Text Size

Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Goodbye Frye?

Talk Browns football and discuss the NFL here.

Moderators: peeker643, jb, swerb, pup

Goodbye Frye?

Unread postby consigliere » Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:01 pm

What's the dealio is in regard to the OBR's article on Frye today? Barry's nuking anything over on the OBR even discussing it, and supposedly it is an article that brings something very newsworthy to the forefront.

I refuse to ever subscribe to anything in the Scout Network again after the fiasco with auto-renewing and all that.
Indians Prospect Insider: http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/
Image
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Unread postby Dozen » Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:13 pm

Edited out - premium content from another site
http://www.thesportshole.com

http://www.youtube.com/TheSportsHole


I have never seen so many kok heads all lumped together like that ~ Yhimmie
User avatar
Dozen
TheSportsHole.com
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:08 pm
Location: Willoughby, Ohio
Favorite Player: my son
Least Favorite Player: venomous/bipolar

Unread postby Guest » Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:16 pm

What would they get for him? A bag of footballs?
Guest
 

Unread postby Dozen » Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:18 pm

Adding more fuel to the Frye fire is the more-than-tepid interest in drafting Brady Quinn—owner Randy Lerner was in attendance at Quinn’s Pro Day workout yesterday—and the somewhat-bizarre and ongoing interest in Marques Tuiasosopo. Savage attempted to acquire Tuiasosopo last offseason, and the Raiders QB is in Berea today visiting with the club.



That should make consig happy. (jk) :lol:
http://www.thesportshole.com

http://www.youtube.com/TheSportsHole


I have never seen so many kok heads all lumped together like that ~ Yhimmie
User avatar
Dozen
TheSportsHole.com
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:08 pm
Location: Willoughby, Ohio
Favorite Player: my son
Least Favorite Player: venomous/bipolar

Unread postby consigliere » Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:26 pm

Yeah, just found it on Cleveland Live. Thanks.

I don't get what all the hype is about this article. So Frye is being shopped. Big deal. He sucks. Move on.

I was just curious after I read the claims on the OBR that it was "the biggest story we ever broke" and all that.

Anyway, as for the article.....I think it is clear as day that Frye is no longer the long-term solution and that the Browns ARE looking for a replacement for NEXT year. I really think it is going to be Quinn now.
Indians Prospect Insider: http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/
Image
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Unread postby Dozen » Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:27 pm

On the same day I get an email getting 2 months for the price of 1, imagine that :roll :roll:
http://www.thesportshole.com

http://www.youtube.com/TheSportsHole


I have never seen so many kok heads all lumped together like that ~ Yhimmie
User avatar
Dozen
TheSportsHole.com
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:08 pm
Location: Willoughby, Ohio
Favorite Player: my son
Least Favorite Player: venomous/bipolar

Unread postby consigliere » Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:37 pm

Dozen wrote:On the same day I get an email getting 2 months for the price of 1, imagine that :roll :roll:


:lol: :lol:
Indians Prospect Insider: http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/
Image
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Re: Goodbye Frye?

Unread postby jb » Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:46 pm

Consigliere wrote:What's the dealio is in regard to the OBR's article on Frye today? Barry's nuking anything over on the OBR even discussing it, and supposedly it is an article that brings something very newsworthy to the forefront.

I refuse to ever subscribe to anything in the Scout Network again after the fiasco with auto-renewing and all that.


It is like The Fight Club.

Rule number one: Do NOT talk about any topics which could possibly be covered by an "insider".

Rule number two: DO NOT TALK ABOUT ANY TOPICS WHICH COULD POSSIBLY BE COVERED BY AN "INSIDER'.

Common sense should tell you that if Phil Savage has half a brain he's not fully convinced Frye is a bona fide NFL starter. I may have some differences of opinion on some of Phil's moves or occasionally his modus operendi, but I've never thought he was dumb.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

How about a productive turn on this....

Unread postby jb » Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:49 pm

Dozen wrote:
Adding more fuel to the Frye fire is the more-than-tepid interest in drafting Brady Quinn—owner Randy Lerner was in attendance at Quinn’s Pro Day workout yesterday—and the somewhat-bizarre and ongoing interest in Marques Tuiasosopo. Savage attempted to acquire Tuiasosopo last offseason, and the Raiders QB is in Berea today visiting with the club.



That should make consig happy. (jk) :lol:


Yo 12 - you listen to Sirius NFL by chance? Sol Wilcotts was ripping Brady Quinn's accuracy and timing. Now personally, I thought it was the kid's strength, butI confess to being a real-time single game wtaher, not a film rat. Anychance you heard it and have a take?
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Unread postby yogi » Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:58 pm

Yeah, I don't get why shopping Frye is a big deal either.

If you go in a Russell/Quinn direction or if you bring in Shaub/Carr, makes sense to me to not have Frye around.

Seems to me Houston and Denver will be looking for a back-up and that could well be Charlie's lot in life. Back-up QB.
User avatar
yogi
Jersey Accent
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:00 pm
Location: NJ

Re: How about a productive turn on this....

Unread postby Dozen » Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:02 pm

JB wrote:
Dozen wrote:
Adding more fuel to the Frye fire is the more-than-tepid interest in drafting Brady Quinn—owner Randy Lerner was in attendance at Quinn’s Pro Day workout yesterday—and the somewhat-bizarre and ongoing interest in Marques Tuiasosopo. Savage attempted to acquire Tuiasosopo last offseason, and the Raiders QB is in Berea today visiting with the club.



That should make consig happy. (jk) :lol:


Yo 12 - you listen to Sirius NFL by chance? Sol Wilcotts was ripping Brady Quinn's accuracy and timing. Now personally, I thought it was the kid's strength, butI confess to being a real-time single game wtaher, not a film rat. Anychance you heard it and have a take?


