The Brady Quinn Debate
The chorus sung in Cleveland is that we don't want to turn Brady Quinn into Tim Couch by starting him too soon and beating the crap out of him. A fair point, yes.
But look at Frye, Anderson and Dorsey, and then look again at Quinn. Who gives the Browns the best chance of winning? It is fine to say we are building toward this or that, but at the end of the day, we want to win football games. And we should start the QB who gives us the best shot at winning, whether he was the starter last year, once the starter in San Fran, or the rookie.
Do the Browns have the luxury of letting Quinn sit? What is he going to learn watching these chumps play that he wouldn't learn better by taking the field?
Playing Couch over Ty Detmer was controversial. But can you honestly say that Frye/Anderson/Dorsey are better -- or even as good -- as Ty Detmer?
Cinci sat Carson Palmer for a year, but they had Jon Kitna. San Diego sat Philip Rivers, but they had Drew Brees. If Frye or Anderson or Dorsey had shown any sign of running this offense competently, I wouldn't suggest it otherwise -- but with two preseason games down and two to go, the Browns had better be giving serious consideration to starting the kid. And that means giving the kid reps in practice with the first team in order to better evaluate that.