DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Frye, Head to Head with opposing QB's

Frye, Head to Head with opposing QB?s

Game 1:
Frye ? 53.3 QB Rating
Brees ? 67.4 QB Rating

Game 2:
Frye ? 58.1 QB Rating
Palmer ? 84.6 QB Rating

Game 3:
Frye ? 90.2 QB Rating
McNair ? 83.8 QB Rating

Game 4:
Frye ? 89.6 QB Rating
Walter ? 43.6 QB Rating

Game 5:
Frye ? 49.9 QB Rating
Delhomme ? 95.5 QB Rating

Game 6:
Frye ? 66.4 QB Rating
Plummer ? 51.8 QB Rating

Game 7:
Frye ? 81.8 QB Rating
Pennington ? 21.1 QB Rating

Game 8:
Frye ? 72.3 QB Rating
Rivers ? 90.0 QB Rating

Game 9:
Frye ? 109.1 QB Rating
Vick ? 43.4 QB Rating


As much as some like to blame Frye for all the Browns woes, he?s out played the opposing QB 5 of the 9 games so far this year.

Get over it bro.

Thanks for the look, good work dude. I'm not a Frye basher, but I'll harp back in on how bad our O-Line is.

well, it would be more meaningful (or perhaps at all meaningful) if both QB's in each game faced the same defense, but it's not a bad comparison...but it's by no means something to hang your hat on.

And the Won - Loss record is......?

Bottom line is, can the QB win for you with the given situation? Comparing Frye against opposing QBs, facing different defenses (theirs versus ours) as well as different coordinators, coaches, etc...doesn't really matter. The bottom line is, wins vs. losses.... If Frye won the stat battle, but not the Won - Loss battle, then he wasn't good enough. The heat will come off Frye when the team's record gets above .500 and stays there. While the Browns lose, Frye and his fans should expect criticism of the QB position...

Personally, as a Browns fan not a Frye fan, I don't care who the Browns start at QB, or what his stats are, as long as the team wins....

...well said. <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" />

I am of the theory that, with a great OL, the "skills guys" don't have to be so skilled,....jmo.

2-1 under Davidson.

Amen ... and let me add that I don't care who starts anywhere .... as long as the Browns win games and championships.

I like the fact that with Davidson calling the plays.........we are throwing the ball down field a little more often.........that is a plus!

In these last three games............Frye has thrown for 3 TDs and 2 interceptions..........that is improving!

I give Winslow a lot of credit for this........the guy is a beast that has great hands and has really caught some very nice passes in third down situations!

At some point in time............we need to get Harrison involved and maybe this week that will happen!

I believe that if we had a better OL and we had a better running game.........Frye would be a much better QB..........and that means better stats!

We are pretty lucky that Charlie has not been sidelined due to injury...........knock on wood! <img src="/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

Not many teams that we have played this season employs a worse OL then we do...............that is a huge credit to Charlie for what he has done!

With that said...........we need to defeat them Steelers this week..........I do not care if it is only by one point and only if it comes in the last second of the game on the ugliest play that we have ever seen!

We need to beat them and Charlie is going to play his heart out.........but that might be including some mistakes............let's hope not! <img src="/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

Edwards has made a few remarks that I do not disagree with about the Steelers.........but he better be ready to catch any pass that Charlie throws his way this week!

This is a major week for the Browns and for Frye..........it is all about revenge! <img src="/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

GO BROWNS! <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" />

The stats I look at when I?m judging a QB are W-L record, touchdown to interception ratio, and yards per attempt.

Frye 3-6, 3:4, and 6.00

Looking at the touchdown ratio and yards per attempt I?m not surprised to see a 3-6 record this year. Sure our line sucks and causes Frye to throw it away or scramble around too much but he is still completing 62.6% of his passes. Lets take a few more shots down field and loosen up the defenses. They don?t have to be 7 step drops or all play action either, you can throw it long off of shorter drops you just have to read the safeties quicker and determine if they are in zone or man.

I like what Davidson is doing with our offense and think we will be taking more shots down field as the season progresses. Good qbs beat blitzes and make you pay for sending extra guys. So far Frye hasn?t done that for us but with Davison opening the o up a little bit each week we might see him doing more of that.

[color:"orange"]Solid addition to the thread. <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

This place is quickly turning High School-ish, with the clique like behavior defending this player and that player.

