PFT: Owners to vote to abolish 75 man roster cuts

[Toruk_Makto]

Next up: Replace 53-man regular season roster with 60-man squad (fingers crossed).

Unlikely. But just going so far as not having inactives on gameday would go a LONG way.

 

[erod]

They should. It would help with injuries.

Would it? Are you going to play #58 on your roster in place of #5?

 

[roughneck266]

Would it? Are you going to play #58 on your roster in place of #5?

Well, obviously, I have no proof that it would since they haven't done it, but to me it kind of stands to reason. Not following the #58/#5 thing. Sorry.

 

[conner01]

That would be awesome but would likely require approval from the players union.

Even just bumping it to 55 players would be a big improvement.

And making them all active for games
But teams don't want more active and players don't want bigger rosters. More players means less for each player

 

[conner01]

Would it? Are you going to play #58 on your roster in place of #5?

Bigger roster wouldn't help with injuries but would make it easier to deal with them from a roster perspective
But the best players are gonna play the most downs, and it only takes one play to get injured

 

[YosemiteSam]

Next up: Replace 53-man regular season roster with 60-man squad (fingers crossed).

Cut it to 11 men, so like when I was in peewee league. I played offense, defense, and special teams!

 

[YosemiteSam]

That would be awesome but would likely require approval from the players union.

Even just bumping it to 55 players would be a big improvement.

If I were the NFLPA, I wouldn't approve that. It would cut into other players salaries.

 

[xwalker]

If I were the NFLPA, I wouldn't approve that. It would cut into other players salaries.

There is some benefit to the players. If it had a corresponding increase in the 46 man game day roster, it would reduce the amount of Special Teams snaps played by starters.

 

[KingintheNorth]

If I were the NFLPA, I wouldn't approve that. It would cut into other players salaries.

They only count the top 51 salaries towards the cap so I doubt expanding the rosters from 53 to 55 (or even 60) would have any impact on other players' salaries.

More players equals more money (more union dues) and more jobs. The NFLPA would be on board.

 

[CT Dal Fan]

I'd like the NFL to allow all 53 players to be active on gameday, eliminate practice squads and just expand the rosters to 63. Teams will still have the same number of bodies to get through a week's practice, and since only the top 51 players count towards the cap, the economics stay the same.

 

[xwalker]

They only count the top 51 salaries towards the cap so I doubt expanding the rosters from 53 to 55 (or even 60) would have any impact on other players' salaries.

More players equals more money (more union dues) and more jobs. The NFLPA would be on board.

That is incorrect.

The rule of 51 in only during the off-season. Once the season starts all players including the 53, practice squad and players on PUP or IR all count towards the cap.

 

[xwalker]

It enabled owners like Mike Brown to pinch pennies.

It weird because the off-season roster was 80 back in the day.

 

[xwalker]

I'd like the NFL to allow all 53 players to be active on gameday, eliminate practice squads and just expand the rosters to 63. Teams will still have the same number of bodies to get through a week's practice, and since only the top 51 players count towards the cap, the economics stay the same.

Top 51 is only an off-season accounting rule. During the season ALL players counts towards the cap.

 

[Nightman]

I'd like the NFL to allow all 53 players to be active on gameday, eliminate practice squads and just expand the rosters to 63. Teams will still have the same number of bodies to get through a week's practice, and since only the top 51 players count towards the cap, the economics stay the same.

It makes sense to let them all dress but all 53 count once the season starts and the 10 Practice Squad guys count as well, another 120k each......plus all the guys on the IR and PUP count........every dollar paid to every player counts ....teams can get rebates for fines and suspensions

Letting them all dress for games wouldn't add a penny unless a PS guy was activated and he would have to be pro-rated up to the min 465k

 

[Nightman]

This means the Friday after the last preseason game will be insane

1200 guys hitting the market at the same time..... guys that make the team on Friday won't be there Monday after cut guys are signed

Preseason Game1 -starters 1 series
PS G2- starters 1/4-1/2
PS G3- starters into 3rd Q
PS G4- no starters at all...... Welcome to the Thunderdome for roster spots

 

[KingintheNorth]

That is incorrect.

The rule of 51 in only during the off-season. Once the season starts all players including the 53, practice squad and players on PUP or IR all count towards the cap.

Yep, you are right.

I still think the NFLPA would be on-board for more NFL player jobs though.

 

[Nightman]

Yep, you are right.

I still think the NFLPA would be on-board for more NFL player jobs though.

It would only cost the teams another 3-4m to make PS guys full timers and have 63 man rosters but legacy costs might be thru the roof for pensions and health benefits for another 320 players a year

 

[xwalker]

Yep, you are right.

I still think the NFLPA would be on-board for more NFL player jobs though.

It's the same pool of money for the players so the more players the less for each. Having said that, the cost of paying a few extra minimum salary players is trivial when all things are considered.