Early, But Who Is Worth the IR - DTR Designation?

Rob0729 said:

I endorse you giving up.

Click to expand...

For the record, I'm giving up because there's no point in repeating myself not because you're right. Because you're not.

Chiuba E. Obele said:

Can you explain this a little more to me? If either Hightower, Collins, Stork, or Chandler got injured, why couldn't they just remain on the roster. Is Bill required to put them on IR if and when an injury occurs?

Click to expand...

You're right, they'd just stay on the roster just like before this new IR-DtR rule was added.

BelichickFan said:

You're right, they'd just stay on the roster just like before this new IR-DtR rule was added.

Click to expand...

Then if that's the case, then there's no need to waste the DTR option.....you'd have to figure that the way things having been working out so well with Butler, Belichick would be willing to take a chance on another rookie cornerback proving himself.

At this point, many of us rate Roberts higher than Logan Ryan, and perhaps Bill feels the same way.

BelichickFan said:

For the record, I'm giving up because there's no point in repeating myself not because you're right. Because you're not.

Click to expand...

I agree that there is no point of repeating yourself because saying something over and over again will not make you right.

The Pats have never IRed designated to return for a bottom of the roster guy. The closest was when they did it for a contributor like Shianco. The last two years they went into the season and used it on a starter who was injured.

They cannot use it until after week one because the player needs to be on the 53 man roster to get the designation. They will not use it on a player unless they feel he is going to a top 25 guy on the roster late in the season. I doubt they will use it on Roberts.

Chiuba E. Obele said:

Can you explain this a little more to me? If either Hightower, Collins, Stork, or Chandler got injured, why couldn't they just remain on the roster. Is Bill required to put them on IR if and when an injury occurs?

Click to expand...

Because Belichick doesn't tie up a roster spot for 8-10 weeks for a player who is inured. Rarely if ever happens. Can anyone ever remember a player who was on the 53 man roster, but had a two to three month injury that kept him out? I can't.

Belichick is one of the people who fought for this designation because he wanted it for a a top 15-25 guy on the roster who would miss 6-10 weeks and he didn't want to waste a roster spot.

I don't get the idea of you need to have that 54th player on the roster for a player who may not play a meaningful down all year even after he gets off the IR designated to return, but you are willing to have a 51 or 52 man roster for 6-8 weeks because you have use a roster spot on an injured starter who won't play during that time because you used your IR designated to return on a rookie.

Rob0729 said:

Belichick disagrees with you because he has saved it the last two years and used it on starters who got injured in the first few weeks of the season.

Click to expand...

Unless you can demonstrate that there were other injured players who met the IR-return threshold that the team simply put on IR, this is an unsupported assertion.

It really is quite simple. If you have a player that you would carry for 8+ weeks injured, you put them on IR-return the first chance you get. You don't wait because you even if someone better gets hurt you end up in the exact same situation - one guy on reserve and the other guy inactive for a few months. There simply is no downside. The only possible negative is not using it at all since it wastes a roster spot for several weeks.

You are apparently arguing against IR-returning a player who does not meet the threshold, which no one is claiming they should.

Chiuba E. Obele said:

Then if that's the case, then there's no need to waste the DTR option.....you'd have to figure that the way things having been working out so well with Butler, Belichick would be willing to take a chance on another rookie cornerback proving himself.

At this point, many of us rate Roberts higher than Logan Ryan, and perhaps Bill feels the same way.

Click to expand...

Butler was not worth the IR designated to return designation last year. He had his moments last year, but he didn't play all that much. He had flashes of brillance, but he also wasn't on the active roster on many games.

I can't see Belichick using a IR Designated to Return on a rookie because rookies have a learning curve (see Butler) and Roberts' learning curve would start in November and not September.

Oswlek said:

Unless you can demonstrate that there were other injured players who met the IR-return threshold that the team simply put on IR, this is an unsupported assertion.

It really is quite simple. If you have a player that you would carry for 8+ weeks injured, you put them on IR-return the first chance you get. You don't wait because you even if someone better gets hurt you end up in the exact same situation - one guy on reserve and the other guy inactive for a few months. There simply is no downside. The only possible negative is not using it at all since it wastes a roster spot for several weeks.

You are apparently arguing against IR-returning a player who does not mean the threshold, which no one is claiming they should.

Click to expand...

Why would I need to demostrate that? If there is someone going into the season who is a top 15 player on the roster or so player who needs the designation, he is likely to get that. I am saying, Belichick isn't going to use it on a bottom of the roster guy just to have a 54 man roster. If there is someone going into the season who deserves the designation, he will get the designation (after week one because that is the earliest he can get it). I was stating that Belichick didn't go into the season with the intent to use it because he had it.

There is no downside using the designation for someone who deserves it. It is a waste to use it just because you have it and you want to use it just because you have it. I don't see anyone currently injured who looks to have long term injury worthy of the designation. Most of the people who would likely get it seem to be close to returning like Edelman, Stork, Chandler, Hightower, etc. You use this designation on a starter or at least a solid contributor.

I am sorry. I hope Roberts has a bright future, but I just don't see Belichick using the designation on him. Most rookie CBs take at least a month or two to get acclimated. Him being out of action until November means he is on a red shirt year. People are overrating this guy. He has a lot of promise, but he was a late round pick for a reason.

Rob0729 said:

Why would I need to demostrate that?

Click to expand...

If you are going to claim Belichick's history supports your point of view, you are going to need to support that assertion.

Rob0729 said:

I am saying, Belichick isn't going to use it on a bottom of the roster guy just to have a 54 man roster.

Click to expand...

Not one single person has made this argument. You've apparently seen some people asking if Roberts would meet the IR-return threshold along with BF's accurate claim that you use that designation on the first player who deserves it and conflated the two.

If you don't think Roberts is worthy, great! But that's a threshold discussion, not a rebuttal to BF's comments.

Oswlek said:

If you are going to claim Belichick's history supports your point of view, you are going to need to support that assertion.

Click to expand...

Why?!? If I cannot name anyone, it backs up my claim as much as disproves it. I never said that Belichick didn't use it on a player deserving who was injured in the preseason because he wanted it for the regular season. I said he kept it into the season rather than use it on a bottom of the roster guy. I NEVER said that he didn't use it on a player that he thought was a valuable contributor just to have it going into the season. In fact, I argued the opposite with Shianco who they hoped would be a key contributor when they added him to the roster.

If say Scott Chandler isn't going to return until like week 7. I am sure Belichick would use the IR designated to return on him. Never said he wouldn't. I said that Belichick isn't going to use it just to use it. You are either not getting my argument or misquoting me.

Not one single person has made this argument. You've apparently seen some people asking if Roberts would meet the IR-return threshold along with BF's accurate claim that you use that designation on the first player who deserves it and conflated the two.

If you don't think Roberts is worthy, that's great. It's also a threshold discussion, not a rebuttal to what BF had said.

Click to expand...

Roberts is the bottom of the 53 man roster guy. He may not be behind Logan Ryan, but he is definitely behind Butler, Brown, and Fletcher. He is listed as the 5th CB on the Patriots unofficial chart. A low round rookie is not going to go into the season as anything but depth and likely not even on the active roster. That is just the facts. Rarely does a rookie play key role early in the season. And if Roberts was IRed DTR, his season would start in November.

Rob0729 said:

Butler was not worth the IR designated to return designation last year. He had his moments last year, but he didn't play all that much. He had flashes of brillance, but he also wasn't on the active roster on many games.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I'm following Rob. He was given a spot on the rotation, wasn't he? Otherwise, how could Butler have played in those games.


You can't have watched the Super Bowl and tell me that Butler wasn't worth including in the rotation. He was good enough to make the roster, wasn't he? So why wouldn't he have been good enough for the DTR?

This is an intriguing topic, and I appreciate you taking time to explain your position. I have to wonder if Belichick sees it differently than you. As one poster put, the DTR seems like a "free, 54th roster spot." That way, Belichick can fill his depth chart with four veteran cornerbacks, and leave one position open for a promising talent who might be ready to take the field come October. When you put it that way, this could very well be a blessing in disguise....

But back to your original point...... I don't see how putting Robert on the DTR is going to cost the team anything. Either Roberts becomes a success or he doesn't.... and if he doesn't, then so what? There's nothing but upside in the equation.

I think you might be making the DTR option more drastic than it needs to be. Belichick did just fine in managing the team's injuries for over 10 years, before DTR was even instituted.

Rob, I'm honestly confused why you continue to argue against points neither I nor anyone else in this thread made. Not trying to be a jerk, just being as forthright as I can be.

I'd bet my life savings Roberts doesn't get that IR to return. I know we're all optimistic about him but the guy has only played one preseason game. Can't see anyway he gets that type of respect. I'd love to see it though but I highly doubt it.

My view is that this designation is a free 54th roster spot. It is one of Belichick's tools over the next month. If a starter is injured after the DTR is used, then we would keep him on the 53 man roster, as we always have done.

Chiuba E. Obele said:

I'm not sure I'm following Rob. He was given a spot on the rotation, wasn't he? Otherwise, how could Butler have played in those games?

"Butler was not worth the IR designated to return"​

You can't have watched the Super Bowl and tell me that Butler wasn't worth including in the rotation. He was good enough to make the roster, wasn't he? So why wouldn't he have been good enough for the DTR?

This is an intriguing topic, and I appreciate you taking time to explain your position. I have to wonder if Belichick sees it differently than you. s one poster put, the DTR seems like a "free, 54th roster spot." That way, Belichick can fill his depth chart with four veteran cornerbacks, and leave one position open for a promising talent who might be ready to take the field come October. When you put it that way, this could very well be a blessing in disguise....

But back to your original point...... I don't see how putting Robert on the DTR is going to cost the team anything. Either Roberts works or he doesn't.... and if he doesn't, then so what? There's nothing but upside in the equation.

I think you might be making the DTR option more drastic than it needs to be. Belichick did just fine in managing the team's injuries for over 10 years, before DTR was even instituted.

Click to expand...

