Interesting Roster Management Rule Change....

[Sarge4Tide]

 

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

Now they can claim ZW is still concussed and IR him before the season to save a spot for legit competition 🙃

[Warfish]

NFL Roster management is soooooooo dumb.

In no circumstance should IR require being out the rest of the season.  Should just mean "off the roster till ready", whenever ready may be.

There should be no "practice squad", just a 60, 65 or 70 man roster, with all players dressing and all available to play if needed.

There should be no restrictions on who can play QB or when.

These silly artificial limits do nothing but worsen the sport.

[Larz]

Yup. We’ll need that one 😂

[Dcat]

50 minutes ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

Now they can claim ZW is still concussed and IR him before the season to save a spot for legit competition 🙃

Shhh   Don't give them ideas.  

[Beerfish]

The NHL roster rules are even stupider.  Salary cap....only until the playoffs so teams like the Bolts and Vegas game the system every year and put some 10 million dollar player on LTIR and he magically gets better game one of the playoffs, essentially letting them have a huge one or two star player advantage over every on else.

[jeremy2020]

2 hours ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

Now they can claim ZW is still concussed and IR him before the season to save a spot for legit competition 🙃

ZW is permanently concussed.

[Barry McCockinner]

gon be a long concussion

[Sperm Edwards]

3 hours ago, Warfish said:

NFL Roster management is soooooooo dumb.

In no circumstance should IR require being out the rest of the season.  Should just mean "off the roster till ready", whenever ready may be.

There should be no "practice squad", just a 60, 65 or 70 man roster, with all players dressing and all available to play if needed.

There should be no restrictions on who can play QB or when.

These silly artificial limits do nothing but worsen the sport.

Generally I agree except that a potential downside with a massively expanded roster is a team then has the opportunity to hoard too many PS-level guys, robbing them of opportunities elsewhere (which happens every year). Now they really can't because they can only protect 2 of them and on top of that they need to fill out a rounded-enough squad for, you know, practicing; they aren't all just extra bench stashes. 

The other reason for it is teams can game the system - which they do already - to gain a larger roster by designating players to IR that maybe weren't IR-level injured. It's one way of stashing rookies without a roster spot or exposing them to the practice squad, so they won't get poached in the meantime. It's hoarding. You can say well good for the team smart enough to do it, but the players can kinda get screwed. 

Plus there are probably other considerations & downsides I'm just not thinking of off the top of my head. 

Just saying there are often unintended bad consequences despite the best intentions. 

[Warfish]

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Generally I agree except that a potential downside with a massively expanded roster is a team then has the opportunity to hoard too many PS-level guys, robbing them of opportunities elsewhere (which happens every year). Now they really can't because they can only protect 2 of them and on top of that they need to fill out a rounded-enough squad for, you know, practicing; they aren't all just extra bench stashes.

I don't see it as an issue.  Players still either get drafted (limited time till FA) or sign FA contracts.

If a "PS-level guy" wants opportunity, he can sign one-year contracts and bank on him getting a chance elsewhere.

I don't see "stealing other teams PS players" as a core component in NFL football or roster management.  

If the Jets want a guy, the 60th or 65th guy, on say, the Pats roster, they can always trade for him.

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

The other reason for it is teams can game the system - which they do already - to gain a larger roster by designating players to IR that maybe weren't IR-level injured.

If the team and player want to do that, then so be it, the player gets what they want, and the team gets what they want.  Hard to see how that really helps a team if IR isn't "gone for the year" anymore frankly.  The team is paying the player and losing a contract year to "stash" them, and the player wants to go along with it?  Not seeing the problem.

If the player objects, you can have NFL league Docs involved and a player-led "appeal" process if the players think they're being abused, with harsh penalties (loss of draft picks) for successful player appeals/abuse of the sytem.

Frankly, I think you're failing to see the forest for a little bush right in front of you.

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It's one way of stashing rookies without a roster spot or exposing them to the practice squad, so they won't get poached in the meantime.

There is no poaching (as you noted).  If those rookies signed contracts, they're with that team, period, no protection needed.  If they're on IR, and no player objection, again, I don't see the harm done.

