Add Comment

• kiddicus said September 11, 2007

  Finally. Should've been done last year - Quinn for the win! maybe.

  Reply

  
• SoCalThrilla said September 11, 2007

  I like the idea of starting Derek Anderson this week with Quinn as the number 2. I still think Cleveland if at all possible should wait until the week after their bye to put Quinn in as a starter. As far as what teams would give up for Frye, given that Cleveland will end up releasing him anyways; I wouldn't look for them to get anything higher then a 7th or 6th a la Kelly Holcomb.

  Reply

  
• FilteringCraig said September 11, 2007

  The real question is what the hell is Charlie Frye worth when he also might be cut?

  Reply

  
• FilteringCraig said September 11, 2007

  Would a team even give up that much if they think he is going to get cut?

  Reply

  
• SoCalThrilla said September 11, 2007

  If the team felt that there were other suitors in free agency that would attempt to sign Frye and they really needed another QB e.g. KC, Atlanta, etc. Sure why not give up a 7th to obtain the services or lack thereof of Frye?

  Reply

  
• gaucho said September 11, 2007

  did not see the game but did see some stats. how can fry get blamed? he threw 10 times and was sacked six. that can't possibly be the qb's fault

  Reply

  
  • FilteringCraig replied September 11, 2007

    Frye took those sacks because he held onto the ball too long. They gave him a three step drop and then some in most cases and he just failed to check down his options and get rid of the ball. Sometimes sacks are the O-line's fault, and sometimes they are the QB's fault. In THIS case, I watched the game and blame the QB.
• MMoorefield said September 11, 2007

  Maybe if Cleveland actually gave their QBs a chance. Sure, Frye played terrible but pulling him after a quarter and a half? What's the point? To give Anderson, who has less experience, a 17+ point deficit against one of the better defenses in the league? They should have stuck with Frye and at least let him get into some kind of rhythm to build confidence for next week. Everyone knows that position is reserved for Quinn anyway, at least let one guy hold it down & give them a shot a winning a couple games until Quinn is ready.

  Reply

  
  • FilteringCraig replied September 11, 2007

    I can't stress just how badly Frye played. Also, if you are just letting the guy fill in until Quinn is ready, why not let someone else do it? There isn't much point in sticking with Frye when he executes as poorly as he did this week. I can't stress enough how bad his decisions were this week. The offensive line did an average job giving him time back there and he failed to unload the ball in his three step drops, threw into triple coverage, and generally wasn't able to check down to his secondary options.
• BHF1999 said September 11, 2007

  The Browns butchered this situation. They could have gotten a late round pick for him had they traded him during camp. Now they'll end up cutting him. Why let a guy start only one game?

  Reply

  
• FilteringCraig said September 11, 2007

  It appears as if everyone's jobs are officially on the line now. The Browns fans have been nothing but supportive, and they are demanding results or changes. It appears that Browns owner Randy Lerner is going to make something happen.

  Reply

  
• Harvey_Bars said September 11, 2007

  Wow. He has already been dealt to Seattle. Has anyone ever been traded that quickly? He was on the trading block for like 6 minutes.

  Reply

  
  • quickhook replied September 11, 2007

    That has to be the quickest hook in the history of the NFL.
• FilteringCraig said September 11, 2007

  Maybe someone in Seattle can teach Charlie how to play QB. Clevelanders will never totally blame a guy like Charlie considering the coaching of Maurice Carthon and Romeo Crennel since he was in town. Mike Holmgren just might be able to teach him a thing or two.

  Reply

  
  • CowboyJoe replied September 11, 2007

    He has done okay with Hasselback.
• rayj0101 said September 11, 2007

  Why Seattle?

  Reply

  
• FilteringCraig said September 11, 2007

  They wanted to start using Seneca Wallace as a receiver and didn't want to do that without an in-game backup QB.

  Reply