I'm not remotely a fan of Barlow, and this better be a DIRT, DIRT cheap signing....but it's not exactly a terrible move. The only real rub about it is that none of the backs on the roster currently are the type they espoused to be looking for(short yardage). To me, that means that they're basically comfortable with Parker getting the GL and short yardage work, and they'll limit his carries/touches in other areas to try and reduce the wear.And I don't see this as a "Barlow potentially takes carries from Parker" gimmick anyway. It's an option for the #2 spot for when(yes, I said WHEN) Davenport gets hurt. If Parker were to get dinged, Dookie wouldn't last a week. How often have we seen that from him over his career? Ahman Green would get dinged, GB would put him in the starting lineup, he'd be on the shelf within 2 weeks with hamstring crap, or a sprained ###.And to say that Dookie Davenport is "good" in short yardage situations is totally and utterly laughable. More than anything that's what I don't dig about the Barlow signing. They're carbon copies of one another: Big backs that don't play like big backs, dance too damn much at the LOS, but can still catch & block a little.I don't think the Barlow signing takes Haynes totally out of the picture either. He's rehabbing at the Steeler facilities at last report. Keep in mind, he'd probably be looked at as the #2 FB if he could get back healthy. The only other "incumbent" back currently on the roster he'd have to really beat out would be Kuhn. Can't imagine that'd be that tough.