|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Actually, Toad, I disagree (you knew that was coming though). I don't fault Savage for drafting Frye, I fault him for not sticking with what he said WHEN he drafted him. Frye wasn't a "failure", either. Frye was drafted to be groomed and brought along slowly, Savage even said so. Instead, he was starting his rookie year. That's hardly sticking with the plan. So, I place blame on Savage but not for the same reason.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Savage put his bet on Frye, and it was a failure. That's on Savage. Now can we blame Frye for the teams losses? Hell no. Can we blame him for not being good enough to be our starting QB? Without a doubt.
I think it's a stretch to even say that Savage put his bet on Frye... Savage knew that we were going to need a quality QB at some point.. Savage also knew that we needed to beef up at other positions first..... It was a very poor draft for QBs after Alex Smith... with Aaron Rogers and Jason Campbell up next... My guess is he tried to steal one with Frye in the 3rd..... Some had Frye pegged higher, he fell... it was a calculated gamble.... I don't believe Savage took Frye with the absolute intention that he was THE answer... Not like he did with Quinn.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,013
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,013 |
to all... do you think it was a bad idea by Savage in the first place to draft a gun-slinging, backyard ball guy with tons of competitiveness to be a calm, calculating game manager?...that, in retrospect, is my fault with Savage's reliance on Frye the last couple years...he said he wanted a guy they could build talent around, not through...and the guy they built talent around had a character/skill-set opposite that required for the expectations being laid out... and B... you're about to see another one of Phil's plans to get thrown out the window...let's hope this time, it's the right move... 
Browns fans are born with it...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
I fault him for not sticking with what he said WHEN he drafted him. Frye wasn't a "failure", either. Frye was drafted to be groomed and brought along slowly, Savage even said so. Instead, he was starting his rookie year.
I think we'll seriously disagree on just how starting Frye at the back-half of his rookie season stunted his growth.
I think it's fair to say that we should have seen at least some improvement in Frye's weaknesses, even if growth was stunted. However, he appeared to be the same guy he was as a rookie. By his third year and two full training camps later as the starter, he should have shown more. I don't believe he was stunted at all.
We'll know in a couple of years after he's sat on the bench in Seattle. However, for the time being, he clearly didn't develop. It's hard to fault Savage for that single aspect, though Savage has to carry the cross for virtually everything else.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Yeah, we'll disagree because I did see growth this off-season. During pre-season, I saw Charlie stay in the pocket, read defenses, adjust to the hot routes, check down to secondary receivers.....all things he lacked doing previously. Yes, he had an atrocious quarter and a half against Pitt, but that doesn't mean I didn't see him making progress in the off-season. Unfortunately, that wasn't something that he had time to build on with the leash so short.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
I think it's a stretch to even say that Savage put his bet on Frye... Savage knew that we were going to need a quality QB at some point.. Savage also knew that we needed to beef up at other positions first..... It was a very poor draft for QBs after Alex Smith... with Aaron Rogers and Jason Campbell up next... My guess is he tried to steal one with Frye in the 3rd..... Some had Frye pegged higher, he fell... it was a calculated gamble.... I don't believe Savage took Frye with the absolute intention that he was THE answer... Not like he did with Quinn.
Perhaps, but regardless of whether or not he felt the same about Frye that he does about Quinn, he still made the decision to hand the reigns to Frye, so the fault still goes on Savage.
It's easy to sit back now and judge Savage, but it's the results that count, and Savage is supposed to be one of the 32-best talent guys in the world when it comes to professional football. A failure is a failure, no matter whether he was trying to "steal one" or not. It was a gamble that didn't pay off, now he, his franchise, and the fans are paying the price.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 10
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 10 |
Quote:
Yeah, we'll disagree because I did see growth this off-season. During pre-season, I saw Charlie stay in the pocket, read defenses, adjust to the hot routes, check down to secondary receivers.....all things he lacked doing previously. Yes, he had an atrocious quarter and a half against Pitt, but that doesn't mean I didn't see him making progress in the off-season. Unfortunately, that wasn't something that he had time to build on with the leash so short.