No Sirus yet for me, radio isnt something I listen to really all that much so I have not gotten it. I thought those were his strengths as well. But from here on out you'll here everyone and their mother give pro's/ con's on everyone so I am taking this with a grain of salt.
http://www.thesportshole.com

http://www.youtube.com/TheSportsHole


I have never seen so many kok heads all lumped together like that ~ Yhimmie
User avatar
Dozen
TheSportsHole.com
 
Posts: 2343
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 7:08 pm
Location: Willoughby, Ohio
Favorite Player: my son
Least Favorite Player: venomous/bipolar

Unread postby jb » Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:05 pm

yogi wrote:If you go in a Russell/Quinn direction or if you bring in Shaub/Carr, makes sense to me to not have Frye around.

Seems to me Houston and Denver will be looking for a back-up and that could well be Charlie's lot in life. Back-up QB.


I'll say this: I don't blame Frye for his being made starter. I blame RAC & Moe. It seemed obvious to me that Trent for 2 seasons or so was Phil's plan, but for all his playing limitations Trent actually understood offensive football so he clashed w/ those two clowns. Frye becasm ethe default and he never earned the position. It'd be like Oakland handing Walter the job this season.

Frye didn't make the mistake of playing himself.
Persobally, I'd love to keep Frye and let him do what SHOULD have been done to a 3rd round, project QB from a small football school - sit on the bench and learn for 3 seasons before he even sets foot in a game as the designated starter.

I say keep Frye as a back up project, but for God's sake, get a real starter.

BTW - Connecting the dots.... as we wash out all these young players who kinda suck and sign the Steinbach's of he world, tell me again what the difference of opinion were between Phil and Jeff Davidson?
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Unread postby FUDU » Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:31 pm

IMO this story screams "don't be shocked if the Browns look for a QB early in the draft", nothing more or nothing less really.

Just how early is the question.

Not suggesting that is their priority going in but I think for the most part the idea of us drafting a QB with our first or second pick has really been silenced by the organization's attitude and moves so far (until this story)


IMO the powers that be know exactly what they have in Charlie and know what their confidence levels are with him. At the same point they know what they have in the guy "behind" him on the depth chart.

If Phil and Romeo by any means feel it could be a coin flip on any given Sunday who could/should be the starter then in my mind that doesn't speak well for Charlie's chances here.

Without a running game and a very solid first two rounds in this year's draft I think it is moot which QB takes the helm. But if we put together a semblance of a running game and grab two contributers on day one then I think it would make a difference down the line (during THIS season) who would be taking the snaps.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13357
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby leadpipe » Mon Mar 05, 2007 6:51 pm

In my opinion it is NEVER a moot point who your quarterback is. It cuts both ways, it certainly is tough to play that position from your ass or if you have zero running game to relieve some pressure. At the same time, we can aquire Steinbach, Thomas and Peterson and if Chaz Frye is still wobbling balls late acroos the middle in the red zone the Browns are no better off.

Like I've said before, I just want them to draft a good player, but to assume they can be successful with a poor quarterback is certainly bucking the odds.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6626
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Unread postby FUDU » Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:05 pm

Like I've said before, I just want them to draft a good player, but to assume they can be successful with a poor quarterback is certainly bucking the odds.


My point was since the Browns do not have a proven GOOD QB then if we are NOT going to surround whatever average to poor one we throw out there with a running game to fall back on what difference does it make which one of the poor QBs play? In the end a team with a no running game and poor to inconsistent line play is going nowhere regardless of how good their QB is. Maybe they get by one season with some smoke and few a mirrors but in the end it doesn't get the job done.

Question for you, do you think since the return it would have mattered who our QB was if we changed absolutely nothing else that we have had?

IMO you could have put Peyton Manning on this team and the end result is a plus of 8-10 wins over the 7 years and probably still only one playoff appearance.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13357
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby consigliere » Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:09 pm

FUDU wrote:IMO you could have put Peyton Manning on this team and the end result is a plus of 8-10 wins over the 7 years and probably still only one playoff appearance.


True.

Although, if who replace Peyton with say "Walter Jones" or Jon Ogden" would our fortunes have changed much?

It goes beyond one player...we have several holes and several mistakes since our return which have put us in the rudderless suck we are in.
Indians Prospect Insider: http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/
Image
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Unread postby leadpipe » Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:49 pm

FUDU wrote:
Like I've said before, I just want them to draft a good player, but to assume they can be successful with a poor quarterback is certainly bucking the odds.


My point was since the Browns do not have a proven GOOD QB then if we are NOT going to surround whatever average to poor one we throw out there with a running game to fall back on what difference does it make which one of the poor QBs play? In the end a team with a no running game and poor to inconsistent line play is going nowhere regardless of how good their QB is. Maybe they get by one season with some smoke and few a mirrors but in the end it doesn't get the job done.

Question for you, do you think since the return it would have mattered who our QB was if we changed absolutely nothing else that we have had?

IMO you could have put Peyton Manning on this team and the end result is a plus of 8-10 wins over the 7 years and probably still only one playoff appearance.


I would agree with this, and my comments weren't necessarily aimed at you. I just think that in reading quite a few post on here some feel the quarterback is just another position. Sure he needs help, it's certainly a team sport. But let's be frank, it's the most important position on the field. And, like I said previous, it goes both ways - put Frye on the Colts and see what happens.

I don't think either one of the points is moot.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6626
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Unread postby FUDU » Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:03 pm

Although, if who replace Peyton with say "Walter Jones" or Jon Ogden" would our fortunes have changed much?

Well now you're talking about something quite different IMO.

Jones and Ogden bring something completely different to their teams, mainly they bring what most QB's need to be successful or be as good as they can be. They bring the skills sets of the foundations of good football in blocking and the ability to help a team run the ball and protect a QB.

What I am saying here is for the most part a QB cannot be good without a "decent" running game (notice I didn't even use good running game). But a team CAN be good with an average to almost poor QB. See Baltimore, Tampa Bay.

So having said that, in regards to our Browns, if we don't have a decent running attack then putting poor QB X in the backfield or poor QB Y in the backfield is relatively indifferent in terms of overall success to the team. Sure one guy may make more plays one game due to his strengths but when the difference between QB X and QB Y is negligible it is moot, a crap shoot in the end.

