"No way do you sign these guys to long term deals when they have no leverage. They are one play away from retirement and haven't played at a high enough level for long enough to warrant a long term deal when no one else is rushing to sign them." - ecbeastor
He finished the season strong, but Jerome Harrison deserve a multi-year contract?
As the Browns continue OTAs for the third week, four of the team's five restricted free agents continue to stay away from the practice field. While the Browns have extended the deadline for the players to sign their one-year tenders to June 15, a debate of sorts has sparked among Browns fans.
Should the Browns sign one or two of their restricted free agents to a long-term deal?
cleveland.com reader ecbeastor says, absolutely not.
No way do you sign these guys to long term deals when they have no leverage. They are one play away from retirement and haven't played at a high enough level for long enough to warrant a long term deal when no one else is rushing to sign them.
Meanwhile, Browns fan rhbole thinks Jerome Harrison, who actually showed up for practice last week, might deserve a multi-year deal.
I would consider giving Harrison and maybe the linebackers conservative deals in the $5-6M over 3 years range with 1/2 guaranteed (although I think Roth has some downside and D'Qwell's tackle numbers were inflated by the lack of production around him).
Where do you stand in this debate? Post your comments below.