skip-zip

Zip Watcher..that's a pretty accurate analysis. The double from the weak side would, in most cases, open up the long jumper from the weak side. But it will likely also open up some easy layups from the weak side also. This is why I am pointing to possible depth problems. There's going to be a lot of people scrambling to pick up shooters, and if you don't have 10 guys that can move around on the floor on the defensive end, many teams will be out of gas by the 2nd half.

Ok..now I understand. That just wouldn't make any sense. Those recruits are probably some of the best talent Akron has ever recruited (in terms of their high school accolades), and we'll certainly be listed as a favorite to win the MAC by quite a few people.

Can you please post the link? That's hard to believe. We all know better.

For most of my 40+ years as a sports fan, I've never bought into the "he's played against better teams" point of view.When you are a QB for a high-level D-1 school, in general, your blockers are also better, and your receivers are faster and more gifted. So, doesn't that give you a reason to believe that a kid from a top-level school might look better than he really is because he plays with better teamates also?There's a reason why the high draft choices don't always come from the best few teams in the country. And there's also a reason why NFL teams spend loads on money on talent scouts.

I'd bet you'd be hard pressed to find a coach that will suddenly decide to start allowing opponents to take uncontested shots, just because the shot is 12" longer. And frankly, as a player, I'd much rather shoot an open shot from 21 feet than a 20 footer with a defender's hand in my face.We'll see what happens, but there's just way too many college players that can hit that shot if left alone.

That's a cleaver response

Coming from someone with a coaching background, I actually see even more disadvantages for the mid-major schools.Sure, it will reduce 3-point shooting percentage, which is one of the most often used tools to keep a smaller opponent in a game.And it will also spread the floor and open up more opportunities in the paint for the big men.But think about a couple more issues that will hurt the smaller D-1 schools....1) Defenders will, in general, have to cover more of the court on the defensive end, which will give an advantage to teams with more depth.2) It will be more risky to use two defenders to trap someone in the baseline area because the distance to run back out and pick up an unguarded 3-point shooter will be lengthened.

That's certainly a valid point for argument that the Browns gave up 2 first round picks for Brady Quinn, because it was very close to that since the 2nd round pick was very very early in the 2nd round. Did we give up too much? I guess we'll find out down the road. But my argument is that I think they've halted the current rebuilding process by putting so much into one player that you won't be able to add to that next year. The Browns still have quite a few areas of need. And without being able to address those needs through a high draft selection until 2 years from now, are they really going to be able to make progress?Again, in my opinion, this is a desperate move by a management team that is desperate to save their jobs. They've put all of their eggs in one basket, and I think that is dangerous when you need so much other help. Especially since we now know that they caved in and gave Dallas more than what they originally wanted to give up. Does everyone remember what happened to the Saints when Ditka gave away several draft picks for Ricky Williams? Not only did Williams eventually not work out, but then they left way too many areas of need unaddressed, and had no high upcoming draft picks to help them out. A similar situation happened between Dallas and Minnesota. The Vikings once traded away several draft picks for Herschell Walker. Does everone remember what Dallas did with those draft picks? They used them to draft the nucleus of their eventual two-time Super Bowl championship team. I know that it's a stretch to say that these two situations are comparable in magnitude, but history is showing us that these kinds of strategies often backfire, and I'm afraid that the Browns have put themselves in the same position.

I really think this is an amazing story. The MAC didn't give this guy any respect when they named their All-MAC team. Plus, people in Akron, besides us loyal fans, really didn't talk a whole heck of a lot about him being a big pro prospect until recently.I think this was definitely a case where someone's athletic ability caught the eye of enough scouts that a buzz started, and some teams felt that he had the tools to developing into a great Guard at the pro level. An offensive lineman from a school like Akron would have to be really impressive in NFL tryouts to get yourself taken in the 3rd round. I'm sure he worked hard, and his work is paying off.

I have a good question. Just for discussion purposes.What if Quinn had come out of college last year. And since the Browns appear to be willing to sell the franchise down the river to get him, they probably would have taken him last year also.So....the question is....if Quinn was Cleveland's starter last year, would they have been a good football team?If your answer is "No, because they still have too many other problems that need to be addressed in order to become a good team".......then.....Why did they draft another quarterback ????? And why this year ????

Thanks guys. I guess some people have forgotten what they might have learned in a statistics or math class. But I will refrain from launching any personal attacks. Big Zip...I simply don't know what more you can say after you've presented solid facts.

What does it mean???Does it not clearly show that you cannot, and should not, judge the future success of an NFL Quarterback based on what he does in his first year as a starter?And it's not just a comparison to Manning. But since you brought it up, are you trying to say that Indianapolis should have drafted another quarterback, and put Manning on the bench after his first dozen or so starts?I'm perplexed as to why a couple of you seem to enjoy the fact that our Browns keep getting rebuilt over, and over, and over and over again. And it has nothing to do with my thoughts about Frye or Quinn. I'm just frankly getting tired of always starting over again.

SMG. I don't think any of us would argue that Charlie's numbers were not stellar last year.If you saw the facts posted on a previous thread about Charlie, you would see that the argument is that Charlie's numbers are comparable, or BETTER than, many of the other star QB's in the league during their first year as a starter. Which happens to be true.Enough said.

I see no other MAC teams, which means that if we once again get robbed by a lucky bankshot 3-pointer, when the clock doesn't start on time.....then....well.....we'll be sitting at home again next year.

GoZips.....excellent work!! I think even those of us that are big Charlie Frye fans can take the fact that the Browns may intend to replace him. But what makes no sense whatsoever is that some moron writer is speaking for "everyone" in saying that we all KNOW that Quinn is better than Frye.Throw me in on the list of people that cynically hopes that Quinn starts on day one. Then we'll see what the media thinks about him once he's under the same defensive pressure that Charlie has faced the last two years, and some NFL defensive linemen start eating him for lunch. Remember, during unsuccessful years, the most popular player on the Browns has always been the backup quarterback. So, maybe it will actually work out better if Charlie is the one starting the season on the bench.

Wow..this is good food for thought...I actually agree with uaakronkid that, to some extent, people will come during the first couple of years to enjoy the new stadium, and won't return. But if we're winning consistently by that point, I would hope that we can turn some of the curiosity-seekers into long-term fans. And concerning Ohio State. Kangaroo...remember that OSU was desperately close to having a losing record back in 2001. But, I don't think that it helped us increase our attendance, so I would have to agree that OSU's success (or lack of) doesn't have much bearing on our attendance figures.Please, just let me see some consistent winning sometime soon. Because, if that doesn't bring in the fans, I'm really at a loss for answers.

Ya gotta love Charlie Frye.I already went into my rant on another thread about how well he rates compared to other star QB's in their first year as a starter, and the fact that he had no running game or OL. So, I will spare you those facts again and concentrate on this...What kind of man would you have to be to take the butt kicking he's taken by being on a crummy team, and now accept that you've been a "temporary" QB in Cleveland's rebuilding process until they found their "franchise" (yet to be determined) quarterback? And to sit back and watch as they make improvements to the offensive line and realize that you will probably never get to see the fruits of your labor? And beyond that, who would be man enough to take the "we want Brady" chants that will be echoing from the stands every time he steps on the field next year?It will be a tough year for him. But that is football. And I assure you, Charlie is no Tim Couch. He won't cry. He loves to play football, will accept the circumstances, will compete like heck, and will handle it professionally. Whatever happens...happens. And I wish him the best of luck.

Kangaroo. I always welcome the input of someone from my era, who has shared in my many year of frustration. I'm an '87 grad, so I've seen enough already. Let's hope we finally get the stadium, and get the winning tradition, and can finally say that we've found the formula for getting people to attend home games. I'm kind of getting tired of being able to walk over row after row of empty seats to get to my seats. And my seats are ON THE 45 YARD LINE !!

I understand that Browns fans want to be optimistic. All I can say is, if they really think that Brady Quinn is "the franchise guy they have been wanting for years", and that they don't see anyone coming out next year that is as good as him, then why didn't they pick him at #3? And why didn't anyone else pick him in the other 20 selections up to that point? EVEN ALL THE TEAMS THAT NEEDED QUARTERBACKS PASSED ON HIM. I like how Dallas basically held out until the Browns agreed to give them the deal of all deals in exchange for that pick. I'm sorry, but I have never heard of a team giving up so much for a #22 pick. What would have been wrong with taking Joe Thomas, then using your next scheduled pick at #35 to get another good player, and using all of your remaining picks to address many of your other areas of need, and waiting for next year's top-10 pick to get another top-notch player?I'll tell you why that didn't happen.....There is a GM and Head Coach that won't be here after next year, and they were getting very very desperate. Here's what my crystal ball is seeing.....1) The Browns will be desperate to showcase their "future", and will insert Brady Quinn into the starting lineup at some point next year.2) Once they realize that they didn't address enough areas of need in this draft, they will find themselves with another losing record, and possibly another injured quarterback.3) The coach and GM will be gone.4) We'll have no high draft selections next year, and we'll have to watch as another coach and GM take us through yet another "rebuilding" phase. Wake me up when it's over. I'm going to hybernate until about 2013.

It's probably a little bit easier to talk about what has NOT worked, and go from there...Back in the 80's, when I was a student, we all thought that playing the Auburn's and Florida's of the world would generate interest, and attendance would skyrocket. It didn't happen. Then people thought that having a big-time team playing in Akron would bring a huge crowd. We played a home game against Virginia Tech in the mid-90's (can't remember the year) and the attendance was about 11,000. So, we found out that this was not true either. We've done giveaways, "Zips Fest", and all sorts of other promotions, with little success.One thing that DID work was the old Acme/Zip promotions. Getting a big corporate sponsor behind a game, and using their stores to sell tickets, was very very successful for years. However, I understand that it was a big money loser for the University because of all the discounted tickets. And, most of the those people would not come to another game the rest of the year. So, I think we're left with two possibilities that have not happened...1) A consistent string of winning records.2) A nice football stadium.When these two things occur, and we are still not getting good attendance, then I will have run out of possibilities to solve the attendance problem.

Jayfromua....your math needs some work.Are you trying to convince us that a #22 pick this year is more valuable than a #13-#17 pick next year? Next year's draft would have to be a really bad draft for that to happen. And that's also assuming that the Browns will have a winning record next year. I appreciate your optimism, but you're reaching. Plus.....you're still forgetting that we also gave an early 2nd round pick as well.

Sorry, I exaggerated on my count But it was still a great 1st day of the draft for the MAC.

Thanks Big Zip. I was hoping someone would post some Frye vs. Other QB first-year ratings. I was too tired to do it last night. And the rest of your comments are right on the money. Savage has basically wagered the future on Brady Quinn, when other teams with the same need didn't take him, EVEN WITHOUT HAVING TO GIVE UP A TOP-10 PICK NEXT YEAR. I'll say a prayer this morning in church for every Browns fan who must be coming to the realization this morning that without a #1 pick until 2009, it's going to be at least 5 more years, and another GM/Coach, before we have a chance to start winning again.Thanks you Mr. Savage.

Quickzips...I agree with you. Rybak did show some signs that he could at least become a "contributor" on this team. However, even though he may have become a decent role player off the bench, I believe that having the extra scholarship is a great blessing. We should be able to get someone who can contribute a lot more than John was ever going to contribute.

Good for Andy. And yes, I have noticed that quite a few MAC players went in those first three rounds.Does anyone know if this is a record for the MAC for the top three rounds? Must have been 10 MAC players get drafted in those first 90+ picks (sorry, I didn't count). That's gotta be good news for our conference.