Frye Conspiracy Theory

[Buckzip]

Ok now I know this is far fetched. However, this is the Clowns we are talking about.The Browns draft Brady Quinn in the 1st round. They plan on him being the starter from early on. They have Chalie Frye and Derek Anderson. They see some potential in CF and none in DA.So, when CF starts off badly, they immediately pull him and then trade him.This way they are avoiding any type of QB controversy.You see, if CF looks good, there is no way they can explain pulling him in favor of Quinn.So basically they wanted him to fail. When that was happening, they immediatly yank him to make sure he can't redeem himself.Now, I realize that if CF looks good, they can still trade him and get a higher draft pick for him. However, that would mean delaying putting in BQ.Also, these are the Browns we are talking about. Stupid things seem to happen non-stop with them.Like I said, this is way out there. However, look at the organization we are talking about.

[Dr Z]

[zen]

You see, if CF looks good, there is no way they can explain pulling him in favor of Quinn.

That's exactly what I said on sunday during the game.A bunch of dropped passes and sacks, and they pull him so early in the game over crap that wouldn't have been any different no matter who is in there???? (don't gimme no shit, because he wasn't holding the ball for a long time, and everyone knows frye can scramble). The first thing I said after they pulled him so early was "Wow, that's perfect. It's exactly what they needed. Fans have no positives to pin on him. He's gone. Quinn is in."Seriously. Why would you PULL HIM SO FAST if it was not for shear panic that if you left him in the game he things could turn around? It was perfect, albiet it would have been better if they left frye in the game longer and things still went badly... but they couldnt' take that chance. They had to get him out right then so they could be sure there was nothing positive to speak of and fans couldn't bitch when they made the move that they needed to make.Even Savage admitted it. "We clarified our QB situation". One guy had to go. Pulling Frye after that start was the perfect excuse. It's not conspiracy. It's political calculation.WE are the reasons it happened too. There's no love or loyalty for DA out there. It's us, the Frye Guys. That's reason behind all this. Were there nobody out there like us, the Browns would have cut or traded DA instead and played Frye up until they put Quinn in. Again, as I said, this isn't a conspiracy if you are in the Browns management. This is all scheme and calculation ("necessary" to keep fan alienation to a minimum)

[blueandgold]

I almost think it was even deeper than that. What I saw was a team that wouldn't block for Frye at all. Even when the he did get the pass off there were drops. It almost seemed like the whole team was in on the plan.

[Buckzip]

I almost think it was even deeper than that. What I saw was a team that wouldn't block for Frye at all. Even when the he did get the pass off there were drops. It almost seemed like the whole team was in on the plan.

I can see the organization being nasty. However, I can't see the other players being part of it.

[blueandgold]

I almost think it was even deeper than that. What I saw was a team that wouldn't block for Frye at all. Even when the he did get the pass off there were drops. It almost seemed like the whole team was in on the plan.

I can see the organization being nasty. However, I can't see the other players being part of it.

I mean the whole team, Charlie included. Did you notice how he threw so far behind players? Also, he had no comments when he left town either. Something just seems fishy.

[skip-zip]

Buckzip...actually, others have speculated similar scenarios, so it's not that far fetched at all.I will say this for sure, getting Charlie out of the picture early in the season definitely gives them a clearer path for "Their Plan", as Savage calls it.If what I heard yesterday is correct, a service that has been keeping stats on the NFL for 30some years says that this is the first time that a QB was declared the starter in Week 1, and was gone before week 2.Leave it to the Cleveland Browns. Which means that, we'll probably hear very soon that the current leadership has been declared the most inept NFL organization of all time as well. And just think, a few short years ago we wanted to run Chris Palmer out of town. Boy, we've made significant progress since those days, haven't we?

[zen]

I almost think it was even deeper than that. What I saw was a team that wouldn't block for Frye at all. Even when the he did get the pass off there were drops. It almost seemed like the whole team was in on the plan.

I can see the organization being nasty. However, I can't see the other players being part of it.