[/color]

<img src="/images/graemlins/plthumbsdown.gif" alt="" />

Then why even click on the thread? You know what the thread is before you even click it.

Its an intersting stat that I personally wouldnt mind seeing in the middle and at the end of the year.

[color:"orange"]I was being sarcastic bro....

I'm on the same page you are, I think EricTurnerFan has the right to post this and I find it interesting as well. [/color]

I LOVE playing "twist the statistics"... do you know what your stats show me? the only way we can win is to hold the opposing QB to a rating of under 45... <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" />

Look at it this way. Our defense has done a good job at keeping QBs numbers down. That is if you buy into the stat, which I don't

"Head to head" for QBs really doesnt mean much. Here are Frye's stats against the teams we have played thus far, and their pass defense numbers overall. (through 9 games)

New Orleans: Frye 132 yards. 1 TD. 2 INT. 5 sacks.
New Orleans defense through 9 games: 189 yards/game. 17 TDs. 4 INTs. 25 sacks.

Cincinnati: Frye 244 yards. 0 TDs. 2 INTs. 0 sacks.
Cincinnati defense through 9 games: 226 yards/game. 13 TDs. 9 INTs. 20 sacks.

Baltimore: Frye 298 yards. 1 TD. 1 INT. 7 sacks.
Baltimore defense through 9 games: 204 yards/game. 9 TDs. 18 INTs. 25 sacks.

Oakland: Frye 192 yards. 3 TDs. 2 INT. 2 sacks.
Oakland defense through 9 games: 164 yards/game. 12 TDs. 13 INTs. 19 sacks.

Carolina: Frye 173 yards. 0 TD. 2 INT. 2 sacks.
Carolina defense through 8 games. 206 yards/game. 12 TDs. 9 INT. 20 sacks.

Denver: Frye 149 yards. 1 TD. 1 INT. 5 sacks
Denver defense through 9 games: 226 yards/game. 6 TDs. 8 INTs. 22 sacks.

NY Jets: Frye 141 yards. 1 TD. 1 INT. 3 sacks.
NY Jets defense through 9 games: 217 yards/game. 11 TDs. 11 INTs. 17 sacks.

San Diego: Frye 236 yards. 1 TD. 1 INT. 5 sacks.
San Diego defense through 9 games: 210 yards/game. 13 TDs. 8 INT. 34 sacks.

Atlanta: Frye 165 yards. 1 TD. 0 INT. 5 sacks.
Atlanta defense through 9 games: 232 yards/game. 11 TDs. 9 INT. 25 sacks.

All of you forgot Frye's rushing stats.

YTownBrownsFan's stats are a little misleading too. Where's the QB ratings? Yards and TD's aren't everything. Big Ben rarely threw for over 200 yards in his first 30 games as a NFL QB yet his team won almost every game. Passing Yards means very little.

What? Like yours? <img src="/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

ETurner is a stuck record, can't he talk of nothing else? Is he objective in his evaluation of Frye? Couldn't his thoughts have been added to the existing myriad of Frye discussion? And the dude talks about agendas <img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

End of discussion innit. <img src="/images/graemlins/naughtydevil.gif" alt="" />

[color:"orange"]If you dont like it keep moving, I dont see you calling out other people running around here with agendas...

He got just as much right to post this as anybody else... [/color]

Crash hot at taking your own advice today Mav. <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" />



I'm guessing you are referring to the Frawg. That dude can fight his own corner and needs no help from me but as a reader of pure football threads it kinda annoys me when the guy re-iterates that Frye deserves more time again and again and that statement is ignored. It also irks me that he outlined his stance with play by play analysis and PURE FOOTBALL talk (we kinda like that around here <img src="/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" /> ) and got a couple of the usual one liner agenda driven crap from the same people who accuse him of agenda. Like i said, get over it. <img src="/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

[color:"orange"]I agree no need for one liner agenda driven crap, like this... [/color]


<img src="/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" /> [color:"orange"]The hypocrisy is too funny... [/color]

I suggest you look up "Hypocrisy" before you accuse it of others. You wouldn't want to be taken out of context...or would you? <img src="/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />


"Get over it bro" had nothing to do with taking sides re: agendas and everything to do with a poster who IIRC spent the best part of 100 posts flooding the board with [censored].

I guess it's easier to say someone has an agenda than to face facts innit? Pssst Mav, let you in on a secret, i've never seen Frye take a single snap.