Well put. Charlie did grow, but ultimately he had to know the writing was on the wall. In reality he was set up to fail. There was no way he could have ever made progress with this franchise. The fans are all too hungry for a winner throwing patience out the window. He only had one season to have REAL veteran QB tutelage and that was in his rookie year. He looked better this preseason and when you consider that he had to know he was on his way out and that there was no way he could win that's even more impressive. If you recap every game last year, Charlie did not have many terrible games. His worst was the second against Cincy and in that game everyone stunk. And for that game against Pitt this past weekend, I'm inclined to think that any quarterback would have had some kind of trouble with that defense. DA didn't look great against the D and he had much more time to settle into the flow of the game that was already out of reach. What separates the great teams from the bottom bunch is continuity. Charlie had 4 different systems in the last 4 years to learn. He had no support when it mattered and in the end, was set up to fail.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
It was a gamble that didn't pay off, now he, his franchise, and the fans are paying the price.
What price? Who else could we draft with that pick? Channing Crowder? Yea yea I know, there were other good players taken after Frye that we could have had... so you are correct that it was a gamble and it didn't pay off... but what price are we paying?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858 |
Just a bit of an overreaction I think,,
But that's JMO
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,810
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,810 |
Quote:
I'll use your quote as an example of why picking Frye, and hanging our QB hopes on him, was such a screwup.
Toadis...and here is an article that brings up points you seem to have overlooked...
HIGH ON FRYE
When Cleveland drafted Akron quarterback Charlie Frye in the third round of the 2005 draft, the Seattle Seahawks were disappointed they didn’t get their chance at him.
But the Seahawks scouting reports on Frye also spelled out instructions that the Browns didn’t seem to follow.
Seattle’s scouting reports said that, given time and given patience, Frye could turn into a superb NFL quarterback. But the report warned the Seahawks not to rush along Frye, to make sure he had a fair amount of time to watch and learn from the bench, and then he would be more prepared to succeed on the next level.
In Cleveland, for a brief amount of time, Frye was viewed as the franchise’s answer at quarterback. But he was inserted into the starting lineup quicker than some in Seattle thought he should have been, and now the Browns are dealing with a similar issue involving first-round pick Brady Quinn.
One NFL executive said the Browns fiercest challenge is going to be holding off all the calls to insert Quinn and to give him the time that Frye did not get.
It is why the Seahawks were willing to trade a sixth-round pick for the quarterback that, only two-plus years ago, was a third-round pick. Seattle thinks that Frye is going to get the time he needs to marinate, to learn. He also is going to get terrific coaching from Seahawks quarterbacks coach Jim Zorn and head coach Mike Holmgren, who helped mold Joe Montana, Steve Young, Brett Favre and Matt Hasselbeck.
web page
This article first posted by stabber
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 765
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 765 |
What is overlooked is that Frye went to Seattle and will be the 3rd Qb.
That is a far cry from a starter. He is a project for seattle.
I will bet my boots that Charlie will never be a "superb NFL quarterback" JMHO
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
well I thought my boy David Greene was actually better than Frye, but obviously the Seahawks thought otherwise... They released Greene.
Frye will pass Seneca Wallace on the depth chart at some point.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,465
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,465 |
Quote:
Frye will pass Seneca Wallace on the depth chart at some point.
I think thats what Seattles hoping for. Not for the obviose reasons of having better talent but I believe that Holmgreen wants frye to be their top backup QB, when hes ready, so that they could use Wallace as a WR, specail teams returner, or a gimmick player in their offense. When Frye is ready to be the top backup, Wallace would actually get more playing time playing other positions, and then be an emergancy QB. Until then, Wallace is their backup QB if hasselbeck gets hurt. I would think that Seattle does not want to see Frye having to play at all this year.
Seattle has only had 2 QBs on the roster, so having Wallce play WR, would mean Holmgreen wont need to go out and get another WR and Wallace understands the offense extremely well. All for just a 6th round pick.