Now enter a running game and all of a sudden one QB's skill set may fit more properly in what the team is trying to do compared to the other QB. Then even though the guy that gets the nod is still average or poor it now does matter what he brings to the table in terms of what he can and cannot do.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13357
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby jb » Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:46 pm

FUDU wrote:
Like I've said before, I just want them to draft a good player, but to assume they can be successful with a poor quarterback is certainly bucking the odds.


My point was since the Browns do not have a proven GOOD QB then if we are NOT going to surround whatever average to poor one we throw out there with a running game to fall back on what difference does it make which one of the poor QBs play? In the end a team with a no running game and poor to inconsistent line play is going nowhere regardless of how good their QB is. Maybe they get by one season with some smoke and few a mirrors but in the end it doesn't get the job done.

Question for you, do you think since the return it would have mattered who our QB was if we changed absolutely nothing else that we have had?

IMO you could have put Peyton Manning on this team and the end result is a plus of 8-10 wins over the 7 years and probably still only one playoff appearance.


While the Browns wouldn't have been a juggernaut w/ a new QB , I think DA vs Pbgh and other things show hos limiting Frye was. While the OL did have some Andruzziriffic jailbreaks, often time the protection wasn't bad at all and Frye just bit, missing WR's and having arm limitations, and being late as hell.

So yeah, I think the Browns win 2 - 3 games with just a decent NFL QB. The SD, Baltimore & 1st Pbgh games come to mind.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Unread postby mistero » Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:18 pm

I don't notice anything earth shattering in that OBR article.
I mean what would we get for Frye? What would Oakland get for Walter?
What would Chicago get for Orton?

I think Phil is having deja vu. frye=Redman.

Get ready for Harrington or Tui in the role of Stony Case.

Seems like Phil's soft under belly.
In Chud We Trust
User avatar
mistero
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:19 pm
Location: North Ridgeville Ohio
Favorite Player: Miller High Life
Least Favorite Player: Natural Light

Unread postby HoodooMan » Mon Mar 05, 2007 10:59 pm

All I have to add is that "FUDU" is a damn fine screen name.
User avatar
HoodooMan
The King
 
Posts: 1735
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 12:04 pm
Favorite Player: Big_Lu
Least Favorite Player: Foldtop Sandwich Bag

Unread postby swerb » Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:21 pm

Fellas, I edited out the post that contained premium content from another site.

I'm well aware that the body of the story was posted on other message boards, but I don't want to partake in that sort of thing over here.
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17919
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

goodbye frye

Unread postby rawdawgexpress » Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:09 pm

And you stay classy Swerb.

No reliable expert has ever said that Frye has the potential to be a starter. Football Outsiders and Ron Jaworski are particularly down on him. And he needs to go to avoid a possible QB controversy here - especially considering he's boyz with Winslow. That said I'd be happy with a 5th.
rawdawgexpress
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 3:00 am
Location: Lakewood

Unread postby swerb » Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:57 pm

I'd take a fifth for Frye.

Cause if I'm forced to watch another season of no arm strength, happy feet, and holding on to ball agonizingly too long ... I'm gonna need to drink a fifth every game.
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17919
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Unread postby General » Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:15 pm

Swerb,
Amen. I wish he was absent just like in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off". As Ben Stein said, "....Bueller, Bueller....Frye, Frye..."
User avatar
General
 
Posts: 1853
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 2:35 pm
Location: Pensacola
Favorite Player: Paul Warfield
Least Favorite Player: 537 Idiots in DC

Unread postby FUDU » Tue Mar 06, 2007 5:21 pm

HoodooMan wrote:All I have to add is that "FUDU" is a damn fine screen name.


If you are thinking it has to do with Duke it doesn't. Although I agree with that notion being a Tar Heel fan myself.

Too long a story to explain the name but thanks anyway.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13357
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby HoodooMan » Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:15 pm

Too long a story to explain the name but thanks anyway.

Nah, not too long. Fuck you, donny. ;)
User avatar
HoodooMan
The King
 
Posts: 1735
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 12:04 pm
Favorite Player: Big_Lu
Least Favorite Player: Foldtop Sandwich Bag

Unread postby jfiling » Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:48 am

Swerb wrote:Fellas, I edited out the post that contained premium content from another site.

I'm well aware that the body of the story was posted on other message boards, but I don't want to partake in that sort of thing over here.


Can't say I blame ya.

And, OT, what's with giant avatars squishing the bodies of posts into a relatively tiny space?
jfiling
Old School Writer
 
Posts: 3874
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:14 pm
Location: Akron, Ohio
Favorite Player: Silky Johnston
Least Favorite Player: Buck Nasty

Unread postby jb » Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:14 am

HoodooMan wrote:Too long a story to explain the name but thanks anyway.

Nah, not too long. Fuck you, donny. ;)


Ahhhh.... Light bulbs go off. This reply had me look closely at the avitar.

What's yer take on 'sup with Frye and the draft?
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Unread postby HoodooMan » Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:52 pm

What's yer take on 'sup with Frye and the draft?

I think if you want to add another young QB to your roster as well as another vet QB to start the grooming process all over again, you can only keep one of Frye, Anderson, and Dorsey(ha!), and I think Phil knew what he was going to do this offseason when he was lowering our expectations for '07.

EDIT: and I think KII isn't going to be happy about it, based on his "not a QB" draft preference.
User avatar
HoodooMan
The King
 
Posts: 1735
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 12:04 pm
Favorite Player: Big_Lu
Least Favorite Player: Foldtop Sandwich Bag

Unread postby FUDU » Wed Mar 07, 2007 5:41 pm

I just noticed the avatar as well, I don't recall it being there originally.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13357
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Frye

Unread postby Gary Reents » Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:09 pm

The reason Phil is exploring trades for Frye:

1. Phil will take Quinn or Russell if either is there. That means the Browns will get a vet to mentor the new young gun and Frye is just in the way in that scenario.

