Seattle Homers (and others) (1 Viewer)

[Dr. Octopus]

Does anyone else think Seattle is better off with Charlie Frye under center than Senneca Wallace? I've always though Frye has flashed some potential and Wallace has not shown me any ability to be an NFL QB which is why they are always flirting with making him a WR.

I thought Frye played better two weeks agao than Wallace did last week. Neither were very good, but imo Frye gives them the better chance.

 

[Phurfur]

Does anyone else think Seattle is better off with Charlie Frye under center than Senneca Wallace? I've always though Frye has flashed some potential and Wallace has not shown me any ability to be an NFL QB which is why they are always flirting with making him a WR.

I thought Frye played better two weeks agao than Wallace did last week. Neither were very good, but imo Frye gives them the better chance.

No, I thought Wallace looked better.

 

[LaneOfSteel™]

Frye sucks

 

[3C's]

Wallace>Frye

 

[millertyme1]

Frye's lucky to be in the league.

 

[Buffaloes]

Wallace is better...he played against Tampa's defense last weekend. They have that effect on a lot of quarterbacks.

 

[TommyGilmore]

I don't know if Wallace is better, but he did put up superior numbers during preseason.

I thought Frye showed a lot of potential in Cleveland. They threw him in there as a rookie and he went 2-3 with a supporting cast that's vastly inferior to what Derek Anderson has to work with today.

 

[the rover]

Wallace has been in the offense for years, and has filled in competently when Hasselbeck's been out. He's hurt himself and faced a tough D. Frye got to showcase his lack of talent against the Packers. He's not good.

They've never really seriously considered converting him to WR. They exploited the helmet mike thing before the green dot rule, and after that he had a couple 4WR sets he was involved in that they ran maybe 10 times a year. This year he was just the only guy left standign that knew the routes.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Frye's lucky to be in the league.

He's a small school QB that held his own starting as a rookie on a bad team and has looked good at times and bad at times. Lucky to be in the league? He could start on at least one team, the Chiefs and maybe a few others imo. Thanks for the responses and I guess the concensus is that Wallace is better. I just haven't seen anything from him in the past or last week, but maybe I am missing something.

 

[burd]

i give Wallace a lot of leeway for last week's performance since he was playing TB. Frye would've looked equally as bad.

 

[Phurfur]

Frye's lucky to be in the league.

He's a small school QB that held his own starting as a rookie on a bad team and has looked good at times and bad at times. Lucky to be in the league? He could start on at least one team, the Chiefs and maybe a few others imo. Thanks for the responses and I guess the concensus is that Wallace is better. I just haven't seen anything from him in the past or last week, but maybe I am missing something.

I guess you didn't see him in the GB game. I am sorry you didn't get the responses you wanted but he is #3 on the Depth Charts. He is lucky to be in the league.

 

[senor peso 2006]

Wallace is still bothered by his calf injury. He needs his mobility to be effective.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Frye's lucky to be in the league.

He's a small school QB that held his own starting as a rookie on a bad team and has looked good at times and bad at times. Lucky to be in the league? He could start on at least one team, the Chiefs and maybe a few others imo. Thanks for the responses and I guess the concensus is that Wallace is better. I just haven't seen anything from him in the past or last week, but maybe I am missing something.

I guess you didn't see him in the GB game. I am sorry you didn't get the responses you wanted but he is #3 on the Depth Charts. He is lucky to be in the league.

No I didn't, I last saw him play with Cleveland. I wasn't looking for any specific response - I have no vested interest in him whatsoever. I actually appreciate the responses that I got so far as was just wondering b/c I've never been impressed with Wallace.I don't agree that Frye is lucky to be in the league, there are far worse QBs in the NFL.

 

[Eights]

Wallace has been in the offense for years, and has filled in competently when Hasselbeck's been out. He's hurt himself and faced a tough D. Frye got to showcase his lack of talent against the Packers. He's not good.

They've never really seriously considered converting him to WR. They exploited the helmet mike thing before the green dot rule, and after that he had a couple 4WR sets he was involved in that they ran maybe 10 times a year. This year he was just the only guy left standign that knew the routes.

[/quote

Here is your answer

 

[the rover]

To be clear, Wallace isn't great either, but he's serviceable. He got a decent amount of playing time in 2006, and if you look at his stats for the 4 games he started that season, he wasn't bad (ignoring the game against the Vikings where he came in halfway through and threw two picks).

 

[amnesiac]

i don't know much about Wallace.

having watched Frye in Cleveland:

he's a fierce competitor, and a very hard worker. he will never give up on trying to make a play.

unfortunately, i don't think he can read NFL defenses very well, and he does not make quick decisions.

 

[everydayj]

I'm a Seattle homer and I'm seeing something that hasn't been mentioned that I feel is likely pretty relevant. It seems to me that Seattle is showing its loyalty to Wallace. He's been in the system for a considerable amount of time, has looked decent when he's filled in for Hasselbeck in the past and Holmgren seems to think a lot of him as a player. Like one previous poster mentioned, they've been reluctant to make him a full time WR or dabble with him on punt returns. While Holmgren has mentioned repeatedly in the past that he has too much athletic ability to be on the bench, his actions have shown that his reluctance to lose him as a back-up QB trumps that athleticism.

Also, Frye just isn't very good at this point. He looked great in the pre-season but we all know about how much the pre-season matters when evaluating talent: none. Frye held on to the ball too long in the game against GB, made questionable decisions and basically looked like he was playing scared. Wallace didn't look much better last week, though, admittedly.