CFZ NFL roster size questions and comments

[Blitzen]

I know that money is the main reason why NFL teams would like to avoid expanding the size of the active roster. I also think that there were way too many sloppy and tedious games throughout the league last year.

I think that the coming seasons for MLB will give NFL teams an idea of what a shorter game might mean for viewership enhancement and maintenance.

My general thoughts of benefits for roster expansion center on fewer sloppy football games and better execution (more points scored and fewer penalties after losing a key player). There are also more opportunities for the- from practice squad to star player stories to sell.

How would you propose an expansion to active rosters? I like the way they are trying to kind of help on this front by expanding the practice squad to 16 and allowing 55 active players (2 of which are from the practice squad per week). The game day roster needs the expansion though.

Could the NFL make it optional for a certain number of practice squad players to dress for a game day? They could place limits on how much the player could earn to just dress and also if they had to actually play some snaps. Keep it separate and optional from the routine salary cap. These players could still sign with other squads if they wanted as they do now.

Just some morning musings.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

I think the sloppiness is more attributable to practice time than it is roster size, though I think the game-day roster should be expanded.

The easiest thing to me is just to eliminate the need to cut to 48 for game day. That's always seemed pointless to me.

 

[thunderpimp91]

I think the sloppiness is more attributable to practice time than it is roster size, though I think the game-day roster should be expanded.

The easiest thing to me is just to eliminate the need to cut to 48 for game day. That's always seemed pointless to me.

I think this is pretty spot on. The only other thing I would really consider is allowing a 3rd qb to dress that doesn’t count against the 48 man roster so we avoid the SF/philly playoff game scenario. Not that a 3rd string qb necessarily wins that game for SF, but it at least keeps it somewhat competitive.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

I think this is pretty spot on. The only other thing I would really consider is allowing a 3rd qb to dress that doesn’t count against the 48 man roster so we avoid the SF/philly playoff game scenario. Not that a 3rd string qb necessarily wins that game for SF, but it at least keeps it somewhat competitive.

Yea.

I think you could give "exemptions" to the 3rd QB and specialists (K, P, LS), but that's kind of a lot of logistics just to add 4 spots to the roster lol

 

[Blitzen]

I think the sloppiness is more attributable to practice time than it is roster size, though I think the game-day roster should be expanded.

The easiest thing to me is just to eliminate the need to cut to 48 for game day. That's always seemed pointless to me.

I agree. My thought was that if allowed you could increase practice squad to sufficient size and practice those guys outside the limits of traditional active roster players. Get them really ready to play your scheme.

And yes, you would absolutely keep one extra of the most critical and least way to replace positions for game day.

 

[jazzcat22]

I think the sloppiness is more attributable to practice time than it is roster size, though I think the game-day roster should be expanded.

The easiest thing to me is just to eliminate the need to cut to 48 for game day. That's always seemed pointless to me.

The 48 active game day is for competitive balance.
The roster has 53, say if they expand it to 55 , it doesn't matter.
One team has no injuries, and the other team has 5 injured players. So each team now has 48 healthy player to use, instead of 1 having 48, the other 53.

I know...injuries part of the game, blah, blah. But this has been working for years. No need to change.

 

[jazzcat22]

I think they should eliminate the amount of times you can activate a PS to the active roster. What is it, 4 times, or whatever. I know there is a strategy, and all that.
But just eliminate that. Bring up who you want and how many you want each week. Allow 55 on active roster, but still have 47 active game day, but on top of that have 1 QB and 1 OL as emergency players that do not count against the 47.

I know 48 is mentioned, but 1 of those is an emergency player and must be an OL.

So maybe increase the active game day roster to 48, plus the 2 emergency players if a 55 player roster.
It should not matter since only the top 51 players count against the cap. if that is still in place.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

The 48 active game day is for competitive balance.
The roster has 53, say if they expand it to 55 , it doesn't matter.
One team has no injuries, and the other team has 5 injured players. So each team now has 48 healthy player to use, instead of 1 having 48, the other 53.

