Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    general counsel's Avatar
    general counsel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    atlanta, georgia
    Age
    52
    Posts
    5,616
    Rep Power
    82

    One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active guys

    Can someone please explain the rationale for why the nfl and its collective bargaining agreement permit a 53 man roster but only allow 46 guys to dress on game day? I dont understand this from either the players or the owners perspective.

    From the owners side, they are paying 53 guys. You would think that they would want all resources available to play on game day. This gives the coaches maximum flexibility based on game situations as to who comes into the game at what point.

    From the players perspective, you would think all guys on the roster would want to the maximum shot of getting into a game, even if the odds are low for the last few guys. One thing for sure, you can't get a better contract if you dont get a chance to play in a game and you cant get a chance to play from the inactive list.

    Another point (raised in the new issue of espn the magazine by michael robinson). With all the attention on concussions, you would think that having those extra seven guys eligible to play on game day might ease the pressure on bringing injured players back into a game prematurely, even if only by a little bit.

    This rule has never made any sense to me, maybe one of you guys can provide some insight.

    Ramming speed to all

    general counsel



  2. #2
    ZiaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Las Cruces, New Mexico, United States
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,530
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    The other 7 members are the practice squad guys.

  3. #3
    general counsel's Avatar
    general counsel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    atlanta, georgia
    Age
    52
    Posts
    5,616
    Rep Power
    82

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    I dont think so Zia. I think that the practice squad guys are incremental to the 53 man roster.

    ramming speed to all

    general counsel


  4. #4
    berg8309's Avatar
    berg8309 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,899
    Rep Power
    42

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    For one, it is a strategic thing, making teams pick the players they need for that game. You can keep them all on your roster, but you need to make the right choices on gameday as well. I think that adds some challenge to the game. In addition to the fact it makes you manage your roster differently during a game.

    Second, it creates competition. Players may have made the squad, but they will still have to work hard to get in the game. Yes, you could allow them to "dress" and not play them unless you have to. But it's different for a guy when he's not dressed. It sends a message that you can't send by dressing him and not playing him.

    I doubt it would solve concussion problems either. Teams don't say "Well we think you have a concussion, but we don't have enough backups, so you are playing." Teams aren't allowed to send players back on the field if they suspect there is a concussion. If they don't suspect a concussion, the guy can play again, and having more backups won't change the fact that teams will still send their best players out there if they feel they can play.

    Overall I think the system works pretty well at creating competition and injecting more strategy into the game. That said, I wouldn't be upset over a modification of the system similar to 3rd QB rule (If that hasn't changed, I forget if they modified it). That being that you can designate a non-dressed player as your third string QB. That QB can enter the game at any time, but if they do, your other two QBs are removed from the game, and can't re-enter until the 4th quarter. If they could adopt that for other positions as well, it might not be a bad thing.

  5. #5
    TekeRam's Avatar
    TekeRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, United States
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,879
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    During the season the teams carry rosters of 53+7 players. The 7 are obviously the practice squad, free to practice with the team, but can be given any contract at or above the PS minimum, and can sign with any team the choose if they are put on the active roster.

    Of the 53 standard players, 45+1 dress for the game, the extra being an emergency 3rd QB. The reason that the full 53 do not dress is simple. It's to keep a competative balance in regards to fatigue in a game. The players who don't dress for the game are essentially reserved spots for injured players. Early inthe year, yes it means that there are healthy scratches, but in the middle to late in the year a team might have trouble fielding a full 45(not to mention 53!), while a healthy team could just swap out players every down and by the 4th quarter, they would be relatively fresh in comparison to the more injured team.

    So the answer you're looking for: Balance. That's why only 45 dress.
    I believe!

  6. #6
    general counsel's Avatar
    general counsel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    atlanta, georgia
    Age
    52
    Posts
    5,616
    Rep Power
    82

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    I find the balance and competition arguments unpersuasive because the same concepts apply if all 53 players dress. As long as both teams have the same number of players dressed, how does it add more balance to have 45 vs 53 dressed? Different teams choose to deploy their guys in different ways. Dressing more guys potentially makes it more, not less competitive because more guys can show what they can do on the field, rather than just on the practice field and different teams can decide how many specialists etc. to deploy.

