Thursday, January 11, 2007

Rewinding to the backup QB debate

After our failed experiment at QB, alot of people are recalling their preseason calls for the signing of a veteran backup QB as a sort of "I told you so". I still don't buy it.

I'm glad that we got a chance to see Frye and Anderson in action. Not that they have convinced me (or anyone) that they are genuine starting QB material, but we have a better idea than we did going into the season.

As I understand it, the argument for the veteran backup QB went something like this:
i) He can take over if the youngun isn't ready
ii) He can mentor the younguns

My responses to each:
i) Who is this veteran? Who are the available QBs who are of starting caliber, whose veteran saavy is enough to justify putting him in over a supposed "QB of the future"? The fact is, you've gotta choose a direction at QB. Do you want to try out a young guy? Or do you want to rely on known mediocrity? Personally, I prefer our current situation, where we now know that Frye has limits and questionable potential. The alternative is that we could have put Kerry Collins out there to get us to 3-9, only to throw in the towel in on him, and then watched Frye go 1-3 with "promising signs" and "great poise under pressure" so that we would now still be under the mistaken belief that Frye may be the next Brett Favre.

ii) This is the more common argument, thrown in when people realize that the veteran backup probably won't be expected to play. To which I say "God, if you're going to hire someone who can be Charlie's friend and hold his clipboard and give him advice, why does that guy have to wear a uniform and count against the salary cap? Why not find a recently retired QB who you can put on the payroll to do the same thing? You can even give him some sort of title. Like QB coach or something."

3 comments:

bob the omnipotent lunchsack said...

goddamn, i'm tired of cleveland fans always giving up on the damn quarterback. don't forget that this was charlie's first full year as a starter. don't forget that the most likely reason that anderson did as well as he did was because the teams he faced didn't have a chance to look at his play. don't forget that charlie probably spent most of camp practicing with a bunch of guys that weren't there for the whole frigging season. give the guy a goddman break, and look at what he gives cleveland for the first time in god knows how many years; a scrambling quarterback with a better than average arm with the ability to make some seriously good plays. give the guy a break and let him work on his decision-making with braylon and kellen the rest of his team for another off-season. if he keeps throwing picks, rolling out too soon, staring down his targets, and repeating the whole host of foibles he's been tagged with this season, i say reassess his competence. but for christ's sake, don't invite more woe in cleveland by giving up on the best quarterback this team's seen since it came back from the dead.

Dwayne_Rudds_Helmet said...

I'm not saying we should give up on Frye yet. Although, I'll admit that if there was another prospect at hand, I would consider it. But seeing as he's here, I agree, we should stick it out for a while longer with him. But I gotta admit, I don't have alot of optimism.

bob the omnipotent lunchsack said...

blind optimism is a refuge of the ignorant. the thing that i like about charlie is that he's cognizant of his shortcomings, and i think he genuinely wants to play (and win) for cleveland. how many browns players can we say that about? the "warrior"? (though he won me over this year, i have to admit). the top draft pick with the stone hands? the guy who's only here 'cause his agent effed up and forgot to file his free agency papers? practical optimism is something that runs in short supply on that team, and in even shorter supply in the fans. i'm not trying to defend a truly miserable season - what happened this year was, in my opinion, a top-to-bottom failure of coaching and playing. however, the cleveland browns have some very good talent...charlie frye not the least among that short list. where was rueben droughns this year? i'm pretty sure he didn't like averging under four yards a carry. i think the front office should do what worked for chicago and pittsburgh in the 70's...find guys with some passion who want to play, give them some love for the team (davin holly, sean jones, ya hear me? kamerion wimbley, stand up, 11 sacks!) and let them try to win in their own way. teams drift with quarterback controversies and lassaiz faire head coaches.