Good mover for Seattle looking into the future when a 6th round pick might not even make their team anyways. But like Couch in Green Bay. Frye might not make their team next year. but I bet he makes it and will be a fine backup. When Savage drafted him, Frye was supposed to be a 2 or 3 year plan. Sound fimiliar? (Couch, Quinn in regards of sit and learn and thrown in early on a bad team)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
It was a gamble that didn't pay off, now he, his franchise, and the fans are paying the price.
What price? Who else could we draft with that pick? Channing Crowder? Yea yea I know, there were other good players taken after Frye that we could have had... so you are correct that it was a gamble and it didn't pay off... but what price are we paying?
Seems as though I allready laid it out:
I'll be more than fair and throw away the 3rd round pick. Maybe we'd have taken Hobbs, maybe we wouldn't. I see rumor that states he was a guy we wanted, but we can't prove it, so It's not fair.
So let's just talk about the price we've paid, are now paying, and will pay:
Have paid: A first-day selection that netted us nothing worthy of being called "value," and a pick that, three years later, has become a 6th round selection.
Are paying: A position in a sad state of flux that now rests on another QB who's not ready to be a starter, and a situation that has seen us trade our opening-day starter a week into the season. That has made us a laughingstock, and obviously has the players, fans, and media questioning the brains of the coaches, GM, and owner.
Will pay: Our 2008 first round pick, which in all likelihood is a top-10 pick, most probably a top-5 pick, not to mention no stability at the position when there should be some entering the 2005's pick's 4th season.
DC, like I said, it's too easy to say that there weren't other QB's in that draft. Savage is supposed to know a good bet from a bad one. He chose to bet on Frye. He lost. If Frye wasn't a good enough bet, Savage should have found something else. He chose Frye, and lost.
MAC: Quote:
Toadis...and here is an article that brings up points you seem to have overlooked...
HIGH ON FRYE
When Cleveland drafted Akron quarterback Charlie Frye in the third round of the 2005 draft, the Seattle Seahawks were disappointed they didn’t get their chance at him.
But the Seahawks scouting reports on Frye also spelled out instructions that the Browns didn’t seem to follow.
Seattle’s scouting reports said that, given time and given patience, Frye could turn into a superb NFL quarterback. But the report warned the Seahawks not to rush along Frye, to make sure he had a fair amount of time to watch and learn from the bench, and then he would be more prepared to succeed on the next level.
How much more time should Frye get? Two or three more years on the bench? Hey, Frye is entering his third year, and in the 3rd year, a first-day QB should be ready to go. He's clearly not any better now than he was as a rookie.
So what you and others are telling us is that Frye was inserted into the starting lineup exactly 5 starts too early. Should he have sat on the bench for TWO years? How about three? Those days are long gone. If you're a first-day QB, you need to be ready to go by your third year. In Frye's case, he should have been ready to go by his second. So 5 starts is what wrecked him?
GMAFB.
Would two full seasons on the bench have taught him how to get rid of the ball quicker? No way!
Would two full seasons on the bench have taught him how to feel pressure that he now isn't able to feel? No way!
Would two full seasons have given him larger hands and a stronger arm? No way!
Besides, you want to point to a SCOUTING REPORT, the EPITOME of SPECULATION, and say that's proof that we rushed Frye?
Yeah, these are the same scouts that just dumped their 2004 1st round pick onto the Texans because Boulware couldn't play safety.
Speculation is proof of nothing.
The bottom line is and will always be that Frye has not shown enough to be considered a competent starter. If he were, he wouldn't have been traded for a 6th round pick. Frye wasn't the right guy, and Savage made the mistake of believing in him.
Hey, Derek Anderson was a SIXTH round pick. Should we excuse him if he isn't ready to be a full-time starter yet? Maybe we should! Afterall, the scouting reports say he needs time to learn. Maybe we should excuse Savage for picking him up. No? Why not? Because it doesn't matter WHERE he was drafted, only that he isn't the right guy for the job. In that context, Frye wasn't the right guy for the job, just the way Akili Smith, Cade Mcown, and Tim Couch weren't the right guys for the job.
