PDA

View Full Version : Derek Anderson?


Beans
11-11-2007, 07:01 PM
Think we could make a run at him through trade or FA? He's 24 and playing great this year. Not sure how he fits into our system though.

BrownsTown
11-11-2007, 07:02 PM
Don't you guys run a west coast offense? (This is me assuming since Garcia only does good in WCOs). If so, then no, Anderson would suck in that.

Beans
11-11-2007, 08:33 PM
Don't you guys run a west coast offense? (This is me assuming since Garcia only does good in WCOs). If so, then no, Anderson would suck in that.

Yeah, we do. Why would he, though?

HoopsDemon12
11-11-2007, 08:36 PM
Yeah, we do. Why would he, though?

He seems a better quarterback and making throws down feild and longer 15 yard routes. Just let him sit back and throw em. To have him roll out and have short to intermeidiate routes at his disposal seem to be a waste of his biggest strength.. which is throwing the deep ball

Beans
11-11-2007, 08:41 PM
Well it's not like we don't chuck a deep ball very often. Galloway gets 'em downfield all the time.

etk
11-11-2007, 08:43 PM
Derek Anderson would be horrible in our offense. He's a dropback gunslinger with limited mobility. Our offense is built on quick reads, short accurate passes and creativity in and out of the pocket. Those aren't his strengths. With that being said, we could can our current system, line up Stovall and Clayton at wideouts, and sign a good pass blocking LT. That's a pretty risky proposition, so I think we'll just stick with what we've got.

HoopsDemon12
11-11-2007, 08:44 PM
Well it's not like we don't chuck a deep ball very often. Galloway gets 'em downfield all the time.

Well ya that is true, but i think its a bigger staple in the browns offence. I think he is in a perfect position to suceed right now, so why take him into a different system... you know? I would take him if my team ran abotu the same system

Caddy
11-11-2007, 11:20 PM
I think the Buccaneers would be better off attaining a QB through the draft. Somebody who has similar mobility to Garcia and excels at short to intermediate throws, but can also throw the occasional deep ball. Anderson has been playing well this year, but unless the offense was to change, he wouldn't be an ideal solution.

dbtb135
11-12-2007, 04:14 AM
Mobility in QBs is a bit overrated here. Garcia is the first time that Gruden has had a QB that could move around and still make plays with his arm (that last part counts Grads out). Simms wasn't overly mobile. Griese didn't leave the pocket all that much. Brad NEVER did.....well, on his own. Guys don't have to have great mobility to come here, not if they can throw anyway.

Caddy
11-12-2007, 04:18 AM
Mobility in QBs is a bit overrated here. Garcia is the first time that Gruden has had a QB that could move around and still make plays with his arm (that last part counts Grads out). Simms wasn't overly mobile. Griese didn't leave the pocket all that much. Brad NEVER did.....well, on his own. Guys don't have to have great mobility to come here, not if they can throw anyway.

Rich Gannon says Hi.

Mobility is important for a QB, particularly in Tampa Bay. Our O-line is still young and whilst there have been a reduced number of sacks this year, that is more so a reflection on the QB than the O-line play. A mobile QB would be preferable to Derek Anderson who would probably be over-valued anyway or would wind-up costing an excessively high draft pick.

dbtb135
11-12-2007, 04:47 AM
Rich Gannon says Hi.

Had here, Gannon is a total given.

Mobility is important for a QB, particularly in Tampa Bay. Our O-line is still young and whilst there have been a reduced number of sacks this year, that is more so a reflection on the QB than the O-line play. A mobile QB would be preferable to Derek Anderson who would probably be over-valued anyway or would wind-up costing an excessively high draft pick.

OL will get better with time. Sears and Penn had 0 starts before this season, Davin and True only had 12 a piece I think. I remember Davin was injured for a stretch and True waited until Yatta went down. Point being, only one year and not even a full 16. Buenning will be back in playing form for the start of 08, as will Petitgout (hopefully). We can't NOT take a QB who is a lot better than any of our other options down the line just because we don't think the line will keep him upright. Thats cutting off your nose to spite your face. We're trying to get better.

Anderson would be a little over-valued as he's getting a lot of help from his OL including Thomas and Steinbach, Edwards and Winslow are having Pro Bowl type seasons and are much better than the options he'd have here. But I don't think, if we make the playoffs, a 1st rounder would be unthinkable IF Gruden is looking for a QB who can accelerate our re-building into a legit contender.

Caddy
11-12-2007, 05:06 AM
It isn't just his lack of mobility which reduces would reduce his effectiveness in Gruden's system. He is more of a drop back and throw the deep ball passer and at this stage in his career I don't think he has the creativity, nor the ability to throw a lot of short and intermediate routes.

I think the Buccaneers would be stupid not to consider Anderson, and I think he is better than a lot of Day 1 QB's (Henne, Dixon etc etc), but I think there are QB's in the draft who would be better options for our current offensive scheme.

dbtb135
11-12-2007, 05:59 AM
It isn't just his lack of mobility which reduces would reduce his effectiveness in Gruden's system. He is more of a drop back and throw the deep ball passer and at this stage in his career I don't think he has the creativity, nor the ability to throw a lot of short and intermediate routes.

Dude, what the crap? Everyone knows how to throw short and intermediate passes. It's not like he's throwing 40 bombs a game. Chris Simms came in with the same tag as a down-field guy, replaced Griese and had a very good completion %, hit his guys short, AND was able to stretch the field and keep safeties honest. The main thing in this system is completion percentage. Which is why Grads (54% with NOTHING downfield) was so awful, yet people think he could be the next Garcia because he's small and mobile. Anderson is currently at 56% going down the field consistently, and Gruden's system bumps everyone's % up quite a bit.

I think the Buccaneers would be stupid not to consider Anderson, and I think he is better than a lot of Day 1 QB's (Henne, Dixon etc etc), but I think there are QB's in the draft who would be better options for our current offensive scheme.

Aside from the big 3 (and they are no glove-like fits as it is), no there isn't.

brat316
11-12-2007, 06:19 AM
I think trading away Quinn is a better idea, look how good the O is with a capable qb, you found one finally why would u get ride of him. Keep him he has experince and shown to win. Quinn who knows? As a steeler fan i say trade him, as a football view, trade Quinn, pull as Scahab.