Now before you take a shot coz that statement is gonna go right over your head, i'll cut you off at the pass and say that i've categorically stayed out of the Frye arguement because basically have nothing but poster opinion to judge him on (and that wouldn't be fair would it.....)

What i've taken umbrage at and the reason for the one liner is people jumping on a poster who's brought football to the table and simply dismiss it out of hand because it's easier and suits their stance...Now tell me where the agenda is Mav? Every freakin' damn post is to glorify Frye, I don't expect you to take that on board as your posting of late has been much the same. <img src="/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> How many times have you (collectively) conveniently ignored the so called "Frye Bashers" re-iteration of support and giving him more time.? <img src="/images/graemlins/plthumbsdown.gif" alt="" />

So like i said (in case you missed it the first 2 times <img src="/images/graemlins/saywhat.gif" alt="" /> )

Get over it. <img src="/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" />

[color:"orange"] I'm not going to take a shot at you because you havent seen a single snap this season (???), but I will say that I've acknowledged Toad's words that Frye needs more time, in fact...I've stood up for him in that regard...by you saying that I've "How many times have you (collectively) conveniently ignored the so called "Frye Bashers" re-iteration of support and giving him more time."...just speaks to you lacking full awareness of the conversations we've had....

I run around these message boards on a daily basis and by far the most annoying guy on a message board is the guy who deems what's worthy conversation and what isnt...basically what you're doing...

Which takes me back to my original point, if you think EricTurnerFan's contribution is irrelevant and not based on football knowledge ( <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> ), move on...

I'm still miffed at the fact that you havent seen a single snap and go off peoples opinion on the internet, I guess one could call you ignorant....

And just real quick, let me concede the fact that ETF(you can throw me in there if you like) has an agenda that is clearly pro-Frye. Do you have it in you to say Toad doesnt have a pro-Droughns agenda???[/color]

You know what collectively means right?



Basically not. I'm not the board police and have never professed to be. Just a frustrated poster who waited and endured a 100 posts of Frye lovin' propaganda before saying my piece. By far the most annoying poster on here is the one who jumps on his own mis-interpretations and shoots off insults whilst failing to see the other side of an arguement. <img src="/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />



And you thought Toad had a man-crush. <img src="/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />




I'm coming back to this (but it's like pulling teeth but i just can't help it. ) Go read in my last post where i said it would go over your head....you didn't disappoint did ya? <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" />
The point is you won't find any insight from me regarding the actual play of Frye or Droughns or, well...anyone really. You missed the point Mav <img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes_devil.gif" alt="" /> I have no Football agenda, i don't see enough and i told you that, but you still went for it. Couldn't resist eh? Good job. <img src="/images/graemlins/saywhat.gif" alt="" />




*sigh* Let me break down Toad's stance re Droughns, god knows i've read it enough maybe it'll sink into your head coming from someone else as you might have "white-text blindness." <img src="/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" />

Toad sees Droughns as solid and servicable. He sees the O line as a problem.
Toad sees greater holes in the roster that need filling before RB. ie better O line = better running success.
Toad knows exactly what Droughns is and realises he's not Tomlinson.
Toad has spent a lot of time watching repeat after repeat of footage and has come to the conclusion that Droughns isn't really doing anything different than he did last year.
(some of the responses to his post flat out sucked and primarily that's why i posted what i did for the first response to this thread. It's the same crap ain't it.)
Toad hates Welshmen Down Under putting words in his mouth.

If Toad has an agenda mate he put in the hard yards to justify his stance, play by play.In short he "brought the football". I saw nothing wrong with his thread at all, just some of the dross responses to it. So much talk of late about no-one talking football and then when a guy does it, it's ridiculed to fit agendas. The same agendas that the Frawg is accused of. <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> Oh the irony. <img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif" alt="" />

and then.....





Did you just take a shot at me Mav? <img src="/images/graemlins/naughtydevil.gif" alt="" /> If ya did that old hypocrisy karma thing didn't take long did it? <img src="/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" />

[color:"orange"]Couldnt resist, man I'm still in disbelief you havent seen a snap...

And not really a "shot", how would you describe someone who hasnt seen a down of football the Browns have played this year?

It's not really a shot unless it offends you. <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" />[/color]

Thats why i don't talk football bro. And i'm not specifically talking football in this case. (thats the bit where i said you would miss the point. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> )

Comes with the territory of living outside of Ohio and the Browns being unfashionable. (unfashionable = losing franchise) On the upside, the Steelers ain't winning either so i'm saved from seeing them every week. <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Question for 'ya Mav, you and ETF are Frye's buddies right?

