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

Chiuba E. Obele said:

One last question, just for clarity's sake...assuming an impact player goes down early in the season, and are slapped with a DTR designation, does that open up their roster spot for someone else?

Click to expand...

They can only use the IR DTR return on a player on the opening day 53 man roster and once they go on it, their roster spot opens up for another player until that player is activated again. The player must sit out six weeks and then can practice for two before being activated. He can practice during that time without costing a roster spot.

Also, if player injured in the preseason is given that designation, he needs to be on the active 53 man roster for the first week of the season before he is put on the IR designation.

Chiuba E. Obele said:

One last question, just for clarity's sake...assuming an impact player goes down early in the season, and are slapped with a DTR designation, does that open up their roster spot for someone else?

Click to expand...

Yes, that's the whole point.

@Oswlek @Rob0729 Alright, thanks for clearing that up

Oswlek said:

I know, which is why I kept pointing out that you were arguing against points that weren't being made. What you bolded is precisely what BF was saying all along.



We would disagree here, but again, that is a threshold discussion, not a logistical one.

Click to expand...

But that isn't the case. I said there was no way that Belichick would use the designation on a bottom of the roster guy and then BF countered with Vishante Schianco to argue against it. Although I think the Pats didn't look at him as a bottom of the roster guy when they put him on it.

Rob0729 said:

But that isn't the case. I said there was no way that Belichick would use the designation on a bottom of the roster guy and then BF countered with Vishante Schianco to argue against it. Although I think the Pats didn't look at him as a bottom of the roster guy when they put him on it.

Click to expand...

No, he countered with Shiancoe to point out that Bill's threshold is probably lower than top 10-15, not to contradict the basic usage of the designation. Why would he when "the first person who deserves it" was his point all along?

Common ground at last! (I hope )

Oswlek said:

No, he countered with Shiancoe to point out that Bill's threshold is probably lower than top 10-15, not to contradict the basic usage of the designation. Why would he when "the first person who deserves it" was his point all along?

Common ground at last! (I hope )

Click to expand...

Sure, that's common ground. The question will be "who deserves it". Clearly "whoever" deserves it could have Blount's roster spot for Game 1.

mgteich said:

Sure, that's common ground. The question will be "who deserves it". Clearly "whoever" deserves it could have Blount's roster spot for Game 1.

Click to expand...

Well, odds are good Roberts will have that spot that game no matter what if he is going to IR (regular IR or IR DTR). I am guessing the Patriots don't want to release him to put him on IR because someone might grab him. And the only way they can put him on IR while avoiding waivers is to have him on the roster week 1.

Oswlek said:

No, he countered with Shiancoe to point out that Bill's threshold is probably lower than top 10-15, not to contradict the basic usage of the designation. Why would he when "the first person who deserves it" was his point all along?

Common ground at last! (I hope )

Click to expand...

Look at his response to me. Not only did he respond to the part of me saying that no way would Belichick would never use the designation on a bottom of the roster player, but he actually stripped all my other points from my longer post and only included it in his response.

The threshold may be more than 10-15. It could be 20-25. I am not in Belichick's head. It is also qualified. For example, Siliga was not a top 15 player last year when he went to IR DTR, but the lack of depth at the position made his contributions up there in that range.

Roberts would be higher because of the lack of depth at CB than his contribution thus far, but the fact that he is a raw rookie lowers his ranking.

Rob0729 said:

Well, odds are good Roberts will have that spot that game no matter what if he is going to IR (regular IR or IR DTR). I am guessing the Patriots don't want to release him to put him on IR because someone might grab him. And the only way they can put him on IR while avoiding waivers is to have him on the roster week 1.

Click to expand...

Yes, Roberts may be on the 53 man roster and then put on season ending IR, if this avoids him being subject to waivers.

Rob0729 said:

Look at his response to me.

Click to expand...

I followed along and it seems like just miscommunication to me. I'm 99.99999999999999999999999999999999% sure BF's point was exactly as I laid out, but he can correct me if I'm wrong.

Rob0729 said:

The threshold may be more than 10-15. It could be 20-25. I am not in Belichick's head. It is also qualified. For example, Siliga was not a top 15 player last year when he went to IR DTR, but the lack of depth at the position made his contributions up there in that range.

Roberts would be higher because of the lack of depth at CB than his contribution thus far, but the fact that he is a raw rookie lowers his ranking.

Click to expand...

I agree completely, which is why I brought up Roberts name initially. You'd almost never expect a 7th round rookie to even warrant consideration, but this may be the rare time it does. I personally suspect that the lost practice time would be too much to overcome. Being on IR-return isn't the same as simply being inactive for the first few months.

Oswlek said:

I followed along and it seems like just miscommunication to me. I'm 99.99999999999999999999999999999999% sure BF's point was exactly as I laid out, but he can correct me if I'm wrong

Click to expand...

Can't get here at work so its been a while. All I was trying to say is you don't need to wait for a starter or really good player, just until you lose someone who will be out 4-8 weeks who you don't want to IR. At that point there's no point in waiting. Not sure why this has gone on so long.

BelichickFan said:

Can't get here at work so its been a while. All I was trying to say is you don't need to wait for a starter or really good player, just until you lose someone who will be out 4-8 weeks who you don't want to IR. At that point there's no point in waiting. Not sure why this has gone on so long.

Click to expand...

So, complete agreement in execution, minor disagreement in where the delineation is, just as I thought.

https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/07-15-15-important-dates6.pdf

1.) Starting on September 6 After 4:00 p.m., New York time, a club is permitted to place a player on Reserve/Injured as “Designated for Return.”

September 6 is before any Week 1 games.

2.) If the Pats want to place Roberts on IR without having him go through waivers they can do so the first cutdown to 75 players which is September 1st.

In @MikeReiss chat today, he speculated that Brandon LaFell could remain on PUP and miss the 1st 6 weeks. Not good.

Chiuba E. Obele said:

In @MikeReiss chat today, he speculated that Brandon LaFell could remain on PUP and miss the 1st 6 weeks. Not good.

Click to expand...

But he's saying this is if Wayne makes a contribution and referred to it as playing safe.

Oh my God! Five ****ing games without Lafell. Lets just give up now.

You dont screw around with WR feet. AD and RW can fill in. You have JE, DA, Gronk and Chandler. We will be fine for 5 games. And what is nice is it opens a spot for Harper until the end of week 6. A lot can happen between now and then.

Devlin is gonna be our IR to return.

deters said:

Devlin is gonna be our IR to return.

Click to expand...

No cause he's more probably then not done for the season

Develin case closed.

Luxusdk said:

No cause he's more probably then not done for the season

Click to expand...

Depends on the break.