Barrow To Be Axed?

[Schneed10]

The Washington Post is reporting that with the re-signing of LB Clifton Smith, Mike Barrow seems to be a prime candidate to get the axe after June 1. This would mean the Skins would save about $1.7 million on the 2005 Cap. Then in 2006, they would have to carry $1.6 million as dead cap money for him. But that would certainly beat keeping him on the roster in 2006, when his cap figure would be $3.4 million.

I would applaud cutting him loose after June 1, the move would make sense. But it's still frustrating to see another old player come aboard and end up eating up dead cap space.

[MTK]

Barrow was still a very productive player when we signed him, he was also very durable.

Sucks to see him go without even seeing him on the field, but with the emergence of Pierce he's expendable, plus there's no guarantee he's going to recover fully from his injury.

I also hope this means they are confident they'll get a deal hammered out with Pierce.

[FRPLG]

This was a good signing at the time...but fortunately his cap numbers aren't so godawful that they inhibit us too much. It would have been nice to see him in this defense but oh well.

[Daseal]

Don't axe till we have Pierce signed.

[Redskins_P]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Don't axe till we have Pierce signed.

Agreed. Sign Pierce, cut Barrow after june 1st.

[SKINSnCANES]

Why cut him. If we can afford him hes not extremely expensive. Hes been a great linebacker, and I would attribute a lot of pierces success to barrows helping teach him. Hes a valuable leader that if he is better would be a great backup, or change of pace player, and a great mentor to our defense. Extra leadership will help out team.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES

Why cut him. If we can afford him hes not extremely expensive. Hes been a great linebacker, and I would attribute a lot of pierces success to barrows helping teach him. Hes a valuable leader that if he is better would be a great backup, or change of pace player, and a great mentor to our defense. Extra leadership will help out team.

I think I remember reading that he may be forced to retire anyway because of his knee.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES

Why cut him. If we can afford him hes not extremely expensive. Hes been a great linebacker, and I would attribute a lot of pierces success to barrows helping teach him. Hes a valuable leader that if he is better would be a great backup, or change of pace player, and a great mentor to our defense. Extra leadership will help out team.

His knee issue is career threatening and if we kept him this year it causes even bigger concern down the road. If we assume he can get back in playing shape for the coming season and even has a good year for us we also have to assume that since his injury is acute knee tendinitis it is never going to go away fully. Tendinitis basically is going to hang around a 35 year LB in the NFL. So anyways he has a good year and even stays healthy enough to not miss much time. Then comes 2006 and he sticks around and the knee flares up. Now you're paying a 35 year old LB with a history of knee tendinitis 3.4 mil to sit on his ass(for the second time in three years). That looks like a bad decision to me even if he had one good season. It justs seems that the Skins could very decide to cut their losses on this and save the 1.7 for the coming season. I know they'll get skewered for this but Barrow was a quality sign when they got him. Who knew he'd develop a dehablitating knee injury that will never go away fully?

[CrazyCanuck]

I've always thought that if Barrow could play at all we should keep him, since we don't really save anything by cutting him.

If he can't play then I have nothing against cutting him. But I wonder why they would choose to eat the deadcap in 2006 instead of 2005.

Assuming Barrow is cut we'll have $2.1M deadcap on our books. Instead of pushing $1.7M to 2006 (our trouble year), why not just eat the entire $2.1M in 2005 and get it over with?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by CrazyCanuck

I've always thought that if Barrow could play at all we should keep him, since we don't really save anything by cutting him.

If he can't play then I have nothing against cutting him. But I wonder why they would choose to eat the deadcap in 2006 instead of 2005.

Assuming Barrow is cut we'll have $2.1M deadcap on our books. Instead of pushing $1.7M to 2006 (our trouble year), why not just eat the entire $2.1M in 2005 and get it over with?

Good points. I don't think he'll displace Pierce as a starter. But I could see some downs where Barrow comes in, Pierce moves to his natural OLB position and either Washington or LaVar line up as a DE

[BrudLee]

Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES

Why cut him. If we can afford him hes not extremely expensive. Hes been a great linebacker, and I would attribute a lot of pierces success to barrows helping teach him. Hes a valuable leader that if he is better would be a great backup, or change of pace player, and a great mentor to our defense. Extra leadership will help out team.

I'm not sure how much of Pierce's success we should give to Barrow. This was a new system for both of them - it's not like Barrow has years of Gregg Williams's schemes and playcalls in his head. Pierce proved himself to be what he has been advertised as - a very intelligent football player. He ran our defense last year, and he did so without a dominant d-line or his expected linebackers around him.

I also question the value of leaders on the bench. I think that, even if Barrow has a full recovery (which he is not expected to have), the starter going into the preseason has to be Pierce, he did too much last year to be considered anything but. What value does the leader on the bench serve? Better to seek leadership from someone in the lineup, I say.

Other than that, I love you, SkinsNCanes.

[dirtbag2112]

I wanted to see Mike play too, but I have no complaints about Pierce. I hope our front office can sign him to a long term deal. Atleast one of the two Giants we got last year worked out well.

[SKINSnCANES]

I wonder if he would retirie and consider being a linebackers coach right away.

[diehardskin2982]

I think we should see if there is any trade value for him and atleast give him a chance to show what he's got before we let him go. We could ask him to restructure to stay
we didn't do it for Trotter and he became the runner up for the comeback player of the year behind Brees. I tired of seeing our free agents going to the superbowl.

[diehardskin2982]

i agree Canuck plus if he gets any better he'll be an added weapon to the # 1 NFC defense