2. Even if Phil doesn't get a new QB and has to go into next season with Frye and DA, this will cause conflict again. Winslow favors Frye because Winslow is Frye's favorite target. DA favors Edwards and Jurivicious over the TEs. Those two, especially Edwards favor the QB that throws most to them. Phil doesn't need another campaign of campaigning. DA will get less in trade than Frye and the Browns will have to pay someone to take Dorsey. Because Frye can bring back some compensation he's the guy that is being shopped.
Gary Reents
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: Dayton Ohio

Unread postby mistero » Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:37 pm

How much are you willing to give for Kyle Orton? How about Andrew Walter?

Really who would trade for Frye and waht would they give?

The only team I could concieve of is GB. And that;s only if the trade of Rodgers for Moss goes down.

Then it's a 6th for Frye.

Really, he's played too much and shown his weakness. Guys like Gerrad in Jax and Schaub have better value with less snaps.
In Chud We Trust
User avatar
mistero
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 10:19 pm
Location: North Ridgeville Ohio
Favorite Player: Miller High Life
Least Favorite Player: Natural Light

Re: Frye

Unread postby leadpipe » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:16 am

Gary Reents wrote:The reason Phil is exploring trades for Frye:

1. Phil will take Quinn or Russell if either is there. That means the Browns will get a vet to mentor the new young gun and Frye is just in the way in that scenario.

2. Even if Phil doesn't get a new QB and has to go into next season with Frye and DA, this will cause conflict again. Winslow favors Frye because Winslow is Frye's favorite target. DA favors Edwards and Jurivicious over the TEs. Those two, especially Edwards favor the QB that throws most to them. Phil doesn't need another campaign of campaigning. DA will get less in trade than Frye and the Browns will have to pay someone to take Dorsey. Because Frye can bring back some compensation he's the guy that is being shopped.


This is so very far from the truth. There are a few guys on this board who know Jurivecius personally, and well, you might be interested what he would have to say about the reciever/quarterback situation. Let me put it to you this way, if you thought it was painful watching Chaz float wobblers late over the middle or hanging receivers out to dry with high floaters, well, just think how you would feel if you were catching them. This includes the Soldier.

Also, what make you think Chaz has any real value on the trade market. Do you really think he has much more value than DA? A nickel is worth more than a penny, but you ain't livin' off either of em'.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6626
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: Frye

Unread postby swerb » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:32 am

Lead Pipe wrote:
Gary Reents wrote:The reason Phil is exploring trades for Frye:

1. Phil will take Quinn or Russell if either is there. That means the Browns will get a vet to mentor the new young gun and Frye is just in the way in that scenario.

2. Even if Phil doesn't get a new QB and has to go into next season with Frye and DA, this will cause conflict again. Winslow favors Frye because Winslow is Frye's favorite target. DA favors Edwards and Jurivicious over the TEs. Those two, especially Edwards favor the QB that throws most to them. Phil doesn't need another campaign of campaigning. DA will get less in trade than Frye and the Browns will have to pay someone to take Dorsey. Because Frye can bring back some compensation he's the guy that is being shopped.


This is so very far from the truth. There are a few guys on this board who know Jurivecius personally, and well, you might be interested what he would have to say about the reciever/quarterback situation. Let me put it to you this way, if you thought it was painful watching Chaz float wobblers late over the middle or hanging receivers out to dry with high floaters, well, just think how you would feel if you were catching them. This includes the Soldier.

Also, what make you think Chaz has any real value on the trade market. Do you really think he has much more value than DA? A nickel is worth more than a penny, but you ain't livin' off either of em'.

Pipe, I think Gary was saying that Joe J favors DA if I read him right.

On the value (or lack thereof) you could get back for Frye/Anderson ... as poorly as Charlie played last year, I still think he brings back more in return than DA. If for no other reason, because DA has played so sparingly ... and Frye is so much more mobile, and was a 1st day pick juat two years ago.

Over/under on what Frye would yield us is about a 5th rd pick IMO. DA ... a little less than that.
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17919
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Unread postby leadpipe » Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:45 am

And all I'm saying is that everyone else shares his feeling. Everyone.

Also, do you really think Frye gets you that high a pick? Maybe I'm wrong but I would be very suprised. Any fourth round choice that really hasn't proved that they were worth a fourth will rarely fetch something that close. What I'm saying is the return on both is pretty low.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6626
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Re: Frye

Unread postby Gary Reents » Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:50 pm

Lead Pipe wrote:This is so very far from the truth. There are a few guys on this board who know Jurivecius personally, and well, you might be interested what he would have to say about the reciever/quarterback situation. Let me put it to you this way, if you thought it was painful watching Chaz float wobblers late over the middle or hanging receivers out to dry with high floaters, well, just think how you would feel if you were catching them. This includes the Soldier.

Also, what make you think Chaz has any real value on the trade market. Do you really think he has much more value than DA? A nickel is worth more than a penny, but you ain't livin' off either of em'.[/size]


Well no, I'm not wrong. I'm dead on.

When the choice is between two QBs and one throws to you and the other doesn't, it really doesn't matter if the one throwing to you sends out Joe Cap flutter balls. In that context it really doesn't matter if Winslow fondly recalls the good old days of having Dorsey throwing to him in college (snicker), to him it only matters that he is more a part of the offense when Chuck was in there.

Likewise, both Edwards and JJ got more balls sent their way with DA in there. Hel...er...heck...DA threw almost all his picks trying to get the ball to Edwards....deep over the middle and thrown...late....but on a line with a really nice spiral.

As to value, the report is that Phil is testing Chuck's value, not DAs. Your question is best asked of Phil.
Gary Reents
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: Dayton Ohio

Unread postby FUDU » Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:56 pm

When the choice is between two QBs and one throws to you and the other doesn't, it really doesn't matter if the one throwing to you sends out Joe Cap flutter balls. In that context it really doesn't matter if Winslow fondly recalls the good old days of having Dorsey throwing to him in college (snicker), to him it only matters that he is more a part of the offense when Chuck was in there.


That comes across as you suggest KW2 is more concerned about personal acclaim and accomplishments then winning?

I am reading you correctly, b/c if so I have to say that is total hogwash.

