Well well

[Zippysgotagun]

Seems as though one of three things are true.1. Charlie Frye is not a very good NFL QB2. Derek Anderson is a good QB3. Cinci's D is badPerhaps it's a mix of the 3. My personal view lies in the neighborhood of option 1 mixed with option 3.

[Ryno aka Menace]

I knew someone would start this thread....cause I was going to also .But, in all fairness we need to give him more than one game. He could of had "a good game". Let's see if he can repeat this performance or was he just having a lucky day. If I see D.A.'s perform like he did today then I will concied that he is better than Fry. But some random thoughts due come to mind.Is he playing loose because he knows he is just warming the seat Quinn?! Is his confidence up because he knows Quinn isn't playing till next year?Feels good because Fry is gone?Or was it good old fashioned beginners luck?!

[Zip_ME87]

It may be a simple matter that Charlie is not a good NFL QB. But, it could also be a combination of many things such as...Charlie and teammates lost confidence in each otherThe coaches lost confidence in CharlieThe other Browns players needed a wake up call that the QB shake up provided..The Clowns have scored a lot of points in past games only to turn around and fizzle the following week. We'll see.

[you am i]

nice game by anderson. but still too early to judge him. we'll know more after next week. apparently, one thing that trading charley did was clear the air. at least now everybody knows the situation: anderson to start until quinn is ready, with dorsey to mentor. when charley was still in the picture, no one really knew what the heck was going on.lost in all the good feelings from today's win is the fact that the defense stunk the place up - again.

[zen]

if you have this game on DVR (or tape if u r oldskool), watch the first several drives. Compare the passes behind the receiver and near interceptions. Frye was removed for the same kindof performance that DA game early in the game. (in fact, frye's was better. His wasn't behind. His were just dropped)There's your moral of the story right there. Frye should have been left in. Who knows what would have happened (I bet you claim to know)Unfortunately, if I claim that last week would have gone differently if Frye wasn't pulled, I will get all sorta shit. I will anyway, so flame away frye-haiting trolls

[w00t]

Frye was removed because he got sacked five times in three series despite having ample time to throw, chucking passes that hit Pittsburgh linebackers in the numbers, and throwing passes that would have required his receivers to contort themselves into pretzels to catch. That's right hubristic of you to call people trolls and flamers (*haha*) just because they aren't sycophants of the church of Charlie like you are.

[zen]

holy fukking shit. we are 7 days away and the revision of history is mammoth!Most of those passes were on the hands, which was most pronounced by the extremely errant placement of passes of DA in the subsequent 2 series. THERE IS NO WAY i am going to edit video and post on youtube just to prove you wrong. I just need to posit my protest. One only need to look at your replies to how he performed in that game last week to see how much more exaggerated (although your characterizations were wrong even then) you have become in your appraisal in one week.If Frye should have been pulled last week, Anderson should have been pulled this week. The outcomes are different because the actions are different.

[zip37]

how 'bout everbuddy cooling off? #5 & Clowns are PROLOGUE (that's in the past); let's see if quinn the dimm does anything near what Plum, Ryan and Bernie did.How about some predictions on the Can't game; if the Zips lose we'll hav Gates back on the board: I sure don't want to se that. GO ZIPS!!!!!!!!!With ball ammunition lock and load, and, of course

[w00t]

Frye was pulled because he stood like a statue while the Pittsburgh linebacking core cleaned his clock five times. Know how many times Anderson was sacked this week? None, so can it.Here's the stellar stat line you're defending... 4-10 34 yds., 1 INT, 5 sacks for a total of 31 yards lost... equates to a passer rating of *drum roll* 10.0. Anderson... sacked once in 7 quarters. Wait, which one is the "mobile quarterback" again?Sorry Mr. Frye, er, zen, at least he still cashes the paycheck.*Edit: I do stand corrected on how many series he played, it was actually seven... four three and outs, an INT, a fumble by Lewis, and one drive where he managed to actually advance the ball 18 yards.*

[skip-zip]

My thoughts are much more in line with Zen...Anderson played a career game today, but didn't suddenly become a good quarterback in one week. He's been with the team for two years, has been repeatedly maligned for having poor accuracy and making bad reads, and has only now become the starter because there's nobody else prepared to start at this point.Beyond that, the offensive unit didn't suddenly become world-beaters in one week either. Look at the tape, and you'll see wide open receivers all day. And some of them Anderson COMPLETELY MISSED!! Plus, I have news for you, Jamal Lewis isn't a 10 yard per carry running back either. By all means, SOMEONE PLEASE go back and look for my posts from Monday or Tuesday. I said that people would see the Browns' offense look much better against Cincinnati's 30th ranked NFL defense, and everyone would be saying, "See?..changing QBs has made all the difference in the world."And that is exactly what happened.Beyond these thoughts....I am a Browns fan, and I know better than to expect too much, knowing that Baltimore's defense will likely bring us right back down to reality again next week.

