Have last season's victory finally get the Browns over the Steelers' domination? It's one of this week's mailbag questions.
Rashard Mendenhall and the Steelers were limited to six points in the Browns' 13-6 victory on Dec. 10, 2009.Hey, Tony: With the signing of Mike Holmgren towards the end of last year, the beating of the Steelers was pushed under the rug a bit. You, however, did not miss a beat on covering that night. What Mangini and Ryan did scheme-wise still amazes me. How huge was that for us to get that monkey off our back? And though the media has a hard time getting coaches here in the past to admit that the Steelers are a huge game for us, do you agree Mangini "gets it"? -- Michael Spitale, Galena
Hey, Michael: I believe the benefit of the win over the Steelers will be realized this year. Now the Browns can play their rivals with that huge albatross removed from their necks. Yes, I think Mangini "gets it" when it comes to the Steelers. He was here in the 1990s when games against the Steelers really meant something. Mangini also had a winning record against the Steelers as coach of the Jets. Incidentally, I view the Steelers as a team on the descent.
Hey, Tony: Why have other teams in the league have some draft picks signed already and no news from the Browns picks? Does this fall to the teams or agents to get the ball rolling? On July 22, we will hear how everyone is signed but [Joe Haden] because he is waiting for the sixth and eighth picks to sign! -- Rick Green, Cleveland.
Hey, Rick: Some teams have jumped the gun and signed several of their draft picks, but none has been signed in the first round. I'm told to expect several first-round holdouts because of complexities resulting from the uncertainty of the labor situation. Option bonuses routinely given in the second year of first-round contracts will be a key issue because teams may not want to pay them if there is a lockout in 2011. At this point, I'm not sure why no Browns latter-round picks have signed. I know some of the key Browns business people are on vacation.
Hey, Tony: With the arrest of Chris Jennings a few months back, do you think that has hurt his chances of making the team? I still think he can be a valuable contributor even with our recent additions at running back. -- Scott Cordle, Blacklick, Ohio
Hey, Scott: My gut feeling is that Jennings' arrest will have no bearing on his future with the team. I believe the charges were dropped. However, keep in mind that Jennings was no lock to make the final roster before the arrest. The addition of Montario Hardesty and Peyton Hillis and the expected return to health of James Davis certainly hurt Jennings' chances of making the team. That big dropped pass in the close loss in Detroit also didn't help Jennings. If he makes that catch late in the fourth quarter, the Browns probably lock up a win.
Hey, Tony: I have a question on the new overtime rules. Let's say Browns and Steelers are playing each other in the playoffs. The game goes to overtime but neither team scores. Because a playoff game can't end in a tie, does the second OT change to sudden death or is it first touchdown or first team to score after one possession. Do they have another coin flip after the first OT or does the game continue like it would in regulation? -- Josh Phillips, Bellevue, Ohio
Hey, Josh: Fabulous question. I am not ashamed to say that I do not know the answer. Now, all the Grossi-bashers will say, "You are paid to know these answers. You cover the NFL, right?" But I would bet you can ask 10 NFL coaches or GMs the same question and several would not know the answer. That's the problem with the new overtime rule. There are so many variables that you need a cheat sheet to provide the answers. My hunch is that because each team has had at least one possession in the first overtime, sudden death would prevail in the second overtime without a coin toss. I hope that every playoff game in 2010 goes into overtime so the ridiculous "modified sudden death" rule change is exposed as a very dumb idea.
Roger Goodell really does want to reduce the preseason exhibitions to just two games, but Tony Grossi doesn't believe he'll get an 18-game regular season easily.Hey, Tony: Do you think Roger Goodell's recent announcement (again) about extending the regular season to 18 games is legitimate? Or [is it] a ploy to get the owners and NFLPA back to the bargaining table with the hopes of hammering out a new CBA to avoid a lockout or strike next season? -- Tim, Winter Haven, Fla.
Hey, Tim: I think that Goodell originally proposed an expanded schedule independent of the current labor situation. I agree with his point that the preseason product needs to be cut because it cannot be improved. I do not agree with the concept of adding two regular-season games, however. There will be more injuries and more "dog" games in the final month of the season between 2-12 teams. Also, an expanded schedule must be accompanied by an expanded roster, changes to the injured reserve rules and a developmental league. The bottom line is Goodell and the owners want to increase revenue and playing more regular games will do it. The union now will demand something in return for adding two games.
Hey, Tony: Any chance the Browns would be interested in wide receiver Vincent Jackson of the Chargers? If so, what would it take to get him? -- Shaylin Butler, Pemberton, N.J.
Hey, Shaylin: Jackson has not signed his RFA tender. If the Browns were interested in him -- and I'm pretty sure they are not -- they would have to give up roughly first- and third-round draft choices in addition to signing Jackson to a lucrative long-term contract. I don't believe San Diego would even consider trading him.
Hey, Tony: I think the Browns need a veteran at the wide receiver position to stretch the field. Do you think the Browns will go after Kevin Curtis to help the position? -- Andrew Dunn, Cleveland Heights
Hey, Andrew: With all due respect, I don't think Curtis is going to stretch the field against anyone. If the Browns had any desire to acquire Curtis, they would have done so before OTAs.
Hey, Tony: I read in an article about how impressed the coaching staff is with Montario Hardesty. Please tell me it was about the contract issues with Jerome Harrison that they're hyping him up and not really considering starting Hardesty. Although I don't think Jerome is the next Jim Brown, I believe he has proved he can start and be very productive. Is Harrison thestarting running back? -- Dustin Hutchinson, Cleveland
Hey, Dustin: I think the Browns' infatuation with Hardesty has everything to do with Hardesty and nothing to do with Harrison's contract situation. Barring an unforeseen injury, I expect Hardesty to win the starting job in preseason. Harrison was sensational in the final three games. But few GMs would stake their jobs on an undersized back. The NFL is just too much a grind and too brutal a sport for the "mighty mite" to play as a feature back.
Hey, Tony: Do you know the status of Peyton Hillis? Is he sick? Injured? Did I read correctly that he'll be ready for training camp? -- Greg Dineen, Middletown
Hey, Greg: Hillis missed a substantial portion of OTAs, and the mandatory minicamp, with an illness that the club declined to disclose. The media were told that Hillis had a bad cold and he was expected to be ready for the start of training camp.
-- Tony