KW2 more than anybody on this team has shown publicly he wants to win bad, very very bad.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13357
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby Gary Reents » Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:38 pm

FUDU wrote:That comes across as you suggest KW2 is more concerned about personal acclaim and accomplishments then winning?

I am reading you correctly, b/c if so I have to say that is total hogwash.

KW2 more than anybody on this team has shown publicly he wants to win bad, very very bad.


No, it's not hogwash. You see this is childish terms.

A great player, like Winslow is, believes that a teams best chance of winning is getting him the ball. Winslow is aware of his stats, but his this is his core belief. Same goes for Edwards. So wanting to win means they want the ball so they can make difference...win the game.

In that context, both Winslow and Edwards campaigned for the ball. This is no opinion, it is a fact as stated by Romeo. When a player wants very much to be the focus of the passing attack and one QB throws more to one than the other and another QB throws to the other more, then you have the situation we saw at the end of the season. Edwards was championing DA and Winslow was backing Chuck.

There is no reason to expect that to change if the two are here competing for the starting spot next year.
Gary Reents
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: Dayton Ohio

Re: Frye

Unread postby jb » Thu Mar 08, 2007 9:35 pm

Gary Reents wrote:
Lead Pipe wrote:This is so very far from the truth. There are a few guys on this board who know Jurivecius personally, and well, you might be interested what he would have to say about the reciever/quarterback situation. Let me put it to you this way, if you thought it was painful watching Chaz float wobblers late over the middle or hanging receivers out to dry with high floaters, well, just think how you would feel if you were catching them. This includes the Soldier.

Also, what make you think Chaz has any real value on the trade market. Do you really think he has much more value than DA? A nickel is worth more than a penny, but you ain't livin' off either of em'.[/size]


Well no, I'm not wrong. I'm dead on.

When the choice is between two QBs and one throws to you and the other doesn't, it really doesn't matter if the one throwing to you sends out Joe Cap flutter balls. In that context it really doesn't matter if Winslow fondly recalls the good old days of having Dorsey throwing to him in college (snicker), to him it only matters that he is more a part of the offense when Chuck was in there.

Likewise, both Edwards and JJ got more balls sent their way with DA in there. Hel...er...heck...DA threw almost all his picks trying to get the ball to Edwards....deep over the middle and thrown...late....but on a line with a really nice spiral.

As to value, the report is that Phil is testing Chuck's value, not DAs. Your question is best asked of Phil.


I'll be straight - I'm not all that interested in which receivers prefer whom literally.

What is important is the Browns seem to have Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb, neither really seems to hold the promise of a long-term solution, and there is a split between them of who will start. Everyone in the org is on record that there is to be a QB competition. The end result is there will probably be a dif of opinion of who should play among some members of the team. Unless you believe that Phil really belives one of them is a long term solution, it isn't worth it. They should endeavor ti dinf The Guy.

I think Phil is a BPA guy, and I won't rule anyone of the big 5 out, but I also think he has confidence he won't be drafting in this high of a position much more. He knows from B-more how hard it is to get that quality QB. Chris Redman was taken in round 3 like Charlie; and like Charlie, a failed experiment. DA is like Stoney Case, a longshot. Phil's role is Bollar is the subject of discussion & conjecture.

From what I can see, Brady Quinn has to be a real serious consideration, and I'm warming to the idea. If Phil & his scouts think that Quinn is a legit franchise QB in a division w/ Ben & Palmer, then it is a good move.

The question is how will Quinn be rought along?

In scene one, Phil intended Charlie to sit & learn behind Dilfer & develop slowly. I believe that RAC rushed that when Phil was out scouting. Normally, I think RAC prefers vets, but I think he deferred to Moe when Moe wanted a kid who'd just do what he wanted w/out questioning his competance, and this was how Frye kept starting when Dilfer got healthy.

So will Phil allow things to develop slowly with Quinn behind Frye or DA, or will he consider Quinn ready to play from day one? Will this happen with RAC prefering vets, so keeping Frye would make it easier on him?

Or will Phil stay steady w/ DA & Frye until after the draft? If he takes a QB would he then ditch Frye and sign a vet to caddy Quinn - or Russell if he falls? Or will he keep Frye and best case scehanrio it becomes a Brees in SD scenario, excpet he can gte something for Frye?

As far as any rumors of shopping Frye? Big damn deal. Does anyone logically think Phil is a bad enough GM to see Frye as a long term solution when DA came in and the O looked so much better w/ him out?
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Unread postby leadpipe » Fri Mar 09, 2007 12:45 am

Gary, I can tell you, straight from one of the horse's mouths what Winslow thinks of Frye. Like I mentioned previously, I believe more than one person who reads this board knows the local product who receives for the Browns. Of course he's not going to speak publicly...... So, if you catch where I'm going here you are not absolutely right about Winslow preferring Frye. This is not conjecture, this is fact.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6626
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Unread postby pup » Fri Mar 09, 2007 8:15 am

While I don't know this local boy receiver(anymore, knew him in HS, but that don't count), I can surely tell you that LeadPipe most certainly does.
Home Run Leaders as RHB 5/7/13

Mark Reynolds (10)
User avatar
pup
Closet Shapiro Fan
 
Posts: 12020
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:15 pm
Location: Eastlake, Ohio
Favorite Player: Vince Shubrownicek
Least Favorite Player: Any other coach

Unread postby wmurphyhh » Fri Mar 09, 2007 11:19 am

Of course Winslow prefers Frye, those two are glued at the hip.
They are seen playing basketball together at Akron U between knee surgeries. They built houses next to each other in Red Tail. So what.

Winslow's health limited his ability to get more than 10 yards down the field every snap last year. If this recent surgery gets him up to 85% vs. 60% from last year, don't you think he'd forget about Frye after DA hits him in stride with a couple of 15 yards slants that go for long TDs ?

All this talk about Quinn...Millen and the Lions are going to screw everyone by taking him. They backup to Jones in T. Bell and two tackles in Backus and Foster. I can't really see Millen taking a 4th WR in the top 10.