It's too easy to excuse Frye's lack of ability because he wasn't a first-round pick. It's too easy to give Savage a buy because there weren't star-studded QB's that fell into his lap. It's time to hold these players, coaches, and GM's accountable for their failures. We've seen no skills from Frye that suggest he's going to be even a competent QB in this league. Every nickel and dime beat writer can tell that he holds the ball too long, that his arm is neither strong enough nor accurate enough, and that he doesn't look at home in the pocket. It's too easy to excuse him for what he lacks, just as it was too easy to excuse players like Smith, Couch, Klingler, and Mcown.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,552
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,552 |
Quote:
well I thought my boy David Greene was actually better than Frye, but obviously the Seahawks thought otherwise... They released Greene.
Georgia loses to South Carolina, David Greene gets cut a couple days later.
Coincidence?? 
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,810
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,810 |
Quote:
How much more time should Frye get? Two or three more years on the bench? Hey, Frye is entering his third year, and in the 3rd year, a first-day QB should be ready to go. He's clearly not any better now than he was as a rookie.
Toader...tell how many QB coaches, Frye had while with the Browns?
Tell us how many offensive coordinators Frye had in his two seasons with the Browns?
Tell us how many different playbooks Frye had in his one game over 2 seasons with the Browns?
How much more time will Frye get, now that he's with an organization that has stability in coaching QBs and one playbook? Two or three more years on the bench with Seatle?
Quote:
So what you and others are telling us is that Frye was inserted into the starting lineup exactly 5 starts too early. Should he have sat on the bench for TWO years? How about three? Those days are long gone. If you're a first-day QB, you need to be ready to go by your third year. In Frye's case, he should have been ready to go by his second. So 5 starts is what wrecked him? GMAFB.
Looking at my posts, I don't believe I said anything about 5 starts too early wrecking Frye...GMAFB.
You can take your argument over what wrecked Frye in Cleveland to Mike Holgren. Your biased opinions vs Holgren's opinions...hmm, tough choice.
Why did the Browns send Frye to Seattle?...He was the only Browns QB other teams showed any interest in. Anderson was on the trading block too, but no one wanted to give a draft pick for him.
Savage knew when he drafted Quinn, we had too many QBs and the other QBs on our roster were playing to see who would be the Browns future backup....and it appears that Anderson won the job though Dorsey did show his knowledge of Chuds playbook with his excellent play during preseason.
In the end, Frye got what is best for him, even though he may not think so now. Solid coaching with some of the best in the NFL and no pressure to be ready now.
Someone had to go...good luck Charlie.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,306
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,306 |
Quote:
He also is going to get terrific coaching from Seahawks quarterbacks coach Jim Zorn and head coach Mike Holmgren, who helped mold Joe Montana, Steve Young, Brett Favre and Matt Hasselbeck.
But Charlie had the one and only "Rip Scherer" coaching him up in Cleveland
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,651
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,651 |
Sooner or later Rip Scherer will be on the hot seat for his failure to develop Browns QB's
I have no understanding why Dorsey is brought back to serve as a mentor to Quinn. That is the QBs coach's responsibility. You do not waste a roster spot on a player that is viewed only as a mentor to another player.
We are beginning to see an ugly trend. Frye, and Anderson do not develop. Dorsey is brought back to help Quinn...
Sounds to me like the Browns could use a QB coach.
Welcome back, Joe, we missed you!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,313
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,313 |
Sounds to me as if Dorsey's in line for the job.. He will someday become a coach.