I know...injuries part of the game, blah, blah. But this has been working for years. No need to change.

What?

If you have an injured player, just take him off the 55 and add a healthy one lol

 

[jazzcat22]

What?

If you have an injured player, just take him off the 55 and add a healthy one lol

Don't work that way and not that easy. They have these rules in place for a reason. They have worked that way for years.
Don't change things just for the sake of changing them.

Doing what you say, is called ..player stashing....they put these rules in place for that reason. The Raiders used to stash players on IR for a hang nail. And have like 20 players to move up and down.

 

[xwalker]

I know that money is the main reason why NFL teams would like to avoid expanding the size of the active roster. I also think that there were way too many sloppy and tedious games throughout the league last year.

I think that the coming seasons for MLB will give NFL teams an idea of what a shorter game might mean for viewership enhancement and maintenance.

My general thoughts of benefits for roster expansion center on fewer sloppy football games and better execution (more points scored and fewer penalties after losing a key player). There are also more opportunities for the- from practice squad to star player stories to sell.

How would you propose an expansion to active rosters? I like the way they are trying to kind of help on this front by expanding the practice squad to 16 and allowing 55 active players (2 of which are from the practice squad per week). The game day roster needs the expansion though.

Could the NFL make it optional for a certain number of practice squad players to dress for a game day? They could place limits on how much the player could earn to just dress and also if they had to actually play some snaps. Keep it separate and optional from the routine salary cap. These players could still sign with other squads if they wanted as they do now.

Just some morning musings.

Same amount of time and same number of coaches with more players to coach.
- How does that improve the "sloppiness" of games?

Any changes must be negotiated with the Player Association.

The cap is the same regardless of how many players are on the active roster.
- i.e. Same total dollars shared by more players.

A ps player must be paid the same as a minimum wage active player when active on game day.
- The NFLPA will oppose paying less to players that actually play in games.

The IR rules are more lenient than in the past which allows teams to protect more players without forcing the players out for an entire season.

 

[Blitzen]

Same amount of time and same number of coaches with more players to coach.
- How does that improve the "sloppiness" of games?

Any changes must be negotiated with the Player Association.

The cap is the same regardless of how many players are on the active roster.
- i.e. Same total dollars shared by more players.

A ps player must be paid the same as a minimum wage active player when active on game day.
- The NFLPA will oppose paying less to players that actually play in games.

The IR rules are more lenient than in the past which allows teams to protect more players without forcing the players out for an entire season.

My thought was to increase practice squad player limits by voluntary means. Make it a minor league practice squad if you like-they can always hire some more coaches for the practice squad.

On game days, you could allow each squad the opportunity to dress say 5-10 of these practice squad players. These players would be separate from the cap. It would be completely voluntary-not mandated for teams to use. They would get game day checks if necessary.

Just a means to allow more players to potentially really contribute to a team if they were on a practice squad.

 

[Creeper]

All this roster size stuff and practice squad stuff is a way for teams to keep players around without paying them full NFL salaries. It is amazing to me how th NFL pinches every nickel out of every aspect of the league then stiffs lesser players who make up the vast majority of the league. They should stop this nonsense and do something for the fans. Increase the roster size to 60 and dress everyone for games. It's not like the owners are starving. If they can pay billions for their teams they can afford to pay 7 low scale players on their rosters.

 

[Motorola]

I know that money is the main reason why NFL teams would like to avoid expanding the size of the active roster. I also think that there were way too many sloppy and tedious games throughout the league last year.

I think that the coming seasons for MLB will give NFL teams an idea of what a shorter game might mean for viewership enhancement and maintenance.

My general thoughts of benefits for roster expansion center on fewer sloppy football games and better execution (more points scored and fewer penalties after losing a key player). There are also more opportunities for the- from practice squad to star player stories to sell.

