Sign in to follow this  
Cowboyz1

STUPID rule if you ask me!

Recommended Posts

According to current rules, NFL teams carry 53 players on the active roster, then must place eight players on an inactive list prior to each week’s game.

 

Can anyone give me one good reason why a team shouldn't be able to play all 53 players that run their asses into the ground all camp and preseason to make the team, just to sit on Sundays and watch as a TE like watson plays tackle after an injury(happened with the rams last year)? What gives? I find no reason teams should not have all their players available. Why not they're on the team! Stupid just plain old stupid.:D

Edited by Cowboyz1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ummm....last time I checked, I wasn't on the NFL rules committee. :D

 

But I'm with you....I don't get it either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember reading about this somewhere. I believe rosters have always been 45 players. I don't know how they arrived at the number 45 originally (maybe a starter and back-up at each position plus a kicker or something I don't know), but that's what they've always been. The players union lobbied over the years to expand the number of players on the roster in order to create more jobs for its members. Eventually, it was agreed to through one of the collective bargaining agreements that teams could carry up to 53 players, but still only 45 would dress on gameday.

 

So basically, the 53 man roster is an NFLPA jobs-creation program for players who otherwise would be out of a job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the inactives get a full pay check? If they do not then that is the only reason it makes sense. Salary cap reasons tor just the fact of saving cash...not sure. There has to be a resaon other then just head count

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do the inactives get a full pay check? If they do not then that is the only reason it makes sense. Salary cap reasons tor just the fact of saving cash...not sure. There has to be a resaon other then just head count

 

997266[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, they get a full game check.

 

Here's an article discussing it - looks like nobody really understands it and nobody is in favor of this rule.

 

53-Man Roster Debate

 

Here's another one where the NFL justifies the rule by saying that suiting up 53 players would somehow hurt the competitive balance of tle league. Seems like a flimsy argument.

 

Roster Limits

Edited by Vet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another factor in expanding to 53 with 45 (plus a team option of making a QB semi-active as a 46th player) was the cyhange of the IR rule. The old rule was IR for 4 weeks minimum, which was changed for IR being out for the year unless he is cut. A problem arose for saving roster slots for shorter-term injuries, so the taxi-squad was expanded to 8 players. It fluxuated from 0-4 players previously). The taxi squad is also for those players the team wants to keep on the roster but don't feel as ready to play in the league and/or for a particular opponent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the 8 inactive players are being paid, I don't understand why they can't play. Unless the NFL is worried about the additional injury risk?

 

I agree this rule makes no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.