nordawg
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 502
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 502 |
I'm not a CF guy... Don't see it with him... But who am I and what do I know... This isn't about me anyway... CF will get the time and education opportunity he needs in Seattle. He is with an solid, experienced team and organization that have positioned themselves to have proven processes in place, the time, money and patience to provide an environment for CF to grow improve, be properly mentored and succeed. Our Browns are a ways a way from providing that environment for any of their QB's at this point in time... And how long have we been waiting for this to change or exist???   The Seahawks and Browns brass, FO's & CS's have several SB visits & victories with several different NFL teams between them and they see value in CF... These facts should mean much more than any opinions or takes here about this topic... All players have strength areas and area's to improve in or deficiencies. Improvement is a continual struggle, goal or focus for everyone... Not to pee on anyone’s party here... Well maybe I do... Have any of you ever played with, competed with or against, recruited, or coached a player in any sport that was as accomplished as you have ever seen? But couldn't or didn't make it at the next level? There may have been several reasons why or possibly just one or two... Some times skill sets just don't transfer... Some times success at a certain level is where the capability stops/ends. The SEC is not the NFL... The Zips don't play in a high level Div. 1 conference either... Sometimes it's not the league it's the player and the opportunity... I for one was surprised that the Brownies and Hawks were/are high on Frye or Greene. I was very surprised by the Hawks taking a chance on Greene in the 3rd round... He is/was not NFL QB material, at this point in time... But what do I know...  Not much, otherwise I wouldn't have the time or inclination to take advantage of the opportunity offered here... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858 |
Quote:
The Seahawks and Browns brass, FO's & CS's have several SB visits & victories with several different NFL teams between them and they see value in CF... These facts should mean much more than any opinions or takes here about this topic...
Yet the deep thinkers on here act as if they know so much more than the FO and CS.....  And they think that because they guess right sometimes.... Geesh
Does kinda make me laugh a little
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,306
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,306 |
Quote:
Sooner or later Rip Scherer will be on the hot seat for his failure to develop Browns QB's
I complained about Rip all the way back in 2005 when we hired him 
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,306
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,306 |
Quote:
Not to pee on anyone’s party here... Well maybe I do...
Just don't get any on my shoes.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 502
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 502 |
Where is the Pee Guy when we need him!!!  "Wasn't me..." 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,223 |
Makes me wanna sing the song from Willy Wonka.......... Cheer up Charlie, no need to frown........ 
![[Linked Image from pic18.picturetrail.com]](http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL905/3216203/6567769/349897772.jpg) "The Browns' defense is kicking mucho dupa."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 664
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 664 |
"The Browns are a club contenders probably don't want to face right now. Their physicality cannot be questioned."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Well I will answer your questions....
1 QB Coach
2 playbooks
3 OC's
But can you really say he played for 3 OC's and 2 playbooks when he didn't even play 2 quarters this year...
You know it doesn't matter that the playbook changed. Every other QB that is in the league would have had to learn the new system in the same amount of time that Charlie had. Did this hurt his development....Well it would be easy for me to say "What development????" but the safe bet is that it hurt a little. However, this being his 3rd year.....He should have been turning a corner, new system or not. I am not saying he should have been a Pro Bowler in his situation.....I am not saying he should have excelled and thrown for 300-400 yards. But he should still have stepped forward in his development. Regardless of how small of a step, he should have moved forward in his development. Instead we saw regression as well as a continuation of the same problems he had as a rookie.
New system or not, the system has nothing to do with recognizing where the blitz is coming from. It doesn't have anything to do with recognizing what coverage a team is employing. That is universal to all systems. A new system can affect a how the play changes at the line or how you might audible out of it. But we saw no recognition in Frye. Especially not in the one system he played the most in.
A QB should have a good idea where he is going to throw the ball before the ball is snapped based on the coverages he reads.....And he should have a couple keys once the ball is snapped to solidify his choice. Charlie never really seemed to know where he was going before the ball was snapped. Or maybe he thought he did, and he was wrong. He was too indecisive and did not have confidence in throws.
I was watching NFL Access this week and they had a little blurb or session over some game tape from last weeks games. It was basically showing some little things that the QB was picking up once the ball was snapped that led to the decision to throw to the Receiver. Sometimes it was which hand the DB used in his initial bump, or it was the footwork of the db. Sometimes it was the position of the safety ( or safeties). But in all these refereences the QB KNEW the receiver was going to be open before the receiver even made his first move or cut. And the ball was thrown LONG BEFORE the route was finished. Did we anything like that kind of recognition in Charlie????
