ANDERSON gets the last laugh?
-
Dude Anderson sucks. Look at his career numbers and tell me he doesn't suck. Sipe, Kosar and Testeverde are not HOF's but they were solid QB's who got the job done. I'd rather have the bar set high than set low. I'm glad Anderson is off our team. He is much worse than Tim Couch or Kelly Holcomb.
I'm not comparing DA to anybody!!!...The guy went out on Sunday, got the job done and walked away with a win......
That's what it's all about...of course he's not Joe Montana...but it'll be interesting to see how he responds being the man without a Queen and all Queens fans bashing him...week after week.
I'll give you Bernie and SIpe..but c'mon..Vinnie was an interception machine...
Cards 1-0
Browns 0-1 and counting...
I'm not comparing DA to anybody!!!...The guy went out on Sunday, got the job done and walked away with a win......
That's what it's all about...of course he's not Joe Montana...but it'll be interesting to see how he responds being the man without a Queen and all Queens fans bashing him...week after week.
I'll give you Bernie and SIpe..but c'mon..Vinnie was an interception machine...
Cards 1-0
Browns 0-1 and counting...
If he keeps playing the way he did Sunday he will be hearing the name Max Hall instead of Brady Quinn. It tends to happen when you continuously perform well below standards.
-
You're ignorant
O that's what my problem is. Thanks doctor!
Did you watch any Seahawks games with Wallace starting? I'm guessing no. But you're here to tell me I'm ignorant. Did they fill stupid people quota on Steelers forum, so you came here? Try again. They might be expanding.
-
You're ignorant
O that's what my problem is. Thanks doctor!
Did you watch any Seahawks games with Wallace starting? I'm guessing no. But you're here to tell me I'm ignorant. Did they fill stupid people quota on Steelers forum, so you came here? Try again. They might be expanding.
O that's what my problem is. Thanks doctor!
Did you watch any Seahawks games with Wallace starting? I'm guessing no. But you're here to tell me I'm ignorant. Did they fill stupid people quota on Steelers forum, so you came here? Try again. They might be expanding.
Now you just proved your ignorance, wallace had a higher qb rating and completion percentage every single year compared to anderson (2006-2009).
Lifetime INTs thrown
Wallace: 14
Anderson: 45 (wallace has been ion the league 1 year longer too and yes I added that extra year to wallace's INT stat)
Of course there are areas in which andersons stats beat wallace like TD's and yards but the TD comparison is only won by anderson due to his 2007 season where he had 29.
You're ignorant and bias.
-
O that's what my problem is. Thanks doctor!
Did you watch any Seahawks games with Wallace starting? I'm guessing no. But you're here to tell me I'm ignorant. Did they fill stupid people quota on Steelers forum, so you came here? Try again. They might be expanding.
Now you just proved your ignorance, wallace had a higher qb rating and completion percentage every single year compared to anderson (2006-2009).
Lifetime INTs thrown
Wallace: 14
Anderson: 45 (wallace has been ion the league 1 year longer too and yes I added that extra year to wallace's INT stat)
Of course there are areas in which andersons stats beat wallace like TD's and yards but the TD comparison is only won by anderson due to his 2007 season where he had 29.
You're ignorant and bias.
Now you just proved your ignorance, wallace had a higher qb rating and completion percentage every single year compared to anderson (2006-2009).
Lifetime INTs thrown
Wallace: 14
Anderson: 45 (wallace has been ion the league 1 year longer too and yes I added that extra year to wallace's INT stat)
Of course there are areas in which andersons stats beat wallace like TD's and yards but the TD comparison is only won by anderson due to his 2007 season where he had 29.
You're ignorant and bias.
Hmm. May be. But have you considered a slight possibility that Seneca's numbers are better because he was a back-up all this time. And when he did play, he played low risk offense similar to Ken Dorsey, Charlie Fry, Brady Quinn, Matt Leinart, etc.
