<![CDATA[Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn]]>Article on ESPN.com

Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn

Comment Email Print Share

Associated Press

BEREA, Ohio -- Cleveland Browns coach Eric Mangini said he's not trying to trade quarterback Brady Quinn, who lost his starting job after just 10 quarters this season.

With the Oct. 20 trade deadline approaching, there has been mounting speculation the Browns will deal Quinn, a former first-round pick who began the season as Cleveland's starter. But Quinn struggled in losses to Minnesota and Denverand Mangini benched him for Derek Anderson.

"We're not looking to move Brady Quinn," Mangini said Wednesday. "Brady is a Cleveland Brown and that's not anything we're looking to do."

Mangini says he has a good relationship with Quinn as does offensive coordinator Brian Daboll.

Quinn has reportedly put his suburban home up for sale.

Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press

]]>https://brownsboard.com/topic/7831/mangini-we-re-not-dealing-quinnRSS for NodeThu, 01 Oct 2026 08:04:41 GMTWed, 14 Oct 2009 15:18:35 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:22:25 GMT]]>Madden downgraded *EVERYONE.*

To emphasize superstars or some such.

Doesn't really matter. People are just going to create Customs will all 99s anyway. Except this time, they're going to be more powerful.

Eek.

EDIT: That was choppier than Tacitus. I haven't even read Tacitus enough to emulate his style. How is this happening?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127803https://brownsboard.com/post/127803Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:22:25 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:18:33 GMT]]>Haha i was just playing Madden and i dowloaded the new rosters they dropped Quinn all the way down to a 68.. God that is low

well atleast he is not as low as Charlie Fry he is a 45...

KINDA off topic just thought that was funny..

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127801https://brownsboard.com/post/127801Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:18:33 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:05:33 GMT]]>

@restinpeace said:

You really think "playing games" matters. BQ hasn't even shown to be a NFL QB unlike DA, who is just a subpar NFL QB.

Quinnbots enjoy the BQ dream, not the reality. Same thing for the Andersonites, who think he is a starting quality caliber of NFL QB.

BQ won't be in the league in a few years.

Look! A false equivalence!

Anderson's played in 34 NFL Games. Quinn's played in 7. There may be a reason why DA has shown something.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127798https://brownsboard.com/post/127798Sat, 17 Oct 2009 03:05:33 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Fri, 16 Oct 2009 16:36:20 GMT]]>

@pumpkin-eater said:

Anderson gets rid of the ball quicker, for better or for worse. That's one reason why the line looks a lot better.

Anyway, I agree about not drafting a QB, the Browns should go Defense first.

It isn't that I wouldn't draft a qb #1...I just don't think any are worth the type of pick we will hold.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127611https://brownsboard.com/post/127611Fri, 16 Oct 2009 16:36:20 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Fri, 16 Oct 2009 02:01:57 GMT]]>

@restinpeace said:

You really think "playing games" matters. BQ hasn't even shown to be a NFL QB unlike DA, who is just a subpar NFL QB.

Quinnbots enjoy the BQ dream, not the reality. Same thing for the Andersonites, who think he is a starting quality caliber of NFL QB.

BQ won't be in the league in a few years.

You obviously know more than the experts, have you seen therir views?

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127464https://brownsboard.com/post/127464Fri, 16 Oct 2009 02:01:57 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:58:40 GMT]]>

@restinpeace said:

You really think "playing games" matters. BQ hasn't even shown to be a NFL QB unlike DA, who is just a subpar NFL QB.

Quinnbots enjoy the BQ dream, not the reality. Same thing for the Andersonites, who think he is a starting quality caliber of NFL QB.

BQ won't be in the league in a few years.

You really think "playing games" matters.

Since you asked. Why don't you go and find somewhere else to be an "IDIOT". 😉

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127463https://brownsboard.com/post/127463Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:58:40 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:15:33 GMT]]>

@restinpeace said:

LOL. Come on. Move on. Who cares what DA does. Who cares what Quinn does. Quinn wasn't sucker punched. He just sucked. Deal with that reality.

Why don't you ask your best buddy "The Lumster", he know's all about what there is to know about Browns quarterbacks. 🙄

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127453https://brownsboard.com/post/127453Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:15:33 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:13:33 GMT]]>

@restinpeace said:

LOL. Come on. Move on. Who cares what DA does. Who cares what Quinn does. ..

Browns fans care.

Just my 2 cents and OK by me you disagree.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127452https://brownsboard.com/post/127452Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:13:33 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:24:25 GMT]]>

@planet-0range said:

I will agree that he sucks, after playing in less than 10 games.

