Do we still re-sign Barksdale?

[oldramfan]

I don't know about you guys but I am uncomfortable with 3 possible rookies on the line. I think we are far better served bringing back Barksdale for a year or two and letting the new O-linemen get some coaching and play time while having at least 3 veteran guys on the line there to help out. Even if we let Tim Barnes start at C none of our O-line will have more than 1 year experience under their belt except Saffold, who gets hurt every year.

 

[ZigZagRam]

They still want him.

There's a standing offer waiting for him. It'll be up for Joe and his representation if he wants what they're offering or not.

 

[Ozoneranger]

I would sign Barksdale. And a veteran center. I heard a saying a long time ago...for every rookie you start chalk up a loss.

 

[fancents86]

Yes. More experience the better. It will also create depth.

 

[LACHAMP46]

Even though we need him. Damn the NY Giants taking Flowers!!!! I still would rather build up Havenstein....That guy gets in pro shape, he could be a monster...
Still wonder why they didn't like Lawrence Gibson?

Tell Joe Barksdale, you snooze you lose.....

 

[tonyl711]

no, get Blalock, and let him and Saffold play next to the rookie RT and whoever wins the battle for center. Barks over played his hand IMO, if I did sign him it wouldn't be for starters money.

 

[JIMERAMS]

ya because all that experience has helped a lot the past couple of years.

 

[ChrisW]

I don't offer Barks any more money. Let him take the deal or walk.

I'm just happy there's going to be a new look to our O-line. The camp battle this year should be fun.

 

[Sum1]

I'd like to see him back. He could be a bridge in case Havenstein isn't ready right away and he could also be the swing tackle. Would also like to see Blalock come in still but I don't think that will happen.

I see Garret Reynolds as more of an interior guy that can play tackle in a pinch.

 

[thirteen28]

If he takes the deal on the table ... maybe. It's been out there for a while and so far he hasn't, and now his value is less thanks to the pick of Havenstein.

Joe got greedy after watching all the stupid money get thrown at OT's in 2014 free agency and now he's on the outside looking in.

If it came down to Barksdale and Blalock at this point, for comparable money, I'd probably go with Blalock. You could put him next to GRob on the left side, move Saffold to RG where he's best, and start Havenstein knowing you have a good player next to him with experience at his position.

 

[RamzFanz]

You have to wonder if Barksdale would give 100% after being forced into a contract he doesn't want. OF course, he would be screwing himself next season and could lose his spot, but some guys get emotional about this stuff like ZS did.

 

[Stel]

I don't think you have to worry about 3 rookies starting on our OL.

Robinson will start at LOT.
Saffold will start at OG.
Barnes, Jones, or Rhaney will start (even Rhaney has had a year in on an NFL team) at OC.
Reynolds will start at OG or ROT.

That leaves one spot for a rookie or one of the existing veteran back ups. If a rookie starts on our OL, he will have earned the spot. None of them will be given a starting spot simply because the show up.

 

[12intheBox]

How many O Lineman can we realistically expect to carry on the 53 man roster?

Right now, we have:

G-Rob
Saffold
Jones
Rhaney
Reynolds
Barnes

then add

Havenstein
Brown
Donnal
Wichmann

Thats 10 right there which is probably the max (I suppose you could carry 11, but that means we are shorting another position group).

 

[den-the-coach]

Rather have Blalock tell Bazooka Joe thanks for the memories.

 

[FrantikRam]

Even though we need him. Damn the NY Giants taking Flowers!!!! I still would rather build up Havenstein....That guy gets in pro shape, he could be a monster...
Still wonder why they didn't like Lawrence Gibson?

Tell Joe Barksdale, you snooze you lose.....

Listening to Fisher and Snead's press conferences, Gurley was the pick at 10 regardless who else was there....so even if the Giants didn't draft Flowers, don't think we would have.

 

[FrantikRam]

But yes, I hope we do re-sign Barksdale.

Let everyone fight it out and the best 9 or 10 make the roster

 

[BonifayRam]

I prefer to go for the goal or the objective of improvement of the 2014 OL. Barksdale would offer very little if any of that. Would JB's insertion to the overall 2015 OL number lets say 9 or 10 .....would that cause a younger rookie prospect OL'er Jamon Brown or a Andrew Donnal with a much higher ceiling get released????

That would be disheartening. We would have to do a repeat in the 2016 draft. Because the possibility that Barksdale will get better..... very doubtful!.

 

[ausmurp]

The continuity and exp would be better for the team. We should resign him. Wouldn't pay him more than $2.5M a yr though.

 

[LACHAMP46]

Listening to Fisher and Snead's press conferences, Gurley was the pick at 10 regardless who else was there....so even if the Giants didn't draft Flowers, don't think we would have.

And you believe them? When has Fisher been one to tell you the complete truth when discussing players?

 

[FrantikRam]

And you believe them? When has Fisher been one to tell you the complete truth when discussing players?

That's true. I believe them because they hid Gurley on their board, indicating he was very high on their board. And also because they commented on the average round for starting offensive lineman (non LTs) - it's 3.6, which indicates that they were going to wait regardless.