Union vetoes revised emergency QB rule

[sb1]

How this affects Milton or Zappe… tbd.

 

[brdmaverick]

I'm sure there is probably more nuance than I can appreciate, but I know I'd be in favor of measures to prevent the San Francisco situation in the NFC Championship game in which they had CMC playing QB.

 

[Ross12]

How this affects Milton or Zappe… tbd.

Very interesting. I'm not exactly sure why the union vetoed it. Perhaps they felt like it would cause many QBs who would otherwise have jobs on the 53-man roster to instead be carried on the Practice Squad for far less money? So it promotes higher pay and job security for veteran QBs...? All I can think of.

I don't think it really affects the Pats since they're likely to carry 3 QBs regardless, although I guess theoretically they might've wanted to declare Milton a game-day inactive and make Zappe the "emergency 3rd" from the PS or something. Now, they'd need to have Zappe on the 53 man roster instead but otherwise functionally the same process would apply. In all likelihood, Zappe probably won't be here and Milton will be the "emergency 3rd" on the roster regardless.

 

[Pape]

wtf

assholes

 

[maust]

Guessing the union saw the rule as a way for owners to create a defacto 54th roster spot for positional insurance that would otherwise cost them more.

 

[maust]

wtf

assholes

I don't know my man. Upon further consideration you might think differently about who exactly are the assholes on this one.

 

[Pape]

I don't know my man. Upon further consideration you might think differently about who exactly are the assholes on this one.

I'm an equal opportunity hater. They all are assholes.

I'm sure the rejection has to be tied to compensation in some way.

with brissette injuring his throwing wing last night, it would have been a good way to stash a 4th qb without impacting the roster

 

[One-If-By-Sea]

with brissette injuring his throwing wing last night, it would have been a good way to stash a 4th qb without impacting the roster

That is exactly what a union does not want. The owners should expand the roster to 54. Problem solved but the owners woukd have to pay more money.

 

[Force Zero Boomer]

I don't think it really affects the Pats since they're likely to carry 3 QBs regardless, although I guess theoretically they might've wanted to declare Milton a game-day inactive and make Zappe the "emergency 3rd" from the PS or something. Now, they'd need to have Zappe on the 53 man roster instead but otherwise functionally the same process would apply. In all likelihood, Zappe probably won't be here and Milton will be the "emergency 3rd" on the roster regardless.

This doesn't affect the Pats, because if they want to keep Zappe, they'll have to carry him on the 53 anyway. He'll either be claimed off waivers or get signed after a 2 week contract expires (or now that the rule is gone, whenever). Or, he'll head the CFL. He wants to be on a roster. He just got married, he needs a stable paycheck and future prospects. And now that JB got hurt, Zappe time is inevitable (if the Pats aren't insane).

 

[Force Zero Boomer]

I'm an equal opportunity hater. They all are assholes.

I'm sure the rejection has to be tied to compensation in some way.

with brissette injuring his throwing wing last night, it would have been a good way to stash a 4th qb without impacting the roster

They weren't stashing Zappe on the PS anyway. If they wanted a QB to stash, they should have brought another young guy into camp.

 

[Pape]

They weren't stashing Zappe on the PS anyway. If they wanted a QB to stash, they should have brought another young guy into camp.

You may be right, you may be wrong... It no longer matters

 

[Clonamery]

You may be right, you may be wrong... It no longer matters

You're a lunatic.

 

[Force Zero Boomer]

You may be right, you may be wrong... It no longer matters

I could be proven wrong even now. They still could waive him, which would be hilarious.

 

[Pape]

I could be proven wrong even now. They still could waive him, which would be hilarious.

lmao...literally made me laugh out loud... either way we win

 

[Pape]

You're a lunatic.

Only when there's a Bad Moon Risin'

 

[Clonamery]

Only when there's a Bad Moon Risin'

I was thinking Billy Joel but CCR is better.

 

[Pape]

I was thinking Billy Joel but CCR is better.

it was clever tbh... but Luna... Lunatic... bad moon risin'... just had to go there

 

[ahmed]

Guessing the union saw the rule as a way for owners to create a defacto 54th roster spot for positional insurance that would otherwise cost them more.

This is it. Teams would have abused the heck out of it.

 

[Pape]

This is it. Teams would have abused the heck out of it.

So?

 

[ahmed]

So?

So not surprising players voted against it.