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

It's hoarding. You can say well good for the team smart enough to do it, but the players can kinda get screwed.

Players who signed a contract aren't being screwed, they get paid on IR, and the contract year ticks over regardless.  

But again, if the player objects (I'm not hurt, it's only a flesh wound!" it's easy enough to have an appeal process.

A team that loses a few appeals would get hammered by lost picks and that would end abuse pretty damn fast.

16 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Plus there are probably other considerations & downsides I'm just not thinking of off the top of my head. 

Just saying there are often unintended bad consequences despite the best intentions. 

I'm not seeing any bad so far, but the larger point stands:  Less annoying pointless roster rules and larger rosters with all players active and allowed to play.  More spots for more players to BE on rosters.  Teams win (more depth/prospects) and the players win (more jobs and more chance they could play, at least on specials).

[jetsrule128]

Can we get rid of inactives and let everyone play ?

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, Warfish said:

I don't see it as an issue.  Players still either get drafted (limited time till FA) or sign FA contracts.

If a "PS-level guy" wants opportunity, he can sign one-year contracts and bank on him getting a chance elsewhere.

I don't see "stealing other teams PS players" as a core component in NFL football or roster management.  

If the Jets want a guy, the 60th or 65th guy, on say, the Pats roster, they can always trade for him.

If the team and player want to do that, then so be it, the player gets what they want, and the team gets what they want.  Hard to see how that really helps a team if IR isn't "gone for the year" anymore frankly.  The team is paying the player and losing a contract year to "stash" them, and the player wants to go along with it?  Not seeing the problem.

If the player objects, you can have NFL league Docs involved and a player-led "appeal" process if the players think they're being abused, with harsh penalties (loss of draft picks) for successful player appeals/abuse of the sytem.

Frankly, I think you're failing to see the forest for a little bush right in front of you.

There is no poaching (as you noted).  If those rookies signed contracts, they're with that team, period, no protection needed.  If they're on IR, and no player objection, again, I don't see the harm done.

Players who signed a contract aren't being screwed, they get paid on IR, and the contract year ticks over regardless.  

But again, if the player objects (I'm not hurt, it's only a flesh wound!" it's easy enough to have an appeal process.

A team that loses a few appeals would get hammered by lost picks and that would end abuse pretty damn fast.

I'm not seeing any bad so far, but the larger point stands:  Less annoying pointless roster rules and larger rosters with all players active and allowed to play.  More spots for more players to BE on rosters.  Teams win (more depth/prospects) and the players win (more jobs and more chance they could play, at least on specials).

I hate this many multi-quotes within a post. Makes more work for me and takes away from valuable time I need to spend typing more words.

Anyway, I don't see the rules as annoying, and don't think GMs or coaches do either. Roster rules aren't a spectator sport in and of themselves, and those that deal with them get used to them plenty fast. Even the dumb ones. 

Truth is I don't much care for the practice that teams use now, to retain a player who needs to cook for a year but don't want to eat up a roster spot for him, so they just use any minor injury to IR him for the season. They don't really lose a year in practical terms because they weren't going to play him. Since the NFL has no minor league system, this is an underhanded remedy. The Jets have used it before, as have all teams.

Nobody complains -- these roster-bubble, marginal players don't object because they get a full year salary guaranteed, as opposed to becoming a free agent right before final roster cutdowns. Once they sign after that, they no longer get a full guaranteed season of salary. Them's are the rules.  I still don't care for it because I'm not in love with the hoarding practice as a generality.

I'm not going to even get into your little bush attempt at an x-rated joke. It's just shameful. I would IR you today if I wasn't such a pushover & so susceptible to your charms. 

[Doggin94it]

4 hours ago, Sarge4Tide said:

 

Good. This ends the frankly stupid dance of cutting a vested vet with a handshake deal to resign him after the injured guy gets moved to IR (remember the freakout last year when they cut Morestead in the trim to 53?)

[Jet_Engine1]

On 3/26/2024 at 4:05 PM, Barry McCockinner said:

gon be a long concussion