Caddy
11-12-2007, 07:16 AM
Dude, what the crap? Everyone knows how to throw short and intermediate passes. It's not like he's throwing 40 bombs a game. Chris Simms came in with the same tag as a down-field guy, replaced Griese and had a very good completion %, hit his guys short, AND was able to stretch the field and keep safeties honest. The main thing in this system is completion percentage. Which is why Grads (54% with NOTHING downfield) was so awful, yet people think he could be the next Garcia because he's small and mobile. Anderson is currently at 56% going down the field consistently, and Gruden's system bumps everyone's % up quite a bit.




Yes everyone knows how to throw a short to intermediate ball, but not everyone can do it well. The fact is, Anderson is not a typical Jon Gruden QB and very Gruden rarely utilises the skills of a drop back an throw QB in the mold of Derek Anderson. Brad Johnson and Chris Simms seemingly refute that, but they weren't part of the Gruden regime. Every QB Gruden has brought to the Buccaneers; McCown/Grads/Garcia, all have above average mobility and excel at the short to intermediate routes.

dbtb135
11-12-2007, 03:48 PM
Yes everyone knows how to throw a short to intermediate ball, but not everyone can do it well. The fact is, Anderson is not a typical Jon Gruden QB and very Gruden rarely utilises the skills of a drop back an throw QB in the mold of Derek Anderson.

Brad Johnson and Brian Griese were both that type of QB, moreso than a Jeff Garcia and both of them had great years with the Bucs. So that "rarely" is 3 of only 4 good years for QBs here. And Simms didn't do too badly either and he wasn't all that mobile. Grads was mobile and had GREAT accuracy short and he was TERRIBLE in this offense because he couldn't do anything deep.

And who knows what Anderson could do in Gruden's offense. He's been playing in Cleveland's air attack, and thats a lot tougher than Garcia throwing 10 times to Earnest Graham in the flats and 9 times to Ike Hilliard on a short curl. Believe me, it's not splitting the atom here, guys can learn. Will he be as effective as a Rich Gannon or as accurate as Garcia now, obviously now. But can he learn to be efficient short while still being lethal deep, I think so.

Brad Johnson and Chris Simms seemingly refute that, but they weren't part of the Gruden regime.

But he kept Simms when he clearly didn't have to.

Every QB Gruden has brought to the Buccaneers; McCown/Grads/Garcia, all have above average mobility and excel at the short to intermediate routes.

Yup, every QB. Brian Griese, Tim Rattay, they're as mobile as it comes! Haha, but really. Grads was a 6th round pick, so it's not like Gruden valued him too much or thought he'd be our QB in the future. Garcia is a perfect fit for the offense and was the only worthwhile free agent QB. Without signing him, we're left with Grads, McCown, and Simms. Up a creek. Also, IF Gruden could find another QB who could be like Garcia is now or Gannon was in Oakland, he'd take him no doubt. BUT, as that shows, those guys don't come along very often. There is NO ONE in the draft that is a Gannon clone. Just none of them are. There are none in free agency. So why would you pass up a shot at maybe the best, and definitely the safest, QB option because you're obsessed with finding someone who's mobile.

Isn't it ironic that the BEST Gruden's passing game has looked is not here with Garcia who everyone says fits Gruden's offense perfectly, but with Brad Johnson who never left the pocket and you say Gruden just inherited.......

619
11-12-2007, 03:54 PM
I think the Buccaneers would be better off attaining a QB through the draft. Somebody who has similar mobility to Garcia and excels at short to intermediate throws, but can also throw the occasional deep ball. Anderson has been playing well this year, but unless the offense was to change, he wouldn't be an ideal solution.

from what ive seen matt ryan fits that mould of a QB the bucs look for

ks_perfection
11-12-2007, 04:32 PM
Anderson won't come cheap though. He's restricted so it would take a 1st/3rd to take him away. Even if he wasn't they'd tag him.

BucSappy
11-12-2007, 04:56 PM
Allen wouldn't part with a first rounder for Derek Anderson. Maybe a 2nd, but I think Jeff Garcia has at least one more great year in him.

QB isn't as big a need as people say it is for the Bucs. As long as Garcia is playing great we don't need a young QB...might need a young QB to groom, but I think personally we develop the rest of our roster until we need a young QB, and that will be in 2009.

619
11-12-2007, 04:59 PM
the depth at QB in the draft this year is pretty good so it would be wise to draft and groom a QB rather then wait til '09

brat316
11-12-2007, 05:12 PM
Depth at qb is good but quality sucks, there is no obvious number 1 qb. There is no amazing qb. Rather wait till next year, unless you want to take a chance on Colt Berrian, who is a system qb. He would be good for that Gruden WCO. He does have an arm, and is fairly mobile.

Caddy
11-12-2007, 05:16 PM
Brad Johnson and Brian Griese were both that type of QB, moreso than a Jeff Garcia and both of them had great years with the Bucs. So that "rarely" is 3 of only 4 good years for QBs here. And Simms didn't do too badly either and he wasn't all that mobile. Grads was mobile and had GREAT accuracy short and he was TERRIBLE in this offense because he couldn't do anything deep.

And who knows what Anderson could do in Gruden's offense. He's been playing in Cleveland's air attack, and thats a lot tougher than Garcia throwing 10 times to Earnest Graham in the flats and 9 times to Ike Hilliard on a short curl. Believe me, it's not splitting the atom here, guys can learn. Will he be as effective as a Rich Gannon or as accurate as Garcia now, obviously now. But can he learn to be efficient short while still being lethal deep, I think so.



But he kept Simms when he clearly didn't have to.



Yup, every QB. Brian Griese, Tim Rattay, they're as mobile as it comes! Haha, but really. Grads was a 6th round pick, so it's not like Gruden valued him too much or thought he'd be our QB in the future. Garcia is a perfect fit for the offense and was the only worthwhile free agent QB. Without signing him, we're left with Grads, McCown, and Simms. Up a creek. Also, IF Gruden could find another QB who could be like Garcia is now or Gannon was in Oakland, he'd take him no doubt. BUT, as that shows, those guys don't come along very often. There is NO ONE in the draft that is a Gannon clone. Just none of them are. There are none in free agency. So why would you pass up a shot at maybe the best, and definitely the safest, QB option because you're obsessed with finding someone who's mobile.

Isn't it ironic that the BEST Gruden's passing game has looked is not here with Garcia who everyone says fits Gruden's offense perfectly, but with Brad Johnson who never left the pocket and you say Gruden just inherited.......

