|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Jul 30, 2022 14:40:39 GMT
Aren't we already at 53 or less prior to the draft barring an off season trade that may put you over 53? Is that what you're referring to?
With off season trades the Jaguars now sit at 55 rostered players, So I would have to cut two? Say maybe Avery Williamson and Golden Tate as examples? I'm not really sure why this needs to be done as you will only likely be adding players who have either retired or are not carded this coming season. Our rosters are so large there'd be no additional talent being added to the pool, only dead bodies.
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 30, 2022 15:39:52 GMT
By keeping a few NC players off the 53 man roster it will be easier to satisfy the minimum position requirements of the computer game Since NC players cannot be used in the computer game.
This will also put our roster sizes more in line with actual NFL teams
|
|
|
Post by Jets and Chargers on Jul 30, 2022 15:47:49 GMT
Aren't we already at 53 or less prior to the draft barring an off season trade that may put you over 53? Is that what you're referring to? With off season trades the Jaguars now sit at 55 rostered players, So I would have to cut two? Say maybe Avery Williamson and Golden Tate as examples? I'm not really sure why this needs to be done as you will only likely be adding players who have either retired or are not carded this coming season. Our rosters are so large there'd be no additional talent being added to the pool, only dead bodies. If you have 53 guys on your roster and 5 NC players -- you now have 58 players. Next season if all your NC players come back you are in a better position than the person that has 53. I find that to be unfair.
Your argument that the guys are all 0s anyways belies your argument. If the players aren't worth having on your roster why do you need the NC spots -- just fill your computer game depth chart with whatever 0-0 is available. The 0 rated player isn't on your 53 and you don't get to keep him. You do get to keep your NC player.
|
|
|
Post by allday28 on Jul 30, 2022 16:03:57 GMT
By keeping a few NC players off the 53 man roster it will be easier to satisfy the minimum position requirements of the computer game Since NC players cannot be used in the computer game. This will also put our roster sizes more in line with actual NFL teams Another great reason why the IR system is needed and should have been adopted years ago.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2022 16:08:30 GMT
I was under the impression rules of this magnitude would need to take affect the following season.
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Jul 30, 2022 16:25:50 GMT
Rich your argument is arbitrary and Anthony and John's commentary is more accurate.
The NFL isn't penalized roster spots when players go on IR. I know we don't have a feee agency system to work with, but nobody is gaining an unfair advantage with players 48-53 on their roster. As a matter of fact, those players aren't even supposed to be active for our games but we have no way to enforce or police that. The NFL also starts with more than 53 players on their rosters each off season and is required to cut down to certain amounts along the way. I'm just not sure where you're going here? Since the Jaguars now have 55 players due to trades do I have an unfair advantage? If my roster become short of 53 in the off season due to players getting injured or retiring how do I make up for my disadvantage prior to the draft.
The injured reserve system would be to account for players who have not been carded due to injury that you would not normally cut, period. It's not being used to gain an unfair advantage and it also does not allow your roster to be short/illegal at a position needed for all formations/backups that the computer game requires.
Let me give you an example here. Denzel Mims was not carded. He played 11 games and caught 8 passes. He should not be eligible to be designated as an injured NC player. Joey Jewel played 2 games, went on IR and was not carded. He should be eligible for our injured reserve system.
JJ Arcega-Whiteside is a different example example. 16 games played, 2 receptions and NC. If I wanted to keep those guys, then I'd need to account for a spot on the 53 man roster or cut them.
If this seems to arbitrary or complicated them maybe we address it like other leagues. A team can keep as many of their rostered NC players that they like as long they have a legal roster within roster limits/maximums. We're putting a limit of 5. Not sure if anybody has more than 5 due to injury.
Quite honestly, I think you're overthinking it.
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Jul 30, 2022 16:41:05 GMT
Here's another thought in the same vain. We roster 46 and a team can designate 7 players at the beginning of each season, carded or not, who do not play during our season.The only restriction is that you cannot have a non carded player as part of your 46 man roster. It's similar to the old X player system but nobody ends up with more players than anybody else.
|
|
|
Post by allday28 on Jul 30, 2022 18:53:34 GMT
I was under the impression rules of this magnitude would need to take affect the following season. There have only been a handful of trades made this season and none of the players involved have been fringe players. If someone had already traded some NC player or a bunch of fringe players that would be one thing. The ratings file was just released giving plenty of time for people to adequately “prepare” for this
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2022 21:49:42 GMT
So we are going to extend teams the opportunity to keep 5 NC cards from their current rosters vs making a decision to cut them to stay under 53 after the draft and before the season thus expanding rosters
I am ok with this but not until 2023 as people operated this past season under current rules and may or may not have included injured players in trades knowing they would have to make a decision on wether or not they would keep them for 2022 season
If not too much trouble I would request all teams NC players are posted to bring this to a much clearer light.
I’ve never played in any league that makes rule changes basically in season it should be presented and posted for vote for 2023 as well as all other changes
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Jul 31, 2022 1:22:27 GMT
I'm not sure where you're going with your thought process on the IR talk, but we are not "in season". This is typically the time that all these types of items are discussed and voted on. We're probably not considered to be "in season" until the draft is completed.
Patriots uncarded players this coming season;
Dobbins, J.K. (Injured- 0 games played) Elliot, DeShon (Injured-6 games played)) Jewel, Josey ( Injured-2 games played) Mims, Denzel (11 games played) Fells, Darren ( 9 games played)
Jaguars uncarded players this coming season;
Alexander, Jaire (Injured-4 games played) Kinlaw, Javon (Injured-4 games played) Arcega-Whiteside, JJ (16 games played) Elder, Corn (Injured-5 games played) Jones, Josh (10 games played) Tate, Golden (0 games played/Baseball/Retired?) Williamson, Avery (Injured-2 games played) Blankenship, Rodrigo (Injured-5 games played) Proche, James-(14 games played)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2022 2:01:41 GMT
2022 rules are still in play is all my point is if we make changes they should take affect for 2023
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Jul 31, 2022 14:26:45 GMT
2022 (Last Season) rules are not still in play in perpetuity. That season is over. The time in between seasons is when discussion to change the rules for the upcoming season occurs. This is nothing new, it's always been this way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2022 14:54:58 GMT
I agree but any new rule changes of this type should be for the following season as rosters are still in last season and should stay so The change you are proposing affects the draft strategy for everyone and everyone should have that same mindset for 2023 draft not 2022 as 2022 rosters and possible holdovers due to rule proposal are affected thus still having an impact on moves made in 2021 for 2022
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 31, 2022 20:54:23 GMT
No one should be advantaged or disadvantaged by a rule change for the current season especially after the ratings are out. Both of my teams would be able to take full advantage of the rule this season. I have at least 10 very keepable NC players. I kind of assumed everyone else would too. But if that’s not the case then this rule probably should take effect in 2023. This is an excellent proposal. So what if it thins out future drafts by removing mistaken cuts. The draft is mostly about the rookies and everyone will be in the same boat.
I change my vote to yes only if it is to take effect beginning the 2023-2024 season.
|
|
|
Post by pbisiules on Jul 31, 2022 21:36:09 GMT
My vote was yes though I would've preferred a smaller limit.
I'm retracting my vote at the moment to catch up on comments and will recast vote later
|
|