possible expansion of Rosters..BUT not for awhile...

[Pats726]

Not sure if this has been posted...

http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm


TALK SPREADS OF INCREASING ROSTER SIZES

Due to a spike in player injuries, a league source tells us that there is growing talk in league circles of increasing team rosters by as many as five players.

Per the source, the numbers being thrown around are 57 and 58. The current roster size is 53.

There's also talk about pumping up the game-day roster from 45. This would reduce situations in which, for example, a backup offensive lineman who is activated because a starting offensive lineman is out with an injury has to take a position on the kickoff team because there wasn't an active roster spot for one of the guys who usually performs those duties.

The presence of additional players, however, would create issues with the salary cap. Teams would either have to find a way to pay all of them with the currently available allotment, or the per-team limit would have to be increased.

But increasing the salary cap would mean increasing the percentage of "Total Football Revenue" that the players of all teams share. Working with the cap as currently formulated would result in less available cash for the players to share.

The bottom line, then, is that it's unlikely that any changes in roster sizes would be made beyond the confines of formal renegotiation of the entire Collective Bargaining Agreement, which currently is due to expire after the 2011 season.

Makes a LOT of sense...I totally afree...although as the article stated, because of salary cap and other CBA type things, it would take 4 years to do.
NOY good. In teh interem, why not expand teh game day roster from 45 to 48 OR something like that...THAT woul;d not interfere with any salary cap and have more players available for the game. Makes sense..so they will not do it.

 

[Oswlek]

FYI, BB has commented on this in the past and he is vehemently against it. Despite NE always getting killed with injuries, he fears the game becoming too specialized.

It certainly would eliminate some of the advantage that NE has with having versatile guys.

 

[jaytyme]

FYI, BB has commented on this in the past and he is vehemently against it. Despite NE always getting killed with injuries, he fears the game becoming too specialized.

It certainly would eliminate some of the advantage that NE has with having versatile guys.

lets just face it head on........every rule change or interpretaton in the past 5 years has been designed to derail the pats. BB has continued to adjust his team to take advantage of the new rules.

 

[xmarkd400x]

Perhaps granting roster exemptions to players who are noted as "Out" on Wednesday or before?

 

[mykl]

Perhaps granting roster exemptions to players who are noted as "Out" on Wednesday or before?

As you've pointed out, there are other ways to address this problem without expanding the roster. Expanding the roster really is like using a nuke to deal with termites. Small problem...a solution that creates all kinds of unintended consequences.

 

[AzPatsFan]

Not sure if this has been posted...

http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm


TALK SPREADS OF INCREASING ROSTER SIZES

Due to a spike in player injuries, a league source tells us that there is growing talk in league circles of increasing team rosters by as many as five players.

Per the source, the numbers being thrown around are 57 and 58. The current roster size is 53.

There's also talk about pumping up the game-day roster from 45. This would reduce situations in which, for example, a backup offensive lineman who is activated because a starting offensive lineman is out with an injury has to take a position on the kickoff team because there wasn't an active roster spot for one of the guys who usually performs those duties.

The presence of additional players, however, would create issues with the salary cap. Teams would either have to find a way to pay all of them with the currently available allotment, or the per-team limit would have to be increased.

But increasing the salary cap would mean increasing the percentage of "Total Football Revenue" that the players of all teams share. Working with the cap as currently formulated would result in less available cash for the players to share.

The bottom line, then, is that it's unlikely that any changes in roster sizes would be made beyond the confines of formal renegotiation of the entire Collective Bargaining Agreement, which currently is due to expire after the 2011 season.

Makes a LOT of sense...I totally afree...although as the article stated, because of salary cap and other CBA type things, it would take 4 years to do.
NOY good. In teh interem, why not expand teh game day roster from 45 to 48 OR something like that...THAT woul;d not interfere with any salary cap and have more players available for the game. Makes sense..so they will not do it.

I do not beleive there is a difference in pay for a player who is on the inactive 53 versus the active 47, except as their individual contracts may differ.

So the league could vote to expand the number of active players upwards from 47 to as high as 53 at no increase in expenses. I agree exapanding above 53 would cost more money though.

 

[jaytyme]

I do not beleive there is a difference in pay for a player who is on the inactive 53 versus the active 47, except as their individual contracts may differ.

So the league could vote to expand the number of active players upwards from 47 to as high as 53 at no increase in expenses. I agree exapanding above 53 would cost more money though.

once again you have said what the original poster said, is plagerism your career?

 

[Va_Pats_Fan]

Not sure if this has been posted...


The bottom line, then, is that it's unlikely that any changes in roster sizes would be made beyond the confines of formal renegotiation of the entire Collective Bargaining Agreement, which currently is due to expire after the 2011 season.

Offer the nflpa a deal, cap rookie contracts and add more ppl to the roster. This allows for more players to get paid, and rookies not get exorbitant salaries. Everyones happy (except maybe rookies )

 

[patchick]

FYI, BB has commented on this in the past and he is vehemently against it. Despite NE always getting killed with injuries, he fears the game becoming too specialized.

It certainly would eliminate some of the advantage that NE has with having versatile guys.

He may be against roster expansion, but hasn't he said he thought everybody on the 53 should be available for each game?

 

[Pats726]

He may be against roster expansion, but hasn't he said he thought everybody on the 53 should be available for each game?

I think he HAS said that and I know the Pats proposed a fw times rules that would allow inactive players to play on special teams or in other situations. The league voted against it every time. It might make sense to be expand teh game day roster AND be against expanding the 53...THAT does make sense.. Not sure about exemptions of players OUT on injury..not counting for a game..but I do think it has to be well thought out befoe changes are made.
As said the easiest involves expansion of the 45 game day roster.