From the looks of this response you seemingly agree with me that Anderson is not an ideal fit which is the point I have been making throughout this discussion. I really don't know why this discussion has mutated into what it is, as what is really to be discussed here is whether or not Derek Anderson would be a good fit in Tampa. The simple answer is no.

I have never been obsessed with the desire to have a mobile QB, I just understand the fact that the Jon Gruden offense relies on a quarterback who is mobile in the pocket and can have well above average success rolling out of the pocket and making plays. This year is a perfect example of how well a mobile QB works with Jon Gruden and I really think the Buc's should do everything in their power to try and maintain that success.

Would I be willing to give him a shot? Definitely. However, I would not want to take this chance at the risk of giving up a high draft pick or at the expense of a QB who better fits the Jon Gruden mold. Unfortunately for us, and everyone else in the league for that matter, as the season progresses, Anderson's value continues to increase. So much so that he would cost the Buc's an excessively high pick in the draft and in my opinion, a 2nd round pick minimum. His situation parallels Schaub, only he has played better than Schaub, in more extensive playing time.

Beans
11-12-2007, 05:38 PM
Depth at qb is good but quality sucks, there is no obvious number 1 qb. There is no amazing qb. Rather wait till next year, unless you want to take a chance on Colt Berrian, who is a system qb. He would be good for that Gruden WCO. He does have an arm, and is fairly mobile.

Brennan would be excellent for us IMO, and I want us to pick him up.

BucSappy
11-12-2007, 05:39 PM
If we get Brennan I'm gonna puke. We already have Gradkowski, we don't need 2 quarterbacks with a lack of arm strength.

Tampa 2 4 life
11-12-2007, 05:41 PM
If we get Brennan I'm gonna puke. We already have Gradkowski, we don't need 2 quarterbacks with a lack of arm strength.

Why do we need a huge arm in a west coast offense?

But yeah, Brennan sucks. Matt Grothe in '09 FTW.

Caddy
11-12-2007, 06:30 PM
Garcia doesn't exactly have the best arm in the NFL but look how well he is doing.

etk
11-12-2007, 08:25 PM
Allen wouldn't part with a first rounder for Derek Anderson. Maybe a 2nd, but I think Jeff Garcia has at least one more great year in him.

QB isn't as big a need as people say it is for the Bucs. As long as Garcia is playing great we don't need a young QB...might need a young QB to groom, but I think personally we develop the rest of our roster until we need a young QB, and that will be in 2009.

I agree with what's said here, except for the trading for Anderson part.

As far as the mobility discussion goes, just take a look at our recent quarterbacks: Garcia, Gradkowski, McCown, Plummer. It was also rumored that we would pursue Culpepper. Clearly Gruden has a fixation with mobility, and it makes sense if you look at his background and see how well the offense flows with Garcia (the prototype IMO). You can't completely disregard a quarterback if his mobility is average or below, but it's always something important to consider. A good quarterback doesn't necessarily make a good WCO quarterback too. I think Chris Simms will be a solid player in the future but his skills resort him to average in this offense.

As far as the future at the position, we have some options in the draft. Colt Brennan is possible, but somewhat risky based on his projected range. Matt Flynn is another possibility that would be less costly. He's a terrific athlete with a good arm and average decision-making skills. He would need time to groom, however. I really like Chase Daniel as a prospect for our offense next year. He's mobile, creative and good at spreading the ball around. He has a very high comp. % and throws his share of deep balls as well. Grothe is an okay prospect. Great runner but struggles with his decisions and accuracy sometimes. He's very inconsistent in college so it remains to be seen if he can turn himself around. If we draft someone and they fail, we won't need to worry. There's always Robert Marve in 2011/2012.

Wootylicous
11-12-2007, 09:58 PM
Happy Birthday to cadillac :D

Caddy
11-12-2007, 10:45 PM
I am finally of legal drinking age. Hallelujah!

etk
11-12-2007, 10:48 PM
I don't know if I've said this before but your birthday is actually 1 year, 2 days before mine. Congratulations, send your liver my best wishes.

Caddy
11-12-2007, 10:51 PM
I don't know if I've said this before but your birthday is actually 1 year, 2 days before mine. Congratulations, send your liver my best wishes.

Haha thanks. It's going to need it in the next few weeks. Graduation dinner/award night thingy this Saturday, and Schoolies next week.

dbtb135
11-12-2007, 10:59 PM
From the looks of this response you seemingly agree with me that Anderson is not an ideal fit which is the point I have been making throughout this discussion. I really don't know why this discussion has mutated into what it is, as what is really to be discussed here is whether or not Derek Anderson would be a good fit in Tampa. The simple answer is no.

He's not an ideal fit. Thats a big 'WELL FRICKIN DUH!' from me. But I was making the point that you said A) Mobility was important [when it's not really] B) Gruden has rarely been able to do anything with pocket passers [when he HAS, and done more with them than QBs that "fit his system"], etc, etc. Just because I agree that he isn't the fit that, say Garcia is, doesn't mean anything else you say is irrelevant.

I have never been obsessed with the desire to have a mobile QB, I just understand the fact that the Jon Gruden offense relies on a quarterback who is mobile in the pocket and can have well above average success rolling out of the pocket and making plays. This year is a perfect example of how well a mobile QB works with Jon Gruden and I really think the Buc's should do everything in their power to try and maintain that success.

How can you say it RELIES on a QB who is mobile when it's THRIVED under one who was completely IMMOBILE? That doesn't make any sense, whatsoever. We've had more success with immobile QBs than we've had with mobile QBs, Garcia included.

Would I be willing to give him a shot? Definitely. However, I would not want to take this chance at the risk of giving up a high draft pick or at the expense of a QB who better fits the Jon Gruden mold. Unfortunately for us, and everyone else in the league for that matter, as the season progresses, Anderson's value continues to increase. So much so that he would cost the Buc's an excessively high pick in the draft and in my opinion, a 2nd round pick minimum. His situation parallels Schaub, only he has played better than Schaub, in more extensive playing time.

