Is this the deepest roster we've had?
-
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 💗
Register Login