It's really down to Thomas or A Pete.
Build the lines and wait for next year to get the premier back.
wmurphyhh
"Murph"
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:24 am
Location: Highland Heights, OH
Favorite Player: Joe Haden
Least Favorite Player: Chris Johnson

Re: Frye

Unread postby Gary Reents » Sat Mar 10, 2007 8:08 am

JB wrote:I'll be straight - I'm not all that interested in which receivers prefer whom literally.

What is important is the Browns seem to have Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb, neither really seems to hold the promise of a long-term solution, and there is a split between them of who will start. Everyone in the org is on record that there is to be a QB competition. The end result is there will probably be a dif of opinion of who should play among some members of the team. Unless you believe that Phil really belives one of them is a long term solution, it isn't worth it. They should endeavor ti dinf The Guy.

I think Phil is a BPA guy, and I won't rule anyone of the big 5 out, but I also think he has confidence he won't be drafting in this high of a position much more. He knows from B-more how hard it is to get that quality QB. Chris Redman was taken in round 3 like Charlie; and like Charlie, a failed experiment. DA is like Stoney Case, a longshot. Phil's role is Bollar is the subject of discussion & conjecture.

From what I can see, Brady Quinn has to be a real serious consideration, and I'm warming to the idea. If Phil & his scouts think that Quinn is a legit franchise QB in a division w/ Ben & Palmer, then it is a good move.

The question is how will Quinn be rought along?

In scene one, Phil intended Charlie to sit & learn behind Dilfer & develop slowly. I believe that RAC rushed that when Phil was out scouting. Normally, I think RAC prefers vets, but I think he deferred to Moe when Moe wanted a kid who'd just do what he wanted w/out questioning his competance, and this was how Frye kept starting when Dilfer got healthy.

So will Phil allow things to develop slowly with Quinn behind Frye or DA, or will he consider Quinn ready to play from day one? Will this happen with RAC prefering vets, so keeping Frye would make it easier on him?

Or will Phil stay steady w/ DA & Frye until after the draft? If he takes a QB would he then ditch Frye and sign a vet to caddy Quinn - or Russell if he falls? Or will he keep Frye and best case scehanrio it becomes a Brees in SD scenario, excpet he can gte something for Frye?

As far as any rumors of shopping Frye? Big damn deal. Does anyone logically think Phil is a bad enough GM to see Frye as a long term solution when DA came in and the O looked so much better w/ him out?


In 05 it was Mo that pressed for Charlie to start and Romeo tried. Phil put a stop to it until Dilfer got a boo-boo and Charlie had to start.

But Phil was going to start Charlie in 06 regardless. He positioned Charlie to do just that because Phil had a timetable in which he had 2-3 seasons to develop his QB. In that time he had to know whether he could get by on the cheap with Charlie, or if he had to pursue other options.

So, Phil is "stupid enough" to take a shot, a long shot, that a 3rd round pick would develop into a legit starter that would allow the team to compete in a division that two of the best young QBs in the league.

I'm not convinced Phil is ready to give up on the low expense approach yet. There is still a chance that Charlie and DA will be the competing QBs in camp. I prefer a real prospect, like Quinn, be brought in because imo the Browns will never conistently compete in the North division until it can reach parity at the most important position on offense, QB. The rest of the teams in this division are now set with top notch QBs and the Browns have nothing but hope and prayers. That HAS to be addressed soon.

If Quinn is brought in, I expect a vet to come in to play the first season and mentor. Quinn would start his second season, no later. If he can't start his second season then he will have proven he was a bad pick. When the GM pushes a 3rd rounder in there expecting him to be a legit starter, you know damn well he'll expect a higher pedigreed prospect to play well at least as soon.

We'll just have to wait and see what Phil does. Phil saw the mistake the Browns made with Couch and the consequences of that. They blew their big chip and wasted years at the cost of talent. I think Phil was/is willing to let the QB position go until the team talent level is raised to where he wants it. Then add the QB as the final piece. Only he knows if the talent level and the opportunity have coalesced into a QB selection in the first round this year, or a signing of a top notch QB in FA, or trade...were one to become available.

IMO, if Phil thinks he can get by with an average to good QB in this division and take it (without some fluke injuries to all over teams at the same time), he's mistaken. Maybe in other divisions, but not in this one. The other teams will always win games in the last two minutes because that is what geat QBs can do.
Gary Reents
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: Dayton Ohio

Unread postby jb » Sat Mar 10, 2007 9:31 am

Still getting used to this interface.....

In 05 it was Mo that pressed for Charlie to start and Romeo tried. Phil put a stop to it until Dilfer got a boo-boo and Charlie had to start.

But Phil was going to start Charlie in 06 regardless. He positioned Charlie to do just that because Phil had a timetable in which he had 2-3 seasons to develop his QB. In that time he had to know whether he could get by on the cheap with Charlie, or if he had to pursue other options.

So, Phil is "stupid enough" to take a shot, a long shot, that a 3rd round pick would develop into a legit starter that would allow the team to compete in a division that two of the best young QBs in the league.


Entirely possible.

But the way these things seem to work, there is the smoke that we hear in rumor and innuendo, and it takes a while for what happens to seep out. That's what seems to be happening with Frye. Too many whispers from too many places.

There's also your eyes that aren't often lyin'.

I just watch Frye play, and I'm not really co-opted by Craig on the other board, but I'm just not seeing it, G. I suppose the question that will be played out is what Phil sees.

But the major tip off to me here is the statement of there being open competition among the QB's in the upcoming camps. Seems to me that if Phil still really felt Chuck was the Guy, he'd be into the old "starters don't lose their jobs because of injury" routine.

DA was refreshing compared to Frye - decisive, strong arm, no comparison with their timing or pocket presence; but he wasn't actually any good except in brief stretches.

I'm not convinced Phil is ready to give up on the low expense approach yet. There is still a chance that Charlie and DA will be the competing QBs in camp. I prefer a real prospect, like Quinn, be brought in because imo the Browns will never conistently compete in the North division until it can reach parity at the most important position on offense, QB. The rest of the teams in this division are now set with top notch QBs and the Browns have nothing but hope and prayers. That HAS to be addressed soon.