Receivers running wrong or bad routes can add to the problem. And I can see it EASILY affecting Frye's confidsence in them. But you know if Charlie had thrown to where the player is supposed to be(and when he was supposed to be there), pretty soon the receiver is going to get his butt chewed out enough that he is goint to start getting there when he is supposed to. Maybe that happened that hte receivers still didn't listen.....Maybe not....But you know I wouldn't be suprised if Frye told them to just get open and I will find you. I have nothing to back that up...and I am not claiming he did...but I would not be suprised if that was the case.
Charlie was an improviser. He was most comfortable when the play had broken down and he was on the run trying to make something happen. He wasn't comfortable in the pocket...even when he had one(as he did MANY times against Pitt last week). ...and he did have one last year more than many would want to admit. Also he couldn't have been very comfortable with Mo Carthon and his totalitarian approach to coaching.
You know the whole 3 OC excuse is ENTIRELY overated "in this situation"...and I will tell you why. Because he had just ONE single playbook and system for the 2 YEARS he played for us. He only had the last playbook and system for 1 and a half Quarters. You don't think that the Browns brought an entirely new system and playbook when they got rid of Mo do you????......the only thing that changed was the playcalling.
Charlie Fry is a GREAT kid. He works his butt off and is tough as nails...It is absolutely natural to want this kid to succeed. Heck I would have LOVED for him to have proven me wrong.....but all of that toughness, work ethic, and character plus $2 will only get you a cup of coffee. Depending on where you go...not even that. In all of his time here....did you ever see Charlie attack the middle of the field other than a dump off????
Charlie played against a Stacked Deck. There is no one denying this. But just because you or I go out and try to play against that same stacked deck and fail....It doesn't mean that it was the Stacked Deck that prohibited us from succeeding.
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563 |
I think you're a little harsh on savage, toad. Frye was a good gamble. It's a gamble he lost, but it wasn't a bad chance to take. We didn't have a young QB - Luke McCown? - so he took a shot at frye in the 3rd. He knew it was a gamble, that's why he didn't take him in the second like a lot of poeple wanted him to.
Did he set the organization back? I don't think so. Let's say we took Hobbs instead. So a good corner, great. But we still wouldn't have a QB. Who would we have taken instead? We had Dilfer and ....? Maybe we could have gotten Brees, maybe not. We still would have had to trade a 1st rounder, which we had to anyway, to get Quinn.
The bottom line is this team wasn't going anywhere, and had a million holes. Savage took a chance on Frye in the third that could have brought us a franchise QB. It didn't work.
And I think trading him was great. He had his last shot this year, and he blew it so bad he had to go. I supported Frye as much as anyone, and when I saw last week, I knew it was over for him. Quinn is the future. Who cares who's laughing at us. They'd be laughing anyway.
Savage has made mistakes, but his building the team well, and QB is just one of many positions he was trying to juggle at once. I really don't think it's that big of a deal.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 8,767 |
Quote:
The bottom line is this team wasn't going anywhere, and had a million holes. Savage took a chance on Frye in the third that could have brought us a franchise QB. It didn't work.
This is the one constant of the last nine years! Every QB has failed because the entire organization has been so inept that over nearly a decade they couldn't assemble the talent necessary to succeed! Sad indeed!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,810
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,810 |
Quote:
Quote:
He also is going to get terrific coaching from Seahawks quarterbacks coach Jim Zorn and head coach Mike Holmgren, who helped mold Joe Montana, Steve Young, Brett Favre and Matt Hasselbeck.
But Charlie had the one and only "Rip Scherer" coaching him up in Cleveland
GM...is it right to judge Rip Scherer after one game?
I'm not saying he is great or terrible, just trying to be fair to Scherer.
That said, getting Ken Dorsey back was the best development resulting from the trade. His influence on Quinn plus his relationship with and his knowledge of Chud/s playbook will help in the development of Quinn.
It seems that Dorsey may be one of the best coaches on the Browns staff...lol.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,810
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,810 |
Quote:
But can you really say he played for 3 OC's and 2 playbooks when he didn't even play 2 quarters this year...
Pete...I can make that comment because it is accurate and truthful. Regardless how long Frye got to play in regular season, he has prepared with the new playbook since Chud handed out his new system.
