Professional Falcons?

[hammb]

While Josh may not be the passer that Charlie [currently] is, he has much better legs, and with the Browns doing little to bolster their O-line, they need a quarterback, especially now, who has some legs under him. All of us around these parts know that Josh has superior legs. Give me all of the draft prognosticator's crap that you want, Josh, for the current Browns, is the much better young prospect.

I only saw Frye play twice last year....in person vs Miami and on ESPN vs Marshall. He suprised the heck out of me with his mobility in both games though. He slipped out of the pocket time and time again and threw on the run with guys right in his face. To be honest, as far as pure quarterback mobility, he looked onpar with Josh. Josh had something that Charlie will never have...the eyes of a tailback. That makes us think of him as being a more mobile QB, but unfortunately with the speed of the game, I don't think that edge will translate into the NFL.

From watching Charlie play I think he moves very well in the pocket, and throws the ball quite well on the run. Josh did the same. Josh is clearly a better runner if you're looking for them to pick up positive yardage, but as FalconKing said its because he's got the eys/instincts of a tailback. Unfortunately he's way too slow to be a running QB in the NFL. FWIW, and its not much, Charlie ran a nearly identical 40 to what Josh ran at the combine (4.88 to 4.84). Neither of those times indicate enough speed to be a legit rushing threat in the NFL.

Let's face it neither of these guys, as prospects, are the next Elway. However, I am high on both of them because they both have that will to win. Both of these guys showed time & time again in college they were capable of playing through pain, and playing well. They also both put their team up on their shoulders at crucial moments and carried them to victory. As I always said about Josh, he has "it". Charlie does as well.

The reason why I think Charlie is the better prospect is because he's a more polished passer and has a higher ceiling passing. He's taller, which is a distinct advantage (If J5 got the starting job he'd be among the 2-3 shortest starting QBs in the NFL). He's also shown better accuracy and consistency in the passing game throughout his career.

I don't believe that Charlie is so vastly superior to Harris that Josh has no chance, absolutely not. Josh still has his shot to go out in training camp and open eyes. The Browns have indicated that they don't plan on bringing in another vet, so it will be up to these two to man the backup duties if Dilfer goes down. I really hate to turn this thread into this kind of argument, because it looks as though I'm bashing Harris, which I absolutely do not want to do. Josh is without a doubt my favorite player in BG history, and I love what he did for our football program. I want nothing more than for him to be the QB that leads the Browns to the superbowl. However, it was asked why most Browns fans are higher on Charlie, and I think that it needs to be said that almost all people in the scouting business would put Charlie ahead of Josh at the time of their respective drafts.

[BGALUMNI]

In their respective drafts?

Luke McCown was taken before Harris in the same draft as Harris and Cleveland gave McCown his walking papers before Harris. Harris was the 9th QB taken in the draft.

Frye was the 4th QB taken this year, but I don't think this class of QBs was rated as high as the 2004 Draft.

2004 had 4 QBs taken in the 1st round alone.

[fredthefalcon]

There is no Falcon colored class clouding my judgement.

Draft day prognastacators? Yeah...Their opinion is just about as good as anyone elses. They have as much of a chance of picking a future hall of fame player as anyone. The draft is a crap shoot. Brady was a LATE round pick but has how many rings now?

My opinion is that if Frye is the future of the Browns, then the Browns are in trouble. Which is fine by me. Last team in the NFl for the Browns is the title I always like to see.

Gotta agree with you. The failure of high profile QBs, much higher than Frye, is somewhat frightening particularly if your team invested a #1 in them. Some examples - Heath Shuler, Akili Smith, Ryan Leaf and Andre Ware. Each was labeled as a can't miss and did. This is not saying that J5 is the answer either. He's a project and not as polished as Brady who was a very accurate thrower anda leader (which is hard to quantify). That said Brady succeeds without the mobility that is sought out today.

