Charlie Frye: QB Score: Week 3
Posted by disappointmentzone on 25 September 2006
Before getting to Charlie Frye’s QB Score for Sunday’s game against the Ravens, I want to comment on The Interception.
Chris McAlister was playing Braylon Edwards to the inside. It was obvious from how he was lined up: McAlister’s outside shoulder was aligned with Edwards’s inside shoulder. Then there was the safety and linebacker, both of who are covering the middle of the field. Everything Baltimore was doing in their coverage was to take away the middle of the field. What’s more, this was obvious.
So why, then, did Frye not check out of a route that ran Edwards right into the teeth of the defense for the more favorable out pattern (or any of its friends)?
Edwards is taller and bigger than McAlister. Simply throwing the ball high and to the corner of the end zone would have been a better option. The Browns didn’t need a touchdown. That play call was about as poor of a play call in that situation as I could imagine, which is a reflection on Maurice Carthon (who had a much-improved game, to be fair) and Frye, who needs to recognize the coverage and situation (up by two with around three minutes to play and second down).
Edwards was quoted in an AP recap as saying that “it was a great play call” and that if Frye hadn’t been hit by Bart Scot the result would have been a touchdown. For the life of my I can’t figure out how this statement makes sense. The entire day Frye was under immense pressure from the Ravens’ defense, often because the line was incapable of holding blocks for more than two seconds. By my count Frye was knocked down three times on plays in which the team ran a max-protection scheme. The line wasn’t blocking well, the Ravens were getting pressure on Frye without blitzing, it’s late in the game and the Ravens need for something magical to happen–was anyone surprised that Baltimore blitzed on that play?
With that knowledge in hand (presumably) running a play that requires Edwards to clear a cornerback (again: McAlister was taking away the inside) is idiotic. I would say there was a 7% chance of that play scoring a touchdown, a 63% chance of an incomplete pass or interception, a 5% chance of pass interference, and a 25% chance of a sack or fumble. With the slight chance of that play working, a sack would have been the next-best option because the clock would have continued to run. An incomplete pass would have been terrible because the clock would have stopped, and an interception the worst outcome. The risk–stopped clock, turnover–far out weighed the reward–an unnecessary touchdown.
Yes, the Browns score a touchdown and the game is over. But if Charlie Frye takes a knee for the first three downs and then the Browns kick a 23-yard field goal, a good 1:40 will run off the clock and Baltimore will have to go roughly 80 yards in roughly two minutes to score a touchdown in order to win. I like our chances to win in that scenario. Moreso, at least, then the chances of winning by running the play they did.
Anyway…Stupid play call. Stupid read. Stupid pass. Stupid loss.
At least Charlie Fry had an otherwise good game. His QB Score per play was an above-average
2.89 1.904 and that includes his underwhelming second half.
[UPDATE: I mistakenly forgot to add the seven sacks to Frye’s QB Score. He was worse than originally stated, but still fairly good (12th best in week 3).]