How would you propose an expansion to active rosters? I like the way they are trying to kind of help on this front by expanding the practice squad to 16 and allowing 55 active players (2 of which are from the practice squad per week). The game day roster needs the expansion though.

Could the NFL make it optional for a certain number of practice squad players to dress for a game day? They could place limits on how much the player could earn to just dress and also if they had to actually play some snaps. Keep it separate and optional from the routine salary cap. These players could still sign with other squads if they wanted as they do now.

Just some morning musings.

Good post.
55 players on the active squad the entire regular season.
10 players on the practice squad.
5 spots designated for PUP/IR; if during the course of a season.
Teams that unfortunately has more injuries in that category than the alloted 5 ---they must waive PS players to allow the IR guys to remain with the team.
My off-the-cuff response to your post...tbh, I am only 60-70% clear on NFL structure and rules and regarding rosters.

 

[DallasEast]

@xwalker has already addressed NFLPA opposition to some of the proposals more eloquently than I would have but I wanted to respond to:

I think that the coming seasons for MLB will give NFL teams an idea of what a shorter game might mean for viewership enhancement and maintenance.

I do congratulate Major League Baseball instituting time management changes like a pitch timer. The rule has several provisions but essentially mandates the pitcher to throw and have the batter get set inside the batter's box more quickly. For reviews, the National Football League can further decrease the time officials convene, discuss the infraction, get under the hood, watch what happened, and announce a decision.

Currently, the average review runs just over two and 1/2 minutes. It should be a realistic improvement for any review to cap at one minute 45 seconds tops. That is well-over 45 seconds longer than viewers at home have made a decision and it would shave 45 seconds off the established average. It would not be a significant time-saving move but any subtraction in time would offset mandated commercial time more than what viewers experience now.

 

[TwistedL0g1k]

I think the sloppiness is more attributable to practice time than it is roster size, though I think the game-day roster should be expanded.

The easiest thing to me is just to eliminate the need to cut to 48 for game day. That's always seemed pointless to me.

This ^

 

[TequilaCowboy]

I say just keep it the way it is.....the issue is teams affording to keep more high quality priced players on their team which could result in better play and games.; so increase the salary cap a lot more than it is done now. Especially because of these obscene salaries the QBs are getting paid. Teams have to make business decisions and wind up having to cut or trade players they would love to keep. Dallas, for example, has to decide what to do with Diggs, CeeDee, Micah, Dak, DLaw, Schultz, Zeke etc.. Can't keep them all, the last two being let go. And if you do, you gut the rest of your team. Football is the ultimate team sport. After saying all that, would not pass the NFL owners vote obviously. And neither would a active roster increase.

So this will remain status quo for awhile. FYI, With the exception of Goodell's salary which is well over $65m plus annually up to now. To put in perspective, the NBA commissioner makes around $10m and MLB comm about $18m. Oh yea, and the NHL comm about $8m .....of course, football is king...but that much more? And they can't afford full time officials which directly affect the quality of the game, and the outcome sometimes. . How you like dem apples?

 

[TwistedL0g1k]

I say just keep it the way it is.....the issue is teams affording to keep more high quality priced players on their team which could result in better play and games.; so increase the salary cap a lot more than it is done now. Especially because of these obscene salaries the QBs are getting paid. Teams have to make business decisions and wind up having to cut or trade players they would love to keep....

Increasing the salary cap won't necessarily change the situation with QB salaries.

I would love to see a rule limiting the percentage of the salary cap any one player can command.

 

[Mac_MaloneV1]

Increasing the salary cap won't necessarily change the situation with QB salaries.

I would love to see a rule limiting the percentage of the salary cap any one player can command.

I think this is the direction that leagues will eventually go. I actually wouldn't be shocked if, eventually, salaries aren't just negotiated as % of cap. That would solve the issue of the highest paid player just being the last one to sign, while giving players natural salary growth and insulate teams from cap growth stagnating.