The IR With Right Of Return

BelichickFan said:

So you would declare, say, Siliga out for the year just in case someone like Vereen happens to get hurt when you could keep Vereen on the roster and have them both available for the playoffs ?

Click to expand...

I would keep Siliga active and save the designation in case Gronk or Mankins or Collins etc... get hurt. I don't see the value in using it on a back-up.

Ivan said:

I would keep Siliga active and save the designation in case Gronk or Mankins or Collins etc... get hurt. I don't see the value in using it on a back-up.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I'd keep Siligia active up to about 6 weeks. After that, it's time to free it up for another big body and hope that it works out.

Ivan said:

I would keep Siliga active and save the designation in case Gronk or Mankins or Collins etc... get hurt. I don't see the value in using it on a back-up.

Click to expand...

I still don't get the "save the designation" concept. It should be used as soon as there's a viable usage otherwise you risk not using it at all which is the biggest waste of it.

BelichickFan said:

I still don't get the "save the designation" concept. It should be used as soon as there's a viable usage otherwise you risk not using it at all which is the biggest waste of it.

Click to expand...

Imo the likelihood that they won't have a significant injury to a major player is as unlikely as it gets. it is extremely rare that any team makes it through a season without a big time player suffering a significant injury. I would much rather have it there for Gronk or Revis or Collins etc..... than use it up on a back-up.

Ivan said:

I would much rather have it there for Gronk or Revis or Collins etc..... than use it up on a back-up.

Click to expand...

I won't keep replying because I'm repeating myself but the only thing "having it there" gains you is a roster spot so you might as well use it "for the roster spot" immediately when a player you want later gets hurt - whoever it is - when you need the roster spot. There's no need to save it for a better player.

BelichickFan said:

I won't keep replying because I'm repeating myself but the only thing "having it there" gains you is a roster spot so you might as well use it "for the roster spot" immediately when a player you want later gets hurt - whoever it is - when you need the roster spot. There's no need to save it for a better player.

Click to expand...

We disagree, major player's have been IR'ed many times over the years instead of them saving the spot and my take is that it's better to have it for a critical player.

BelichickFan said:

- Player out an extended time
- Don't want to cut (or IR) the player
- Need the roster spot.

Then you use it. End of story.

Click to expand...

I just see it as a bit more complicated. Every player currently on the roster has value; if they did not they would not be on the roster. So we don't want to cut any of them. But there is a big difference in the value of say, Gronk and van Hooser (to take an extreme example). But if van Hooser rips an MCL tomorrow, I suspect neither of us would consider the designation, whereas for Gronk we would. I see players as having widely different values within the category of "don't want to cut". And "need the roster spot" also comes in degrees. And the value of both the the players and the roster spot change as the season progresses, players emerge, others get injured, etc. Of course I would agree that it is silly not to use it at all, but I also think there is such a thing as wasting it. Here in the preseason there is a probability close to 100% that there will be a better opportunity with a player of greater value than those in the OP at a time when the spot is more important.

BelichickFan said:

I still don't get the "save the designation" concept. It should be used as soon as there's a viable usage otherwise you risk not using it at all which is the biggest waste of it.

Click to expand...

I'm not understanding why there'd be a risk of not using it at all. Belichick isn't going to come to the halfway point of the season and suddenly forget about having it; therefore I don't understand how/why it wouldn't get used?

I would assume that using it on a bit player with minor importance such as Chris Jones would be much more of a "waste" than anything else, but that's just my opinion. Obviously, we're going to have more important players/injuries by the mid-point of the season when the IR designation is due.

FWIW - Here's the roster cutdown timeline:

August 30 - Prior to 4:00 p.m., New York time, clubs must reduce rosters to a maximum of 53 players on the active/inactive List. Simultaneously with the cutdown to 53, clubs that have players in the categories of Active/Physically Unable to Perform or Active/Non-Football Injury or Illness must select one of the following options: place player on Reserve/Physically Unable to Perform or Reserve/Non-Football Injury or Illness, whichever is applicable; request waivers;terminate contract; trade contract; or continue to count the player on the active list.

August 31 -- Claiming period for players placed on waivers at the final roster reduction will expire at 12:00 noon, New York time. Beginning at 12:00 noon, New York time, clubs may establish a practice squad of eight players by signing free agents who do not have an accrued season of free agency credit or who were on the 46-player active list for less than nine regular season games during each of any accrued seasons. A player cannot serve on the practice squad for more than three seasons.

September 2 -- After 4:00 p.m., New York time, a club is permitted to place a player on Reserve/Injured as “Designated for Return.”


So if the Patriots decide to use the IR-DFR on Siliga or Chris Jones, that defensive tackle makes the 53-man roster on 8/30 - meaning that another player is waived or released. That cut player must clear waivers in order for him to be re-signed on 9/2 when the IR-DFR designation is used.

The present IR rules were constructed to offer away to handle injured players. They were also constructed to prevent stashing players there by good teams.

So the IR players are done for the season. For all teams, they are eligible again on the first game of next season. Now an exception exists for only 1 player.but he must be designated as such. I see no reason to have to designate a player before hand, simply allowing only one IR returnee per team eliminates the threat of stashing. As with the IR DtR I'd require a minimum of 8 games per season before a return is possible.

I think the Playoffs are in reality, a seperate next season but not all teams are invited to attend.

So players should be able to return for the Playoffs, as a seperate season. Players available at that late date won't be stashed.

The benefit is that fans can see injured stars compete in the playoffs, if their team earns a berth, if they are healthy. It also reinvigorates teams for the toil of additional Playoff games.

It may also be considered to be a safety issue. Doing so may deter injuries. A hobbled player may not have to play in the playoffs just "gutting it out" and risking further injury, because there is no alternative , to his undermanned team.

What's wrong with Jones and Siliga?

varjao said:

What's wrong with Jones and Siliga?

Click to expand...

Chris Jones - Following up on DT Chris Jones' injury - espnBoston

Sealver Siliga - Following up on New England Patriots DT Sealver Siliga - espnBoston