Think about this: When AZ coach was asked what made difference in his choice of starting QB, he said: First downs. Now I'm sure he's stupid cuz you gots to look at the stats, but that's how most of the employed coaches think.
Jake will throw INT's but he will also get 1st downs and TD's. You won't have that with Seneca, he'll play safe. His QB rating will be great too. He just won't win any games.
...and thanks for calling me ignorant. It means a lot coming from someone like you.
-
Now you just proved your ignorance, wallace had a higher qb rating and completion percentage every single year compared to anderson (2006-2009).
Lifetime INTs thrown
Wallace: 14
Anderson: 45 (wallace has been ion the league 1 year longer too and yes I added that extra year to wallace's INT stat)
Of course there are areas in which andersons stats beat wallace like TD's and yards but the TD comparison is only won by anderson due to his 2007 season where he had 29.
You're ignorant and bias.
Hmm. May be. But have you considered a slight possibility that Seneca's numbers are better because he was a back-up all this time. And when he did play, he played low risk offense similar to Ken Dorsey, Charlie Fry, Brady Quinn, Matt Leinart, etc.
Think about this: When AZ coach was asked what made difference in his choice of starting QB, he said: First downs. Now I'm sure he's stupid cuz you gots to look at the stats, but that's how most of the employed coaches think.
Jake will throw INT's but he will also get 1st downs and TD's. You won't have that with Seneca, he'll play safe. His QB rating will be great too. He just won't win any games.
...and thanks for calling me ignorant. It means a lot coming from someone like you.
Hmm. May be. But have you considered a slight possibility that Seneca's numbers are better because he was a back-up all this time. And when he did play, he played low risk offense similar to Ken Dorsey, Charlie Fry, Brady Quinn, Matt Leinart, etc.
Think about this: When AZ coach was asked what made difference in his choice of starting QB, he said: First downs. Now I'm sure he's stupid cuz you gots to look at the stats, but that's how most of the employed coaches think.
Jake will throw INT's but he will also get 1st downs and TD's. You won't have that with Seneca, he'll play safe. His QB rating will be great too. He just won't win any games.
...and thanks for calling me ignorant. It means a lot coming from someone like you.
Hoe many games has Andersuck won in the last 2 years?
-
Hmm. May be. But have you considered a slight possibility that Seneca's numbers are better because he was a back-up all this time. And when he did play, he played low risk offense similar to Ken Dorsey, Charlie Fry, Brady Quinn, Matt Leinart, etc.
Think about this: When AZ coach was asked what made difference in his choice of starting QB, he said: First downs. Now I'm sure he's stupid cuz you gots to look at the stats, but that's how most of the employed coaches think.
Jake will throw INT's but he will also get 1st downs and TD's. You won't have that with Seneca, he'll play safe. His QB rating will be great too. He just won't win any games.
...and thanks for calling me ignorant. It means a lot coming from someone like you.
Hoe many games has Andersuck won in the last 2 years?
Hoe many games has Andersuck won in the last 2 years?
1 for 1 with Az. Won 6 of the 8 Cleveland wins the last two years, despite starting less than half the games.
-
Now you just proved your ignorance, wallace had a higher qb rating and completion percentage every single year compared to anderson (2006-2009).
Lifetime INTs thrown
Wallace: 14
Anderson: 45 (wallace has been ion the league 1 year longer too and yes I added that extra year to wallace's INT stat)
Of course there are areas in which andersons stats beat wallace like TD's and yards but the TD comparison is only won by anderson due to his 2007 season where he had 29.
You're ignorant and bias.
Hmm. May be. But have you considered a slight possibility that Seneca's numbers are better because he was a back-up all this time. And when he did play, he played low risk offense similar to Ken Dorsey, Charlie Fry, Brady Quinn, Matt Leinart, etc.
Think about this: When AZ coach was asked what made difference in his choice of starting QB, he said: First downs. Now I'm sure he's stupid cuz you gots to look at the stats, but that's how most of the employed coaches think.