Bruce Gradkowski fits the mold. He sucks. That well clearly tells me it's up to whoever the best QB is, and IF it's close, then definitely give the edge to the guy who can be that Gannon-type QB. But who comes close to Anderson for us, right now? Matt Ryan as mentioned already. Brian Brohm has the kind of accuracy that Gruden likes, but isn't necessarily mobile. Now, take into account that we'll be picking in the 20s in all likelihood. Those guys are out, guys like Colt Brennan, Erik Ainge, and JDB in later rounds are in. Garcia will be 38 BEFORE the draft, we've got to start looking at other options for the future sooner rather than later. This isn't a situation where a guy can come in, ride the bench for two seasons, develop, and go. And considering where we're drafting, and what other veteran QBs become available, Anderson is pretty easily the best option, if pricey. Can't just write him off because he's not as mobile as some others.

dbtb135
11-12-2007, 11:00 PM
I am finally of legal drinking age. Hallelujah!

I was there too a couple months ago. Two words: strip club!

Caddy
11-13-2007, 06:01 AM
dbtb I've never "written" Anderson off, I am just of the belief that for the price he would most likely command, he is not the best option based on Gruden's system. Brad Johnson seems to be an exception to the rule. He thrived off a hard working offensive line and capable receivers as well as the number 1 defense in the NFL. However if his value was that of a 3rd round pick, then in all fairness I wouldn't mind bringing him in as he offers the Buc's more than a Dixon or Keller etc etc.

Everyone in this thread agrees that he is not a good fit and it is a pure opportunity cost debate. Do you give up a pricey pick for an unsuitable QB who may command a change in total offense, or do you risk your hand and go for a guy who is a much better fit; Ryan/Brennan, potentially Ainge to a degree who I'm quite high on.

The whole Anderson debate poses a very difficult question for the FO and Gruden to make. Do you take the proven guy who albeit not an ideal solution, has shown the ability to play effectively in the NFL; or do you draft a rookie who has the potential to excel in your offensive scheme, despite being unproven.

Caddy
11-13-2007, 06:02 AM
I was there too a couple months ago. Two words: strip club!

I live on the mid north coast of New South Wales and the only nightclub (no strip clubs :( ) we have is some crappy joint called 'Downunder', aka "Grab-a-Granny".

dbtb135
11-13-2007, 06:44 PM
dbtb I've never "written" Anderson off, I am just of the belief that for the price he would most likely command, he is not the best option based on Gruden's system. Brad Johnson seems to be an exception to the rule. He thrived off a hard working offensive line and capable receivers as well as the number 1 defense in the NFL. However if his value was that of a 3rd round pick, then in all fairness I wouldn't mind bringing him in as he offers the Buc's more than a Dixon or Keller etc etc.

1. So who do you think would be a better option? As I mentioned in my previous post, with the draft and FA, our options are limited. Who would you go with over Anderson?

2. As good as Johnson played, Griese almost matched that in 2004. Our OL came together for the playoff run in 02, thats it. Aside from that, they stunk as usual. It is Yatta, Wade, Coleman, etc we're talking about here.

Everyone in this thread agrees that he is not a good fit and it is a pure opportunity cost debate. Do you give up a pricey pick for an unsuitable QB who may command a change in total offense, or do you risk your hand and go for a guy who is a much better fit; Ryan/Brennan, potentially Ainge to a degree who I'm quite high on.

Again, it's a disagreement in "suitable". I think more "unsuitable" QBs have had success here than you are giving credit for (Johnson in 02 and 03, Griese in 04, Simms in the 2nd half of 05), and therefore aren't as "unsuitable" as they may seem. None of them commanded any change in the offense, not surprising seeing as how stubborn Gruden is with his 3 foot thick playbook.

Ryan, I'm pretty sure, would cost MORE than Anderson (likely our 1st and 2nd/future 1st depending on how high he's projected) and isn't nearly as safe seeing as how no one knows how he'll fare vs. NFL defenses. That to me is just as big a risk as bringing in someone who doesn't fit the offense that well.

And Brennan isn't an option to me. Even system aside, he's not all that impressive to me. Ainge, ironically, played a lot better last year going deep a lot to Meachem.

I live on the mid north coast of New South Wales and the only nightclub (no strip clubs :( ) we have is some crappy joint called 'Downunder', aka "Grab-a-Granny".

Heh, ouch.

Caddy
11-13-2007, 07:51 PM
1. So who do you think would be a better option? As I mentioned in my previous post, with the draft and FA, our options are limited. Who would you go with over Anderson?

I would take Brohm or Ryan in the middle of the first round, no earlier than that. I also like Brennan in the late 2nd as well as Erik Ainge. The UFA QB's this year are garbage. However even for these players there is exceptions. I would only want them over Anderson if the value was right. If we had to give up excess draft picks for one of them, go with Anderson, but if we didn't, those are the QB's I like this year.


2. As good as Johnson played, Griese almost matched that in 2004. Our OL came together for the playoff run in 02, thats it. Aside from that, they stunk as usual. It is Yatta, Wade, Coleman, etc we're talking about here.

For some reason they played well that year :confused: Don't ask me how. Griese was a decent QB, but even he differs from Anderson and is much more adept at the short to intermediate route and wasn't really suited to the long ball, like Anderson.




Again, it's a disagreement in "suitable". I think more "unsuitable" QBs have had success here than you are giving credit for (Johnson in 02 and 03, Griese in 04, Simms in the 2nd half of 05), and therefore aren't as "unsuitable" as they may seem. None of them commanded any change in the offense, not surprising seeing as how stubborn Gruden is with his 3 foot thick playbook.

Ryan, I'm pretty sure, would cost MORE than Anderson (likely our 1st and 2nd/future 1st depending on how high he's projected) and isn't nearly as safe seeing as how no one knows how he'll fare vs. NFL defenses. That to me is just as big a risk as bringing in someone who doesn't fit the offense that well.

And Brennan isn't an option to me. Even system aside, he's not all that impressive to me. Ainge, ironically, played a lot better last year going deep a lot to Meachem.


For me, determining which QB to bring in is all about value. If Anderson presents better value than any other option, then he would make for a better choice. I am just of the personal belief that if we can get a guy more suited to our system at a similar to better value than Anderson then we should do that. I guess it's really just a matter of choice. Anderson or a rookie. I kind of prefer risking a pick for a guy who could excel rather than getting a 'sure-thing' who would be an adequate starter. I guess it all depends on what you want in a QB really.

dbtb135
11-14-2007, 12:03 AM
I would take Brohm or Ryan in the middle of the first round, no earlier than that. I also like Brennan in the late 2nd as well as Erik Ainge. The UFA QB's this year are garbage. However even for these players there is exceptions. I would only want them over Anderson if the value was right. If we had to give up excess draft picks for one of them, go with Anderson, but if we didn't, those are the QB's I like this year.

