There’s nothing better than a good case of “he said this, he said that” antics to make an organization look foolish. And that is exactly what has happened to the Browns lately with their handling of TE Kellen Winslow’s staph infection. It’s a long story, and it doesn’t quite add up, so I would imagine Phil Savage and the organization have something else to hide, most likely some form of shoddy communication between them and their Pro Bowl tight end. Nevertheless, Winslow is back from his one-game suspension (any coincidence though that Steve Heiden had three receptions for 73 yards?) and is looking to make an impact this Sunday against the Baltimore Ravens.
Not only do the Browns baffle me from an organizational standpoint, but also on the field. This is a team that no one could possibly predict on a week-to-week basis. One week they play like, well, the usual Browns and other weeks (see: wins against the New York Giants and Jacksonville Jaguars) they show glimpses of their potential as a team. It is unexplainable, except for maybe one facet: Kellen Winslow just happened to be absent during both of those wins. Does it mean anything? I cannot say for sure, but could the team possibly play looser at this point without Winslow?
This brings me to a thought that could very easily materialize in the off-season. If Derek Anderson starts putting up decent numbers (although there is no doubt he would attract attention from teams right now) and the rumors about deals for Winslow continue to swirl, that could mean a plethora of draft picks for the Browns. After a very weak 2008 draft, Savage and Friends could be looking to recoup their losses and gear up for a huge showing in 2009. Just a thought, but those two could bring quite a bit in return.
However, I ask this: how confident would you be heading into the 2009 season without both Derek Anderson and Kellen Winslow, once key components of a 10-6 season?