Jake will throw INT's but he will also get 1st downs and TD's. You won't have that with Seneca, he'll play safe. His QB rating will be great too. He just won't win any games.
...and thanks for calling me ignorant. It means a lot coming from someone like you.
Hmm. May be. But have you considered a slight possibility that Seneca's numbers are better because he was a back-up all this time. And when he did play, he played low risk offense similar to Ken Dorsey, Charlie Fry, Brady Quinn, Matt Leinart, etc.
Think about this: When AZ coach was asked what made difference in his choice of starting QB, he said: First downs. Now I'm sure he's stupid cuz you gots to look at the stats, but that's how most of the employed coaches think.
Jake will throw INT's but he will also get 1st downs and TD's. You won't have that with Seneca, he'll play safe. His QB rating will be great too. He just won't win any games.
...and thanks for calling me ignorant. It means a lot coming from someone like you.
Wallace is a #2 that was my point and anderson has played like a #3 qb his entire career except for 2007. You actually said that you'd rather have delhomme/anderson here and not in that order necessarily. A qb who makes smart (safe) choices as opposed to taking a risk every throw and forcing something that isn't there will in fact win more games. This is rather pointless you're obviously an anderson fan boy still to this day.
-
Anderson is the best QB the BRowns had in the new era ... there is no debate.
-
We are in a division that has top notch defense. JD played is a less intense division with some good goto receivers. DA in 07 had KW JR, Joe J and Braylon Edwards who atleast can stretch the defense.
Let us first find a team WR's and TE's as good as the one we had in 07 before we talk DA or JD. Right now it is a moot point.
-
-
Anderson is the best QB the BRowns had in the new era ... there is no debate.
One good year. Couch was the best, when he wasn't buried under 3 linebackers.
Luck is Tim Couch. Big, Dumb Goofy, slow thinking QB - Ghoolie, 2-28-12 -
Anderson is the best QB the BRowns had in the new era ... there is no debate.
You obviously know nothing about football. Tim Couch was a much better QB than Anderson. Anderson has posted some of the worst numbers in NFL history. 2 for 17? Less than 50% completion percentage? Sucking so bad he was benched in favor or crappy Quinn? Throwing INT after INT to lose to the Bengals and miss the playoffs? How does that make him the best? You sir are pathetic.
-
One good year. Couch was the best, when he wasn't buried under 3 linebackers.
I think Couch suffered from the same thing that hurt Linhart. College was fairly easy for them then they got the keys to the castle.
I was at a Browns raiders game way back when couch was still the starter 01' I think. The Browns came to Oakland at 2-0 on the opening drive went down the field and scored then after the Raiders scored a few processions later the Browns went 3 and out Couch walked off the field while the rest of the offence jogged he shrugged his shoulders and I swear the season went down hill from there.
Soccer, Futball, Fusball, Futsal, Foosball, Europe ... Mods are all gay. -
In fact Tim Couch is one of the biggest busts ever yet his career passer rating is still higher than Andersucks. Andersuck is a franchise wrecker. People fall in love with his rocket arm and are fooled into thinking he is good. He's a joke.
-
Anderson is the best QB the BRowns had in the new era ... there is no debate.
You obviously know nothing about football. Tim Couch was a much better QB than Anderson. Anderson has posted some of the worst numbers in NFL history. 2 for 17? Less than 50% completion percentage? Sucking so bad he was benched in favor or crappy Quinn? Throwing INT after INT to lose to the Bengals and miss the playoffs? How does that make him the best? You sir are pathetic.
You obviously know nothing about football. Tim Couch was a much better QB than Anderson. Anderson has posted some of the worst numbers in NFL history. 2 for 17? Less than 50% completion percentage? Sucking so bad he was benched in favor or crappy Quinn? Throwing INT after INT to lose to the Bengals and miss the playoffs? How does that make him the best? You sir are pathetic.