    Bottom line to me is that as long as its a level playing field (ie both teams dress the same number of guys) i dont see why guys should be on a roster but not be eligible to play on game day. I understand the practice squad, that is a different concept.

    ramming speed to all

    general counsel


  7. #7
    RAMarkable is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Age
    59
    Posts
    2,095
    Rep Power
    41

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    Quote Originally Posted by general counsel View Post
    Can someone please explain the rationale for why the nfl and its collective bargaining agreement permit a 53 man roster but only allow 46 guys to dress on game day? I dont understand this from either the players or the owners perspective.

    From the owners side, they are paying 53 guys. You would think that they would want all resources available to play on game day. This gives the coaches maximum flexibility based on game situations as to who comes into the game at what point.

    From the players perspective, you would think all guys on the roster would want to the maximum shot of getting into a game, even if the odds are low for the last few guys. One thing for sure, you can't get a better contract if you dont get a chance to play in a game and you cant get a chance to play from the inactive list.

    Another point (raised in the new issue of espn the magazine by michael robinson). With all the attention on concussions, you would think that having those extra seven guys eligible to play on game day might ease the pressure on bringing injured players back into a game prematurely, even if only by a little bit.

    This rule has never made any sense to me, maybe one of you guys can provide some insight.

    Ramming speed to all

    general counsel
    ^^^This^^^^ With all of the concern about injuries and especially long-term chronic brain conditions becoming more in the news every day, it is past time for the NFL and the Player's Union to wake up and change the policy of having 46 dress while 7 other players sit around and do nothing.

    I agree wholeheartedly with gc on this issue. I can't find any reason why the league has this rule and it needs to be changed now.

    Good thread, gc


    WHAT SAY YE?

  8. #8
    ZiaRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Las Cruces, New Mexico, United States
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,530
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    Agh there we go it's 53 plus 7 practice squad guys. My bad

  9. #9
    RealRam's Avatar
    RealRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    8,407
    Rep Power
    68

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    Legit question / good point, GC. How about sending to NFL and/or STL Rams?

  10. #10
    TekeRam's Avatar
    TekeRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, United States
    Age
    30
    Posts
    3,879
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    Quote Originally Posted by general counsel View Post
    I find the balance and competition arguments unpersuasive because the same concepts apply if all 53 players dress. As long as both teams have the same number of players dressed, how does it add more balance to have 45 vs 53 dressed? Different teams choose to deploy their guys in different ways. Dressing more guys potentially makes it more, not less competitive because more guys can show what they can do on the field, rather than just on the practice field and different teams can decide how many specialists etc. to deploy.

    Bottom line to me is that as long as its a level playing field (ie both teams dress the same number of guys) i dont see why guys should be on a roster but not be eligible to play on game day. I understand the practice squad, that is a different concept.

    ramming speed to all

    general counsel
    Because in NO week in the NFL are you going to have 53 guys per roster who can actually play in a game. There will be "minor" injuries in training camp that make a player miss the first 2 weeks. Then in week 1 there will be players hurt. And again in week 2, 3, and so on.

    Unless there is some way to make teams come clean about how many players are truly injured and how many can play, there is no way to make both teams dress the same number of guys without setting an arbitrary number. Yes, you can have all 53 guys dress, but then a healthy team will destroy an injured one on stamina alone.

    Having a better IR system would work, but as it stands now, if all 53 players dressed, firstly, hardly any team would be able to, and secondly, each team will end up fielding a different number than their opponent.
    I believe!

  11. #11
    berg8309's Avatar
    berg8309 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,899
    Rep Power
    42

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    Quote Originally Posted by general counsel View Post
    I find the balance and competition arguments unpersuasive because the same concepts apply if all 53 players dress. As long as both teams have the same number of players dressed, how does it add more balance to have 45 vs 53 dressed? Different teams choose to deploy their guys in different ways. Dressing more guys potentially makes it more, not less competitive because more guys can show what they can do on the field, rather than just on the practice field and different teams can decide how many specialists etc. to deploy.

