Jump to content

NFL teams can now dress 3 QBs moving forward.


Recommended Posts

Tom Pelissero @TomPelissero

NFL owners approved the bylaw proposal allowing teams to dress a third QB without using an active roster spot, I’m told. A no-brainer to bring it back in the aftermath of the San Francisco playoff game.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Pelissero @TomPelissero

Meanwhile, a potential vote to put the ball on the 25-yard line following a fair catch on a kickoff now is expected to be pushed back to Tuesday. Special teams coordinators unanimously oppose the change, but the competition committee has been in favor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Field Yates @FieldYates

The NFL has approved a rule allowing a team to designate a roster spot on an emergency 3rd QB.

A couple important rules:
* That player must be on the 53-man roster (it cannot be a practice squad call-up)
* That player can only play if the top 2 QBs are injured (no benchings)

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, C Mart said:

Tom Pelissero @TomPelissero

Meanwhile, a potential vote to put the ball on the 25-yard line following a fair catch on a kickoff now is expected to be pushed back to Tuesday. Special teams coordinators unanimously oppose the change, but the competition committee has been in favor.

The league would like to eliminate the kickoff without actually eliminating it. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it's really just bringing back the old emergency QB rule that had long existed. I guess the only slight difference is the "injury" qualifier but in the NFL it's beyond easy to consider every player some degree of injured at any point. I'm sure that just means you'd have to rule the other QBs as "out" first, which is still just the same as the old emergency QB rule. This essentially just means the extra active spot teams were given when they gave up that rule stays, while the rule now comes back, which honestly is fine other than maybe adds some more creativity to how teams use their last few roster spots.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, C Mart said:

Tom Pelissero @TomPelissero

Meanwhile, a potential vote to put the ball on the 25-yard line following a fair catch on a kickoff now is expected to be pushed back to Tuesday. Special teams coordinators unanimously oppose the change, but the competition committee has been in favor.

Yeah, that's just idiotic. 100% on the coordinators' side with this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Bleedin Green said:

So it's really just bringing back the old emergency QB rule that had long existed. I guess the only slight difference is the "injury" qualifier but in the NFL it's beyond easy to consider every player some degree of injured at any point. I'm sure that just means you'd have to rule the other QBs as "out" first, which is still just the same as the old emergency QB rule. This essentially just means the extra active spot teams were given when they gave up that rule stays, while the rule now comes back, which honestly is fine other than maybe adds some more creativity to how teams use their last few roster spots.

The old rule is better. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ian Rapoport @RapSheet

Among the issues set to to decided here in Minnesota at the Spring League Meeting today and tomorrow:
— A new rule that would place all kickoff fair-catches at the 25 yard-line.
— Can TNF games be flexed?
— The location of the 2025 NFL Draft.
— The location of Super Bowl 60.

 

Hopefully Giants Mara has enough pull to get this voted down again..Just an awful proposal for fans wanting to travel to an away game

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, C Mart said:

Ari Meirov @MySportsUpdate

NFL owners have passed a bylaw that allows teams to have a 3rd QB in uniform (a 47th active player) on gamedays, in case of a worst case scenario situation (like the 49ers in the NFC Championship Game), per NFL Network.

All teams can now dress 3 QBs moving forward.

Good.

Next up should be the full roster dressed and active on game day.

The idea that you are forced to inactivate players is dumb, and always has been.

It's not like it's college and teams have 95 players.   Roster is 53, all 53 should be active and dressed and allowed to play as desired/needed.  Not just 46.  SMH.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Good.

Next up should be the full roster dressed and active on game day.

The idea that you are forced to inactivate players is dumb, and always has been.

It's not like it's college and teams have 95 players.   Roster is 53, all 53 should be active and dressed and allowed to play as desired/needed.  Not just 46.  SMH.

I agree.....until I heard it explained that the concept of the 46/53 was for some players who may be banged up for that week but not bad enough to lose on a multi-week IR designation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, C Mart said:

Ari Meirov @MySportsUpdate

NFL owners have passed a bylaw that allows teams to have a 3rd QB in uniform (a 47th active player) on gamedays, in case of a worst case scenario situation (like the 49ers in the NFC Championship Game), per NFL Network.

All teams can now dress 3 QBs moving forward.

