RAC seems terrified of a quarterback controversy. I'm not sure the Browns' QB situation is not among the few bright spots this season.
I was one of the few anywhere insisting that Derek ought to get the start before Charlie got hurt. Most, Bill Livingston chief among them, assumed without any evidence that he was a stiff despite excelling in practice, a pretty good pre-season in limited opportunities and success against big time college opposition.
I conceded that it might turn out that he was another Todd Philcox while pointing out that his situation was not unlike that of Tom Brady who was lowly regarded until getting a chance to play.
While I'm not yet ready to suggest a spot be reserved next to Brady's for future induction to the Hall of Fame in Canton I think Anderson passed his first few tests admirably and gives reason to believe he can be a solid NFL quarterback.
After the KC game critics suggested that it was a fluke because the Chiefs had no time to prepare and didn't blitz much.
The Steelers had time to prepare and still Derek was one of the few bright spots in a dismal showing.
Then some said he had not yet been hit hard and might come unglued after being sacked a few times. Also that the Ravens knew him very well and would expose his weaknesses.
Well, he kept his poise and led a brilliant game-tying TD drive after having been pounded. Had the defense not given the momentum back in just three plays the Browns might have pulled it out.
There is simply no reason for him not to get another start next weekend and, barring a disastrous performance, start the final game as well.
If he continues to do well there will be absolutely no reason to ponder drafting a quarterback or signing a big money free agent QB with the team in desperate need for upgrades at so many other positions. The draft picks and FA money should better be spent elsewhere.
Anderson has a cannon arm, a quality which cannot be taught, the abilityto find and use all his receivers. And he seems to have the ability to make the right pass to the right guy in the red zone.
He would also get the opportunity in practice to time up with Winslow and Edwards whom he had not gotten to throw to in practice much until the past couple of weeks.
Fry has given some responses to reporters' questions which suggest that he's miffed about some favorable comparative reviews for Anderson in some of the media.
One can feel for him. After standing up to a terrible beating all year he's in danger of losing his starting job after having the most productive 30 minute performance of his career against KC. Tradition says you don't lose your starting job because of an injury.
And he is the more mobile of the QB's though it's questionable whether he learned yet how and when to get the most out of that important quality.
Certainly, he is entitled to an equal shot at the starter's job in pre-season competition next year. No use risking re-injury to his wrist in the final game with no playoff spot at stake, even if one believes he is the better QB.
If both do very well in pre-season next year? I have a brainstorm which will make the purists cringe and I'm sure has some drawbacks.
I don't know that it is against the rules to announce you have two starting quarterbacks. Nor that you must tell the opposition which will start ahead of time. Force them to prepare for two very different QBs which should complicate the lives of rival defensive coordinators.
Just a wild thought.
I was one of the few anywhere insisting that Derek ought to get the start before Charlie got hurt. Most, Bill Livingston chief among them, assumed without any evidence that he was a stiff despite excelling in practice, a pretty good pre-season in limited opportunities and success against big time college opposition.
I conceded that it might turn out that he was another Todd Philcox while pointing out that his situation was not unlike that of Tom Brady who was lowly regarded until getting a chance to play.
While I'm not yet ready to suggest a spot be reserved next to Brady's for future induction to the Hall of Fame in Canton I think Anderson passed his first few tests admirably and gives reason to believe he can be a solid NFL quarterback.
After the KC game critics suggested that it was a fluke because the Chiefs had no time to prepare and didn't blitz much.
The Steelers had time to prepare and still Derek was one of the few bright spots in a dismal showing.
Then some said he had not yet been hit hard and might come unglued after being sacked a few times. Also that the Ravens knew him very well and would expose his weaknesses.
Well, he kept his poise and led a brilliant game-tying TD drive after having been pounded. Had the defense not given the momentum back in just three plays the Browns might have pulled it out.
There is simply no reason for him not to get another start next weekend and, barring a disastrous performance, start the final game as well.
If he continues to do well there will be absolutely no reason to ponder drafting a quarterback or signing a big money free agent QB with the team in desperate need for upgrades at so many other positions. The draft picks and FA money should better be spent elsewhere.
Anderson has a cannon arm, a quality which cannot be taught, the abilityto find and use all his receivers. And he seems to have the ability to make the right pass to the right guy in the red zone.
He would also get the opportunity in practice to time up with Winslow and Edwards whom he had not gotten to throw to in practice much until the past couple of weeks.
Fry has given some responses to reporters' questions which suggest that he's miffed about some favorable comparative reviews for Anderson in some of the media.
One can feel for him. After standing up to a terrible beating all year he's in danger of losing his starting job after having the most productive 30 minute performance of his career against KC. Tradition says you don't lose your starting job because of an injury.
And he is the more mobile of the QB's though it's questionable whether he learned yet how and when to get the most out of that important quality.
Certainly, he is entitled to an equal shot at the starter's job in pre-season competition next year. No use risking re-injury to his wrist in the final game with no playoff spot at stake, even if one believes he is the better QB.
If both do very well in pre-season next year? I have a brainstorm which will make the purists cringe and I'm sure has some drawbacks.
I don't know that it is against the rules to announce you have two starting quarterbacks. Nor that you must tell the opposition which will start ahead of time. Force them to prepare for two very different QBs which should complicate the lives of rival defensive coordinators.
Just a wild thought.