1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

48 man game day roster limit is stupid.

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by hitman8, Aug 13, 2017.

  1. hitman8

    hitman8 Well-Known Member

    3,040
    2,485
    113
    Nov 11, 2016
    It's because of this stupid limit that teams have to play starters and star players on special teams.

    I don't know what idiot or group of idiots came up with this rule but it should be increased from 48 to 53 asap.

    That way you can keep your starters off the field on ST and not risk losing them to stupid injuries like what just happened with Raekwon.
     
  2. dirtylandry

    dirtylandry Well-Known Member

    4,214
    1,750
    113
    Aug 2, 2015
    it is 53
     
  3. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    It's actually 46 I believe, but here's how you want to look at it, it's a 46 man active roster and a 53 man season roster.

    The league allows 53 for slightly injured players, there's always a couple nicked up players, so lets say you have 7 players injured for this game, and the opponent has none, now it's 46 vs 53, giving injury a much larger impact on winning and losing, also that might induce teams/players to play injured.

    As a by product, HCs use it as a message sending tool, see Jayjay week one 2016, but it's for parity and player safety.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  4. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    [​IMG]
     
  5. hitman8

    hitman8 Well-Known Member

    3,040
    2,485
    113
    Nov 11, 2016
    I think it is stupid logic and counterproductive for the NFL to risk their star players on special teams. The game day roster should be increased to 53 so that starters dont have to play ST.

    You can still have an inactive list for injured or doghouse players simply by increasing the season roster from 53 to 58.

    53 active players for gameday is what we need in order to avoid playing starters on ST.
     
  6. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    That probably wouldn't change who played ST though, you can't just throw bodies on the field, they have to be able to play, expanding the roster to 58 isn't going to get you any better players, the bottom of every teams roster is a mess because there isn't enough talent to go around.

    I think the main issue is that you're not giving ST enough credit, you're looking at it as if it's a 2nd class citizen thing, it's just as important as O or D, it's all about winning.

    Kwon didn't get injured for no good reason, he got injured playing football, it happens and it's really just as simple as that, there's no one to blame.
     
    Redwine4all, dolphin25 and Tin Indian like this.
  7. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    Starting players are starters for a reason...they are better players than back-ups and I think it is stupid logic to play back-ups in fear of starters being injured on special teams plays.

    Granted I'm not NFL Coach but if I were, I want the best 11 guys on the field that I have, be it offense, defense or special teams. I would be playing to win, not to keep players from getting hurt. If I were that kind of coach, I'd be coaching flag football.
     
    jdallen1222 likes this.
  8. hitman8

    hitman8 Well-Known Member

    3,040
    2,485
    113
    Nov 11, 2016
    Completely backwards logic, the best special teams players are usually not starters on offense or defense and are not star players. You dont need your best players to play ST in order to have a good ST unit. On the contrary if you could have more specialized special teams players you would see better special teams play, not worse.

    This roster limit crap is just a holdover from the old days when there was no salary cap and owners wanted to control payrolls through limits on the player roster.
     
  9. The_Dark_Knight

    The_Dark_Knight Defender of the Truth

    11,817
    10,321
    113
    Nov 24, 2007
    Rockledge, FL
    You have to have roster limits...you just HAVE to. Every sport as a roster limit. It is part of the structure and uniformity of professional sports that grants it legitimacy and not the folly and farce that professional sports were when they originated.

    Only in professional sports do most college kids become instant millionaires. Any other college graduate usually has to work 10-20 years in their chosen profession to attain the salaries that professional athletes do...provided their chosen profession ever has salary potential of that magnitude and yet we have folks here that are crying and feeling SORRY for these kids that CHOSE this career path?

    Look, I like Ryan Tannehill but do I feel badly for him that he's out for the season with his knee injury? Not a bit! He's made more money before the age of 30 than I have at 51.

    I was really excited to see what McMillan was going to bring to the defense but he made more money signing his contract at age 22 than I made in 20 years of serving in the Army.

    My point is this. The NFL has structure...it has guidelines and uniformity and that is what makes it professional. Injuries are part of the game, even in preseason. Teams have a 53 man roster, 46 active on game day. 11 starters on offense, 11 starters on defense, one place kicker, one punter...that's 24 players, leaving teams 22 left over players as back-ups and special teams. That's MORE than enough room for coaches to play their chess match in constructing their team...22 players left to try and get playing time and if they aren't being selected to play on special teams and they aren't starters on offense or defense, then they are merely filling holes as backups and wont have long steady NFL careers.

    Increasing the roster limit will never be a solution nor should it ever be considered a solution. Ticket prices are high enough as they are.
     
    dolphin25 likes this.
  10. Unlucky 13

    Unlucky 13 Team Raheem Club Member

    51,932
    63,010
    113
    Apr 24, 2012
    Troy, Virginia
    As was said, increasing the roster above 53 is a financial issue, and isn't likely to happen. Even if each of those players was making the league minimum, thats an increase of at least 3 million dollars on each teams salary. Multiplied by 32, thats about 100 million dollars league wide each season, and even for the NFL, thats a big deal.

    The original question about allowing all 53 players on the active roster to suit up is a seperate question though, IMO. Yes, it does allow for some level of fairness, with players with short term injuries being part of those on the weekly inactive list. But to me, thats the luck of the draw. Most teams are going to have a few of those guys every week, but if by chance team A has 53 healthy guys and their opponent only has 45, so be it. It adds to the intrigue. It forces them to make hard choices during the week and on gameday, and thats part of what makes the game so interesting and exciting for me. The three hours on Sunday are only part of the bigger picture.
     
  11. roy_miami

    roy_miami Well-Known Member

    1,385
    560
    113
    Oct 11, 2013
    Special teams is just another area where good coaches separate themselves from poor coaches. In Seattle you've got star players begging to be a part of special teams, thats how it should be. And on some poorly coached teams being asked to play on special teams feels like a punishment.
     

Share This Page