T.J. Ward and Browns have had “several conversations”

AP

The Browns put a transition tag on center Alex Mack on Monday, leaving safety T.J. Ward unfettered with the start of free agency looming in a week.

Ward’s agent Josh Arnold gave an update on the status of talks with the team to Nate Ulrich of the Akron Beacon Journal and it doesn’t sound like anyone should be expecting a deal in the next couple of days.

“After receiving numerous requests from local and national media outlets, fans, and several others connected to the Cleveland community we felt it necessary to provide a statement with respect to T.J.’s current contract situation. Detailed contract discussions with multiple front office executives of the Browns began last month at the NFL Scouting Combine in Indianapolis. Since then several conversations have occurred in an attempt to secure a new deal for T.J., but we’ve yet to agree on terms that work for both sides.”

Arnold added that he and Ward “remain open” to further conversations with the Browns, but it looks like Ward is going to get a chance to shop his wares to the rest of the league. There’s been talk that the Browns are interested in safety Jairus Byrd, who played for Browns coach Mike Pettine in Buffalo last season.

17 responses to “T.J. Ward and Browns have had “several conversations”

  1. why not create a cap on positions. I think if you are going to have a structured cap for competitive reasons each position should also have a cap. For example the quarterback position should top out at 12 million. The players are worried about getting veterans paid and how can they when nearly a quarter of each teams salary is spent on two players. This will create even more competitive balance and spread the money to more players. That is what the players were striking over, wasn’t it?

  2. jebsta, you’re not considering how many “Graham is a TE/WR” debates there then would be. It’d be ridiculous. Plus, what about stuff like an outside LB in a 3-4 vs Edge Rusher in a 4-3? Or like a punter playing the QB posistion, ie. Flacco. Nevermind, those aren’t punts, sorry.

  3. ^
    Or you could have less opportunities for busts and players that don’t perform well to walk away with more than their fair share. The more money that leaks out to those that aren’t worth it, the less money available where it is deserved, and that’s a cost to everybody except the people that have no business having that money in the first place. You kind of have to develop a plan for that and work out an agreement of some sorts in advance. It could even be called a CBA for Collective Bargaining Agreement. The bunk-ass deal they call the CBA isn’t worth the digital file space it is stored on.

  4. If it is created by the players union then there is no questioning it. A linebacker is a linebacker, a dlinemen is a dlinemen and a TE is a TE as stated on the depth chart.

  5. I like Ward. But I would rather have Byrd. And if I was to choose between Ward, Joe Haden, and opposite Skrine. Or An average safety, Joe Haden, and opposite Sam Shields. I would take the later. The corner position is of more importance.

  6. “Why not create a cap on positions?”

    Because it’s dumb for three reasons. First, the value of positions change over time. Tight ends are more valuable than they used to be because of the new breed of pass catching specialists, while traditional fullbacks are nearly extinct.

    Second, there’s no way an NFL mandated cap on each position could be reached by consensus. Quarterbacks, cornerbacks, wide receivers will complain about being underpaid.

    Third, players often play multiple positions making it difficult to label them. Sometimes a cornerback moves to safety for a couple of games. Sometimes a running back lines up as a QB in the wildcat formation. Etc.

  7. ok how about this one – a safety who also returns punts vs one that doesn’t.

  8. “If it is created by the players union then there is no questioning it. A linebacker is a linebacker, a dlinemen is a dlinemen and a TE is a TE as stated on the depth chart.”

    Ok. Then when Andrew Luck and Russell Wilson are due for new contracts, their teams should list him on the depth chart as punters, so that way they only can get paid a very small amount.

    Seriously. If you think a depth chart designation solves the issue of positional versatility, you haven’t been watching football much recently.

  9. Ward was basically lazy and hurt, until his contract year. Pay him big and he will be that way again…Plus he is not fast in pass coverage.

  10. It can be worked out fairly easy. It won’t please everyone but it will distribute more money to more players just like what the stoppage of work was all about. This would be an absolute win for the players union and teams but hey, if you guys think it is that hard then you must be right, afterall, pft has the greatest collection of armchair lawyers, gm’s and agents the internet has to provide.

  11. bengalguy says: Mar 4, 2014 5:32 PM

    Probably talking about how they’re not gonna be able to catch the Bengals in the North for the next 5 years!
    ————
    No need to catch the Bengals. Just wait until January and watch them trip over their quarterback.

  12. Browns are being smart. Ward was horrible until last year. 1 good year doesnt deserve big money. If i were the Browns, if you cant get him at the right price, let him walk. Again, no impact plays out of Ward except the pick 6 vs Buffalo. He takes the worst routes on runners and on passes of any safety ive ever seen.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!