deal with the Browns or will he be tendered, and even if he is signed that doesn't mean the Browns won't trade him.

So as of this moment, I "think", that teams already have a very clear picture as to where the Browns will tender DA, now the question really is can they make a better deal?? And guess who they have to make that deal with???

I admit it's all opinion on my part, but I can't think of a reason that a team wouldn't make inquiries to see what DA's status is with the team since no matter what they have to go thru the Browns to get DA, anyway. Even if it's just a call saying what would you take for DA's rights? Are you willing to work a deal we feel a 1 and 3 is going to be a bit high. But bet your ass DA will be tendered at a 1 and 3. That hardly makes it a fact but at this juncture to me anyways that part is a done deal. From there teams have to try to work a deal, and that can happen at anytime including now, today...

BTW I understand how the RFA deal works...

Brown to the Bone

Quote:

---

Fantasy: Anderson's reps are said to be measuring him for Tony Romo money -- $30¤million guaranteed.

---

Read the quote above.... It only says that DAs Reps are SAID to be looking for Romo Money... it confirms NOTHING..... it's a reporter talking out his butt...


The superbowl is over,, the Giants upset the Pats,, and this is all we have to talk about.. hasn't this subject been beat to death.,.,

Quote:

---

I asked this in another thread but didn't get an answer as the DEADBATE was going on too strong.

Does anyone think that other teams have allready contacted Andersons Camp or Savage and hinted at interest?

Can they do that legally by NFL rules?

I just think that if other teams have put fliers out there that could really affect both camps.

Just curious and if anyone could answer I would appreciate it.

---

I remember reading something toward the end of the season saying that an unnamed coach or GM said they would give up a first and a third for DA right now, meaning at that time in the season.

So I would have to think there are teams that have gave Phil a little wink and nudge and said hey call me if you want to make a deal.

Quote:

---

Save all the BS about right to 1st refusal.

---

It's not BS, it is a sequence of how things work.

Quote:

---

BTW I understand how the RFA deal works...

---

BTW, it's a message board, and my reply was not only to you but informational for those that may not know how it works.

There isn't a damned thing wrong with having knowledge on a topic, especially one that affects our team as this one may.

Quote:

---

I admit it's all opinion on my part, but I can't think of a reason that a team wouldn't make inquiries to see what DA's status is with the team since no matter what they have to go thru the Browns to get DA, anyway.

---

Ever played poker???

Quote:

---

With Quinn in wings, Browns won't sign Anderson to long deal

---

Quote:

---

The Browns are not going to give Anderson six years. Five? Maybe. Four? Likely.

---

So 6 years is "long term" ....... but a possible 5 deal isn't?

Savage states:

Quote:

---

"Another option is ... a real contract ... anywhere from two years to seven years," Savage said.

---

I sometimes wonder where writers get their info from ... I mean ... besides pulling it out of their own butts.

Quote:

---

I remember reading something toward the end of the season saying that an unnamed coach or GM said they would give up a first and a third for DA right now, meaning at that time in the season.

---

Unnamed being the operative word.

No egg to clean off, i wasn't throwing any

Just didn't want the thread to get gain another offshoot (though i guess i kinda gave it that ... )

Maybe the interviewee was Phil Savage talking off the record. Saying that if he were in the position of some teams out there, he would give those up for one that could end up being a good one.

This IS funny Ammo................

You point to "articles" that clearly point out that the Browns and DA's people are on "different levels". Sources that state he's looking for "Romo money". It keeps people busy for DAYS trying to discredit EVERY source from EVERY direction!



I'm not going to even comment. Just going to watch them all squirm.

Quote:

---

Anderson told The Plain Dealer his people are on another level in what they think he deserves

---

As well they Should be...Heck, this is now a Pro-Bowl QB we are talkin' about!!!! Go Brownies!!!!

Exactly !....Thank you for showing where in the article that Anderson implied that he wanted Romeo $$....I also found it interesting that he said he would let his agents handle that stuff , once again shifting the criticism of his request for Romeo $$ from himself to them , as IF he was not influencing the contract talks ....

Do you people understand negotiations? One party gives a low bid and the other a high bid. They typically both give some. What is your beef?

And why in God's name is so much attention being paid to comments that are "believed" to be true, while every single one of you ignore these comments from the horse's mouth, Phil "Freaking" Savage?

General Manager Phil Savage did shed some light on the team's approach during a talk at The Chapel in Marlboro, where he was the guest of Pastor Joel Cochran.

The Browns have two options with Anderson, a restricted free agent. They can sign him to a long-term deal or high-tender him a one-year contract for about $2.56 million. Anderson is then free to negotiate with other teams, and the Browns could match any offer or let him sign and receive first- and third-round draft picks as compensation.

"Another option is ... a real contract ... anywhere from two years to seven years," Savage said. "Something long enough to keep him on the Browns, but short enough so that we're not taking the soul and competitiveness away from Brady Quinn.

"We have two quarterbacks under 25. That's rare in the NFL. We're trying to prolong trying to have to make a decision and choose a fork in the road with either Derek or Brady Quinn."

Savage is right, from the team's perspective. Based on where Cleveland's offense is and the kind of season Anderson had, Cleveland can't afford to hitch its wagon to either quarterback. It has to let the competition play out. Savage thinks Anderson's 2007 season was only a start.

