The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Redskins' Barrow Is Allowed to Seek a Trade

Thursday, July 21, 2005; Page E02

The Washington Redskins have granted veteran linebacker Mike Barrow permission to seek a trade, according to a league source, another sign that could point to his departure from the organization without ever playing a game.

The Redskins signed Barrow, 35, to a six-year, $13-million deal last year, including a $2.5-million signing bonus, but he suffered a serious knee injury in training camp and remained sidelined through mini-camp. Barrow has not played in a regular season game in nearly two years and the Redskins have stocked up on linebackers this offseason. Washington declined to release Barrow in June, when teams can begin seeking salary-cap relief, surprising many executives around the NFL, but he does not appear to be in the team's long-term plans.


The Redskins have given permission to linebacker Mike Barrow to seek a trade from any other team. (John McDonnell - The Washington Post)

Barrow's agent, Marvin Demoff ,was allowed to begin contacting other teams within the last month, according to a source with knowledge of the situation, but the likelihood of receiving even a late-round draft pick for him appears remote.

"We don't have interest there, and I can't see anyone else making a move for him, either," one NFL personnel executive said.

Demoff did not return a phone message yesterday. Most of Washington's top officials are on vacation and team spokesman Karl Swanson did not respond to inquiries seeking comment on Barrow's status. Cutting Barrow would save the Redskins $1.74 million in salary cap space and cost them $1.66 million against the 2006 cap. Washington is about $1.65 million under the cap, league sources said, and still must sign its top four draft picks, including two in the first round.

The Redskins also are expected to release wide receiver Rod Gardner , which would create $2.1 million in cap space. Gardner, a former first-round pick, was granted permission to seek a trade shortly after the season ended. He did not train with the team and Coach Joe Gibbs has said he would not participate in training camp if still on the roster.

An NFL source said Carolina has expressed some interest in Gardner, but with most clubs expecting the wide receiver to eventually be released there have been no substantial trade offers.


-- Jason La Canfora

Jake wrote:

Redskins' Barrow Is Allowed to Seek a Trade

Thursday, July 21, 2005; Page E02

Riggo44 wrote:no one's giving us a pick for someone who hasn't played a game in 2 years. especially when it seems like the league is talent-rich at LB. teams would rather develop their own, than overpay for a high-priced / injured veteran.

1niksder wrote: The cap relief from his release may allow us to hold onto 50/50 until someone gets desparate.

SKINZ_DOMIN8 wrote:This is EXCELLENT. Get rid of another injured player that hasn't done anything for us the past 2 years like Lavar, Jansen, etc.....

He is another deadweight on this team and I hope he just leaves. I LOVE this. Shows Gibbs is not going to play with these mouthy losers and has the same philosophy about constantly underachieving players as do I. Hasta La Vista Barrow. Hopefully Mr. Can't Get Right is next.

SKINZ_DOMIN8 wrote:This is EXCELLENT. Get rid of another injured player that hasn't done anything for us the past 2 years like Lavar, Jansen, etc.....

He is another deadweight on this team and I hope he just leaves. I LOVE this. Shows Gibbs is not going to play with these mouthy losers and has the same philosophy about constantly underachieving players as do I. Hasta La Vista Barrow. Hopefully Mr. Can't Get Right is next.

SkinsDomin8 wrote:Shows Gibbs is not going to play with these mouthy losers and has the same philosophy about constantly underachieving players as do I. Hasta La Vista Barrow.

BossHog wrote:Folks... personal attacks will not be tolerated outside of the smack forum. Keep your comments to the post -- not the post-er.

SkinsDomin8 wrote:Shows Gibbs is not going to play with these mouthy losers and has the same philosophy about constantly underachieving players as do I. Hasta La Vista Barrow.