People forget that Butler was the third guy off the bench in the Super Bowl. He had a great Super Bowl when he got in, but if you looked at his season up to the last play of the Super Bowl, you would argue he wasn't worth the IR designated to return. I am looking at this as the type of player he was last year more than the impact of the final play of the Super Bowl. In fact, I am really not even talking about Butler per sea, but a guy like Butler. I would not IR designated for return for a guy that Butler was until the end of the Super Bowl.

Again, giving Roberts that designation doesn't cost the team anything unless they end up needing for an impact player who is injured early in the season. If the Pats are forced to IR an impact player or only have a 52 man roster for 5-7 weeks because they have to carry an impact player who can't play because they don't have that designation, then it is a fairly big deal. You don't use that designation on potential. You use it on impact.

mgteich said:

My view is that this designation is a free 54th roster spot. It is one of Belichick's tools over the next month. If a starter is injured after the DTR is used, then we would keep him on the 53 man roster, as we always have done.

Click to expand...

I don't know about that...had to use it on Vereen in 2013. I mean with Roberts (not sure if you're thinking that) we're talking about a rookie who's missing pretty much all of the preseason and now he's going to jump in late in the season and play? Eh...I don't know about that.

This is the weirdest thread because usuall Rob gets it. Eliminate the bottom 5 or so players on the roster as they're probably pick up quality. Say the bottom 8 to make it a round number. That leaves the top 45, on a roster like the Patriots all of them will be worth keeping. One of them gets hurt for the sweet spot of "at least several weeks but not for the year". At this point you have three choice. IR him which isn't a viable option because he's above pick up quality and will return. Carry him on the 53. Or IR-DtR him.

If you IR-DtR him two things can happen - either someone else gets hurt in the sweet spot for DtR or someone doesn't. If someone doesn't you've gained the roster spot. If someone does then you have TWO players eligible. One gets IR-DtRed, the other is carried. Either way you are using one roster spot on two injured guys. But you're better off using it on the first to get the clock ticking on the return.

Oswlek said:

Rob, I'm honestly confused why you continue to argue against points neither I nor anyone else in this thread made. Not trying to be a jerk, just being as forthright as I can be.

Click to expand...

I am not trying to be a jerk either, but I don't get why you are accusing me of doing something that you are doing to me. You keep on asking me to give a list of players worthy of using the designation that Belichick didn't use it on to keep the designation into the season when I believe if there was someone worthy of the designation, he would have used it. I am just saying he would not use it just to use it.

So you keep arguing with me about a point I never said.

And by the way, many people have said that it is stupid not to use the designation to keep a 54th player. If there is no one worthy of that designation, that means these people are arguing exactly what I am trying to argue with them against. They want to use it just to use it.

BelichickFan said:

This is the weirdest thread because usuall Rob gets it. At the end of the day, eliminate the bottom 5 or so players on the roster as they're probably pick up quality. Say the bottom 8 to make it a round number. That leaves the top 45, on a roster like the Patriots all of them will be worth keeping. One of them gets hurt for the sweet spot of "at least several weeks but not for the year". At this point you have three choice. IR him which isn't a viable option because he's above pick up quality and will return. Carry him on the 53. Or IR-DtR him.

If you IR-DtR him two things can happen - either someone else gets hurt in the sweet spot for DtR or someone doesn't. If someone doesn't you've gained the roster spot. If someone does then you have TWO players eligible. One gets IR-DtRed, the other is carried. Either way you are using one roster spot on two injured guys. But you're better off using it on the first to get the clock ticking on the return.

Click to expand...

I don't know who you had in mind, but people are talking about using it on Ruufus and Roberts who haven't proven yet (not saying I think they suck, it's been positve but very small sample size) they can play in this league. I think you're right on the money if it's a guy we know can contribute.

BelichickFan said:

This is the weirdest thread because usuall Rob gets it. At the end of the day, eliminate the bottom 5 or so players on the roster as they're probably pick up quality. Say the bottom 8 to make it a round number. That leaves the top 45, on a roster like the Patriots all of them will be worth keeping. One of them gets hurt for the sweet spot of "at least several weeks but not for the year". At this point you have three choice. IR him which isn't a viable option because he's above pick up quality and will return. Carry him on the 53. Or IR-DtR him.

If you IR-DtR him two things can happen - either someone else gets hurt in the sweet spot for DtR or someone doesn't. If someone doesn't you've gained the roster spot. If someone does then you have TWO players eligible. One gets IR-DtRed, the other is carried. Either way you are using one roster spot on two injured guys. But you're better off using it on the first to get the clock ticking on the return.

Click to expand...

Not to worrry, I get it just fine. I know how Belichick uses the designation. He doesn't use it as a way to stash a 54th man on the roster. He uses it to avoid putting an impact player on long term IR because he values roster spots too much to tie up a roster spot for two months waiting for them to return.

Again, Oswelk keeps on asking me to give an example of what I never argued. But I have asked for examples of times where Belichick has tied up a roster spot on a player who couldn't play for 6-8 weeks or longer. The only one I can remember who was close was Gronk at 5 weeks (twice), but he is a special player and I think no one expected him to take five weeks to get back the second time.