ASHKUM BEAR Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 www.rotoworld.com is the source Dolphins claimed OL Kirk Barton off waivers from the Bears. Third TE Sean Ryan will be waived later Thursday. Barton's skills are limited enough that he doesn't project as more than a swing-type reserve. Source: Chicago Sun Times Related: Bears Looks like we lost out on the Kirk Barton sweepstakes. He decided to take his chances on Miami's 53 man roster. Good luck Kirk, 2 years from nows when I see you on MNF as a starting RT i'll be a little po'd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Suniva b****. Oh well, if we expect to win now, this is a good move as Barton wouldn't of seen the field this year. Best of luck to Kirk as he looked like a promising player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Suniva b****. Oh well, if we expect to win now, this is a good move as Barton wouldn't of seen the field this year. Best of luck to Kirk as he looked like a promising player. Too bad. Would have loved to keep him. He will end up starting at some point. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyBear Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Here it is from the suntimes Link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LT2_3 Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 www.rotoworld.com is the source Dolphins claimed OL Kirk Barton off waivers from the Bears. Third TE Sean Ryan will be waived later Thursday. Barton's skills are limited enough that he doesn't project as more than a swing-type reserve. Source: Chicago Sun Times Related: Bears Looks like we lost out on the Kirk Barton sweepstakes. He decided to take his chances on Miami's 53 man roster. Good luck Kirk, 2 years from nows when I see you on MNF as a starting RT i'll be a little po'd Ummmmm when a player gets claimed off waivers, they have no choice in the matter. The Dolphins are required to keep him on the 53 man roster for 3 weeks. They may be only be taking him for a test drive of sorts. If they waive him after 3 weeks and if he clears waivers, then we will have a shot at signing him to our practice squad at that point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 thanks for the info lt2_3! Ummmmm when a player gets claimed off waivers, they have no choice in the matter. The Dolphins are required to keep him on the 53 man roster for 3 weeks. They may be only be taking him for a test drive of sorts. If they waive him after 3 weeks and if he clears waivers, then we will have a shot at signing him to our practice squad at that point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChileBear Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 thanks for the info lt2_3! Damn! There goes he outh movement on the OL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LT2_3 Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 Damn! There goes he outh movement on the OL. Youth movement = rebuilding Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted September 11, 2008 Report Share Posted September 11, 2008 I hear ya...but there appears to be some hope to get him back, maybe pick up a young guy in Tauscher in FA next season, use the draft...and cross our fingers! Damn! There goes he outh movement on the OL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 I hear ya...but there appears to be some hope to get him back, maybe pick up a young guy in Tauscher in FA next season, use the draft...and cross our fingers! Tauscher will be 30 next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Bears 88 Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 Barton looked promising. So, we picked up "false start" Miller. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 Barton looked promising. So, we picked up "false start" Miller. We might have planned on Barton passing through waivers, but JA had to know a team like Miami, Oakland, Kansas City, or St. Louis was going to pick up a young, good looking OT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearial Assault Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 So with Barton gone and Miller just signing this week... who exactly is going to be our backup tackle if St. Clair or Tait were to get injured this weekend? I can't imagine they'd throw Miller in there yet although they may have no choice. I really hope it doesn't come to that, especially with a DE like Peppers on the other side, because not having a backup that's up to speed on the offense could cost us an otherwise winnable game if someone gets hurt. At least Miller knows the offense, but I'm sure he's a little rusty and may not quite be in football shape yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
butkusrules Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 Disagree with this move. Angelo doesn't develop his OL well enough. Miller is a waste of roster space. IF someone goes down then Barton has to step up , simple as that. Its how OL develops in the NFL. Look at Packers from a couple years ago. Packers OL got better out of neccessity. Angelo does't want to invest the time or has any faith in anybody he has drafted and thats why we are in this mess at OL. We should have never dropped Colombo either, we spent so much money rehabbing him just to have the cowboys reap the rewards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
butkusrules Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 Disagree with this move. Angelo doesn't develop his OL well enough. Miller is a waste of roster space. IF someone goes down then Barton has to step up , simple as that. Its how OL develops in the NFL. Look at Packers from a couple years ago. Packers OL got better out of neccessity. Angelo does't want to invest the time or has any faith in anybody he has drafted and thats why we are in this mess at OL. We should have never dropped Colombo either, we spent so much money rehabbing him just to have the cowboys reap the rewards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