I mean the whole team, Charlie included. Did you notice how he threw so far behind players? Also, he had no comments when he left town either. Something just seems fishy.

I don't agree that players would EVER cooperate with something like that, but Frye had only 2 passes that could have been considered bad, and one was blatant (the interception). The rest of the dropped passes were on the hands (when he actually had a freaking chance to throw) It was DA who was the one throwing behind.As I said, it's not a conspiracy. The players were not "in on it". It's just that the first three series were absolutely horrid (multiple sacks, dropped passes, short yardage runs) and it was the perfect opportunity to remove Charlie and leave a bad taste with the fans.

[Buckzip]

We need to get Skully and Mulder on this ASAP.

[blueandgold]

I almost think it was even deeper than that. What I saw was a team that wouldn't block for Frye at all. Even when the he did get the pass off there were drops. It almost seemed like the whole team was in on the plan.

I can see the organization being nasty. However, I can't see the other players being part of it.

I mean the whole team, Charlie included. Did you notice how he threw so far behind players? Also, he had no comments when he left town either. Something just seems fishy.

I don't agree that players would EVER cooperate with something like that, but Frye had only 2 passes that could have been considered bad, and one was blatant (the interception). The rest of the dropped passes were on the hands (when he actually had a freaking chance to throw) It was DA who was the one throwing behind.As I said, it's not a conspiracy. The players were not "in on it". It's just that the first three series were absolutely horrid (multiple sacks, dropped passes, short yardage runs) and it was the perfect opportunity to remove Charlie and leave a bad taste with the fans.

I know it's not a conspiracy. I just thought of something outrageous to say. The Browns management is too dumb to come up with all those scenarios everyone has mentioned.

[Zipgrad01]

I listened to Savages press conference and it really rubbed me the wrong way. He basically said that they thought about getting rid of Frye on draft day, but they felt his value wouldn't rise if they kept him, so they did. They wanted a practice dummy to beat around for the beginning of the season and also to keep the heat off Quinn because they had no idea how long he would hold out. Plus, they know Charlie is a good little soldier and never mouths badly about the team.Basically, they used Frye this entire time instead of letting him go and try to earn a job with another team. It is shady and I lost a lot of respect for the Browns. I used to be a die hard and I keep liking them less and less. I will have a hard time rooting for them with Romeo and Phil are still there.

[jeaglet1]

Frye had only 2 passes that could have been considered bad, and one was blatant (the interception). The rest of the dropped passes were on the hands (when he actually had a freaking chance to throw)

I must have been watching a different game, because even I was calling for them to pull Frye. Even in watching a replay. I saw a couple passes that were, at best, on the receivers back shoulder. Could they have been caught, probably, but they were no where close to good passes. At least half of the sacks he took could have been avoided if he had thrown the ball away. Then you turn around and watch Big Ben getting chased and toss the ball OB. That was my biggest problem was he didn’t seem to learn to throw the ball away. Whether that’s due to bad coaching is up for debate...When the Browns drafted Charlie I was excited. It just didn’t work out. I will say I think Frye will make a competent backup in the NFL, I just don't see him as a starter. Maybe he'll prove me wrong.

[ZipGrad93]

I listened to Savages press conference and it really rubbed me the wrong way. He basically said that they thought about getting rid of Frye on draft day, but they felt his value wouldn't rise if they kept him, so they did. They wanted a practice dummy to beat around for the beginning of the season and also to keep the heat off Quinn because they had no idea how long he would hold out. Plus, they know Charlie is a good little soldier and never mouths badly about the team.Basically, they used Frye this entire time instead of letting him go and try to earn a job with another team. It is shady and I lost a lot of respect for the Browns. I used to be a die hard and I keep liking them less and less. I will have a hard time rooting for them with Romeo and Phil are still there.

