Finding some help for the receiving corps is a prime concern for many Browns fans in this week's mailbag.
Muhsin Muhammad has been in the NFL for 14 seasons, but some fans wonder if he could provide some veteran leadership for a young receiving corps.Hey, Tony: Have the Browns showed any interest in Muhsin Muhammad or Kelley Washington? Both could be a much-needed third-down WR and could mentor the younger players. I know Muhammad is 50 years old, but Jake Delhomme is familiar with him. -- Chris Kingzett, Parma Heights
Hey, Chris: While the Browns have kept the door open to the possibility of adding a veteran receiver, nothing is imminent. Neither player appears to be on their radar screen. The Browns apparently want to see their receiving corps perform in OTAs and minicamp -- and perhaps a couple weeks into training camp -- before concluding they need to add a veteran. Muhammad is actually 37 and has been replaced by Carolina with a rookie.
Hey, Tony: With Jerome Harrison unsigned and the backfield full of rookies, do you think the Browns will pick up someone to add some veteran experience or do you think Harrison will sign and fill that role? -- Rein Pold, Clarion, Pa.
Hey, Rein: I believe Harrison will sign. Peyton Hillis has a few years' experience, too. I don't believe the Browns want to add tired legs to the backfield.
Hey, Tony: Do you agree that the Browns are playing hard ball with their restricted free agents? Why not just try and sign Jerome Harrison and Matt Roth and get them involved in the OTAs? -- Tom Barker, Wadsworth
Hey, Tom: The Browns believe the one-year tenders, amounting to $1.759 million for Harrison and $1.809 million for Roth, represent significant increases over their 2009 salaries. The stance of the new management team is the club does not want to commit long-term contracts to the players until they see them perform in 2010. I don't consider that hard ball.
What would be hard ball is if the Browns exercise their option on June 15 and replace the one-year tenders with salaries just 10 percent greater than 2009. That would be significantly less than the tenders in each player's case. That would create bad will and probably signal the end of their careers in Cleveland.
Hey, Tony: Just for argument's sake, let's say a new CBA isn't completed and there is a lockout or strike after this season. How would that affect players who would have been free agents next year? Would they have the freedom to shop their services to any team once play resumed, or would their last employer still own their contractual rights? I ask because I wonder if all the fuss from RFAs and their agents this year is because of what may or may not happen next year regarding a new CBA or work stoppage. -- Tim, Winter Haven, Fla.
Hey, Tim: These are good questions that many players, agents and executives themselves may be pondering. Theoretically, if the 2011 season is wiped out in a work stoppage -- which is unlikely but possible, I believe -- players whose contracts expired after the 2010 season would be free agents when play resumed. The gray area is whether four- and five-year players would be restricted free agents, as they are right now, or unrestricted free agents -- as they were under the old collective bargaining agreement. Only a new, defined CBA can end the uncertainty.
I believe a work stoppage will be averted at the last minute, sometime soon after the Super Bowl in February, if not before. The RFAs are the immediate victims of the labor uncertainty.
Hey, Tony: I've read where Scott Fujita and Chris Gocong have been playing both inside and outside in OTAs. Coach Mangini seemed to do this with some of the younger guys last year. Is this flexibility as good as the team thinks, or is it better to put someone in position and leave them there? Is this more Mangini's idea or Rob Ryan's? I don't see a lot of other teams doing the same. -- John Kusich, Hermitage, Pa.
Hey, John: Bill Belichick has been doing it for many years with New England. The theory is that the deception created by moving guys inside and outside gives the defense an edge over the offense. The risk is the player may not play one position as well as the other, but Mangini does it only with guys he knows can play equally well inside or outside. David Bowens was a good example of this last year.
Patrick Crayton is most likely expendable with the new faces on the Cowboys' roster, and well worth considering, says Tony Grossi.Hey, Tony: With the Browns being so thin at receiver, why haven't they brought back Mike Furrey? He could be a decent third receiver. They won't need him on defense this year, so he could just concentrate on catching the ball. -- Eric Blosser, Toledo
Hey, Eric: Since Furrey has not signed with another team, it's possible he could be a fallback plan for the Browns if they decide to add a veteran receiver. However, keep in mind that GM Tom Heckert is now the final authority on roster additions and his evaluation of Furrey may be different from that of Mangini.
Hey, Tony: I don't know if anyone asked this question yet, but what do you think about the Browns trading for Patrick Crayton of Dallas? He gives them the leadership they need, speed, can catch and is ready to be a No. 1 or 2 WR. He also can return kicks if needed. -- Brian Aikens, Richmond Heights
Hey, Brian: I have singled out Crayton as a possibility. He has experience and hasn't yet reached his peak as a player. Plus, Heckert is very familiar with him, having competed against the Cowboys twice a year with the Eagles. We will see what happens.
Hey, Tony: During ESPN draft coverage, Steve Young indicated he firmly believed Jake Delhomme's issues were injury related. I have read he went 12-4 after his shoulder surgery and before his Arizona meltdown. Sounds healthy to me but I would assume as much money as he was paid, the Cleveland Clinic worked overtime checking out that shoulder.
Is there any belief the system Daboll/Gil Haskell use will match up with Jake's skill set better than John Fox's system? -- Austin Lindsay, Logan
Hey, Austin: The key person in the signing was Mike Holmgren. He believes Delhomme is healthy and that his bad year in Carolina was the result of a loss of confidence. He thinks the change of scenery will revive him. I'm sure Holmgren envisions Delhomme as a good fit in his system and especially in the locker room. But there remains uncertainty about the direction of the offense and whether a shift to the West Coast system is actually occurring in the second year under Mangini.
-- Tony