A Burgundy and Gold Obsession
Kneel before Sod

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Disagree Disagree:  0
Post of the Year Post of the Year:  0
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Join Date
    06-30-09
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    3,569
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Indiana

    Default NFL ups roster limit from 80 to 90

    Oh boy, 320 more UDFAs get to try their shot at becoming an NFL football player.

    League unexpectedly expands rosters from 80 to 90
    Posted by Mike Florio on April 23, 2012, 6:33 PM EDT

    Getty ImagesLast month, the NFL’s owners tabled until May a variety of proposed changes, including the expansion of the offseason rosters from 80 to 90 players per team.

    On Monday, out of the blue, NFL spokesman Greg Aiello announced on Twitter that, as of 4:00 p.m. ET on Tuesday, the roster limit officially will be expanded.

    ( Greg Aiello ‏ @gregaiello
    NFL roster limit has been increased from 80 to 90 players, effective 4 pm ET tomorrow.5:39 PM - 23 Apr 12 via web )


    It means that another 320 players will get a chance to win a job on the 53-man roster via their efforts during a truncated offseason program and a less intense training camp. (It also means that another 320 players will have the chance to say “no, thanks” to an invitation to play pro football — and none will.)

    It’s unclear how the change was made apart from the confines of an ownership meeting. It’s possible that a vote was taken electronically or by phone, or that some other approval process was used, given that the change technically will be made to a bylaw, not a formal rule.

    As explained by Competition Committee chairman Rich McKay last month, the increase from 80 to 90 will result in a decrease from 90 to 80 players after the third preseason game and a drop from 80 to 53 after the final preseason game, which will flood the market with 864 players less than a week before the first game of the season.
    Link: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...from-80-to-90/


    Shanny does like having extra bodies around for competition. The more the merrier.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    I'm giving it a 2-4 year window. Looking for improvement in all areas. Redskins, you're on the clock.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    04-11-09
    Location
    Greensboro, NC
    Posts
    17,838
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    94
    Marine Corps Virginia

    Default

    This makes no sense unless you're going to also expand the game day roster. With the increasing risks of injury, I don't get why they don't just bump the roster limit up to 57 or 60 players. What's the downside? It would be a good thing for everyone involved.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    Subscribe to our BGO Mailing List

    You ain't bonafide

  3. #3

    Join Date
    10-01-09
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    9,780
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    133
    Virginia

    Default

    No problem with the expansion. But the cuts could be handled better. Cut to 80 after first preseason game. Cut to 70 after second preseason game. Then to 60 after game three. Then to 53 or whatever number the teams want to have for the regular season.

    864 players released at one time is insane. 256 go to practice squads, but the formula for releasing each week in the preseason is better.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    The simplicity in me is complicated.
    I live in my own little world, but that's ok. They know me here.
    Redskins Fan - Emeritus

  4. #4

    Join Date
    06-30-09
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    3,569
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Indiana

    Default

    Boone, I tend to agree with you for one reason-if your increasing the number of slots available for those wanting to try to make the roster of an NFL team by 12.5% then make the number of roster slots increase by 12.5% also. I've been thinking for a while that 53 is an inadequate number of total roster spots available for each team in today's NFL anyway and a 12.5% increase would allow-rounding up a bit-60 roster slots for each team. To me it seems to be a win-win.

    Of course I also would like to see the whole "game day inactives" thing looked at with a very critical eye as well and be eliminated if it can't be seriously justified.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    I'm giving it a 2-4 year window. Looking for improvement in all areas. Redskins, you're on the clock.

  5. #5
    2016 BGO Survivor Champ

    Join Date
    08-01-09
    Location
    My location
    Posts
    11,498
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Florida State

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by servumtuum View Post
    Boone, I tend to agree with you for one reason-if your increasing the number of slots available for those wanting to try to make the roster of an NFL team by 12.5% then make the number of roster slots increase by 12.5% also. I've been thinking for a while that 53 is an inadequate number of total roster spots available for each team in today's NFL anyway and a 12.5% increase would allow-rounding up a bit-60 roster slots for each team. To me it seems to be a win-win.

    Of course I also would like to see the whole "game day inactives" thing looked at with a very critical eye as well and be eliminated if it can't be seriously justified.

    The owners don't want to pay those extra salaries.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    The more things change...the more they stay the same. It's like deja vu all over again.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    13,516
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Florida Atlantic

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Boone View Post
    This makes no sense unless you're going to also expand the game day roster. With the increasing risks of injury, I don't get why they don't just bump the roster limit up to 57 or 60 players. What's the downside? It would be a good thing for everyone involved.
    Disagree - gives those borderline guys that don't get contracts a chance to prove themselves, when they otherwise might have just gone on to another career. I like this move, although I would have liked it better if they'd done the cuts like BB suggested.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. For 12 Year-Old Astrophysicist Prodigy, the Sky's the Limit
    By Lanky Livingston in forum The 5 O'Clock Club
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-30-11, 10:57 AM
  2. Hold the brownies! Bill could limit bake sales
    By Sarge in forum The 5 O'Clock Club
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-06-10, 12:50 PM
  3. Redskins Rule: Warm Ups
    By BGO in forum Redskins Video
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-27-09, 07:30 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-21-09, 01:51 PM

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

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