"He's only scratched the surface of what he can be," Savage said. "People are more familiar with Brady than Derek. Derek is not chopped liver. He was Mr. Football and Mr. Basketball in Oregon. ... We're hoping to keep both."

Smoke and mirrors? At the Chapel in Marlboro? *L* Does anyone but me know the size of Marlboro? Does anyone understand that he was at a Chapel? Sheesh. If it was a smokescreen, why not make the comments at the Senior Bowl or the Super Bowl?

And I love the comment that Phil is pulling a fast one on the other GMs around the league.

Let's see...........you guys on a message board that don't know squat about football can read what Savage is doing, but GMs for professional football teams, guys who do this for a living, will be fooled by Savage "upping" the price for DA. OTAY!

So much credence is being given to Bud Shaw, whose article didn't make sense and yet you all ignore Phil Savage. Why?

Don't bother, we know why. You are in the business of twisting reality to fit your own viewpoints. It's bogus and cheap.

I don't know what will happen w/DA. But, I sure as hell am not going to pretend to know because some columnist writes an article filled w/facts and fantasies that were anything but.

From everything that I have seen, it appears that Savage wants to bring back both QBs and let the situation play out. Whether DA agrees w/that or not.......I don't know. But Savage is smart enough to know that he shouldn't make a final decision on the QB of this team right now, even if you guys aren't.

Need proof? Here is what Savage said:

We're hoping to keep both." Twist that one.

"Another option is ... a real contract ... anywhere from two years to seven years," Savage said. "Something long enough to keep him on the Browns, but short enough so that we're not taking the soul and competitiveness away from Brady Quinn. Twist that one.


"We have two quarterbacks under 25. That's rare in the NFL. We're trying to prolong trying to have to make a decision and choose a fork in the road with either Derek or Brady Quinn." Are you all blind?

Oh come on Vers ...... anyone can read what he said .....


But it takes pure genius to know what he really meant ......

Quote:

---

Let's see...........you guys on a message board that don't know squat about football can read what Savage is doing, but GMs for professional football teams, guys who do this for a living, will be fooled by Savage "upping" the price for DA. OTAY!

---

Yeah ..... they'll all be fooled ...... and give up entire drafts ..... really .......

It really is scary sometimes ......

Quote:

---

Another option is ... a real contract ... anywhere from two years to seven years," Savage said. "Something long enough to keep him on the Browns, but short enough so that we're not taking the soul and competitiveness away from Brady Quinn. Twist that one.

---

OK...

READ THAT 10 TIMES...And another 10...

That's about the most ignorant contradicting thing I've heard from Savage...

Absolutely we hope to keep both.

Quite frankly, I want to keep both. I just have my opinion on who I feel will end up being better in the end.

I said this in the Pro Bowl thread and I'll say it again...the potential negatives of trading Anderson for a 1 and a 3 far outweigh the positives if Quinn either isn't what we hope he is or if he gets hurt. Obviously, I don't feel that the former will happen, but the latter is a distinct possibility.

My stance since the end of the season has been I think Quinn will be better but I don't want to lose DA this year. I stand by that. Draft picks be damned. Assume Anderson is traded and Quinn goes on IR, our 2008 season is immediately down the pooper.

Seeing how the Browns very likely could be the division favorites, that's something I don't want to mess with.

BUT, given the parameters Savage gave about not wanting to take the competitive soul out of Quinn, I find it hard to believe we'll sign DA to a long-term deal this year. IMO, if I'm in Anderson's shoes, 3 years ain't long enough. Then if I'm in Quinn's shoes, anything more than 3 years says "I'm about to lose a ton of incentive money here...this sucks."

Obviously we're all speculating here but I think the end result will be he's here at $2.56 million next year...maybe even the franchise tag (yes...I grow more gunshy at the thought of trading him no matter how good I feel about Quinn panning out...I just feel we're too close to winning the AFC North).

It is clear to me that Savage wants to bring back both DA and BQ. He will try to negotiate a contract with DA, but I think that we will probably end up tendering him. I feel that both him and BQ will be solid NFL quarterbacks. We have to decide which one is our future. I'm sure that we would rather wait a year or two to make this decision, but there is a good chance that we won't have this option.

Personally, I think that BQ will be the better quarterback. But, we cannot be sure of this. We KNOW what we have in DA. The only game action we have from BQ is from the preseason, (which was against scrubs) college, (which, as we all know, is quite a bit different from the NFL) and one drive in a regular season game. In the end, the Browns may benefit more from trading DA, but we just don't know right now. Our offense has almost unlimited potential. I would hate to see our quarterback holding us back.

Dawg.........I think it means that he is going to try real hard to sign DA for around 4 years. I was actually hoping for 3, but I doubt that will happen now.

I think the following sums up how Savage sees the situation:


"We have two quarterbacks under 25. That's rare in the NFL. We're trying to prolong trying to have to make a decision and choose a fork in the road with either Derek or Brady Quinn."

Dude, it makes perfect sense. It's what I have been hoping for the entire time. It covers our bases. It allows the situation to play out...........just as it should!

Quote:

---

I'm sure that we would rather wait a year or two to make this decision, but there is a good chance that we won't have this option.

---

How old are you again? Dang, you are a smart kid. I really believe that the Browns [RAC, Savage, Chud, Rip, etc] want to bring back both QBs, but I am not sure if DA will cooperate. I just hope he does.