Expanded NFL Roster Discussions

hawkstalker

New member
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
Salem, Or
When the NFL conducts their meetings this spring, has the topic of expanded rosters say from 53 to 57 been put on the agenda? I seem to remember a discussion of expanding rosters to offset concussions? Does anyone remember this??
 

Zowert

Active member
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
2,014
Reaction score
6
Location
West Seattle
I vaguely remember this. But I believe they were talking about only expanding it to 55. So 2 more players per roster, which may not seem like a big deal. But it can mean something in the team's overall depth.
 

seedhawk

New member
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
2,912
Reaction score
0
Seems like it was centered around Redskin GM Allen suggestion that the K, P and LS not count against the 53.
 

drdiags

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
10,682
Reaction score
1
Location
Kent, Washington
Can they expand the roster size during the current CBA? Would they want to? It is all about the money and adding 4 slots with the increased minimum would mean close to $3M minimum if the minimum salary escalates as reported in the new CBA. I think it goes to close to $700K by the end of the deal or more (could be wrong, just my recollection).
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
509
Reaction score
2
seedhawk":29jyngn2 said:
Seems like it was centered around Redskin GM Allen suggestion that the K, P and LS not count against the 53.

How do K, P and LS not count against the roster? They play the game just like everyone else. They have just as much as a part of the team as everyone else.
 

v1rotv2

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
3,538
Reaction score
5
Location
Hurricane, Utah
Sandpoint Hawk":16rqfdrm said:
seedhawk":16rqfdrm said:
Seems like it was centered around Redskin GM Allen suggestion that the K, P and LS not count against the 53.

How do K, P and LS not count against the roster? They play the game just like everyone else. They have just as much as a part of the team as everyone else.

I think the reasoning is that those particular positions do not get injured as often and are on the field a lot less. So why not use the count against the roster for the positions that are on the field a majority of the time and are more prone to injuries. It's not like their not on the team or anything. Accountants do this kind thing all the time. Hey look at the federal government!
 
Top