Adkins: Tales From The Inbox

With training camp coming to a close on Thursday, OBR reporter Lane Adkins dives back into the inbox to see what are the hottest topics and concerns considering the Cleveland Browns.

Question: Heading into training camp, the impression Browns fans were given was that rookie running back Montario Hardesty was going to be the starter, leaving the Browns with a tough decision as to what other backs would make the team. As camp is close to a conclusion, what do you see transpiring at the running back position?

Lane Adkins: I anticipate Jerome Harrison to be the starter, with a potentially healthy Hardesty gaining some meaningful reps, if he can get on the practice field.

The Browns staff likes the toughness and ability of Peyton Hillis coming out of the backfield, so he sticks, as does arguably the best fullback in the game, Lawrence Vickers.

The final spot comes down to 2009 draft selection James Davis and Chris Jennings, with Davis holding a slight lead due to having a solid camp oin special teams.

Q: Much was made of the team disposing of quarterbacks Derek Anderson and Brady Quinn. Now with old man Jake Delhomme and receiver playing quarterback Seneca Wallace under center, is there any reason to believe it's getting any better? Seriously, Delhomme and Wallace?

LA: In watching this team work to date, I'd take Delhomme and Wallace any day of the week. Both are the anti-DA/Quinn, as both have proven the ability to hit the broad-side of a barn and a receiver.

As for Delhomme, I may have spent the most time I ever have, not just watching his play over a career, but discussing the reasons behind his disappointing 2009 season in Carolina. From his questioning of himself, to issues within the scheme which he did not endear himself to, the factors are plenty as to why he struggled last season.

At times in camp Delhomme has looked fantastic, at others he has forced things and made some poor decisions. This type of occurrence can be expected when learning a new offensive system and working with relatively inexperienced receivers.

All things considered, I do believe Delhomme is going to provide a leading presence and stability to the Browns offense, as long as the receivers and play-calling continue to develop. If the reigns are pulled in on Delhomme, the season could again be ugly, but I do not anticipate such.

Q: How can the Browns rightfully expect to improve and be competitive when they have done nothing to improve a poor receiving corps?

LA: This is a valid question. The Browns 2010 season could ultimately be either a positive experience or negative fiasco, dependant on whether the passing game can be a viable weapon on game-day.

For much of the 2009 season, the Browns were pathetically poor throwing the football. Now in adding a couple of experienced QB's, as well as a season under the belts of Massaquoi and Robiskie, the belief is development with instill growth, equaling improved production and efficiency.

Also couple in Chansi Stuckey being with the team for the off-season and Josh Cribbs gaining experience at the position, there is reason to be cautiously optimistic.

But, I do agree, it would have been nice to have seen the Browns add a true, proven WR to go along with the moves made at QB.

Q: There are a couple wide receivers out there that could be available, such as Vincent Jackson in San Diego and Patrick Crayton in Dallas. Have the Browns entertained the option of seeking viable receivers such as these two, or anyone else on the radar?

LA: I have been told everytime I have inquired about the Browns and Jackson, that the Browns have never discussed the WR with the Chargers.

During the draft, there was plenty of speculation and discussion about Crayton. The Cowboys never appeared serious about dealing the WR, though they did receive calls after selecting WR Dez Bryant in the first round of the draft.

I am told the Browns did have an interest in Crayton, but unsure whether the Browns officially inquired about the WR.

If a true dynamic at the position were to pop-up, the Browns would certainly have their eyes open, but it does appear they will go into the season with the core group on the roster and continue to develop talent in-house.

Q: It's been eight months since Shaun Rogers was injured and he still is not practicing with the team. Does it set a bad precedent when a player like Rogers can be arrested, not practice and then play when he appears to be out of shape each year? Also, players such as Mosely and Francies remain on the PUP list without any knowledge as to when they will return. How can the team afford to keep these players there, unless there is some substantial injury in taking up a roster spot?

LA: In defense of Rogers, he appears to be leaner at this time than he has been in years and certainly since coming to Cleveland. Being in good physical condition does not appear to be a real issue at this time for the defensive lineman.

Now, being in game shape is a completely different story. As we have witnessed since he has come to Cleveland, Rogers has had time off in each training camp, with this 2010 camp being the most extensive to date.

Rogers has been working inside the facility, has been working on the bikes and pounding the sleds and looks terrific. Now, getting him to the point of full-go, contact and all is the next step. The Browns will play it cautious with him, but will have him on the practice field a couple weeks prior to the start of the season, if physically cleared.

Mosely has been hampered from off-season surgery and is expected on the practice field in the next week or so.

As for Francies, we have been unable to gain the reasoning behind his extended stay on the PUP, but for a young player always unable to practice, this type of issue is one way to jettisoned from a roster.

With the three players being on PUP, they are not counted against the roster, thus providing the Browns an opportunity to have three additional players on the field to evaluate.

The OBR Top Stories