You're taking a BIG chance that we're either picking low enough to get Ryan/Brohm or that one would fall that far.

For some reason they played well that year :confused: Don't ask me how. Griese was a decent QB, but even he differs from Anderson and is much more adept at the short to intermediate route and wasn't really suited to the long ball, like Anderson.

They didn't play well that year, they played well in the playoffs. They were their usual selves in the regular season. Griese has a solid deeper ball in 04, and had a 61% completion percentage (much lower in Miami) before he got here. He improve GREATLY short and intermediate passes under Gruden.

For me, determining which QB to bring in is all about value. If Anderson presents better value than any other option, then he would make for a better choice. I am just of the personal belief that if we can get a guy more suited to our system at a similar to better value than Anderson then we should do that. I guess it's really just a matter of choice. Anderson or a rookie. I kind of prefer risking a pick for a guy who could excel rather than getting a 'sure-thing' who would be an adequate starter. I guess it all depends on what you want in a QB really.

That again is where we differ. You think Anderson would struggle in this system, when players who have not been tailored to this system have not only performed adequately, but thrived. Anderson could excel just as much if not more in this system than someone like Brennan or Ainge, IMO. And this is not to mention he's 10x the deep passer than either of them.

Caddy
11-14-2007, 12:29 AM
You're taking a BIG chance that we're either picking low enough to get Ryan/Brohm or that one would fall that far.

You don't have to make a trade before the draft so that shouldn't be a big issue. I wouldn't trade up for either and would then look for the late 2nd/3rd round for a QB. If nothing is promising, then give the Anderson trade a thorough look.



They didn't play well that year, they played well in the playoffs. They were their usual selves in the regular season. Griese has a solid deeper ball in 04, and had a 61% completion percentage (much lower in Miami) before he got here. He improve GREATLY short and intermediate passes under Gruden.
They played well enough during the season to get the team to the playoffs but in all fairness the whole team coasted on the success of the defense.



That again is where we differ. You think Anderson would struggle in this system, when players who have not been tailored to this system have not only performed adequately, but thrived. Anderson could excel just as much if not more in this system than someone like Brennan or Ainge, IMO. And this is not to mention he's 10x the deep passer than either of them.

I think you have struggled to grasp my view on the situation. I don't necessarily think he would struggle as I said I thought he would be adequate. It's just that I'm looking for a QB who could be excellent in the system. Maybe Anderson could adapt to the system, who knows? It is just that once you see what a guy tailored to the system can do, you should do all you can to try and maintain that which is something that Ryan/Brennan etc could do potentially better than Anderson.

dbtb135
11-14-2007, 05:01 AM
You don't have to make a trade before the draft so that shouldn't be a big issue. I wouldn't trade up for either and would then look for the late 2nd/3rd round for a QB. If nothing is promising, then give the Anderson trade a thorough look.

I didn't mean as it pertained to Anderson, I meant it as it pertains to our options. Our best option right now QB-wise is that one of the top 3 QBs falls to us. That, however, is highly unlikely. The next best option would be Anderson IMO, and none really come close. Ainge would probably be the closest, and he'd take a while to develop and would have a much bigger chance of not becoming a franchise QB. He's a lot like Brodie Croyle IMO, not so much as a prospect, but as a boom/bust player. There's a chance that he could be a stud, but a much, much bigger chance that he could perform at a very average or worse level.

They played well enough during the season to get the team to the playoffs but in all fairness the whole team coasted on the success of the defense.

They weren't terrible in-season, but they were still below-average as an NFL caliber OL. In the playoffs, they played pretty well above average. But Johnson's play was consistent the entire season, including playoffs.

I think you have struggled to grasp my view on the situation. I don't necessarily think he would struggle as I said I thought he would be adequate. It's just that I'm looking for a QB who could be excellent in the system. Maybe Anderson could adapt to the system, who knows? It is just that once you see what a guy tailored to the system can do, you should do all you can to try and maintain that which is something that Ryan/Brennan etc could do potentially better than Anderson.

I get your view, but at the same time when a player comes from playing VERY well as he is now to playing "adequately" because of the offense, I do think that implies he'd struggle.

And again, who's to say Anderson could not play on par with what Garcia is doing now if not better? Johnson did. Griese did, and if not, came very close. I don't think one such as Brennan could do great things in our system. His ceiling is pretty limited, the opposite of Ryan/Brohm or even Ainge. I think Colt has the potential to be only "good enough" in any situation you put him in, where as Anderson has the potential to be very good, maybe even in our system.

Caddy
11-14-2007, 05:43 AM
I didn't mean as it pertained to Anderson, I meant it as it pertains to our options. Our best option right now QB-wise is that one of the top 3 QBs falls to us. That, however, is highly unlikely. The next best option would be Anderson IMO, and none really come close. Ainge would probably be the closest, and he'd take a while to develop and would have a much bigger chance of not becoming a franchise QB. He's a lot like Brodie Croyle IMO, not so much as a prospect, but as a boom/bust player. There's a chance that he could be a stud, but a much, much bigger chance that he could perform at a very average or worse level.

I agree with the whole Ainge thing. I think he has a lot of potential as a QB, particularly in Tampa Bay and yes he would need at least a year to sit, but luckily Garcia signed a 2 year deal.



They weren't terrible in-season, but they were still below-average as an NFL caliber OL. In the playoffs, they played pretty well above average. But Johnson's play was consistent the entire season, including playoffs.

Johnson just had to be consistent during the 02 campaign and performed that job well. Considering the dominance on defense with Sapp, Brooks, Lynch etc he really never had to win games.



I get your view, but at the same time when a player comes from playing VERY well as he is now to playing "adequately" because of the offense, I do think that implies he'd struggle.

And again, who's to say Anderson could not play on par with what Garcia is doing now if not better? Johnson did. Griese did, and if not, came very close. I don't think one such as Brennan could do great things in our system. His ceiling is pretty limited, the opposite of Ryan/Brohm or even Ainge. I think Colt has the potential to be only "good enough" in any situation you put him in, where as Anderson has the potential to be very good, maybe even in our system.

It's obviously a hard question to answer. You can never really be sure how a QB is going to fit into a system other than the one they are playing in. There is an infinite number of reasons why a QB could excel or suffer. Everyone has their own interpretation, we just have to hope that the Front Office makes the decision which best suits the team.