I think he's basing his stats on the fact that DA is the only Browns QB to make it to a Pro Bowl in the new era.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
You obviously know nothing about football. Tim Couch was a much better QB than Anderson. Anderson has posted some of the worst numbers in NFL history. 2 for 17? Less than 50% completion percentage? Sucking so bad he was benched in favor or crappy Quinn? Throwing INT after INT to lose to the Bengals and miss the playoffs? How does that make him the best? You sir are pathetic.
I think he's basing his stats on the fact that DA is the only Browns QB to make it to a Pro Bowl in the new era.
I think he's basing his stats on the fact that DA is the only Browns QB to make it to a Pro Bowl in the new era.
A few good games does not a career make. Plus he only made it because everyone else didn't feel like playing.
-
I think he's basing his stats on the fact that DA is the only Browns QB to make it to a Pro Bowl in the new era.
A few good games does not a career make. Plus he only made it because everyone else didn't feel like playing.
A few good games does not a career make. Plus he only made it because everyone else didn't feel like playing.
You're right, his 3,787 yards and 29 touchdowns had nothing to do with it. Any other year, those stats would have gotten him in outright probably. That year, it just so happened a couple QBs had the hot hand.
Although I do agree, one year doesn't prove anything. All it proves is that when he has a legitimate deep threat that actually has thumbs, he's a real QB. But take that away and he's nothing.
-
A few good games does not a career make. Plus he only made it because everyone else didn't feel like playing.
You're right, his 3,787 yards and 29 touchdowns had nothing to do with it. Any other year, those stats would have gotten him in outright probably. That year, it just so happened a couple QBs had the hot hand.
Although I do agree, one year doesn't prove anything. All it proves is that when he has a legitimate deep threat that actually has thumbs, he's a real QB. But take that away and he's nothing.
You're right, his 3,787 yards and 29 touchdowns had nothing to do with it. Any other year, those stats would have gotten him in outright probably. That year, it just so happened a couple QBs had the hot hand.
Although I do agree, one year doesn't prove anything. All it proves is that when he has a legitimate deep threat that actually has thumbs, he's a real QB. But take that away and he's nothing.
His horrendous completion % and terrific number of interceptions has nothing to do with his wide receivers. Tim Couch had way worse receivers yet still posted better career numbers. Anderson played with the best supporting cast ever. Yet he couldn't even make it to the playoffs.
-
You're right, his 3,787 yards and 29 touchdowns had nothing to do with it. Any other year, those stats would have gotten him in outright probably. That year, it just so happened a couple QBs had the hot hand.
Although I do agree, one year doesn't prove anything. All it proves is that when he has a legitimate deep threat that actually has thumbs, he's a real QB. But take that away and he's nothing.
His horrendous completion % and terrific number of interceptions has nothing to do with his wide receivers. Tim Couch had way worse receivers yet still posted better career numbers. Anderson played with the best supporting cast ever. Yet he couldn't even make it to the playoffs.
His horrendous completion % and terrific number of interceptions has nothing to do with his wide receivers. Tim Couch had way worse receivers yet still posted better career numbers. Anderson played with the best supporting cast ever. Yet he couldn't even make it to the playoffs.
His horrendous completion percentage and number of interceptions had a great deal to do with his wide receivers. There were an inordinate amount of dropped balls in '08 and '09. At one time we had something like 10-15 a game. And he was forced to throw into tight coverage on many occasions because we've never had a receiver who can get seperation.
I'm not putting all the blame on them, because DA made some horrible, horrible decisions. But if you think that his receivers were completely fault-free, then you are crazy.
This team needs receivers, plain and simple. That will end these QB woes. A great WR makes even the shittiest QB look good, not the other way around.
-
One good year. Couch was the best, when he wasn't buried under 3 linebackers.
Couch was drafted Number 1 with a team of has beens and washouts. He is lucky he survived his brief NFL career. The guy was sacked so many times I'm sure he has suffered severe bodily damage.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login