Derek Anderson's historically bad performance

Remember how Eric Mangini went back to Derek Anderson because he thought Anderson would play better at quarterback than Brady Quinn. Well it just so happened that Anderson's performance yesterday ranks as one of the worst of all time: 2-17, 23 yards, 1 sack, 1 INT, zero touchdowns. He had a QB rating of 15.1 and his completion percentage was just 11.8% -- the second-lowest percentage of a winning quarterback since the AFL merger. Only Don Gault, who won a game in 1970 despite converting on only 1 of 16 passes, had a worse completion percentage. It's also the first time since the turn of the century that a team won with just three or less completions.

Obviously, Anderson's performance means that he has to come down with the blame. But look at what he has to work with: in the span of two years, Edwards and Winslow are gone, and his No. 3 receiver, Stallworth, is in jail for killing someone. That team is rapidly self-destructing, and with a coach who fined a player $1,701 for a bottle of water, it's no surprise.

Personally, I thought Mangini should have stuck with Quinn even before Anderson's game. Derek Anderson isn't a rookie: you know what you're getting from him, and what you're getting isn't very good. Quinn has only started in six games, and while he's struggled in those games, you have to give him more of a chance. With Quinn, at least there's a possibility that he could get better. There's no chance of that happening with Anderson.

And it's not like they don't have time to give Quinn or anything. They're in the same division as the Steelers, Bengals and Ravens -- their season is long done, so they should at least try to salvage it by finding a quarterback.