[hammb]

Luke McCown was taken by Butch Davis ahead of Harris. Davis knew nothing of talent evaluation. That said, Savage's comments about the trade were that they were trading one of the two QBs and they could get more in return for McCown than they could for Harris. He graded both of them fairly equally and traded the one that had market value. Harris was on the open market last season, and the Browns were the only team to take him.

Savage stated that he regraded both McCown & Harris this year as if they were re-entering the draft. In doing so he looked at their potential and their ability to play now. He obviously felt that Charlie was better than both of them, or he would've stuck with what he had.

[Falconfreak90]

I just want Josh to get a fair opportunity to play....and I think Romeo Crenell will give him that chance.

Frye is a fine QB...and I think good enough to make it in the NFL.

[BGALUMNI]

You can't say that Cleveland was the only team that bit. Baltimore was basically trying to get by with Harris on the practice team, but did have plans to bring him along for better things.

Cleveland waived the carrot and Josh bit. I think he probably would have been better off in Baltimore, but I think he wanted to be a Brown. (Don't know why.) Anyhow, there were plenty of disappointed Baltimore fans knowing that Harris had potential in their system.

I think Harris will get a fair chance, but he has never gotten a fair chance from the Cleveland fans from day #1. Many Browns fans were dogging him from Day 1.

I am sorry, but they didn't get much for McCown anyhow and the only reason is McCown actually saw PT, due to injuries and a poor talent in Cleveland. That is the only thing that gave McCown more stock if you will. Actual NFL starts...not that they were quality starts, but starts none the less.

[hammb]

I think there are plenty of Cleveland fans who have given Josh support. There were many who wanted him to start last season after seeing McCown's performances. I've been singing his praises on the BerniesInsiders boards since before the draft, and I know a lot of others also started talking him up, especially after he became a Brown.

He'll get a fair shot, because Crennel is a fair guy. If he performs he'll be fine and this will all be moot.

[Jacobs4Heisman]

I want to see Josh get his shot as much as anybody, and I'm sure with his fire and competitiveness, Josh is dying to get on the field. Having said all that, there are worse fates than being a backup quarterback in the NFL. It's not to shabby of a 15-year job to sit on the bench and make 400 g's to 1.5 mil a year. I was thinking last year how cool it would have been to be Doug Pederson (Favre's backup) for the last ten years. I mean, you know Brett is going to play if his head is detached while Doug gets paid 90 thou a game to hold a clipboard. This way Doug gets the money and doesn't lose 10-15 years off his life span. I think at the least, Josh has enough talent and leadership to make rosters all over the place until he fits into the right situation to get his shot at starting. I'm not sold that Cleveland is that situation. What I do know, is that when Josh is given a chance to play every day, he'll capitalize on it. That dude's a born winner.

[BGSU-Ph.D.]

And finally to those of us who have seen quite a bit of both players, Frye is a better pro prospect.

That would be your opinion. I have seen Frye play quite a bit and I wouldn't rank him so high.

Then again I am not, nor will I ever be confused with a Cleveland Browns fan.

My opinion, Phil Savage's opinion, and likely the opinion of nearly every NFL personnel man who has a job. Also the opinion of most draft prognosticators as well.

I love Josh & would love to see him become the starter for the Browns and push Charlie to a career backup, but most people who are not clouded by Falcon colored glasses know that he is not a top level NFL prospect. I think Josh can become a good starter at the next level, but it will take a lot of things falling into the right places for that to happen.

------------------

As I have written before, if everyone was always correct with their picks then all first-rounders would be all-pro, all second-rounders would be quality starters, etc.... Man, that Ryan Leaf is sweet!

And, we wouldn't have late round or undrafted superstars like Davis, Rice, et. al.

Funny how "doesn't agree with hammb" always equals "clouded" in your world.

[Falcons4Life]

I didn't really notice anybody touching on this...but if we remember correctly the browns tried a run-around type quarterback last season...he was that crackpot that wore pantyhose on his head and stole the number 5 and disgraced it. I think it is going to be a while before the browns hit up the run and gun type of quarterback....Josh is good, but not for this system...Frye unfortunately is the dropbackish type quaterback that they are looking forward to fit into their "offense." I am a huge browns fans, and a huge falcons fan but the fact is that Josh isnt' going to get his start here....I know it sucks....but who knows....