You know what collectively means right? [color:"orange"]What does YOU mean?[/color]





*sigh* Let me break down Toad's stance re Droughns, god knows i've read it enough maybe it'll sink into your head coming from someone else as you might have "white-text blindness." <img src="/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" />

Toad sees Droughns as solid and servicable. He sees the O line as a problem.
Toad sees greater holes in the roster that need filling before RB. ie better O line = better running success.
Toad knows exactly what Droughns is and realises he's not Tomlinson.
Toad has spent a lot of time watching repeat after repeat of footage and has come to the conclusion that Droughns isn't really doing anything different than he did last year.
(some of the responses to his post flat out sucked and primarily that's why i posted what i did for the first response to this thread. It's the same crap ain't it.)
Toad hates Welshmen Down Under putting words in his mouth.

If Toad has an agenda mate he put in the hard yards to justify his stance, play by play.In short he "brought the football". I saw nothing wrong with his thread at all, just some of the dross responses to it. So much talk of late about no-one talking football and then when a guy does it, it's ridiculed to fit agendas. The same agendas that the Frawg is accused of. <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" /> Oh the irony. <img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif" alt="" /> [/quote]

[color:"orange"]Uhhhh...I think his stance is pretty clear at least to me it is...

You've got the wrong name man, you're more like Robin (to Toad's Batman) than the Riddler. <img src="/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />[/color]

[color:"orange"]No. I think ETF played football with Frye in HS, I've talked with him(Frye) a few times, but not to the extent ETF has...I know quite a few players on the team...
[/color]

There's ALOT more to it than just a QB Rating...BUT...

As much as stats can be skewed this way and that...A QB Rating is one of the BEST INDICATORS AS TO A QB's GROWTH...Completion % and TD/Int Ratio...It's also a reason Manning is always at or above 100...Along with the Yards Per Attempt from Indy's Offense...

For those that have no idea how it's calculated...Fill in the blanks...

http://brucey.net/nflab/statistics/qb_rating.html

BTW...If KC puts Green in to replace Huard they're NUTSO!!!!!!!!

You as in the Frye lovers. It's generalizing and i hate to do it but it's easier than naming all of "you", but if the cap fits. <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" /> Bring back Corpus, he'd show you what a hater is. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />




He asks that people use bittorrent to do what he did with an open mind, why don't you take him up on the offer? i'm sorry your pigeon-holing again <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />




And you're more like Goose than Maverick. <img src="/images/graemlins/rofl.gif" alt="" />

Now here's the skinny, if you are close to a player, how objective can you be in evaluation?

Straight question Mav, no smokescreen, no agenda.

Gonna bail out to the bat-cave now. Cat Woman is picking the in-laws up from the airport. Been fun Mav, got a bit off my chest not that i'll think it'll make much difference to ETF's "Creative" (hidden Riddle there <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" /> ) writing style but hey.....I'll "get over it" <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

[color:"orange"] Did you read what I posted in Toad's thread? I copied and pasted his thoughts, as soon as I get the SD DVD, I'll be giving him my feedback... <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" />

And as I said earlier, I posted in support of Toad about people claiming he had been too hard on Frye, etc...please go to page 4 of the "Jury is still out on Frye" thread...and read my post...
[/color]

To be honest, you ain't the target of my ire....you're just here.

Gotta bail. <img src="/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Lifetime QB ratings

George Blanda 60.6
Bob Waterfield 61.6
Joe Namath 65.5
Bobby Lane 63.7
Terry Bradshaw 70.9

All Hall Of Famers

Jeff Hostetler 80.5
Neil O Donnell 80.8
Neil Lomax 82.1
Aaron Brooks 82.1
Brian Griese 83.0
Brad Johnson 84.1

Now which of those QB's were better???


As I have said over, and over, QB ratings are more worthless than used toilet paper.

[color:"orange"] I'll let you be the judge, and others can chime in if they like...I've been pretty even in my criticisms...none have been free from blame in my posts...I think I've even stated that the problems on offense are 1/3 Frye, 1/3 OL, 1/3 Droughns...but, I'm sure you read that <img src="/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif" alt="" />
[/color]

What ! no play calling?! <img src="/images/graemlins/rolleyes1.gif" alt="" />