quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

What about Grossman? [:'(]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

I think I would drive to Chilly's house and puke on his lawn if he went after Grosser.

(I don't have a dog)

Derek Anderson's Trade Value
Sun Feb 15, 2009




The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports the Cleveland Browns are trying to decide whether to keep or trade QB Derek Anderson. Anderson's three-year contract, negotiated by former GM Phil Savage to keep Anderson off the restricted free-agent market in 2008, is extremely "player friendly." In the coming season, the second of the contract, Anderson is scheduled to receive a base salary of $1.45 million and a workout bonus of $50,000. That's cheap for a quarterback with one Pro Bowl on his resume. The problem is a guaranteed $5 million roster bonus due on March 15. The Browns have to pay it even if they release Anderson before then. If they trade him before then, the new team would inherit the roster bonus. Who would make that trade with the Browns before the bonus is paid? The Browns can pay the bonus and continue to pursue a trade. Anderson's trade value would figure to be at its height in the days before the draft when quarterback-starved teams realize there isn't a quarterback in the draft reasonably capable of stepping in and contributing immediately. Anderson's final year of his contract in 2010 includes another roster bonus of $2 million and a base salary of $7.45 million. Trading Anderson would not clear Anderson's salary cap figures from the Browns' books. If they traded him after paying the $5 million bonus, Anderson would count about $8.2 million on the Browns' 2009 salary cap. If they kept Anderson, he would count about $8.8 million. So, is it better to keep him and have him compete with QB Brady Quinn at a cap cost of $8.8 million? Or should they commit to Quinn and get something in return for Anderson at the cost of $8.2 million in cap charges? Anderson's trade value is open to wide debate. Some believe the increasing prospect of the league salary cap being removed after 2009 hurts Anderson's trade value because teams would be less inclined than ever to surrender high draft picks. This theory suggests the Browns are more likely to command a player(s), rather than draft pick(s), in return. Other negatives for the Browns: Anderson's performance in 2008 regressed as opponents scouted him more thoroughly and receivers failed him, and teams realize the Browns don't have a lot of leverage in moving him. But there are positives. Anderson is young (he turns 26 in June) and his NFL experience is a double-positive. His 27 games as a starter set him up to be a winner immediately in the right situation, and you can argue that he'll only get better over time. Plus, he has the one thing coaches cannot teach -- a rocket arm. If the Browns pay the $5 million before trading him, that alone would increase his value because the acquiring team would be on books for only $1.5 million in 2009. That's quite a bargain for a starting quarterback. Add it all up. It says here that it's not unrealistic for the Browns to demand a No. 1 pick for Anderson, or a combination of picks that approaches similar value. Ten teams should be in the market for a starting quarterback. Foremost in this field of teams would be the Jets, Minnesota, Chicago and Tampa Bay.

quote:

Anderson's trade value is open to wide debate. Some believe the increasing prospect of the league salary cap being removed after 2009 hurts Anderson's trade value

quote:

ORIGINAL: Duane Sampson

Derek Anderson's Trade Value
Sun Feb 15, 2009




The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports the Cleveland Browns are trying to decide whether to keep or trade QB Derek Anderson. Anderson's three-year contract, negotiated by former GM Phil Savage to keep Anderson off the restricted free-agent market in 2008, is extremely "player friendly." In the coming season, the second of the contract, Anderson is scheduled to receive a base salary of $1.45 million and a workout bonus of $50,000. That's cheap for a quarterback with one Pro Bowl on his resume. The problem is a guaranteed $5 million roster bonus due on March 15. The Browns have to pay it even if they release Anderson before then. If they trade him before then, the new team would inherit the roster bonus. Who would make that trade with the Browns before the bonus is paid? The Browns can pay the bonus and continue to pursue a trade. Anderson's trade value would figure to be at its height in the days before the draft when quarterback-starved teams realize there isn't a quarterback in the draft reasonably capable of stepping in and contributing immediately. Anderson's final year of his contract in 2010 includes another roster bonus of $2 million and a base salary of $7.45 million. Trading Anderson would not clear Anderson's salary cap figures from the Browns' books. If they traded him after paying the $5 million bonus, Anderson would count about $8.2 million on the Browns' 2009 salary cap. If they kept Anderson, he would count about $8.8 million. So, is it better to keep him and have him compete with QB Brady Quinn at a cap cost of $8.8 million? Or should they commit to Quinn and get something in return for Anderson at the cost of $8.2 million in cap charges? Anderson's trade value is open to wide debate. Some believe the increasing prospect of the league salary cap being removed after 2009 hurts Anderson's trade value because teams would be less inclined than ever to surrender high draft picks. This theory suggests the Browns are more likely to command a player(s), rather than draft pick(s), in return. Other negatives for the Browns: Anderson's performance in 2008 regressed as opponents scouted him more thoroughly and receivers failed him, and teams realize the Browns don't have a lot of leverage in moving him. But there are positives. Anderson is young (he turns 26 in June) and his NFL experience is a double-positive. His 27 games as a starter set him up to be a winner immediately in the right situation, and you can argue that he'll only get better over time. Plus, he has the one thing coaches cannot teach -- a rocket arm. If the Browns pay the $5 million before trading him, that alone would increase his value because the acquiring team would be on books for only $1.5 million in 2009. That's quite a bargain for a starting quarterback. Add it all up. It says here that it's not unrealistic for the Browns to demand a No. 1 pick for Anderson, or a combination of picks that approaches similar value. Ten teams should be in the market for a starting quarterback. Foremost in this field of teams would be the Jets, Minnesota, Chicago and Tampa Bay.

quote:

Favre’s antics from last year prompted many fans and members of the media to conclude that the wide-eyed country boy act was just that, and that at his core Favre is as conniving and manipulative and petty as every other spoiled athlete who regards himself as the center of the known universe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynn G.

From the article that Don linked about Favre:

quote:

Favre’s antics from last year prompted many fans and members of the media to conclude that the wide-eyed country boy act was just that, and that at his core Favre is as conniving and manipulative and petty as every other spoiled athlete who regards himself as the center of the known universe.

How come some of us saw that years ago, and others are just now figuring that out? He's always been a prima donna and a manipulator, and definitely put himself above his team. It seemed so obvious. I guess those who thought of him as "godlike" just couldn't accept it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

Life in NY doesn't revolve around 1 single think like it does in GB.  The media and fans in NYC have more to look forward too.  GB fans and media would get run out of town by other fans/media if they said anything bad about a Packer.  It would destroy the only positive thing in GB.  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

That's funny because he can go IMO.  Take Souhan and Ruesse with him.  Sid can stay because I need a good laugh now and then.  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

Did you ever watch the Sport Show by Mike Max?  It would have Max, Sid, Reusse and Star in a round table discussion about sports.  It was the best (not meant to be) comedy ever invented.  In fact, it was sheer genius.  The basic premise was a bunch of jackasses sitting around and making fun of Hartman and his never ending homerism.  [&:]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

Did you ever watch the Sport Show by Mike Max?  It would have Max, Sid, Reusse and Star in a round table discussion about sports.  It was the best (not meant to be) comedy ever invented.  In fact, it was sheer genius.  The basic premise was a bunch of jackasses sitting around and making fun of Hartman and his never ending homerism.  [&:]