Active Roster - 45 plus one that depends on opponent

[mgteich]

I see these 45 positions as almost always being active, although injuries could affect this "plan" in any given week.

The additional play could be almost anyone. If we sign an additional LB (like White or Davis), he might take one of the ST active roster spots.

OFFENSE (20)
QB (2)
RB (3)
FB (1)
WR (4)
TE (3)
OL (7)

DEFENSE (18)
DE (3)
DT (4)
LB (4)
CB (4)
S (3)

SPECIAL TEAMS (7)
K (1)
P (1)
LS (1)
ST (4) probably Slater, Butler and 2 safeties

 

[Ring 6]

I do not think 3 TE is a lock. Especially when the 5th WR is a much better player. We should spend a lot of time in 3 wide and we can use an OL as the 3rd TE
I would not expect hooman to be active at the expense of Thompkins.

 

[Ring 6]

I think you are light on the front 7 also especially proposing 5 safeties and 10 total DBs active. Need another DE especially if jones continues to move inside in sub. With 4 lbs you have to be considering nink a backup so the 4th DE is also important for that reason

 

[mgteich]

I think you are light on the front 7 also especially proposing 5 safeties and 10 total DBs active. Need another DE especially if jones continues to move inside in sub. With 4 lbs you have to be considering nink a backup so the 4th DE is also important for that reason

I guess that I'm fine with a 8th DL. I guess I just don't see Moore as always being worth an active roster spot as the 4th DE.

 

[mgteich]

I do not think 3 TE is a lock. Especially when the 5th WR is a much better player. We should spend a lot of time in 3 wide and we can use an OL as the 3rd TE
I would not expect hooman to be active at the expense of Thompkins.

I would expect that most of the time we would activate both Thompkins and Hooman. However, your point is well taken. An OL can be the blocking TE, if one is needed.

I agree that we will spends lots of time in 3 wide, perhaps a bit less now that we have Wright. It don't follow that we need FIVE active wide receivers. Four is probably plenty. After all, even if we send out 5 receivers, one should be Gronk.

 

[mgteich]

Based on Andy's comments, I think that we can be more flexible, having 2 flexible positions instead of one. I agree that 3 TE's is not a lock.

I also agree that we would also carry another from seven defensive player, perhaps the to-be-signed linebacker.

OFFENSE (19)
QB (2)
RB (3)
FB (1)
WR (4)
TE (2)
OL (7)

DEFENSE (18)
DE (3)
DT (4)
LB (4)
CB (4)
S (3)

SPECIAL TEAMS (7)
K (1)
P (1)
LS (1)
ST (4) probably Slater, Butler and 2 safeties

 

[Ring 6]

I guess that I'm fine with a 8th DL. I guess I just don't see Moore as always being worth an active roster spot as the 4th DE.

I thought we were discussing the spots needed, not the individual players. If we need to have 4 DEs (especially considering that our starting DE could have to move to LB if there were 2 injuries) then the 4 we have will be active, regardless of who they are.

 

[Ring 6]

I would expect that most of the time we would activate both Thompkins and Hooman. However, your point is well taken. An OL can be the blocking TE, if one is needed.

I agree that we will spends lots of time in 3 wide, perhaps a bit less now that we have Wright. It don't follow that we need FIVE active wide receivers. Four is probably plenty. After all, even if we send out 5 receivers, one should be Gronk.

Game day actives have to account for in game injuries. If our base is 3 wides, having only 1 backup to 3 starters is thin. I suppose you could argue that Wright is a WR too.

 

[brownj12]

I do not think 3 TE is a lock. Especially when the 5th WR is a much better player. We should spend a lot of time in 3 wide and we can use an OL as the 3rd TE
I would not expect hooman to be active at the expense of Thompkins.

Devlin could also play as the third TE in some situations. I would agree 3 TEs is not a lock.