Originally Posted by AbeBeta
If you did that then you would have to have some sort of weekly injured list -- otherwise you create a real pressure to put guys with minor injuries on IR so you don't end up out manned.
All that points to having more players getting paid. And you know the owners aren't going for that.
Ah, there you have the reason that the roster size isn't going up any time soon. I don't think the players' union is all that interested ether. The union is controlled by the top players, who will not approve anything that might lower their take. If you increase roster size, you have to also increase the cap limit, which would decrease the owners' percentage of revenues. However, it is unlikely that the limit would go up in direct proportion to the roster-size increase, which would decrease the salaries paid to the super stars.
Back to the owners: they don't even want to have the game rosters increased because that would increase their traveling costs. Now they can leave most inactive players back home. I am convinced that is the reason that Shanahan's proposal of a few years back, to determine roster size at game time based on the team with the most injured players, was rejected. Teams would have to travel with healthy players who might wind up inactive on game day.