[hammb]

Funny how "doesn't agree with hammb" always equals "clouded" in your world.

That's not it at all. I can take being wrong. I get tired of seeing arguments on this site that are unsupported, except by, "I saw him play and I think this" It takes more than that, IMO, to argue a point when the point you're arguing is that so-and-so is better and you have an emotional attachment to that player.

The only two arguments that I've seen anyone make that Josh is better are that A) Lower drafted players turn out to be good all the time, and B) Josh is more mobile than Charlie and thus better since the Browns' OL sucks.

I'm sorry but that argument is not cutting it. If someone wants to post a well thought out argument to put me in my place that's fine, I'll gladly admit that I see your point.

But until that time when my only replies are stuff like, "I've seen Frye play and he's not any good", or "Draft gurus are wrong all the time, see: Tom Brady" I'm going to think that the judgment is clouded towards the BG player.

The fact is that I think both of these guys are good pro prospects, but neither of them is a top level prospect. I think they both could become good players, but neither is a cannot miss guy in my mind. However, comparing the two I think Charlie is the better prospect and I've outlined my reasoning in the past...I can do so again if need be.

[BGALUMNI]

hamm...but you are using the same arguements. Having seen Frye, etc. Or using someone else's opinions. The "experts" opinions.

I haven't seen any proof behind your posts and comments either that isn't based on opinion.

[kdog27]

I have to admit that a lot of the time I do not agree with what Hammb says but I can say that he always backs up what he says with more than just his own opinions. His posts are always pretty well thought out.

I will not go by draft analysis and all that babble because I pay no attention to that. I only go off what I have seen in person and statistics. Josh Harris was an unbelievable QB here. I think Josh Harris is one of the best all around athletes around. I think he could have started 3-4 different positions at the college level. I think his greatest skill was his running ability. When I say this I don't mean that he was super fast, a lot of people act like he was a super fast QB. He really wasn't. His greatest ability was running between the tackles. When he put his head down he was like a true RB. I can still see some of the sick spin moves and cuts he use to make in my head. He has above average speed but he is definitely not going to run around the pocket all day long. If you still think J5 was all that fast than go back and find how many 20+ yard runs he had. Not many at all. He was great at picking up first downs and putting himself in the endzone. His passing was never exceptional. He improved a lot by his senior year and hopefully he has still improving right now. I definitely do not think he has the arm and pocket presence that Charlie Frye has. When I think of C Frye I think of a QB when I think of J5 I think of a RB first.

As a fan of all MAC schools I want both of these players to latch on somewhere and become starters. Being on the same roster it makes that difficult. I hope Josh ends up being the better player for obvious reasons. He was one of the most entertaining players to watch at BG

[BGSU-Ph.D.]

Funny how "doesn't agree with hammb" always equals "clouded" in your world.

That's not it at all. I can take being wrong. I get tired of seeing arguments on this site that are unsupported, except by, "I saw him play and I think this" It takes more than that, IMO, to argue a point when the point you're arguing is that so-and-so is better and you have an emotional attachment to that player.

The only two arguments that I've seen anyone make that Josh is better are that A) Lower drafted players turn out to be good all the time, and B) Josh is more mobile than Charlie and thus better since the Browns' OL sucks.

I'm sorry but that argument is not cutting it. If someone wants to post a well thought out argument to put me in my place that's fine, I'll gladly admit that I see your point.

But until that time when my only replies are stuff like, "I've seen Frye play and he's not any good", or "Draft gurus are wrong all the time, see: Tom Brady" I'm going to think that the judgment is clouded towards the BG player.

The fact is that I think both of these guys are good pro prospects, but neither of them is a top level prospect. I think they both could become good players, but neither is a cannot miss guy in my mind. However, comparing the two I think Charlie is the better prospect and I've outlined my reasoning in the past...I can do so again if need be.