3 OCs...yep, Carthon, Davidson and now Chudzinski...that is 3, Pete. Something else I did not touch on, Pete....tell us about the quality of those teaching those offensive systems. Where does Carthon rates as an OC?...Where does Davidson rate as an OC?...and Chud is brand new and this is his 1st OC job in the NFL...Chud lacks experience at the NFL level but may be the best OC of the bunch...the jury is still out on Chud, as it should be.
Quote:
You know the whole 3 OC excuse is ENTIRELY overated "in this situation"...and I will tell you why. Because he had just ONE single playbook and system for the 2 YEARS he played for us. He only had the last playbook and system for 1 and a half Quarters. You don't think that the Browns brought an entirely new system and playbook when they got rid of Mo do you????......the only thing that changed was the playcalling.
Pete...tell us how you know Davidson did not have his own playbook?...I read that Davidson did use Carthon's playbook in the first game because the offense only had like 3 days to prepare for the next game. You want us to believe Davidson went on to become OC with Carolina and didn't have a playbook
Chances are, both Carthon's playbook along with Davidson's playbook were used by Davidson with the game play being a combination of both playbooks. Regardless, your claiming a change in OCs and playbooks makes no difference to a QB's play...we disagree.
Quote:
this being his 3rd year.....He should have been turning a corner, new system or not. I am not saying he should have been a Pro Bowler in his situation.....I am not saying he should have excelled and thrown for 300-400 yards. But he should still have stepped forward in his development. Regardless of how small of a step, he should have moved forward in his development. Instead we saw regression as well as a continuation of the same problems he had as a rookie.
Pete...your judging Frye's progress in the new system based on 1.5 qts of football?
Here is some news for you...Frye was not traded because of his play in the Pittsburgh game. Frye was traded because we had too many QBs which was impeding Quinn's progress.
With both Frye and Anderson on the team, Quinn was the #3 QB and the #3 QB does not get many snaps with the #1st team offense in practice. Savage and the Browns are committed to Quinn and his development as he will be our starter. Someone had to go to move Quinn up the depth chart because both Frye and Anderson were better than Quinn at this time.
Frye was traded because he was the only QB the Browns could get something in return for. Savage said, he was fielding inquires about both Anderson and Frye after the Browns drafted Quinn, thus both Anderson and Frye were on the trading block.
Seattle did not want Anderson, they wanted Frye and were willing to give up a draft pick to get him.
Though the trade makes the Browns front office look a little amateurish coming off after the first game, the trade is all good for Quinn's future. Quinn moves up the depth chart to #2, thus getting more snaps during practice, with the return of Dorsey, Quinn gets his mentor and friend back, and for the Browns, do get a draft pick in return for Frye.
Whomever the Browns kept between Anderson and Frye, one was playing to be Quinn's backup. Frye's play last Sunday had nothing to do with the trade. Holmgren had targeted Frye in the 2005 draft and Savage picked him before Holmgren could. Obviously, nothing in Charlie's 2 yrs with the Browns changed Holmgren's opinion of Frye.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Quote:
Pete...tell us how you know Davidson did not have his own playbook?...I read that Davidson did use Carthon's playbook in the first game because the offense only had like 3 days to prepare for the next game. You want us to believe Davidson went on to become OC with Carolina and didn't have a playbook
Because it wasn't Carthon's Offense to begin with....Carthon didn't design the offense. And Davidson might have added a play or 2 here and there as ANY team does in its adjustments from week to week. But you act as if he brought a whole new system in which is complete and totaL HOGWASH.....It was the same playbook, the same system, the same terminology...just a different playcaller.
Had either one of these QB's stepped up to the plate in the preseason....we wouldn't have been in the situation we had vs Pitt. But as it was....we didn't have much option but to stay with the 2 QB's until one actually did step up. That or unless it was the best time to move one of them. and when several QB's got hurt...Many felt this was the best tie to move one of them....Most probably looked into Charlie and gave better offers...So bye bye Charlie...
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,306
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,306 |
Quote:
GM...is it right to judge Rip Scherer after one game?
I jusged him BEFORE his first game as a Browns coach  and he has yet to change my mind.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Frye Traded #2
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)