I think the biggest clue in this area is the JaLew signing and resulting quotes. From Ja Lew's own cakehole, you hear that the Browns are "committed to the run" and that they will be adding more OLmen. No way you commit to the run with JaLew and no one backing him up or splitting time worthy of playing on Sunday, and the OL has a ways to go on the right side and as far as depth before you can say it is one that can commit to the run. Now I grant you a few things as Truths:

* You can add plenty of good OLmen via FA , trade (there is an unsubstantiated rumor of Chaun for Nick Kaczur) or draft that doesn't involve the top pick.

* You can have a franchise talent & production level QB and still be committed to the run. Look at NE. Quinn reminds me of Brady.

* Commitment to the run is the best way for a young QB to succeed. See also, Ben. So that may suggest a young, developmental QB rather than preclude him.

But given where this team is now, and I'd say they have one good OLman and two average OLmen and no one at RG & RT who is good and reliable. JaLew is oft injured and needs to be spelled for 10 / 15 rushes per game if you want to rush 35 times, I'm seeing that nearly all resources available pretty much HAVE to go toward OL & another good, young RB, AND Phil wants some DL help as well.

That doesn't exactly suggest a QB in round one.

So the question remains, what are the other options "on the cheap" ?

Another vet?

A trade down scenario to get both a QB prospect and another RB or OL?

A second tier QB in the draft we're not bandying about , like a Stanton-type prospect?


We'll just have to wait and see what Phil does. Phil saw the mistake the Browns made with Couch and the consequences of that. They blew their big chip and wasted years at the cost of talent. I think Phil was/is willing to let the QB position go until the team talent level is raised to where he wants it. Then add the QB as the final piece. Only he knows if the talent level and the opportunity have coalesced into a QB selection in the first round this year, or a signing of a top notch QB in FA, or trade...were one to become available.


Definitely in a wait and see mode still. We have some clues and data points, but I think this FA will play out slowly from now on and we'll need to see what the draft brings.

However, I am inclined to believe that Phil pays much more attention to HIS experiences rather than Cleveland's from afar almost 10 years ago now.

He sees that he fielded a team that had the talent not to win one SB , but arguably could have won 2 or 3 but for the achilles heel of QB . He knows how hard it is to get that long term solution by going with "plug-a-vet", and he knows how hard it is to get the lon-term guy later in the draft. I look at his B-more experiences and see him thinking if Quinn is worthy, he almost HAS to take him and work on the finishing touches with the team while Quinn sits as you say. It gives him one more off season to add talent, probably on D almost exclusively if he "fixes" the OL and JaLew comes back strong this season.

I don't think Phil cares about Tim Couch and what happened to the Browns nearly a decade ago any more than he analyzes how the Miami Dolphins or St Louis Rams are functioning.


IMO, if Phil thinks he can get by with an average to good QB in this division and take it (without some fluke injuries to all over teams at the same time), he's mistaken. Maybe in other divisions, but not in this one. The other teams will always win games in the last two minutes because that is what geat QBs can do.


Then again, this division had Ben, the national media darling, and Palmer, arguably the best passer in the league not named "Peyton" , and who were they looking up at when the season ended?

The team with the old man "plu-a-vet" and the strong OL and kickin' D .
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Unread postby HoodooMan » Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:09 am

No way you commit to the run with JaLew and no one backing him up or splitting time worthy of playing on Sunday, and the OL has a ways to go on the right side and as far as depth before you can say it is one that can commit to the run

Suppose in the 2nd & say 4th or 5th rounds of the draft, Phil takes an OT like Ugoh and another OG (preferably an OG with some ability to play center or vice versa like Beekman or Datish). Then you're looking at:

LT: Shaffer
LG: Steinbach/Andruzzi
C: Fraley/2nd day pick
RG: Sowells/2nd day pick
RT: Ugoh/Butler

That's a young right side of the line, but not one without talent. JL said Phil planned to add more OL; he didn't say he promised him a finished product.

JaLew is oft injured and needs to be spelled for 10 / 15 rushes per game if you want to rush 35 times

Aren't his injuries generally of the all-or-nothing variety, though? Meaning, if he doesn't tear an ACL, he's in pretty good shape.

(he was 8th in the league in rushing attempts last year, btw)

The way the pieces are falling in place looks to me like Phil's trying very hard to build a solid support system for a franchise QB prospect. QB in round one, OT in round two, maybe a CB or a DL mixed in there in round 3 depending on what happens with the rest of FA, another OL early on the 2nd day of the draft, and maybe some competition for Jamal's backup RB later on the 2nd day.

While JL's using us for a big payday in '08, we're using him by running him into the ground in order to take pressure off of our franchise QB, before we add our RB of the future in the '08 draft (no Adrian Petersons, but a pretty good class of RBs).

That doesn't exactly suggest a QB in round one.

If not JMR or Quinn, who then?
User avatar
HoodooMan
The King
 
Posts: 1735
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 12:04 pm
Favorite Player: Big_Lu
Least Favorite Player: Foldtop Sandwich Bag

Unread postby swerb » Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:54 am

The way I see things, Phil is convinced Charlie is not the answer, that DA has better upside, and is fully committed to taking either JaMarcus or Brady, both of whom he likes.

The primary missing pieces to this puzzle are a long term answer at QB, a couple young backs, and an infusion of talented yoots on the lines.

I think Phil feels this thing is finally trending the right way and that this is going to be his last chance to get a marquee QB in the draft because he won't be picking high enough again. I also think there is creedence to what Gary is saying about Phil taking a look around the division, seeing Carson, Big Ben, and a still effective McNair.

A couple other things to consider is that this draft has some intriguing big backs that will be there in Rd 2, 3, and 4. Backs that fit the profile of the type of running game Phil wants. Also, next years draft is being touted as potentially one of the best RB drafts ever.

And lastly, the unspoken goal is playoffs in '08, and unlike a RB, a QB is going to need a year to develop.

