Is this the deepest roster we've had?
-
at certain positions yes. we got a ton of guys in the D backfield to compete for spots. RB as well. we brought in a lot of WR because of the gordon situation and the fact that we didn't draft one.
i think a lot of those names will be gone by the end of TC.
-
For me, it first needs to be broken down by how many guys will be kept at each position. In some, I see only 3 backs being kept. Not realistic IMO. I see it as such.....
QB....3
RB....4
WR...6
TE/FB..3
OL...9
25 total on O
DL...6
LB...8
CB...5
S.....4
23 total
LS....1
P......1
K......1
3 total
Thats 51 slots....2 more open...best of the bunch....one will probably be another corner type....those guys are good on special teams...the other probably a backer type...again, they offer special team value.
-
For me, it first needs to be broken down by how many guys will be kept at each position. In some, I see only 3 backs being kept. Not realistic IMO. I see it as such.....
QB....3
RB....4
WR...6
TE/FB..3
OL...9
25 total on O
DL...6
LB...8
CB...5
S.....4
23 total
LS....1
P......1
K......1
3 total
Thats 51 slots....2 more open...best of the bunch....one will probably be another corner type....those guys are good on special teams...the other probably a backer type...again, they offer special team value.
For me, it first needs to be broken down by how many guys will be kept at each position. In some, I see only 3 backs being kept. Not realistic IMO. I see it as such.....
QB....3
RB....4
WR...6
TE/FB..3
OL...9
25 total on O
DL...6
LB...8
CB...5
S.....4
23 total
LS....1
P......1
K......1
3 total
Thats 51 slots....2 more open...best of the bunch....one will probably be another corner type....those guys are good on special teams...the other probably a backer type...again, they offer special team value.
That is definitely NOT the way it works. You fill the required spots, then you keep the BEST PLAYERS on the roster. Every team does it different, and it depends on the offensive/defensive systems and the primary positions your best STs players play. If we are going to be a "run heavy" offense, we may keep 5 RBs on the roster, while a team like Denver might keep 7 WRs. Same on defense. If you're running a 4-3, you might keep 10 D-lineman, but if you're running a 3-4 you might keep 10 LBs...
Good coaches can fit the roster to their talent, not the other way around...
#Justsayin' -
We could go position by position with this.
QB should be easy. I think it's a safe bet the Browns start the season with 3. Hoyer and Manziel are locks. The Browns would probably like Thigpen to outperform Shaw in TC so they can surround Manziel with a couple vets and try to stash Shaw on the PS. Other way around? Shaw probably gets the nod as QB 3 because they feel they would lose him otherwise.
RB is a little tougher. 3 or 4, not totally sure. Waddya think? Tate and West are locks. I'd be wondering who could catch out of the backfield, like as in a 3rd down back.
Crowell not known as a catcher. Ogbie is and played that role a little bit last year, l think. Baker seems to have the speed, not sure about the hands. Lewis is the dark horse for me. The Ourlads depth chart on another thread seems to indicate he can catch ok and seems to have the size (as in about 20 lbs lighter than Tate or West).
I'll stop with that to avoid a marathon post and see if any other interest in this direction.
-
Ogbo needs to step it up in camp or happy trails
-
I am pushing for Baker. Lewis might be a dark horse.
-
For me, it first needs to be broken down by how many guys will be kept at each position. In some, I see only 3 backs being kept. Not realistic IMO. I see it as such.....
QB....3
RB....4
WR...6
TE/FB..3
OL...9
25 total on O
DL...6
LB...8
CB...5
S.....4
23 total
LS....1
P......1
K......1
3 total
Thats 51 slots....2 more open...best of the bunch....one will probably be another corner type....those guys are good on special teams...the other probably a backer type...again, they offer special team value.
That is definitely NOT the way it works. You fill the required spots, then you keep the BEST PLAYERS on the roster. Every team does it different, and it depends on the offensive/defensive systems and the primary positions your best STs players play. If we are going to be a "run heavy" offense, we may keep 5 RBs on the roster, while a team like Denver might keep 7 WRs. Same on defense. If you're running a 4-3, you might keep 10 D-lineman, but if you're running a 3-4 you might keep 10 LBs...
Good coaches can fit the roster to their talent, not the other way around...
That is definitely NOT the way it works.
Good coaches can fit the roster to their talent, not the other way around...
How do you know? I think you have position minimums.
Sure, some teams may go with 2 QB's or massage the numbers I presented, but to say that isn't how it works is ignorant. I don't care how many players are better, a team isn't going in to the season with just 5 offensive lineman on the roster.
If you agree with that, then you agree with me and know your previouis comment was stupid. How many times have you read a guy got cut because he got caught up in the numbers? WTF do you think that means?
You can disagree with some of my numbers.....cool...that's open for discussion, but to say that isn't how it works tells me you don't understand the game.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
Isn't it nice to argue about who will be cut? We finally have some viable depth thanks to Farmer, Pettine, et al.
In the recent past it was basically, "Oh, he's ALIVE? Wow! Let's keep him".
Mike
INÂ DORSEY I TRUST -
It's best football players regardless of position.
Last year we had only 4 CB's on the roster for game1.
-
Isn't it nice to argue about who will be cut? We finally have some viable depth thanks to Farmer, Pettine, et al.
In the recent past it was basically, "Oh, he's ALIVE? Wow! Let's keep him".
Mike
Isn't it nice to argue about who will be cut? We finally have some viable depth thanks to Farmer, Pettine, et al.
In the recent past it was basically, "Oh, he's ALIVE? Wow! Let's keep him".
Mike
HA! hilarious!
so true.
-
That is definitely NOT the way it works.
Good coaches can fit the roster to their talent, not the other way around...
How do you know? I think you have position minimums.
Sure, some teams may go with 2 QB's or massage the numbers I presented, but to say that isn't how it works is ignorant. I don't care how many players are better, a team isn't going in to the season with just 5 offensive lineman on the roster.
If you agree with that, then you agree with me and know your previouis comment was stupid. How many times have you read a guy got cut because he got caught up in the numbers? WTF do you think that means?
You can disagree with some of my numbers.....cool...that's open for discussion, but to say that isn't how it works tells me you don't understand the game.
I don't care how many players are better, a team isn't going in to the season with just 5 offensive lineman on the roster.
Wow... That's all I can say in response that...
-
Wow... That's all I can say in response that...
That's all you can say? Like it or not, there are positional minimums beyond the starters.
-
That's all you can say? Like it or not, there are positional minimums beyond the starters.
And who decides those minimums? The coach and GM (on some occasions). There is no mandated number of players at any position, but each team will have THEIR idea of who to keep based on scheme. I said before "you fill the required spots, then keep the BEST PLAYERS on the roster." I will forever stick to that.
The team sets the position requirements, which are generally pretty obvious. Who fills out the rest of the roster is based on the talent they have, versatility of the players, and who is a key contributor on STs.
They can't go into camp with 51 empty slots, and say "we better fit our guys into THESE positions." They have to take the players abilities into account first. If you have 5 good RBs, you keep thm. If you only have 5 good DTs, you only keep them. You don't cut a talented player because he doesn't fit your 53-man design...
Even more, I think teams look first at that 46-man active roster, and fill out the other 7 spots with players who are versatile and can play multiple positions in case of injury...
#Justsayin' -
To have the luxury of too much depth at positions....
If you have a plethora of players at a particular position (tongue twister?), so much so as to cause a shortage in another position, perhaps you screwed up in drafting/free agency? Then a good trade might be order at first chance...
-
That's all you can say? Like it or not, there are positional minimums beyond the starters.
And who decides those minimums? The coach and GM (on some occasions). There is no mandated number of players at any position, but each team will have THEIR idea of who to keep based on scheme. I said before "you fill the required spots, then keep the BEST PLAYERS on the roster." I will forever stick to that.
The team sets the position requirements, which are generally pretty obvious. Who fills out the rest of the roster is based on the talent they have, versatility of the players, and who is a key contributor on STs.
They can't go into camp with 51 empty slots, and say "we better fit our guys into THESE positions." They have to take the players abilities into account first. If you have 5 good RBs, you keep thm. If you only have 5 good DTs, you only keep them. You don't cut a talented player because he doesn't fit your 53-man design...
Even more, I think teams look first at that 46-man active roster, and fill out the other 7 spots with players who are versatile and can play multiple positions in case of injury...
And who decides those minimums? The coach and GM (on some occasions). There is no mandated number of players at any position, but each team will have THEIR idea of who to keep based on scheme. I said before "you fill the required spots, then keep the BEST PLAYERS on the roster." I will forever stick to that.
The team sets the position requirements, which are generally pretty obvious. Who fills out the rest of the roster is based on the talent they have, versatility of the players, and who is a key contributor on STs.
They can't go into camp with 51 empty slots, and say "we better fit our guys into THESE positions." They have to take the players abilities into account first. If you have 5 good RBs, you keep thm. If you only have 5 good DTs, you only keep them. You don't cut a talented player because he doesn't fit your 53-man design...
Even more, I think teams look first at that 46-man active roster, and fill out the other 7 spots with players who are versatile and can play multiple positions in case of injury...
No doubt you want to keep the best players you can. I simply gave my opinion on what kind of positional numbers are needed to cover a football team. I also think if you do some digging you will find those numbers are pretty close to what happens with most teams year in and year out. Why is that?
Probably because teams do have positional numbers in mind. Sure, it can be tinkered with a bit, but there are limits. As an example, I have never seen a team go in to the season with 1 QB on the roster and 6 runningbacks. I admit I am going to an extreme here, but you seem to ignore hearing how a player got caught up in the numbers. In case you didn't know, it means he got cut because the team had to carry players at other positions. It makes no sense to keep multiple players you are never going to play.
I agree with you, you want to keep the best players at various positions, but having a really talented 4th string halfback shouldn't keep you from keeping a back-up QB.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better đź’—
Register Login