butkusrules Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 Disagree with this move. Angelo doesn't develop his OL well enough. Miller is a waste of roster space. IF someone goes down then Barton has to step up , simple as that. Its how OL develops in the NFL. Look at Packers from a couple years ago. Packers OL got better out of neccessity. Angelo does't want to invest the time or has any faith in anybody he has drafted and thats why we are in this mess at OL. We should have never dropped Colombo either, we spent so much money rehabbing him just to have the cowboys reap the rewards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 Disagree. It may be "rebuilding" when you are throwing a bunch of youth at starting positions, but filling the backend of your depth chart w/ youth is common practice, not a sign of rebuilding. Youth movement = rebuilding Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 Expect a switch-a-roo. Tait to LT and Miller in at RT. Frankly, w/ Barton still here, that likely would be the plan. Tait is the only LT who I see us considering a LT at this point. I have read talk about Metcalf at OT too, as he played there in college, but agian, he would be a RT as well. So with Barton gone and Miller just signing this week... who exactly is going to be our backup tackle if St. Clair or Tait were to get injured this weekend? I can't imagine they'd throw Miller in there yet although they may have no choice. I really hope it doesn't come to that, especially with a DE like Peppers on the other side, because not having a backup that's up to speed on the offense could cost us an otherwise winnable game if someone gets hurt. At least Miller knows the offense, but I'm sure he's a little rusty and may not quite be in football shape yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 (a) Agree Angelo/Lovie do not develop OL. In fact, I would remind all of Lovie's comments at the beginning of the offseason, when he essentially said he doesn't like drafting OL because he prefers veterans at that position. He believes it takes time to develop OL, more so than at most other positions, and would prefer to simply get a develop player than to develop him himself. That may have worked once, but w/ how much even lesser OGs make in FA now, that plan simply is now too expensive. ( I disagree Miller is a waste of roster space. Few ripped him more than I, yet I do have to say this. When did we ever hear about his injury last year? But it appears he was in fact injured. Why do we not give Miller the same benefit of doubt giving to Reuben Brown, who most everyone wanted. Brown looked like our worst OL last year, even worse than Metcalf or Miller, but then we read about how he was playing w/ one arm, and all was forgiven. Well, per Miller, he was something like 50% last year w/ an ankle injury. When you play injured (1) you suck and (2) you are going to get more penalties, as you try to "cheat" to compensate. Point is, if Miller is healthy, he is an upgrade to our depth. I would not be thrilled w/ him as a starter, but as depth, I have no issue. © Where I do have an issue is, I would not have cut Barton. Sorry, but OL is too big of a position right now. I would have found another player to release or trade. Hell, what about trading Adams. I personally like Adams, but if he isn't even going to be active on game days, and isn't exactly a player we are looking to develop, why keep him. (d) Disagree on Columbo. The belief was he would never play again. It's one thing to hold onto a player like Mike Brown, Rex Grossman or even now Williams, when you expect them to heal and recover. The belief at the time was Columbo was done, and thus he was released. He came back, and warrants credit for doing so, but sometimes there is no one to blame when injuries are involved. Shit happens. Disagree with this move. Angelo doesn't develop his OL well enough. Miller is a waste of roster space. IF someone goes down then Barton has to step up , simple as that. Its how OL develops in the NFL. Look at Packers from a couple years ago. Packers OL got better out of neccessity. Angelo does't want to invest the time or has any faith in anybody he has drafted and thats why we are in this mess at OL. We should have never dropped Colombo either, we spent so much money rehabbing him just to have the cowboys reap the rewards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 We might have planned on Barton passing through waivers, but JA had to know a team like Miami, Oakland, Kansas City, or St. Louis was going to pick up a young, good looking OT. Why should angelo have known. I am an Angelo basher, but I simply am not sure it should have been expected that Barton would be picked up on another teams 53 man roster. We are talking about a 7th round draft pick. You say good looking OT, and personally I agree, but I am not sure that he looked so good as to gain league wide attention. As much trouble as we had on the OL, he was still a late game (preseason) guy, so it isn't like he was some 7th rounder who was being considered for a starting job. He was a deep depth, 7th round pick, w/ limited upside who was being cut by a team w/o a lot of talent on the OL. If we cut TE, LB, DL or DB, I can understand a team taking a look, but I was not expecting many teams to be watching for OL we cut. I assume Miami had Barton on their draft boards, and are bringing in him for a look. As LT2 mentioned, he is basically going to get a 3 week tryout w/ Miami. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted September 12, 2008 Report Share Posted September 12, 2008 Oops! I don't know why I thought he was younger... But still not that old I suppose. Tauscher will be 30 next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted September 13, 2008 Report Share Posted September 13, 2008 In response to all of this, as long as I can remember, the Bears carry 3 offensive tackles. No more, no less. If Chris Williams comes back, my guess is that he replaces Fred Miller. It's reported that Miller expects to stay the entire season. But if Tait, St. Clair, & Williams are all healthy, why would we save a roster spot for him? The only exception would be if Beekman fails, Beaumont (poor spelling?) is not good, and St. Clair moves back to LG. (I'm assuming Metcalf is out of the equation reguardless.) Either way, I can't envision a scenerio that involves us either wanting or needing Barton. If Barton is that good and the Bears let him go, we're retarded. Hell, we kept Caleb Hanie thinking another team might snatch him up. Apparently if we believe in a players ability, we'll protect him. This reminds me of a few weeks back when Bear's fans were pissed we cut J.T. O'Sullivan. Last week J.T. went for 150 yards, no touchdwowns and 1 interception. Not exactly "Mike Martz" worthy. Hell, the Bears already have quarterbacks who can put up those kind of numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrizzlyBear Posted September 13, 2008 Report Share Posted September 13, 2008 Why get rid of of someone if they are both on the 53 man roster? No reason to. When williams comes back it will look the same as before he came back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted September 14, 2008 Report Share Posted September 14, 2008 Why get rid of of someone if they are both on the 53 man roster? No reason to. When williams comes back it will look the same as before he came back. For the same reason we don't keep two punters . . . it's a waste of a roster spot. Right now Fred Miller is apparently an upgrade over Barton. Good move. He's our back-up tackle. He's likely to retire after this year. When & if Williams returns, assuming he doesn't suck, he'll become the back-up. Fred becomes expendable. Like I said, if we plan on moving St. Clair back to guard, I could understand it. Otherwise, it's a waste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.