You really think "playing games" matters. BQ hasn't even shown to be a NFL QB unlike DA, who is just a subpar NFL QB.

Quinnbots enjoy the BQ dream, not the reality. Same thing for the Andersonites, who think he is a starting quality caliber of NFL QB.

BQ won't be in the league in a few years.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127374https://brownsboard.com/post/127374Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:24:25 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:30:21 GMT]]>

@oconrecon said:

I feel bad for Quinn as I really think the Browns sucker punched him.

He grows up a Cleveland fan in Ohio and the Browns trade a ton to come up in the draft to get him. Such a move gives the impression the team really wants him, and with this impression, will look for a reason to start him, sooner rather than later.

BUT, the Browns use every reason they can not to start him. After 2 long years of riding the pine, he's given 10 quarters to get things going against the top D's. When he can get it done, the back-up lays an even bigger egg and somehow gets the team's nod. He is cast to the side with no indication he will ever be considered again. As he sits on the side lines, the current QB completes 2 of 17 against a terrible team and there is no hint of worry from the HC, only words of positive reinforcement. Quinn knows if he would have stumbled into a couple of field goals to get the W, there would have been hell to pay, and none of this "a win is a win" crap.

You can't make this stuff up.

Here's hoping DA comes in and lights up the Steelers. There is zero indication this will happen, but stranger things have happened.

LOL. Come on. Move on. Who cares what DA does. Who cares what Quinn does. Quinn wasn't sucker punched. He just sucked. Deal with that reality.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127351https://brownsboard.com/post/127351Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:30:21 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:13:46 GMT]]>I feel bad for Quinn as I really think the Browns sucker punched him.

He grows up a Cleveland fan in Ohio and the Browns trade a ton to come up in the draft to get him. Such a move gives the impression the team really wants him, and with this impression, will look for a reason to start him, sooner rather than later.

BUT, the Browns use every reason they can not to start him. After 2 long years of riding the pine, he's given 10 quarters to get things going against the top D's. When he can get it done, the back-up lays an even bigger egg and somehow gets the team's nod. He is cast to the side with no indication he will ever be considered again. As he sits on the side lines, the current QB completes 2 of 17 against a terrible team and there is no hint of worry from the HC, only words of positive reinforcement. Quinn knows if he would have stumbled into a couple of field goals to get the W, there would have been hell to pay, and none of this "a win is a win" crap.

You can't make this stuff up.

Here's hoping DA comes in and lights up the Steelers. There is zero indication this will happen, but stranger things have happened.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127348https://brownsboard.com/post/127348Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:13:46 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:04:18 GMT]]>your right it could def. send a message. if it was a passive message it got a massive response.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127345https://brownsboard.com/post/127345Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:04:18 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:02:14 GMT]]>

@razor1414 said:

or maybe he just really hates the half hour commute.

Maybe. 🙂 Just saying--peculiar timing.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127343https://brownsboard.com/post/127343Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:02:14 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:59:16 GMT]]>or maybe he just really hates the half hour commute.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127341https://brownsboard.com/post/127341Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:59:16 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:46:50 GMT]]>

@dawg08 said:

Yeah, ESPN reported that he said he is downsizing. He's probably downsizing because he's not going to make that 11mil incentive for not taking 70% of the snaps. I had no idea that was in his contract, until I read it the other day. I now see why he's been benched. He's not any better than DA, so why fork out 11mil for someone of equal quality in DA??

Yeah, but Quinn's already made millions. This year, doesn't he get 700,000 without the incentives?

It isn't like the house is some monster 10 million dollar palace he's paying on; it's only worth $630,000.

Why would he need to downsize that, knowing what his salary is? And in the middle of the season? Conveniently after DA's debacle of a performance? Knowing the media would run with it, like they did with Jay Cutler?

I think he either knows his name's is in serious discussions or he's sending a passive message.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127337https://brownsboard.com/post/127337Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:46:50 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:40:39 GMT]]>

@carddawg said:

I never looked at it as the Browns saved a ton trading down to get the non-sexy Alex Mack, then saved $11-mil on sexy Brady. Damn, that's some serious dough ... but next year gonna cost them a ton to sign all them draft picks.

Kokinis smaked of pride when he said it...like justification for trade down....also eric steinbach and corey williams will be cut or let go or traded...because of CAP. Esp williams. We keep rogers or we are stupid!

