sgm405

Week 2 Comparison-----------------------Anderson328 yds, 5 TD, 1 INT, 0 sacksFrye0 yds, 0 TD, 0 INT, 1 clipboard heldSeriously though...Anderson obviously won't do this every week, and he didn't play a perfect game by any means...but when did Frye EVER look like that? Ever???It's amazing how much an offense opens up when a QB actually looks down field and doesn't hold on to the ball and take sacks all the time. Thank God we're in the post-Frye era in Cleveland...GO BROWNS!

I never implied anywhere to be cheap to anyone. Your reading skills are really lacking if you are inferring this information from my posts. Again, if a server is wearing Zips clothing and you want to show your appreciation, show them a strong tip. No no...I meant that for one of the other previous posts...sorry for the confusion!

Agreed...but wouldn't the more intelligent move be to discuss the matter with management that to stiff servers that survive on getting good tips? Have some damn class...that's all we're saying. If it's that big of a deal what shirt your waiter/waitress wears, talk to the manager...don't take it out on them. What an embarrassment...

I will refer back to my original post when this started. Reward your server if they are wearing Zips stuff. No need to be punitive if they are wearing something else. If you want to send a message to your server that their Akron attire is appreciated, show them by giving a strong tip. As BuckZip pointed out, they probably wear what they are told to wear. All being cheap to the servers is going to do is make you cheap and embarrass the Zips Nation. Unless you're saving up for skyscrapers...then I guess it's OK.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAOhhh that was great

He comes in as # 3 because he doesn't know anything about the system. Seattle runs their program the right way. Developing players and not just tossing them (ala Cleveland) to the dogs after they have a 60% grasp of a system.You are such a tool. No...Charlie is number 3 because Hasselbeck and Wallace are both better than him. back in troll mode eh? If troll = being realistic, then yes...I'm a troll Even the people on the Seahawks boards aren't as smart as you about their quarterbacks. Many of them speculate about what to do with Wallace. hmmm... Well, they have:Matt Hasselbeck-------------------31 years old(Two-time Pro Bowler; One of the top 10 best QB's in the game)Seneca Wallace-------------------27 years old2006 - 82-141, 58%, 927 yds, 8 TD, 7 INT; 18 rush attempts, 117 yds(Just signed to a three year, $5.4 M extension in last month)Charlie Frye-------------------26 years old2006 - 252-392, 64%, 2454 yds, 10 TD, 17 INTThat's the situation...you honestly think Frye is ever going to get on the field in Seattle? Even if he did beat Wallace (who I believe is better) or if Wallace switched positions, he'd never beat out Hasselbeck. His only hope is to become a better QB this year and try to latch on with someone else as a backup next year. I think we've seen the last of "Charlie Frye - NFL Starter".

He comes in as # 3 because he doesn't know anything about the system. Seattle runs their program the right way. Developing players and not just tossing them (ala Cleveland) to the dogs after they have a 60% grasp of a system.You are such a tool. No...Charlie is number 3 because Hasselbeck and Wallace are both better than him. back in troll mode eh? If troll = being realistic, then yes...I'm a troll

He comes in as # 3 because he doesn't know anything about the system. Seattle runs their program the right way. Developing players and not just tossing them (ala Cleveland) to the dogs after they have a 60% grasp of a system.You are such a tool. No...Charlie is number 3 because Hasselbeck and Wallace are both better than him.

You're main argument is that Charlie sucked as bad as other QB's in his first 16 starts in the league. That tells the entire story right there.And it wouldn't be a bad argument if every other QB didn't get leaps and bounds better in their 2nd year (Charlie didn't of course).

sgm, this one could take years to pan out, and I really sorta wish there was a fast forward button or powers of forshadowment, but I really think you're going to eat it on your extremely low opinion of Charlie Frye Hey, maybe I will...but I honestly don't think Frye will ever play regularly in the NFL again. He'll certainly never be a team's #1.

Frye will be the #2 QB in Seattle by mid season. Two reasons. First, Wallace will be playing WR by then. Second, I think Wallace is in his fourth year. if so, he could be a free agent at the end of the year. Frye still has one year left on his contract and Seattle probably does not want to eat the cap hit. Frye makes too much money not to use him as #2.....especially next season. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/football/328498_hawk22.htmlWallace just signed an extension through 2010. Frye is the #3, emergency QB. And I think the only way that changes is an injury happening to Hasselbeck or Wallace.

http://www.fanballnews.com/player_notes/nfl/5723"Seahawks: Frye added via trade Tuesday 9/11, 12:21 PM CTThe Seahawks acquired quarterback Charlie Frye from the Browns via trade on Tuesday, according to ESPN. What the Cleveland received in exchange for Frye is still unknown.Our View: It is unlikely the Seahawks gave up much in return since they already had an adequate backup on the roster in Seneca Wallace, who they even signed to a contract extension this summer. Frye will be on the bottom of the depth chart for now and serve as the Seahawks' emergency quarterback on game days."

http://www.cleveland.com/sports/plaindeale...2260.xml&coll=2Good article

1) I don't feel Charlie ever "claimed" the starting job...it was given to him. Can you honestly say he ever looked really good out there? He was starter by default - lucky that the Browns had nobody else. 2) I never said the Browns team was good enough to make the playoffs...I was speaking in terms of the long-term plan, and if Frye could be the one to lead them back.3) I don't need a Frye stinks argument...simply go look at his statistics. They say enough about his performance in the NFL 4) There were a few people, like the one I quoted, saying they were jumping ship on the Browns and becoming Steelers fans because of the trade. I'd certainly like to think that these idiots are indeed in the minority, as you say. 5) I totally agree that we don't know what the future holds for the Browns...but if you want the best for Charlie, him going to a team with a stud QB already in place isn't going to help. Sure, if Hasselbeck gets hurt he'll get in...but you're also talking about a guy who's only missed 9 starts in 9 years...a guy that is only 31 years old...and a guy who is head and shoulders above Frye. If him collecting a paycheck and never playing is what you want, the Seahawks are perfect for him. It's the perfect situation for Frye fans...he'll never play, so they can always say he'd produce if given the chance...and if he does play and doesn't perform, they can blame the Browns for "ruining him"...it will simply never be Charlie Frye's fault that Charlie Frye isn't a starter in the NFL.

Finally, the voice of reason speaks. I just want to know why all those Steeler fans in NE Ohio don't also follow the Buccos. Pittsburgh still has a baseball team?

If you are now a Steelers fan because the Browns traded a horrible QB in Frye, you were never a Browns fan to begin with.

I do agree with that...they should've named DA the starter if they knew Charlie wasn't going to last.But I also do think he had more than enough opportunities to claim the job, and failed time and time again.As for the tongue-in-cheek, hey, ya never know...a lot of these people were the same ones who didn't think Frye played horribly last Sunday...

A conspiracy theory against Charlie? The team in on it? Everyone but Charlie making mistakes?Wow...just wow. Frye supporters have reached a new low here. He was replaced because...drumroll please...HE WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH!Romeo Crennel is fighting for his job...you really think if he thought Frye was good enough to lead them to the playoffs that he'd let him go????Phil Savage is on the seat seat as well...if he felt Frye was good enough, would he have let him go? And the players not playing for Charlie? Give me a damn break...it's the NFL, and those players take pride in what they do. They don't tank games in the National freakin Football League and you all know that just as much as I do. I mean, seriously guys...whbat will it take for you to admit Charlie didn't do the job? Does he have to turn around and throw it through the goalposts? Does he have to crap his pants in the huddle? Even then, you guys would probably blame it on the wind, or the team cook, or anyone else not named Charlie Frye.

I can think of worse ways to make a million dollars. Derek Anderson's gonna get the snot beat out of him for less than 1/2 that salary. No...Derek Anderson actually gets rid of the ball. Charlie will probably still find a way to get sacked on the sidelines. sgm, You are hilarious. DA will get rid of the ball, right to a Cinci defensive back, or the shoe laces of a Browns Receiver. Then after weeks of the same thing, sack, incomplete pass, interception Savage will say.."Quinn is now ready." He will get canned by what ever team he plays, and say that he was just earning his stripes. Then the rest of the season Quinn will look like Tom Tupa and at the end of the year Quinn will show his true egotistical colors saying the team isn't good enough for him to show his true ability.If Chicago can win with Grossman, you obviously don't need a "great" QB to be a succesful team. What exactly did the Bears win? With one of the best defenses in recent memory, they still came up short...why? A big part of that was Rex Grossman...who by the way, is much better than Frye.

True but DA might get hurt tackling one of the players who intercepts him. Haha you guys are hilarious. It is the perfect situation for those who won't accept the reality of Charlie Frye:1) Derek Anderson will probably struggle until Quinn is ready (Anderson isn't very good either...which says a lot about Frye to me)2) Charlie will never start in Seattle...so you'll always be able to go with the ol' "Well, if he ever got a chance..." argument

I can think of worse ways to make a million dollars. Derek Anderson's gonna get the snot beat out of him for less than 1/2 that salary. No...Derek Anderson actually gets rid of the ball. Charlie will probably still find a way to get sacked on the sidelines.

He'll look good holding that clipboard

Where does Matt Hasselbeck play into your scenario????

And thank you

hahahahahahahaha.But seriously, who watched yesterday's game (I had the misfortune of witnessing it firsthand) and didn't think Charlie looked like a high school QB? There is no disputing SGM when he compares the five sacks in three series to one the rest of the game, just admit it. Charlie didn't have a clue, his throws were off target (when he actually threw the ball), and he couldn't scramble to save his life. Anderson looked more mobile, and that's saying something. I'm sorry, I loved the guy here at Akron (and I'm not any sort of huge Browns fan), but he absolutely laid an egg yesterday and to these eyes looks like no sort of NFL QB. (And don't blame the line, he had more than enough time to throw, as did Anderson).Enough with the sgm hating... this place is devoid of objectivity, that's the only reason none of you like him. Thank you