You're calling Michael Barrow a mouthy loser? Huh? The guy is a totally class act... so much so that he will likely be a coach when his playing days are done (which they may be). Gregg Williams also calls him one of the smartest football players that he has ever been around. Williams is hardly known for tossing around bogus statements like that... so I'll presume Barrow is a very head-y player.

And the guy got hurt. We picked up an injured player and gave him a big contract... that's the problem in this instance... not the player himself. It doesn't grant you the right to slander his name because you're bitter about the way it worked out.

Have you ever played football at any decent level? How many players DON'T get hurt at some point. How many games did Lavar miss before last year... how about Jansen... I'll tell you... collectively between them... two games. Jansen played 82 games in a row... Lavar started 62 of 64 before missing 12 games last year.

Obviously it would be moot to argue their relative worths last year... they barely played.

The year before.. they missed 0 starts between them. You stated that we 'Get rid of another injured player that hasn't done anything for us the past 2 years like Lavar, Jansen'... did I miss a year somewhere. Did they squeeze in a season between 2003 and 2004 that I don't know about? Because not only did they not miss any games, L.A went to the Pro Bowl. Now I know the Pro Bowl is a big popularity contest and means little... but while they aren't always the BEST players at their position the last year.... they are usually SOME OF THE BEST players that year.

Lavar is a good player... Lavar has played well... Lavar hasn't been the next coming of Lawrence Taylor as hyped by some... but it hardly makes him a bum. Your OVER-ESTIMATION of Lavar's talent may be to blame... but teams would line up to grab him if he became available... because he's a GOOD player, and he's a GOOD player with the potential to be even better. And he's a good player that was effective in different ways for 5 different defensive schemes in 5 years. That's hardly to be scoffed at.

Your over-generalizations are the reason that your posts have no substance to anyone but you.

redskincity wrote:

BossHog wrote:Folks... personal attacks will not be tolerated outside of the smack forum. Keep your comments to the post -- not the post-er.

SkinsDomin8 wrote:Shows Gibbs is not going to play with these mouthy losers and has the same philosophy about constantly underachieving players as do I. Hasta La Vista Barrow.

You're calling Michael Barrow a mouthy loser? Huh? The guy is a totally class act... so much so that he will likely be a coach when his playing days are done (which they may be). Gregg Williams also calls him one of the smartest football players that he has ever been around. Williams is hardly known for tossing around bogus statements like that... so I'll presume Barrow is a very head-y player.

And the guy got hurt. We picked up an injured player and gave him a big contract... that's the problem in this instance... not the player himself. It doesn't grant you the right to slander his name because you're bitter about the way it worked out.

Have you ever played football at any decent level? How many players DON'T get hurt at some point. How many games did Lavar miss before last year... how about Jansen... I'll tell you... collectively between them... two games. Jansen played 82 games in a row... Lavar started 62 of 64 before missing 12 games last year.

Obviously it would be moot to argue their relative worths last year... they barely played.

The year before.. they missed 0 starts between them. You stated that we 'Get rid of another injured player that hasn't done anything for us the past 2 years like Lavar, Jansen'... did I miss a year somewhere. Did they squeeze in a season between 2003 and 2004 that I don't know about? Because not only did they not miss any games, L.A went to the Pro Bowl. Now I know the Pro Bowl is a big popularity contest and means little... but while they aren't always the BEST players at their position the last year.... they are usually SOME OF THE BEST players that year.

Lavar is a good player... Lavar has played well... Lavar hasn't been the next coming of Lawrence Taylor as hyped by some... but it hardly makes him a bum. Your OVER-ESTIMATION of Lavar's talent may be to blame... but teams would line up to grab him if he became available... because he's a GOOD player, and he's a GOOD player with the potential to be even better. And he's a good player that was effective in different ways for 5 different defensive schemes in 5 years. That's hardly to be scoffed at.

Your over-generalizations are the reason that your posts have no substance to anyone but you.

**Point and laughs**

This was an obvious bad signing by Gibbs and the front office. However, hindsight is 20/20,