Twitter: NFL Owners to vote to allow two players to come off IR

[GhostOfPelluer]

I bet the owners would go for it if they didn't have to increase the percentage of revenues that the players get. The players don't want that, because then the same size pie is cut into more pieces.

 

[Longboysfan]

Assuming the next vote will be proposed by Mara to suspend Zeke until 2023

But of course - what else did you expect.

 

[gmoney112]

The player rules really don't make any sense.

Nonsensical even.

 

[conner01]

Owner greed.

Not just owners
The smaller numbers allows for more money to each player so

 

[LocimusPrime]

What isn't manipulated by the Pats? They will find a way to cheat the system

They are working on it right now. Lol

 

[LocimusPrime]

I would love to see the game day roster expanded to 60, and you can choose which 53 players go towards your cap....the extra 7 don't affect the cap, regardless of salary or position. That would be awesome

 

[Toruk_Makto]

They still wont expand the rosters? What is the road block there?

Owner and player greed.

 

[links18]

Owner and player greed.

And as a result half the time we end up with a mash unit of street FAs playing critical positions by the the end of the year, with everyone crying about injuries.

 

[BotchedLobotomy]

Love it
As long as it can't be manipulated by the pats it's a great idea
Players have very short careers

I see how this works, when everyone else can bring back one, the cheaters brought back two. Now that everyone can bring back two, it's safe to assume the cheater will be bringing back three.

 

[xwalker]

I bet the owners would go for it if they didn't have to increase the percentage of revenues that the players get. The players don't want that, because then the same size pie is cut into more pieces.

It would only cost about 4M to bump the 10 practice squad players up to full 53 man minimum salaries.

 

[Direwolf63]

I would love to see the game day roster expanded to 60, and you can choose which 53 players go towards your cap....the extra 7 don't affect the cap, regardless of salary or position. That would be awesome

They don't even need to do that. If you have 53 players on the roster, they should be allowed to play on Sundays. Period.

 

[dogunwo]

They need to add another one to make it at least three. Most teams will suffer a pretty impactful injury or two that knocks out a couple of starters.

Loosening this more only helps the competitive balance for teams late in the year.

What they really need to do is look specifically at expanding the rosters from 53 or at least make everyone on the roster available in games. Designating "inactive" players is just punitive unless a team has perfect health.

I understand the game day active thing for competitive balance. Just expand the rosters from 53 to 56 and allow two more game day spots.

 

[Melonfeud]

So all teams will get 2, but the Giants, Steelers, Packers get 3. The Patriots get as many as they can, until caught, but it will drag out for 2 years before they are punished with a small fine and loss of a 5th round draft pick. Mara will suspend 5 Dallas players because NE got caught.

 

[aikemirv]

And as a result half the time we end up with a mash unit of street FAs playing critical positions by the the end of the year, with everyone crying about injuries.

It is the same effect. I don't see the need for expanded rosters at all. Either you are on a practice squad and you have the ability to change to go to a place where a team needs you or you are an older vet who really can't cut the mustard and are only called upon off your couch when the situation is dire. There is probably 1 player in a hundred/ maybe in 2 hundred that can't make a 53 that could possibly make a 60 man, that would ever make a huge difference and have a great career. and... that player if determined enough will eventually make a team anyway.

The owners know this (why spend another 3 million in minimums on players that will never really make a difference). The players in the union don't care either, they are IN!

 

[Toruk_Makto]

It would only cost about 4M to bump the 10 practice squad players up to full 53 man minimum salaries.

Which would be ~$120MM additional dollars annually that someone would have to account for. Which over a decade is an additional $1.2 billion dollars either out of owners or players pockets. Who is going to pay for that?

Additionally if you added 10 roster spots to every team what's the likelihood that teams would only want to add minimum salary players?

This is greed from owners and players.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

It would only cost about 4M to bump the 10 practice squad players up to full 53 man minimum salaries.

Per team. That's $128 million for the league. And that might be only about 2% of the entire salary pie, but it's still taking money from one side or the other.

 

[CCBoy]

Where does one sign up for this no-name group?

 

[big dog cowboy]

I wish they would vote to increase the roster size to 55.

 

[xwalker]

Per team. That's $128 million for the league. And that might be only about 2% of the entire salary pie, but it's still taking money from one side or the other.

I would not cost the owners anything extra. It would just slightly dilute the pie. The practice squad is normally about 1M. Giving them all rookie minimum salaries would bump it to about 4M.

It wouldn't really help the existing players unless they also increased the game day 46 man limit. Increasing that would result in fewer starters or significant offensive/defensive contributors from playing as many Special Teams snaps.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

I would not cost the owners anything extra. It would just slightly dilute the pie. The practice squad is normally about 1M. Giving them all rookie minimum salaries would bump it to about 4M.

It wouldn't really help the existing players unless they also increased the game day 46 man limit. Increasing that would result in fewer starters or significant offensive/defensive contributors from playing as many Special Teams snaps.

$100 million has to come from somewhere. Either the owners or the players. Neither is willing to give it up.