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127335https://brownsboard.com/post/127335Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:40:39 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:22:20 GMT]]>

@solon16 said:

Just curious how you would feel getting Fkd out of 11 million dollars? It isn't like this regime hasn't come out already about saving 40 mill over time on the #5 overall pick....so holding BQ out till he can't reach the 70% escalator in his contract is VERY reasonable and if it were me would Piss me the fk off....trudat. I'd ask for a trade after the guy in front of me completed TWO fking passes.....but that's just me.... 🙄

I never looked at it as the Browns saved a ton trading down to get the non-sexy Alex Mack, then saved $11-mil on sexy Brady. Damn, that's some serious dough ... but next year gonna cost them a ton to sign all them draft picks.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127331https://brownsboard.com/post/127331Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:22:20 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:40:39 GMT]]>

@dawg08 said:

Yeah, ESPN reported that he said he is downsizing. He's probably downsizing because he's not going to make that 11mil incentive for not taking 70% of the snaps. I had no idea that was in his contract, until I read it the other day. I now see why he's been benched. He's not any better than DA, so why fork out 11mil for someone of equal quality in DA??

ding ding ding...we have a winner!

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127312https://brownsboard.com/post/127312Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:40:39 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:26:49 GMT]]>Brady Quinn has got a gun, and plenty of arm strength. I think he was dropping back too far, opening himself up for our RT to get beat around the edge and causing sacks. He isn't tall like the Derek Anderson and can't see over the line, therefore couldn't sit within the pocket. Quinn would be most effective playing for a team that can open passing lanes to throw to, not over - allowing the tackles to run their guys deep with Quinn setting up inside (like Adnerson does). I seen Quinn throw between O-linemen in preseason games. He squeezed it right in there, through blind holes, hitting receivers in-stride. It's a dangerous game (squeezing passes between the trees), and it hasn't worked out well for him in the Pro's. He plays like he is 6'-0".

He did take too long making decisions though and I never understood why because he looked to only be surveying half the field.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127208https://brownsboard.com/post/127208Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:26:49 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:16:04 GMT]]>

@dumasswhiteguy said:

The way Quinn denied trade rumors and said something about needing a smaller place thats easier to maintain and closer to work in an article in the PD somehow reminded me of the press conference when he denied knowing he was the starting QB for game 1 a couple days beforehand.

Maybe some truth to the rumors?

It seems kinda funny to me how six weeks ago we were all clamoring for DA to get traded and now its BQ...Some things change quickly in Brownstown.

Yeah, ESPN reported that he said he is downsizing. He's probably downsizing because he's not going to make that 11mil incentive for not taking 70% of the snaps. I had no idea that was in his contract, until I read it the other day. I now see why he's been benched. He's not any better than DA, so why fork out 11mil for someone of equal quality in DA??

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127203https://brownsboard.com/post/127203Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:16:04 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:29:57 GMT]]>I think there's no doubt DA gets rid of the ball quickly. Its a strength of his but it probably has counterbalancing weaknesses around completion percentage (holding the ball a bit longer can give receivers time to get open and allow for a deeper progression) and turnovers (staring down the primary).

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127180https://brownsboard.com/post/127180Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:29:57 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:20:35 GMT]]>

@pumpkin-eater said:

Anderson gets rid of the ball quicker, for better or for worse. That's one reason why the line looks a lot better.

That and they replaced Womack with Fraley. I was thinking that StClair was a problem, but perhaps he was having to subconsciously cheat inside to help cover for Slowmack. Sure explains why every single one of Dumvervil's four sacks was to the outside (and explains why many of us were screaming to get a TE over there to help).

Anyway, it will be interesting to see how much better our line looks this week without having to face Aaron Smith.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127171https://brownsboard.com/post/127171Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:20:35 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:54:34 GMT]]>Anderson gets rid of the ball quicker, for better or for worse. That's one reason why the line looks a lot better.

Anyway, I agree about not drafting a QB, the Browns should go Defense first.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127145https://brownsboard.com/post/127145Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:54:34 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Mangini: We're not dealing Quinn on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:41:57 GMT]]>

@legacy-fan said:

That seems a little farfetched, but would definitely be one of the shrewdest business moves I've ever witnessed in the NFL.

How do you get a player to buy into a system (any player but BQ definitely) after your coach trots you out on the field and purposely limits you so that you some how look worse than the worst passer in the league (who happens to be starting now) even though you actually weren't? That's a pretty steep hill for any organization to climb. And it's certainly a world apart from Tom Brady taking a paycut to bring in some more talent. At least his coach let's him go throw 50 TDs in a season before he ever pulls that kind of BS.

I know, I really think they pulled Quinn because he kept checking down and showed no improvement.

]]>https://brownsboard.com/post/127134https://brownsboard.com/post/127134Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:41:57 GMT