    Bottom line to me is that as long as its a level playing field (ie both teams dress the same number of guys) i dont see why guys should be on a roster but not be eligible to play on game day. I understand the practice squad, that is a different concept.

    ramming speed to all

    general counsel
    You are essentially arguing the same thing, except saying that more = better. I disagree. The inherent unfairness of having to choose between your special teams specialist who is a WR, and an extra DT who is good at stuffing the run makes it more challenging for coaches. You aren't really adding drama or strategy, or even the decision of how many specialists to deploy if you allow all players on the field, because you've deployed them all. The system now forces teams to decide how many specialists to employ, and in what area. Need WR help for that game? Then maybe a CB takes a seat. But maybe you are going against the packers, so actually a DE takes a seat. Teams have to adjust strategy and which guys to dress based on the team they play. As opposed to choosing every single guy every single time. Now if you had rules like baseball, where once you come out you don't go back in, that would require a larger bench, but you don't.

    And I still say it does create more competition. I don't see how getting rid of the limit makes it more competitive. Your argument seems to be if they play in the games, and not just practice, it is inherently more competitive. I don't see how those link together. What the system does now is get guys to work harder and improve their game so they are the ones standing there in pads, not the guys they are competing with. If you want to show you have what it takes to play, you have to show it in practice. Yes, some guys don't show much in practice and then shine on gamedays, but it would be a poor decision to change the rule just to accomodate the random few who don't practice well. Show the coaches you have what it takes in practice, or go home. This is the NFL, not kindergarden. Not everyone gets to play.

    Finally, as far as injuries go...it also reduces the non-dressed players risk of injury. Most of the non-dressed players would probably play ST, since they are generally considered more expendable. ST players are more likely to get hurt. Not sure how it reduces the risk of injury. Overall rule changes would do that, not additional players slamming into each other.
    Last edited by berg8309; -05-22-2012 at 04:05 PM.

  12. #12
    MauiRam's Avatar
    MauiRam is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Maui, Hi.
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,905
    Rep Power
    79

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    Quote Originally Posted by TekeRam View Post
    Because in NO week in the NFL are you going to have 53 guys per roster who can actually play in a game. There will be "minor" injuries in training camp that make a player miss the first 2 weeks. Then in week 1 there will be players hurt. And again in week 2, 3, and so on.

    Unless there is some way to make teams come clean about how many players are truly injured and how many can play, there is no way to make both teams dress the same number of guys without setting an arbitrary number. Yes, you can have all 53 guys dress, but then a healthy team will destroy an injured one on stamina alone.

    Having a better IR system would work, but as it stands now, if all 53 players dressed, firstly, hardly any team would be able to, and secondly, each team will end up fielding a different number than their opponent.
    It would seem that increasing overall roster size and gameday active rosters would be the best way to provide better competition on the field. Now that rookie salaries have been brought under control, owners could redirect some of the savings to a few more roster spots. I doubt it will never happen though. Veteran players will want to divvy up those savings along with the owners ..

  13. #13
    general counsel's Avatar
    general counsel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    atlanta, georgia
    Age
    52
    Posts
    5,616
    Rep Power
    82

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    I find the injury argument a compelling one. I think a disabled list concept would fix that problem. The IR rule in the NFL is all messed up. However, i point out that injuries are part of the game and towards the end of the season, competition gets thrown way out of whack anyway because teams that are out of it are more likely to put guys on IR than teams who are still trying to make the playoffs, which creates greater disparity between the haves and the have nots.

    Ramming speed to all

    general counsel


  14. #14
    berg8309's Avatar
    berg8309 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,899
    Rep Power
    42

    Re: One NFL Rule that i can not make any sense of....the 53 man roster vs 46 active g

    Quote Originally Posted by general counsel View Post
    I find the injury argument a compelling one. I think a disabled list concept would fix that problem. The IR rule in the NFL is all messed up. However, i point out that injuries are part of the game and towards the end of the season, competition gets thrown way out of whack anyway because teams that are out of it are more likely to put guys on IR than teams who are still trying to make the playoffs, which creates greater disparity between the haves and the have nots.

    Ramming speed to all

    general counsel
    The IR definitely needs to be revamped, but I think that's a separate issue from 46 vs. 53 dressed players. I don't see how the extra dressed players would reduce injuries when the full 46 don't see the field anyway.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: -11-22-2011, 02:25 PM
  2. Gordy Promoted To Active Roster
    By r8rh8rmike in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -09-21-2011, 08:03 PM
  3. Which WRs will make the 2011 Rams Active Roster?
    By AvengerRam in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: -05-04-2011, 03:56 PM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: -11-29-2009, 11:45 AM
  5. TE Butler Promoted To Active Roster
    By r8rh8rmike in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -11-26-2009, 02:17 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •