sgm405

1) Why would the Lakers want Romeo Travis?2) Lebron wants to win. Period. It doesn't matter if it's his best friend or an overseas player who can't speak a word of English...he wants the best 12 basketball players on the team. And I'm sorry, if Romeo Travis is one of those 12, the Cavaliers are in some trouble.

I don't think anyone has stated Romeo will, or should get a roster spot. What people have stated above is, if he were given a roster spot, the Cavs would win no more, or no fewer games than if Wesley/Pollard/Newble/Chuck Nevitt/ML Carr or any other end-of-the-bench, towel-waving stiff were there. And, the Cavs would save a huge chunk of money. When Newble was first brought in, he was an excellent defender...the move would've been great if it weren't for the length of the contract, because his skills have diminished over the past season or so. Travis does not have any overly outstanding facet of his game. Pollard may be a stiff, but he's 6'11" and has a lot of NBA experience...he provides depth at center should the other big men get into foul trouble or should someone get hurt. Romeo could not provide that same kind of depth. Newble, Pollard, Wesley...at this point in their careers, none of them are good NBA players. But they are and have been good enough to stick in the NBA, and are guys who could step in - if needed - and give you some minutes without hurting the team. I'm not sure I could say the same for Romeo. He was a very good college player who will be needing a passport soon. And like I said before, there's certainly nothing wrong with that. But with his size and overall ability, he would be an absolute waste of a roster spot, even at the league minimum.

Actually, I'd say Romeo's shot is better than yours. At least an NBA team knows who he is. Ooooohhh got me there! But I do ask this...do you think the Cavaliers would really know he was if he wasn't buds with Lebron? I was just having fun with you. Glad you took my comment in the spirit it was meant. Yes, LeBron is probably the reason that Romeo is on the Cavs summer league roster. But, LeBron helping Romeo is no different than me or you helping any of our friends. Romeo gets his chance, and the Cavs will decide. Good for Romeo, good for LeBron, and good for the Cavs. If Romeo doesn't pan out for them, the worst they have done is indulge their superstar. Haha I knew it was all in good fun...don't worry And don't get me wrong on the whole Romeo situation...I think it's great for him and think it will lead to him getting a nice offer from a European squad. I just don't think the people who honestly think it'd be a good decision for the Cavs to give him a roster spot are thinking very clearly, that's all.

I'll repeat - Romeo gets recognition by NBA squads because of Lebron. And why waste a roster spot on Travis? Sure, Wesley didn't do anything on the court this year, but he did bring a veteran presence to the team. He averaged double figures for 10 straight years in the NBA. I'm guessing he had a great effect on the Cavs' younger players, having "been there before"...that's why teams bring in vets like Wesley. Comparing him to Travis is just silly IMO.

Actually, I'd say Romeo's shot is better than yours. At least an NBA team knows who he is. Ooooohhh got me there! But I do ask this...do you think the Cavaliers would really know he was if he wasn't buds with Lebron?

Let's be honest folks...Romeo Travis has about as good of a shot making an NBA team's final roster as I do marrying Jessica Alba...it's just not going to happen. He was added to the team - as expected - as a favor from Lebron to basically audition for a contract overseas. He and Dru will be playing in Europe...and that's certainly nothing to be ashamed of.

Well, the first thing that comes to mind for me is his leadership. He is the unquestioned leader of the offense out there on the field, even though a few other players have tried to steal the spotlight. He has great scrambling skills for an NFL QB, which I feel are underutilised. Hopefully the new OC will take advantage of his strengths and not rely on the same ineffective crap the Browns have been doing the last few seasons. The players all seem to love him as a QB. He has good chemistry with his teammates. He has a better arm than people give him credit for. He obviously isn't perfect, and is definetly not a top 10 QB, but he is not the worst in the league.If you want to bash him and pull up stats reflecting on the O-line more than what he brings to the table as a QB, then go do it on a website that isn't so closely affiliated with him. Complaining about him here is like if someone insulted a close friend of yours to your face. We know he's not perfect, but we still like him.You can't win here. Some responses...- Why is an honest personal assessment of the guy as an NFL player a "potshot" or "bash" or whatever else? And how does my assessment reflect on my support for the guy? Hell, I'd love to see him succeed. It'd help the Browns win and it'd be great for Akron. I just don't think he's a very good NFL QB. I don't come here to be an Internet cheerleader...I come here to share my honest opinions on topics discussed on this forum. - So here is the opinion on Charlie (according to your post) - the guys like him and follow him, he can scramble, his arm isn't that bad, and the OC hasn't used him right. I'd agree with the first one, I guess I'll give you the second one...the third one I disagree with (his arm is weak) and the fourth I disagree with as well...there's only so much you can do when your QB makes bad decisions and can't throw the ball down the field.

NCAA 2008 has released it's overall team ratings for it's new game set to come out in mid-July. Here they are:Team OVR OFF DEF SPT----------------------------------------------Akron 76 78 75 642007 OPPONENTS:Army 71 72 67 64Ohio State 92 92 91 77Indiana 80 83 75 75 Can't State 73 76 71 64Connecticut 71 76 67 61Buffalo 69 67 69 61BGSU 78 81 71 72Ohio 80 83 77 69Miami 76 81 69 72C. Michigan 78 83 71 64(Western Michigan and Temple not listed)OTHER MAC SCHOOLS:Ball State 76 78 67 77E.Michigan 76 94 75 64N. Illinois 78 81 73 75

Temple Football - Helping Your Conference Win Total with Pride

In other news, I've been told that Bryan Hipsher led his intramural basketball team to another championship...congrats Bryan!

No big surprise here...I think most of us realized - whether we wanted to admit it or not - that neither playher was a legitimate NBA prospect. Dru should get a shot overseas, - I think he's the better player of the two. I do see him eventually coaching either at UA or St. V. Romeo was a very good college basketball player, but never reached "star" status like we all hoped he would. He'll likely play for the Cavaliers summer league squad (thanks to Lebron) and get a shot to play overseas as well. And there's certainly nothing wrong with making six figures to play a sport.

OK, I'll ask again. What has Charlie done to make you think he is a good NFL QB? So far, here is what I have heard:1) He is tough and gritty (although, in all honesty, most NFL players are)2) (Insert name here) wasn't that good at first either. 3) He is bad because else around him is bad.Seriously...what strengths does he have as an NFL QB? I'm not trying to be an ass...I really just don't see whatever it is and would love to find out what - aside from him being an Akron alum - people like about him as a player...???

1) With Charlie's individual statistics, team success, lack of improvement in his time in the league, and general lack of top-flight raw abilty, how could anyone rank him higher? I have yet to hear an argument for Charlie being ranked higher, or for Charlie being considered a good quarterback. I hear that he has nothing around him, that the coaches are bad, that all QB's start out bad, etc etc etc. Doesn't he have to take some ownership for his play? And can anyone...ANYONE...present an argument that shows why Charlie should be ranked higher than the bottom of the barrel at this point and time?2) Just because a person doesn't like Frye as an NFL QB doesn't mean they are "bashing" or "hating". Let's face it, he's done little to prove otherwise. And that's their opinion. I can't stand Brady Quinn, but I think he has the skills necessary to become a very good NFL QB. It's nothing personal against Charlie, I think we all wish him the best. But at the same point, when did ZN become a cheerleading site? Why is someone attacked for saying what most say outside of Akron - that Frye is mediocre at best...??? I thought ZN was made up of fans who liked and presented good, honest analysis. Maybe I'm wrong...you know...I don't want to "disrespect" Zips fans again.

If I'm not mistaken, the "OSU Promotion" is actually a site link to an Online Sports Store. If you click the link you are taken to this store's page, which does indeed sell Akron items.

Troll Why is he a troll?

What arguments do you have for him to be any higher?

I understand that, but there's two things that make me believe Charlie is nothing more than average:1) He doesn't have the raw, physical gifts of those quarterbacks. Sure, Peyton Manning struggled early on. But Peyton Manning also had raw physical ability that you knew - when molded and developed - would make him a superstar. Charlie doesn't have the arm and natural ability - IMO - to develop into anything more than an average QB.2) I really don't feel Frye got that much better from 2005 to 2006. He did the same things, made the same mistakes. Those other QB's constantly improved their game in their developmental process. Frye 05 - 60%, 4 TD, 5 INT, 6.1 YPA, 72.8 RAT (7 GP, 5 GS)Frye 06 - 64%, 10 TD, 17 INT, 6.2 YPA, 72.0 RAT (13 GP, 13 GS)I just don't see much improvement...Now some other QB's and their 1st/2nd years(QB Ratings only cuz I'm lazy lol)P. Manning - 71/91E. Manning - 55/76C. Palmer - 77/101D. McNabb - 60/78J. Losman - 65/85The difference? Physical ability...these guys have a lot of it, Charlie does not (at the NFL level anyway)

I'm from Can't State because I think Charlie Frye is a mediocre NFL QB? Good reasoning...good God we have some idiots on this board. To respond to your responses...1) So basically, you have nothing to support your opinion that Brady Quinn is a sissy. Because he looked disappointed for falling further down than he was expected to go in the Draft? Good reason...2) What do you expect them to do for the offensive line? What more can you do than sign the best free agent and draft the best college player? And my reason for bringing up Bentley was that they signed the best FA o-lineman last year as well, but just had bad luck with his injury. 3) "The fun part is that Crennel and Savage must win now or they both are out of a job." = Maybe you didn't use the exact wording, but it's basically the same point. 4) What bias? Bias against bad QBs? He's in the bottom part of just about every category...how is that not bad? 5) Skewed statistics? How? Sure, Charlie hasn't had much around him...but if he was any good, wouldn't he still show at least SOME signs of improvement? Wouldn't he at least do SOMETHING well?

You do realize that if they replaced Winslow with a blocking tight end he'd lose his best screen-ass option, right? Oh, and did you totally forget Steinbach?

Some random responses...1) What makes Brady Quinn a "darling, sissy boy"? I've heard nothing but praise about the way he plays the game and the toughness that he has. Seriously, what makes Charlie Frye any tougher than he is? 2) As Big Zip noted - if signed the best free agent LG and drafting the best LT in college football (along with signing Bentley last year) isn't doing everything possible to address the O-Line, I don't know what is. 3) You contradict yourself a great deal. You say that the Browns are desperate to win...which is true. Seeing as through Frye's competition is a rookie and a career backup, shouldn't he be able to win the starting job if he really is as good as you say he is? If they are really desperate for success, wouldn't they be pushing for Frye if he was as good as you say he is?4) The Bears don't want Charlie Frye. They already have a bad QB, don't need two. 5) Just bears repeating:Frye 2006 - 252 of 392, 2454 yds, 64%, 10 TD, 17 INT, 44 Sacks, 72 RAT NFL Rank:YDS - 23rdYPA - 26thTD - 27thINT - 27thSK - 26thPCT - 5thRAT - 26thSo unless we're building an offense around screen passes, I don't think he's shown any signs of being successful.Look, I wish he were doing better...because he's a UA alum, because I don't like Brady Quinn (as a player I do)...but most of all because I want the Browns to win. But - if you take off the Zips blinders - you'll see that he's been nothing but mediocre, and is - in all honesty - lucky to even be competing for a starting QB job in the league with his past performance.

ARTICLEIf the Browns had to open the season today, the quarterback probably would be Derek Anderson. That's the word from some with the Browns, but it's written in pencil, and keep in mind that Anderson is being judged on drills where they wear shorts and helmets and the quarterback is not being sacked. He has the strongest arm of the three candidates, and it will look the best in this type of minicamp setting.That said, the Browns also believe Anderson showed some promise in the four games he played last season. He completed 63 percent of his passes, five for touchdowns, with eight interceptions. His stats were skewed a bit because he was terrible in his final start, completing 10-of-27 with four interceptions and a QB rating of 12.1 against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. He also suffered a separated shoulder in that game.New offensive coordinator Rob Chudzinski has a new offense, and all three quarterbacks have been struggling to grasp the different motions and formations. This takes away some of the advantage that incumbent Charlie Frye would have. Brady Quinn is a rookie, so it's no surprise he has been overwhelmed. All three have been at some point.Frye's best moments have been in the two-minute drills when he has been on the move around the pocket. His advantage is having played against the Cincinnati Bengals, Baltimore Ravens, Pittsburgh Steelers and Oakland Raiders, the first four opponents on this year's schedule. He knows their defenses, and with 18 pro starts, he has more experience than anyone else.Listening to General Manager Phil Savage, it's obvious the quarterback spot is wide open, and Anderson definitely has a legitimate chance to become the starter. It's between Frye and Anderson, and it might not be decided until the middle of the exhibition season.

OK...I just still can't imagine getting anything more than a 6th or 7th rounder for him. Just my opinion though.

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but can you cite that with some kind of link or quote???I haven't heard a thing about teams asking for Frye and the Browns refusing to trade him. It was my understanding that they shopped him around and couldn't get anything back for him. Why wouldn't they deal Frye for a draft pick if they could get one, especially considering that they signed Quinn and that Anderson is just as good?

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2899577ESPN Story"Frazer plans to visit up to five schools as early as this week. Among the schools with mutual interest are Rutgers, UConn, Miami, Louisville and East Carolina.Several MAC programs have also inquired about the strong-armed, 6-foot-5, 226 pound redshirt freshman."--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------That article doesn't seem to be as positive as the radio interview you discussed when talking about the Zips' chances of getting him.

It's all a game. He says top 5 money, the Browns surely started at what he'd get paid where he was picked...they'll surely meet in the middle. If his agent simply took the Browns first or second offer, he wouldn't be doing his job. As for how it affects Frye, I don't think it does that much to be honest. The only thing that might be affected is the length of time until Charlie is replaced as starter by Quinn (Assuming Frye beats out Anderson, which isn't a given at all). Unless he plays like an All-Pro, Charlie's just keeping the seat warm until he's traded to be someone else's backup. The decision has been made the Charlie is not "the guy", but will be lame-duck QB until someone else steps and and shows they are ready.