Do you have to designate who the 3rd QB is? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Good.

Next up should be the full roster dressed and active on game day.

The idea that you are forced to inactivate players is dumb, and always has been.

It's not like it's college and teams have 95 players.   Roster is 53, all 53 should be active and dressed and allowed to play as desired/needed.  Not just 46.  SMH.

I think the reason for this is to even the playing field for teams with injured players on the 53... One team can have 53 active with no injuries and the other could have 53 active and 6 injured and you can't drop them to ps or put them IR for week to week injuries

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, C Mart said:

Tom Pelissero @TomPelissero

Meanwhile, a potential vote to put the ball on the 25-yard line following a fair catch on a kickoff now is expected to be pushed back to Tuesday. Special teams coordinators unanimously oppose the change, but the competition committee has been in favor.

That stinks. The rules favor the offense enough already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, CTJetsFan said:

I agree.....until I heard it explained that the concept of the 46/53 was for some players who may be banged up for that week but not bad enough to lose on a multi-week IR designation.

So they dress and don't play. 

Surely the team is aware of such cases, and can manage that accordingly without sacrificing a definitive 7 guys ineligible to play no matter what.

Lets be honest, it's mostly for the degenerate gamblers than anything.   Only they need to know exactly who is "hurt but not enough to be on IR" to inform their bets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bleedin Green said:

So it's really just bringing back the old emergency QB rule that had long existed. I guess the only slight difference is the "injury" qualifier but in the NFL it's beyond easy to consider every player some degree of injured at any point. I'm sure that just means you'd have to rule the other QBs as "out" first, which is still just the same as the old emergency QB rule. This essentially just means the extra active spot teams were given when they gave up that rule stays, while the rule now comes back, which honestly is fine other than maybe adds some more creativity to how teams use their last few roster spots.

Yeah that happened with Tupa when Testaverde got injured in week 1 of '99.

Nominally the QB2 was Tupa, because Parcells was trying to create an extra game-day roster spot. If he went to the QB3 (Mirer) then the QB2 (Tupa) would have to be inactive if activated before the 4th quarter, which (in that case) would've left the team without a punter.

It was a stupid rule; the old rule iirc made both the QB1 and QB2 inactive if the QB3 was activated before the 4th quarter. Should've just knocked out one of them (team's choice) but not both. Then again it was purely supposed to be an emergency rule not a true extra gameday roster spot.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, C Mart said:

Ari Meirov @MySportsUpdate

NFL owners have passed a bylaw that allows teams to have a 3rd QB in uniform (a 47th active player) on gamedays, in case of a worst case scenario situation (like the 49ers in the NFC Championship Game), per NFL Network.

All teams can now dress 3 QBs moving forward.

Sometimes the NFL acts like these proposals are so brilliant when they are as obvious most times as washing your hands after you wipe your ass.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Warfish said:

So they dress and don't play. 

Surely the team is aware of such cases, and can manage that accordingly without sacrificing a definitive 7 guys ineligible to play no matter what.

Lets be honest, it's mostly for the degenerate gamblers than anything.   Only they need to know exactly who is "hurt but not enough to be on IR" to inform their bets.

You might be right, but I thought I recall hearing/reading that it was the players union who wanted this so guys who shouldn't be playing that week weren't put on the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Yeah that happened with Tupa when Testaverde got injured in week 1 of '99.

Nominally the QB2 was Tupa, because Parcells was trying to create an extra game-day roster spot. If he went to the QB3 (Mirer) then the QB2 (Tupa) would have to be inactive if activated before the 4th quarter, which (in that case) would've left the team without a punter.

It was a stupid rule; the old rule iirc made both the QB1 and QB2 inactive if the QB3 was activated before the 4th quarter. Should've just knocked out one of them (team's choice) but not both. Then again it was purely supposed to be an emergency rule not a true extra gameday roster spot.

ya i remember that. I thought if QB3 stepped onto the field, then neither QB1 or 2 could return for the remainder of the game. Same thing really. But I liked Tupa. He actually made a few nice throws!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, slats said:

The league would like to eliminate the kickoff without actually eliminating it. 

I feel like the term "kickoff" is so synonymous with football that you can't remove it from the game... But in terms of entertainment value vs. injury risk I can understand the movement to get rid of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...