Here's how I see this thing playing out ...

~Frye traded for whatever we can get
~Quinn the pick at #3, assuming JMR goes #1
~Vet brought in to tutor Brady
~Rds 2-7 ... a RB, OL, DL
~Top tier RB at all costs in next years draft

And frankly, I agre with that approach.
User avatar
swerb
JoBu's bee-yotch
 
Posts: 17919
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 5:04 pm
Location: Twinsburg, OH
Favorite Player: Mango Hab
Least Favorite Player: Bob LaMonte

Unread postby jb » Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:59 am

Suppose in the 2nd & say 4th or 5th rounds of the draft, Phil takes an OT like Ugoh and another OG (preferably an OG with some ability to play center or vice versa like Beekman or Datish). Then you're looking at:

LT: Shaffer
LG: Steinbach/Andruzzi
C: Fraley/2nd day pick
RG: Sowells/2nd day pick
RT: Ugoh/Butler

That's a young right side of the line, but not one without talent. JL said Phil planned to add more OL; he didn't say he promised him a finished product.


I guess something like that is possible, prehaps even probable, so not syain' you'd be wrong. But I offer to counter thoughts. One is that this means RAC starts two OLmen on the right side who have almost no experience between them. Now I know the popular take is RAC is some ball-less wonder at this point, like Borat's fat buddy, but I don't know about him being down with that. Also, weren't the Browns pretty adament at mid season that Ike wasn't a legit OG prospect, and they more or less moved him to RT in a permanent manner?

I'd expect us to see one or possibly two more vet OLmen signed. What they SHOULD do is outbid Pbgh for Mahan, as KFFL has links they want him to replace Hartings at C . Why allow your bigest rival to get stronger?

I'd expect us to draft not fewer than 2 OLmen based on Phil's statements, but I don't know where. CB remains a gaping hole. I also don't know how hip RAC is to strating rooks.

So there's that.

And then there's the cynic in me that says you are thinking too optimistically. Your thoughts feature a raw rookie, who is by definition a crap shoot, and an unproven player who was a 5th round pick who was moved out of the position he was pencilled into. I'm not seeing anyone but Chris Palmer trying that.

Aren't his injuries generally of the all-or-nothing variety, though? Meaning, if he doesn't tear an ACL, he's in pretty good shape.

(he was 8th in the league in rushing attempts last year, btw)


Point. Then again he received lots of criticism for being tentative w/ his ankle spurs he played thrugh and not attacking holes as in the past. JaLew has hiow own take on that, but the Rats let him go for a reason. And BTW - in counter - it isn't like Magahee is that much younger. Dude is what, 2 years yougnger? 3 perhaps? (bein' lazy)

The way the pieces are falling in place looks to me like Phil's trying very hard to build a solid support system for a franchise QB prospect. QB in round one, OT in round two, maybe a CB or a DL mixed in there in round 3 depending on what happens with the rest of FA, another OL early on the 2nd day of the draft, and maybe some competition for Jamal's backup RB later on the 2nd day.


I can see that perhaps. I can see the top pick going down in no fewer than 6 valid options at this point:

trade down
JMR
Quinn
A Pete
Calvin (not from McDonalds)
THomas


We simply don't have enough 411.

While JL's using us for a big payday in '08, we're using him by running him into the ground in order to take pressure off of our franchise QB, before we add our RB of the future in the '08 draft (no Adrian Petersons, but a pretty good class of RBs).


No beef from me at all. I like the plan on on the simplest level he should be an upgrade from the Droughns.

But I also see a 1 year deal as not precluding A Pete whatsoever at this point, esp when you hear all the "commit the the run" talk.

It can still go in any direction.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward

Unread postby HoodooMan » Sat Mar 10, 2007 11:19 am

One is that this means RAC starts two OLmen on the right side who have almost no experience between them. Now I know the popular take is RAC is some ball-less wonder at this point, like Borat's fat buddy, but I don't know about him being down with that.

Sure, RAC doesn't like playing the yoots, but I think the point stands for two reasons:

1) Phil didn't tell JL he was going to add more OL that he knew RAC would use right away; again, just that he'd add more OL.

2) By not signing legit vets to man the RG & RT positions, as with Sean Jones last year and likely Brodney Pool this year as well, Phil isn't leaving him much choice.

Also, weren't the Browns pretty adament at mid season that Ike wasn't a legit OG prospect, and they more or less moved him to RT in a permanent manner?

I remember reading that from you before, but I must have missed it if that ever came from the Browns (hardly unlikely). My understanding at the end of the year (IIRC, JT may have said something along these lines as well) was that his move to RT was only due to the dire need to have someone fill in there because of all the injuries, but that they're still high on him, regardless of position.

I'd expect us to see one or possibly two more vet OLmen signed. What they SHOULD do is outbid Pbgh for Mahan, as KFFL has links they want him to replace Hartings at C . Why allow your bigest rival to get stronger?

I don't like looking at things that way. With Fraley in the fold, I think a 3rd-to-late round OG/C makes more sense for us. Fraley's the guy at C for now, but you groom the yoot to take over if Bentley never returns or move him to OG or OG/C depth when Bentley gets back.
User avatar
HoodooMan
The King
 
Posts: 1735
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 12:04 pm
Favorite Player: Big_Lu
Least Favorite Player: Foldtop Sandwich Bag

Unread postby jb » Sun Mar 11, 2007 10:14 am

Don't have the link, but 99% recall that the Sowells' move was based on his skills and noy depth issues. But I will give you that as he didn't have a TC w/ injury they might have just wanted to play him at T , his college position, even if there was a side switch IIRC.

Another thing, yah know, unless Phil thinks about a vet stop gap at CB, like the due from Indy, we are pretty much locked into the need to draft a day one CB as we've struck out in free agency - beside adding the Ralph Brown of the NFC.
jb
 
Posts: 17730
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:08 pm
Location: Defend Youngstown
Favorite Player: Daddy Rich / Carwa$h
Least Favorite Player: Hines Ward


Return to Cleveland Browns & The NFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests