How do you keep 3 RB's active gameday?

I heard this question discussed between Holmgren and Mitch. Holmy said its difficult if one of the RB's isn't returning kicks or producing on special teams.

I never thought of it this way. Do you see an issue? Is there any standard formula for the active 45 on gameday?

I'm sure they will figure it out. They kind of HAVE to this season...you can't really have Turbin or Michael inactive.

FlyingGreg":1pyvsl89 said:

I'm sure they will figure it out. They kind of HAVE to this season...you can't really have Turbin or Michael inactive.

Click to expand...

You lazy SOB, GlidingGreg. We cant make that assumption unless or until we see a standard chart for the 45 dressed on game day.

If he is active, do they force touches to him? And, wouldn't it telegraph the plays a bit? I love Michael, but he aint going in on a passing down, period. He cant block well enough.

That's what I don't understand about the NFL and their rosters. Why have a 53 man roster if only 45 can suit up on game day? Then again, the way the league is going, since tackling isn't really allowed any more it will probably be a 30 man roster in like 5 years because no one will ever get injured.

JMO but Michael is just as good/bad a blocker as Trubin. Both have had their good showing and both have had some ridiculously bad showings.

I'd rather see them keep Beast fresh thru the year. Let Michael and Turbin get more carries this year, keep the fresh legs, and the change of pace etc.

If keeping 3 RB's isn't the norm (unless a Leon Washington situation), who/what does Michael replace? A OL'men? A DB? A LB?

pehawk":2f72zw2q said:

FlyingGreg":2f72zw2q said:

I'm sure they will figure it out. They kind of HAVE to this season...you can't really have Turbin or Michael inactive.

Click to expand...

You lazy SOB, GlidingGreg. We cant make that assumption unless or until we see a standard chart for the 45 dressed on game day.

If he is active, do they force touches to him? And, wouldn't it telegraph the plays a bit? I love Michael, but he aint going in on a passing down, period. He cant block well enough.

Click to expand...

No, I'm making you do the work. What's your answer?

It's actually an easy assumption to make. Why in the world would they not have both Turbin and Michael active?

I hate convention, and so does Pete and this staff. Remember - "you can't have a 6-4 guy playing cornerback", "you can't start a 5-10 QB", etc..

All 3 will be active on game day as will Robinson

Rooster854":i7bvkpm9 said:

All 3 will be active on game day as will Robinson

Click to expand...

:13:

I'd expect to see Michael in there ruturning kicks and a heavy dose of Bobby Turbo on special teams.

McG":1kh1e900 said:

That's what I don't understand about the NFL and their rosters. Why have a 53 man roster if only 45 can suit up on game day? Then again, the way the league is going, since tackling isn't really allowed any more it will probably be a 30 man roster in like 5 years because no one will ever get injured.

Click to expand...

I think the general idea is that the inactive list each week is the way to keep banged up players on the 53 without placing them on IR and losing them for the season. Then every team has the same number of active players each week, regardless of injuries. It does seem like a weird rule though.

I thought I read something that the 3rd QB rule was removed a couple years ago and the active list was increased to 46? I'm certainly no expert at NFL roster rules so I could very well be wrong.

pehawk":1xn1tam3 said:

I heard this question discussed between Holmgren and Mitch. Holmy said its difficult if one of the RB's isn't returning kicks or producing on special teams.

I never thought of it this way. Do you see an issue? Is there any standard formula for the active 45 on gameday?

Click to expand...

I think this question is interesting too: What position would we be adding to on gameday to replace the loss of Washington?

If Washington is not there on gameday anymore, and we normally had 3 active RBs, which position would they be adding a spot to now?

HawkFan72":ldpqwvy1 said:

pehawk":ldpqwvy1 said:

I heard this question discussed between Holmgren and Mitch. Holmy said its difficult if one of the RB's isn't returning kicks or producing on special teams.

I never thought of it this way. Do you see an issue? Is there any standard formula for the active 45 on gameday?

Click to expand...

I think this question is interesting too: What position would we be adding to on gameday to replace the loss of Washington?

If Washington is not there on gameday anymore, and we normally had 3 active RBs, which position would they be adding a spot to now?

Click to expand...

Okay, that makes sense.

pehawk":254ri3sz said:

HawkFan72":254ri3sz said:

pehawk":254ri3sz said:

I heard this question discussed between Holmgren and Mitch. Holmy said its difficult if one of the RB's isn't returning kicks or producing on special teams.

I never thought of it this way. Do you see an issue? Is there any standard formula for the active 45 on gameday?

Click to expand...

I think this question is interesting too: What position would we be adding to on gameday to replace the loss of Washington?

If Washington is not there on gameday anymore, and we normally had 3 active RBs, which position would they be adding a spot to now?

Click to expand...

Okay, that makes sense.

Click to expand...

I think it just depends on if another position player will provide significantly better special teams coverage than what Michael or Turbin can do.

SoulfishHawk":wv12cbv4 said:

I'd rather see them keep Beast fresh thru the year. Let Michael and Turbin get more carries this year, keep the fresh legs, and the change of pace etc.

Click to expand...

Every Lynch owner in FF will want to kill you with that remark. LOL. However, as a Hawk fan and NOT having Beast on any of my fantasy teams, I agree with this. I want him strong for the playoffs.

I believe the Saints have had 3 active RBs without any being a KR/PR. Always wondered what they sacrificed to have that luxury, but maybe they didn't have a FB (though that seems wrong, since Heath Evans was there back when they came here in 2010 for the playoffs). Maybe LBs or DBs took the hit?

I hear ya, when he played in that Atlanta game, although he got was was supposed to be the winning TD etc. he looked very tired.

The Hawks did have three active all last year, Lynch, Turbin and Washington.

DSM":2nh63hqu said:

The Hawks did have three active all last year, Lynch, Turbin and Washington.

Click to expand...

Yep, but the crux of this discussion is that Washington played special teams.