If somehow Anderson did become a Buc, and exceeded expectations, I would be glad to eat my own words.

dbtb135
11-14-2007, 04:35 PM
Ainge, I like. But I just don't know about him. Mainly because he'd take a second round pick and we'd be getting a 25/75 shot at a good QB. Not knocking him, thats just the way things are with QBs. But we could draft a CB (DEEP class) in the second round who would probably be great. Then again, with the pick Anderson would cost we could get a great LT, even though Anderson would be the much safer play.

Brad Johnson played great in 02. Just flawless. It wasn't like he was Trent Dilfer, given the ball and 6 points and told not to screw it up. 8th in yards per game, 9th in TDs despite only playing 13 games, 6th in completion percentage, tied for 1st in INTs(low), and 3rd in QB rating. I'd compare him to Ben Roethlisberger when he won, only without any run game. He was a top 10, arguably top 5 QB that year.

Caddy
11-14-2007, 05:57 PM
Ainge, I like. But I just don't know about him. Mainly because he'd take a second round pick and we'd be getting a 25/75 shot at a good QB. Not knocking him, thats just the way things are with QBs. But we could draft a CB (DEEP class) in the second round who would probably be great. Then again, with the pick Anderson would cost we could get a great LT, even though Anderson would be the much safer play.

Brad Johnson played great in 02. Just flawless. It wasn't like he was Trent Dilfer, given the ball and 6 points and told not to screw it up. 8th in yards per game, 9th in TDs despite only playing 13 games, 6th in completion percentage, tied for 1st in INTs(low), and 3rd in QB rating. I'd compare him to Ben Roethlisberger when he won, only without any run game. He was a top 10, arguably top 5 QB that year.

When you think about it, what this whole discussion comes down to is what value the Browns place on Anderson at the end of the year, if they even want to trade him at all. If it is a trade similar to the Schaub deal, I don't even think it should be considered. But if it is for say, a 3rd rounder, then I really think it could be a good deal.

BrownsTown
11-14-2007, 06:07 PM
When you think about it, what this whole discussion comes down to is what value the Browns place on Anderson at the end of the year, if they even want to trade him at all. If it is a trade similar to the Schaub deal, I don't even think it should be considered. But if it is for say, a 3rd rounder, then I really think it could be a good deal.

I don't think there's any chance they'd part with him for less than what Schaub got.

j05son
11-14-2007, 06:22 PM
Think we could make a run at him through trade or FA? He's 24 and playing great this year. Not sure how he fits into our system though.

He's an FA, but not an UFA. You'll have to give up draft picks for him. Most likely multiple draft picks. Trade may work, Savage is a dealer...I could see a sign and trade if a team didn't want to part with picks.

Derek Anderson would be horrible in our offense. He's a dropback gunslinger with limited mobility1. Our offense is built on quick reads, short accurate passes and creativity in and out of the pocket2. Those aren't his strengths. With that being said, we could can our current system, line up Stovall and Clayton at wideouts, and sign a good pass blocking LT. That's a pretty risky proposition, so I think we'll just stick with what we've got.

1. His mobility isn't bad at all. Cleveland has ran designed QB draws with Anderson. Derek also scrabbled up the sidelines against the chiefs to get us into field goal range in a win in overtime last season. He's a pocket passer, but he can move. Moves well in the pocket and can move outside of it. He's no VY, Vick, Garcia, etc.
2. Anderson has been HIGHLY praised on his quick reads and quick release. That's never been question. His accuracy on the other hand you have a point. He's doing well this season, but that was one of the things hampering him down as a starter.

I don't think there's any chance they'd part with him for less than what Schaub got.

100% agreed. The Browns brass are real high on him. They felt he could preform like this. The Browns didn't seem to be interested in Quinn until he fell past Miami and Savage started wheeling and dealing on a potential steal. Anderson is a big, strong armer QB, who has success in the NFL. They will want more then Atlanta got for Schaub.

619
11-14-2007, 06:27 PM
no doubt for what anderson has done he deserves more than what atlanta got for schaub. hes much more proven then schaub was at the time of the trade.

Caddy
11-14-2007, 07:03 PM
I don't think there's any chance they'd part with him for less than what Schaub got.

Exactly. Which is why I think going after another QB is a better option.

dbtb135
11-14-2007, 10:08 PM
So, hypothetically, you'd use our 2nd rounder on Ainge but not the exact same pick to trade for Anderson?

Chucky
11-14-2007, 10:10 PM
So, hypothetically, you'd use our 2nd rounder on Ainge but not the exact same pick to trade for Anderson?

The value of what was given up for schaub was more like the equivalent of a mid first round pick.

Caddy
11-14-2007, 11:03 PM
The trade moved the Texans up 2 draft slots (10 to 8) and they also gave up two 2nd rounders. If we had to do that for Schaub, I'd much rather have Ainge in the 2nd.

dbtb135
11-15-2007, 12:06 AM
I was responding to your "if we could get him for a third, it would be a good deal" remark. I was just wondering how much would be too much in your opinion for Anderson....

Merlin
11-15-2007, 12:37 AM
If Anderson continues the second half of the season as he has played the first, then the Browns are going to be in the same position as the Chargers were, with Bree's and matey boy who's name I can't remember......aarrgghh!

Anyway, my point is, what will the Browns do, or what should they do, will they resign and stick with what appears to be a winning formula with a 24 year old QB who appears to have found his feet, or pull an untested, 1st rd QB of the bench to replace him?

We're all considering Anderson, maybe we''re looking at the wrong QB?

etk
11-15-2007, 10:13 PM
1. His mobility isn't bad at all. Cleveland has ran designed QB draws with Anderson. Derek also scrabbled up the sidelines against the chiefs to get us into field goal range in a win in overtime last season. He's a pocket passer, but he can move. Moves well in the pocket and can move outside of it. He's no VY, Vick, Garcia, etc.
2. Anderson has been HIGHLY praised on his quick reads and quick release. That's never been question. His accuracy on the other hand you have a point. He's doing well this season, but that was one of the things hampering him down as a starter.



Mobility in this offense is different from others. It's not just being able to get out of the pocket and pick up a first, it's also being shifty in the pocket and eluding the rush. Anderson has decent straight-line speed, but he's not very agile or quick. I'll trust you when you say he makes quick reads, as you know him better than I do. My brother is a Browns fan and I've watched most of their games. He gets rid of the ball on time but I question whether he can make even quicker reads and throws since our routes are different.

d34ng3l021
11-19-2007, 03:12 AM
Not to mention the kind of talent Anderson gets to work with. He would be a bust if he played anywhere outside of CLE, NE, or IND.

etk
11-19-2007, 10:36 AM
A lot of his big completions are simple passes where he throws it up high and lets his receivers go up and get it. Any quarterback can do that, and that's not really a staple of our offense anyway. He still played really well against Baltimore, though.

BucSappy
11-20-2007, 06:40 PM
I say we wait until 2009 to draft a quarterback. (crossing my fingers for Hunter Cantwell or Todd Boeckman, but preferrably Cantwell)

Tampa 2 4 life
11-20-2007, 06:42 PM
I say we wait until 2009 to draft a quarterback. (crossing my fingers for Hunter Cantwell or Todd Boeckman, but preferrably Cantwell)

Matt Grothe > Every other QB ever combined.

etk
11-20-2007, 07:13 PM
There's a guy being talked about as a legit contender in the Heisman race this year...he's a Junior by the name of Chase Daniel. He's about 10x better than Cantwell & Boeckman, while Grothe won't be available until the '10 draft (he's a poor man's Grads anyway).

brat316
11-20-2007, 07:15 PM
Tebow Look at the guy he is amazing

Turtlepower
11-20-2007, 07:17 PM
Tebow Look at the guy he is amazing

He will not be an NFL caliber starting QB.

etk
11-20-2007, 07:22 PM
He will not be an NFL caliber starting QB.

Care to back up that statement? The only reason why I don't consider us drafting Tebow is because he won't likely be available to us. He will be a top 5 pick. He has a very strong and accurate arm, makes good decisions and can buck people running the ball. If Alex Smith was a #1 pick, why shouldn't Tebow be given the same consideration?

brat316
11-20-2007, 07:25 PM
Is he going to be like a Ken Dorsey

etk
11-20-2007, 07:32 PM
Is he going to be like a Ken Dorsey

He is going to be a slightly faster and quicker Ben Roethlisberger.

brat316
11-20-2007, 07:34 PM
Nice I love Roethlisberger.

So when does Tebow come out
I am going to say he plays untill his senior year, wait how old is he?

Caddy
11-20-2007, 08:21 PM
Nice I love Roethlisberger.

So when does Tebow come out
I am going to say he plays untill his senior year, wait how old is he?

He is a sophomore and I think considering he has only really started for one season, he will probably go back for his senior year and come out in 2010.

Obviously he could play like a god next year and the senior class could play ordinary so you never know what can happen which could lead to a early draft entry.

BucSappy
11-20-2007, 08:31 PM
Care to back up that statement? The only reason why I don't consider us drafting Tebow is because he won't likely be available to us. He will be a top 5 pick. He has a very strong and accurate arm, makes good decisions and can buck people running the ball. If Alex Smith was a #1 pick, why shouldn't Tebow be given the same consideration?

Tebow has horrible footwork. He won't be very durable in the NFL considering how many tims he is getting hit (since he is running the football). He puts horrendous touch on the long deep ball. He is operating in an offense that doesn't translate well at all to the NFL.

His reads are very easy in the passing game. "Is Percy open? Nope, scramble." It is why Alex Smith is looking like a bust. Going from the spread option to the West Coast Offense is like going from 3rd grade math to quantum physics.

His threat to run the ball won't freeze the LBers in the NFL because teams won't run the spread option. He isn't going run the veer.

He is a horrendous fit into Jon Gruden's offense on top of all this because it is so complicated.

Tampa 2 4 life
11-20-2007, 08:50 PM
(he's a poor man's Grads anyway).

Haha.

1. Grothe has a better arm.
2. Grothe has better legs.
3. Grothe is tougher.
4. Grothe has similar accuracy.
5. Grothe is a better mental QB.

dbtb135
11-21-2007, 12:22 AM
Gradkowski is the Absolute Zero of QBs, you cannot go any lower and therefore there can be no "poor man's Grads".

BucSappy
11-21-2007, 12:41 AM
Gradkowski is the Absolute Zero of QBs, you cannot go any lower and therefore there can be no "poor man's Grads".

I am loving that we have a franchise backup with Grad. He isn't as bad as you think he is.

dbtb135
11-21-2007, 01:14 AM
Last year:

54% completion in a dink and dunk offense. 4th worst in the NFL.
5.1 Y/A pointing out how little he got out of his many throws. Worst in the NFL.
127.8 YPG. 2nd worst in the NFL.
9 TDs. 3rd worst in the NFL.
11 fumbles. 3rd worst in the NFL.
Unfortunately, there is no stat for arm strength, but he is assuredly last in the NFL in that also.

This year, he has attempted 4 passes and has had 1 picked off.

BucSappy
11-21-2007, 01:23 AM
Last year:

54% completion in a dink and dunk offense. 4th worst in the NFL.
5.1 Y/A pointing out how little he got out of his many throws. Worst in the NFL.
127.8 YPG. 2nd worst in the NFL.
9 TDs. 3rd worst in the NFL.
11 fumbles. 3rd worst in the NFL.
Unfortunately, there is no stat for arm strength, but he is assuredly last in the NFL in that also.

This year, he has attempted 4 passes and has had 1 picked off.

I'm not rushing to judgement. He was a rookie, and the entire offense blew complete monkey chunks this year. Now, would I rather have Luke McCown as our backup, yes I would (I hope we deal Simms in the offseason).

BucSappy
11-21-2007, 01:24 AM
Hope you all like my new ballin sig.

etk
11-21-2007, 09:46 AM
Haha.

1. Grothe has a better arm.
2. Grothe has better legs.
3. Grothe is tougher.
4. Grothe has similar accuracy.
5. Grothe is a better mental QB.

Just the response I was looking for. It's so easy to get you going.

Gradkowski is the Absolute Zero of QBs, you cannot go any lower and therefore there can be no "poor man's Grads".

Good point, lol. I was kidding but thanks for the reminder.

Tampa 2 4 life
11-21-2007, 05:03 PM
Just the response I was looking for. It's so easy to get you going.

Nobody messes with the only good offensive player on the bulls...

Caddy
11-21-2007, 05:31 PM
Last year:

54% completion in a dink and dunk offense. 4th worst in the NFL.
5.1 Y/A pointing out how little he got out of his many throws. Worst in the NFL.
127.8 YPG. 2nd worst in the NFL.
9 TDs. 3rd worst in the NFL.
11 fumbles. 3rd worst in the NFL.
Unfortunately, there is no stat for arm strength, but he is assuredly last in the NFL in that also.