Here is an idea: don't ASSUME anything about any bias that you are guessing someone is employing. And, leave the ad hominems for ESPN.com.

[hammb]

If you want something more than just my opinion, or those of other people, I guess that pretty much just leaves stats. Both players showed a propensity for late game heroics & toughness, so that will be equal.

The best place to start for statistics, IMO, is what happens when they're both put into similar situations? Both players came from the MAC and got a chance to prove themselves with unfamiliar personnel & playbooks in the Senior Bowl. In the 2005 Senior Bowl Charlie Frye was 10-12 for 138 yards and 1 TD. He was named the MVP. In the 2004 Senior Bowl Josh Harris was 2-7 for 13 yards and 1 INT. That is a player's first taste of an NFL coaching staff and an NFL system. Yes, its an unfamiliar playbook & surrounding cast, but still it is telling when you look at the disparity between the two performances. Of course that was just one day.

I put no stock in 40 times, especially for QBs, but both players posted similar combine numbers at 4.84 & 4.88. Neither is quick enough to be a run first QB at the next level. That is damaging to Josh's prospects because the one place where he really excels in this comparison is by looking at rushing numbers. Harris was a horse of a running QB at the college level, but his lack of speed will likely make it real tough for him to have similar success at the next level. His quickness, vision, and instincts make him play faster than he times, but still I think he'll struggle if he's trying to be a true rushing threat at QB. In all honesty only Vick & McNabb are real rushing threats in the NFL, and they are freakish athletes. Looking at the stats Josh clearly trounces Charlie in pure rushing ability ~2200 to ~400 yards. No denying Josh is the better rushing threat, but few NFL teams pick their QB based on their rushing ability, mainly because so few QBs can consistently gain yards on the ground in the NFL.

In passing, the career numbers favor Charlie. For his career Frye completed 63% of his passes to Josh's 59.6% That is a pretty big difference in what many people believe to be a very important stat when projecting a QB. Completion percentage is indicative of a QB's accuracy & ability to read a defense. Charlie threw for 4000 yards more than Josh in his collegiate career, but did have about 400-500 more attempts than Harris. Still Charlie's career numbers are stellar. He is in the top 20 all time in passing yardage in D1A and in the top 50 all time in passer rating career. Looking at the stats I think it is fair to say that Charlie is the more accurate passer, and did it over a longer period of time. Josh had a stellar senior season, but before that time he was a mediocre passer. I think you could very easily make a case that Harris had a far superior supporting cast as well. Akron has been pretty much devoid of talent in recent years, Frye was the lone bright spot.

Looking at the stats says to me that clearly Charlie is the more polished passer, and Josh is the more polished runner. Another thing to factor in is their height. Frye measured in at the combine as a legit 6'4. Harris measured in at just under 6'1. That is HUGE. It is possible to play QB, without being tall, of course, but it is much more difficult. If you put Josh in a line with all the starting NFL QBs he'd be among the 2-3 shortest in the group. One of those guys shorter than Harris is Vick, and he's an athletic anomaly. Heiight is certainly not everything, but in the NFL it helps immensely to be tall to help see over the line and avoid getting balls batted down.

In the end these guys both have holes in their game. Josh was a marginal passer before a stellar senior season. He still didn't throw downfield as much as you'd like to see from an NFL QB. Frye is much less mobile, but can move around in the pocket to buy himself time to throw. Frye's arm is probably not as strong as Josh's, and like Josh he didn't throw downfield as much as you'd like. I think both played through multiple injuries in their college careers, and both showed the ability to carry their teams on their backs. I think both could be good, if not great, and both could turn out to be out of the league in 3 years, only time will tell.

I think it comes down to the fact that in the NFL you're usually better off with the taller more polished passer than you are with the superior athlete who is a raw passer. 9 times out of 10 that athlete never becomes a good enough passer for the NFL level.