[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!

[skip-zip]

sgm..sorry dude. I know you love bashing Charlie Frye, but the "when has Frye performed this well, ever" comment tells me just how often you blurt out your own rhetoric, as opposed to paying attention to what is actually FACT.Charlie Frye - 136.7 QB Rating in win over Jacksonville on 12/4/05.Take that to the bank.

[sgm405]

sgm..sorry dude. I know you love bashing Charlie Frye, but the "when has Frye performed this well, ever" comment tells me just how often you blurt out your own rhetoric, as opposed to paying attention to what is actually FACT.Charlie Frye - 136.7 QB Rating in win over Jacksonville on 12/4/05.Take that to the bank.

He was 13-20 for 226 yds, 2 TD, 0 INT, 5 sacks.Anderson today was 20-33 for 328 yds, 5 TD, 1 INT, 0 sacks. Anderson also led his team to a victory...Frye did not. You honestly think Frye's game was better?

[skip-zip]

I guess you just like to argue, sgm. I can't see any other reason why you say some of the things that you say.You were obviously trying to say that Charlie's never had a great game, and you would be wrong.

[Zipgrad1990]

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! 

Any QB would look good against the defense the Bengals played yesterday, even CF. The Bengals had 0 pressure on the QB and I doubt CF would have been sacked either.I hope DA continues to look good, but don't be surprised if he looks bad when facing a real defense. That's the problem with DA he looks good one game and then horrible the next.

[skip-zip]

And just for the record, that's a 136.7 Rating as opposed to Anderson's 121.0 yesterday.So, yes, it's better. In fact, that's a pretty big difference.But, I'm sure you'll argue that too, just for the sake of trying to irritate someone.

[Zippysgotagun]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6420AP...html?source=rssSounds like Seattle's GM can barely contain his excitement about acquiring such a quality QB.

[skip-zip]

Just a few more FACTS for those couple of you who might be thinking that the Browns' organization has done a fine job of evaluating their quarterback talent.Here's the current stats of another recent Browns' QB who took the blame for the team's poor play. After all, a guy who is this BAD, got sacked repeatedly, and eventually was cut, HAD to be the reason why they lost so many games while he was under center. 2007 - Jeff GarciaCompletion Pct. - 67.4 thru 2 gamesNO Interceptions thru 2 gamesPlusQB Rating of 145.8 yesterday against New Orleans (wow..can you have a rating that high??)And, he's led the Eagles to the NFC Championship game since leaving the Browns.Image where we "could" have been at this point with our QBs, with Garcia starting, and someone like Frye learning under his mentorship for a few years. Especially since they both have very similar playing styles.One can only imagine now.

[sgm405]

Just a few more FACTS for those couple of you who might be thinking that the Browns' organization has done a fine job of evaluating their quarterback talent.Here's the current stats of another recent Browns' QB who took the blame for the team's poor play. After all, a guy who is this BAD, got sacked repeatedly, and eventually was cut, HAD to be the reason why they lost so many games while he was under center. 2007 - Jeff GarciaCompletion Pct. - 67.4 thru 2 gamesNO Interceptions thru 2 gamesPlusQB Rating of 145.8 yesterday against New Orleans (wow..can you have a rating that high??)And, he's led the Eagles to the NFC Championship game since leaving the Browns.Image where we "could" have been at this point with our QBs, with Garcia starting, and someone like Frye learning under his mentorship for a few years. Especially since they both have very similar playing styles.One can only imagine now.

Jeff Garcia wasn't successful here because he's a West Coast offense QB. The Browns don't run that type of offense. It may turn out that this is the same reason Frye wasn't successful (not a pocket passer), but I'm guessing it's more that he's just not very talented.As for comparing the two games, sure, the QB rating might be higher...but can you honestly say with a straight face that Frye against Jax in 05 was better than DA yesterday? Especially considering DA got the win?

[skip-zip]

Isn't that what a QB rating is designed to measure? All factors considered?

[sgm405]

Isn't that what a QB rating is designed to measure? All factors considered?

Not always...honestly...you think Frye was better?