This year, he has attempted 4 passes and has had 1 picked off.

Noodle-arm Penningon is pretty bad. :D

RoyHall#1
11-21-2007, 05:39 PM
Not to mention the kind of talent Anderson gets to work with. He would be a bust if he played anywhere outside of CLE, NE, or IND.

Considering you're not a Brown's fan, this is sig worthy.

dbtb135
11-21-2007, 08:21 PM
I'm not rushing to judgement. He was a rookie, and the entire offense blew complete monkey chunks this year. Now, would I rather have Luke McCown as our backup, yes I would (I hope we deal Simms in the offseason).

This is true, but his play was even pretty bad for a rookie. Yet he got pub outside of Tampa like he was actually good or something. And yeah, I'd rather have Luke's deep ball, zip on passes, similar mobility, and height over Grads' package of smart, moblie, ok short passes.

And Caddy, never before have I seen a deep ball in the NFL look quite as bad as Grads' deep ball vs. the Cowboys last year that was only caught because Galloway beat the coverage that badly. Hey, it'll be the one year anniversary of that awful throw on Thursday!

Caddy
11-21-2007, 08:54 PM
This is true, but his play was even pretty bad for a rookie. Yet he got pub outside of Tampa like he was actually good or something. And yeah, I'd rather have Luke's deep ball, zip on passes, similar mobility, and height over Grads' package of smart, moblie, ok short passes.

And Caddy, never before have I seen a deep ball in the NFL look quite as bad as Grads' deep ball vs. the Cowboys last year that was only caught because Galloway beat the coverage that badly. Hey, it'll be the one year anniversary of that awful throw on Thursday!

I never said it was good. I agree with you. I just think he isn't the worst. He is definitely bottom 5 though without a doubt. He sort of just lobs it up and hopes that everything falls into place as opposed to other QB's who are able to land the ball precisely where they want it too.

dbtb135
11-22-2007, 12:56 AM
I never said it was good. I agree with you. I just think he isn't the worst. He is definitely bottom 5 though without a doubt. He sort of just lobs it up and hopes that everything falls into place as opposed to other QB's who are able to land the ball precisely where they want it too.

I know, I was just saying I DO think it's the worst in the NFL. But bottom five is indicative enough of his suckitude, I guess.

dbtb135
11-25-2007, 04:07 PM
Grads showcased his skills (or lack thereof) again today. Four turnovers by the Skins (inside their own 35, FG range) to start the game. Grads leads the offense on 17 plays for 32 yards. Grads went 2-5 for 18 yards, and our ONLY TD came when we ran it 3 straight times with Graham. Instead of "don't turn the ball over", with Bruce it's "don't do anything at all, because nothing good can come of you."

etk
11-25-2007, 04:18 PM
Every time he stepped on the field my blood pressure shot up. At halftime I really just wanted the game to end because I knew we were ****** with Grads in full time. Words can't really describe how bad he is, and he might have even gotten worse since last year. He almost missed Graham 3 yards in front of him. We'd have better luck punting a deep ball to our receivers than letting Bruce throw it. I can't tell you how many times I thought I was going to have a heart attack this game. I kept screaming "Get to the ball Ronde" at the TV and finally he made the pick instead of letting them catch it in front of him. Then they did the same thing on the next drive but Kelly came up big. We're so lucky to come up with this win. I credit the entire victory to the intensity and ferociousness of our defense. That Phillips hit and FF was beautiful. White was huge again, but he was so gassed on the final drive that he couldn't do anything. Gaines played great as well, getting huge penetration on that 4th and 1 stop. Carter finally did something! Oh yeah, Clayton had another drop, WOOHOO. Stovall is so valuable on specials, it's no wonder Gruden doesn't want him on offense too much.

We really need to get another QB. We just can't risk not having a backup. Not with the Bruce-domino effect. Defenses come up and crowd the box. The defensive line knows the run is coming. Our line kept getting driven back because their linemen knew all they had to was bullrush.

SeanTaylorRIP
11-25-2007, 04:20 PM
Yeah he really was bad, you should have won 50-10, but he is so bad. Graham would have run for 250 on us if you showed any sort of passing threat with Gradkoswki. But you deserved to win, the skins were given the win but refused all game long. Just pathetic on our part. Your punter was your MVP today.

Tampa 2 4 life
11-25-2007, 04:20 PM
Hmm. How about Joe Flacco as a back up?

etk
11-25-2007, 04:24 PM
Yeah he really was bad, you should have won 50-10, but he is so bad. Graham would have run for 250 on us if you showed any sort of passing threat with Gradkoswki. But you deserved to win, the skins were given the win but refused all game long. Just pathetic on our part. Your punter was your MVP today.

They never said the official hangtime on that one punt, but I'd like to know how it stands record-wise.

I don't think the Skins were that pathetic. The turnovers are obviously frustrating, but you had the right gameplan. 3 of those fumbles were really unavoidable on the part of the ballcarrier.

JAlexander
11-25-2007, 04:36 PM
Gradkowski wasn't THAT bad, he didn't have turnovers against a good defense. The Galloway miss-throw could have been a great play if Galloway looked up sooner because Gradkowski was leading him away from Landry. I'm not saying he played good, but it wasn't like he was out there fumbling and throwing picks.

etk
11-25-2007, 04:38 PM
Gradkowski wasn't THAT bad, he didn't have turnovers against a good defense. The Galloway miss-throw could have been a great play if Galloway looked up sooner because Gradkowski was leading him away from Landry. I'm not saying he played good, but it wasn't like he was out there fumbling and throwing picks.

He had about 4-5 balls that were way off target and could've been picked. That's what made this game so nervewracking...he kept getting away with being terrible.

SeanTaylorRIP
11-25-2007, 04:42 PM
Whatever the reason, yeah we controlled the ball, but 9 yards, zero first downs in the 2nd half won't cut it against real teams.

BucSappy
11-25-2007, 10:49 PM
www.buccaneers.com

Check out the end of Gruden's press conference (videos you can access in the middle of the screen)...hilairious.

Oh yeah, I'm officially off the Bruce Gradkowski bandwagon. :) It's pretty obvious he is incapable of being a starting QB in the NFL. He's obviously Jon Gruden's favorite player (watch the press conference lol)