The Cleveland Browns Do Not Have a Quarterback Controversy
It is only a controversy if you let it become one. That is the phrase that I am sticking to right now with regard to the Cleveland Browns quarterback position after Charlie Frye hurt his wrist on Sunday and Derek Anderson led a game winning drive in overtime. My philosophy in this case being; How can there be a controversy when I won’t let it happen? There can’t. Plus, there is really no reason for it at this point in time. Here are the reasons.
- First of all, the Browns are 4 and 8 on the year. Four wins doesn’t justify a conversation about the starting quarterback. With a record like that, the quarterback is either really bad or the rest of the team is so bad around him that it really doesn’t matter.
- Maurice Carthon made any realistic judgement of Charlie Frye impossible. Carthon was not only green and inexperienced; he had no ability to relate to players and subsequently lost the support of his team. Things like mismatching play calls with blocking schemes will cause a team to revolt in a hurry. Bad play calling is one of the main reasons that Charlie Frye was laying flat on his back for the entire first part of the season. The other reason that Frye was on his back. . .
- The offensive line is one of the worst in the league. While Browns fans were distracted by the horrific thought of going into the season without a decent center after Lecharles Bentley got hurt, they didn’t think about the rest of the line. The Browns ended up getting a decent starter at center in Hank Fraley from Philly. And as the fans were wiping the nervous sweat off their brow, they failed to see that guards Cosey Coleman and Joe Andruzzi, although relatively young in human years at 28 and 31 respectively, were playing like men who could get the free cup of coffee at Denny’s with their “Moons over My Hammy.” Couple that with Ryan Tucker’s “undisclosed mental illness” and I think it is probably safe to say that judging a QB behind that “line” is pure and utter silliness.
And even if we had good data on Charlie Frye, who’s to say anything about Derek Anderson right now?
- Derek Anderson won the game on Sunday, but hasn’t shown anything yet. How can you have a quarterback controversy when your starter hasn’t been properly judged as I have stated above, and then you have even more suspect data on your backup? People will always remember Derek Anderson as the wacky scrambler who wouldn’t go down in overtime as he set up the game winning field goal. I am not that short-sighted. He also had the ball near midfield at the end of regulation with a chance to get into field goal range. That was when he threw a horrendous interception. On first down, I think. And I can’t emphasize the word “horrendous” enough. There wasn’t even a remote possibility that the target was going to be open.
- At least when the Browns last had a controversy between Tim Couch and Kelly Holcomb we had a couple great performances to back up the idea that Tim Couch wasn’t going to cut it and that Kelly Holcomb was better. But even still, Browns fans kind of missed the point during that controversy. It should have provided a valuable lesson to Browns fans and this is my final word about why there is no controversy. Anytime you have a controversy with a young guy, a career backup, two young guys, or two career backups, you probably need to go back and reevaluate the personnel in your organization before arguing over which guy is less awful. Obviously, you haven’t found “the guy” just yet. Usually a team just knows when they have found their QB. When you are looking at Trent Dilfer vs Charlie Frye, it isn’t a controversy. You are just in trouble. Doug Flutie and JP Losman? Trouble. Until further notice Frye and Anderson just means that the Browns don’t have their guy yet. It isn’t a controversy if neither one projects to be great. And if either one was “great” we would probably know it already.
Controversies never help the team. I am sure there are occasional situations where they are warranted, but not here and now with this Cleveland Browns team.
Comments
7 Responses to “The Cleveland Browns Do Not Have a Quarterback Controversy”
Leave a Reply



Did you know Derek Anderson wears a size 17 shoe? His mom had to call the Portland Trailblazers when he was young so Derek would have shoes. He ended up wearing second hand Nike’s from Arvidyus Sabonis the Croatian Center for the Blazers at the time.
I am not sure why, but this has warranted mentioning in 90% of the local media coverage of D.A’s performance Sunday.
BTW, Phil Dawson knows at least 14 ways of killing you without leaving his seat, irrespective of where you are in the world.
This Thursday should be interesting for whoever is quarterback as we all know Shitsburgh will be sending blitzes from everywhere. We will probably get a look at Ken dorsey at some point and then there can be a three way argument about who should be quarterback.
I wonder what Tom Tupa is doing right now. maybe we could get him to come out of retirement to play QB and punt on 4th down?
The plural of controvery is controversies; an apostrophe is not necessary.
You are right. That is one of those that I know, but doesn’t pop up on Microsoft Word.
What did you think of the rest of the article?
Usually someone who picks apart something like grammar has something else they don’t like about a post.
Must be a K.C. fan.