Ditto.ZipGrad93

[BirdZip]

How's this for kicking you in the A$$ on your way out the door. From WTAM's web site:But Savage says they feel fortunate to have gotten something in exchange for Frye, based on his Sunday performance. In fact, Savage is squarely placing the blame for most of the team's six sacks Sunday on Frye’s shoulders. Savage says the offensive line against the Steelers was the best he's seen in three years, and it was Frye's job to get rid of the ball during the blitzes they knew the Steelers would run.......Savage says Anderson was much more effective, getting sacked only once and leading a touchdown drive. Savage says it was very disappointing to see the game slip away in the first eight minutes. He says because of that, they had to throw out most of the game plan.

[Zipgrad01]

Which game plan was that? Was that not letting Santonio Holmes catch a 50 yard td or was it missing about 40 tackles and not being able to run the ball AT ALL? If those parts were in the game plan then yeah, he had to throw them out the window.I find this funny because Terry Pluto even wrote in the paper on Monday that the Steelers stopped blitzing so much once they brought Anderson in. The game was in hand and it wasn't all scapegoat Charlie's fault. Fact is....Phil and Romeo are trying to save their jobs and the fans are dumb enough to believe these clowns when they say "It was Frye's fault." Do you honestly think Savage is going to say "Well, Joe Thomas got beat all day and Steinbach didn't make much of an impact either. Jamal Lewis couldn't run the ball and our new guys couldn't tackle. Basically, all my off season moves didn't do jack shit to help the team so far." That is the reality, but don't ever expect him to say it. He is being a politician now and spinning everything to make himself look free of blame.

[Dr Z]

I also thought this was a jab at CharlieThe Browns look chaotic by doing this now. Yet trading a below-average quarterback who beat up on stiffs after a debacle isn't a big deal.

[zen]

Savage says the offensive line against the Steelers was the best he's seen in three years, and it was Frye's job to get rid of the ball during the blitzes they knew the Steelers would run....

BULLSHITWHY OH WHY OH WHY did I erase that game off my DVR!!!!

[Zipgrad01]

That guy is a douche. I just roll my eyes at almost every commentary he makes.

[Zips Win!]

Folks, no one wants Charlie to succeed more than me....But he was awful on Sunday and I didn' even get to see it. Hearing it on the radio was bad enough.......

[ZippyBoy]

Updating Charlie's first practice...Frank Hughes, of the Tacoma News Tribune, reports Seattle Seahawks QB Charlie Frye threw two interceptions during 7-on-7 drills Wednesday, Sept. 12. Frye also threw a deep touchdown pass during the practice.

[Dr Z]

Looks like he is holding on to the ball too long here.

[skip-zip]

I sure hope nobody is believing what you are hearing right now from a desperate NFL administration that is scrambling to save their own jobs. If you watched the game, the offensive line got battered in the 1st quarter, as Pittsburgh was coming at us hard, and spending every down in our backfield. I saw countless Browns' OLs on their back. Once Pittsburgh got a decent lead, they called off the dogs. However, I certainly didn't think Charlie played well at all, even if it was only for a quarter. I credit that to the Browns' coaching staff not adequately preparing ANY of their QBs to start the season , let alone a Steelers game, the way they ran their camp, and the dividing of playing time during the exhibition games. Although DA got more gametime play than Charlie in the exhibition season, he isn't prepared to be a starter right now either. And it's certainly not Quinn. So, it's going to be a long year. I am glad to see that the Browns have acknowledged what insiders were telling us all along. That teams were wanting Charlie when they drafted Quinn, but they couldn't afford to let Charlie go at that point. Although, it's not as if they are any better off now. According to the paper this morning, Holmgren intends to work Charlie in slowly. WOW..what a concept !!

[Dr Z]

I wish somebody had an image of Shaffer getting pancaked during that game. Funniest thing I have ever seen from an OL.

[skip-zip]

Dr. Z...if we are thinking of the same play, Shaffer got pushed to his back with such ease that it looked like he was standing on a street, and a truck ran him over.

[zipdiehard]

In regards to Livingston's "logic": I've never understood the arguement either way about who you faced in college determining your pro ability. While the "big" schools do have better overall talent, most of them still only have a few pro caliber players on their roster. If his logic was true, then why at one point last season were 15% of the starting QB's from the MAC?