Practice Squad
A player is eligible for the Practice Squad if he has fewer than three practice squad seasons (a PS season = on the PS for at least six weeks) and one of the two following apply to him the player does not have an accrued season of credit or the player does have an accrued season but he was on the 46-player active roster for fewer than nine regular season games during each accrued season. A team can have 10 such PS players at any time.

Of course it had to also throw in the new PS "exemption rule"...

There is also a new Practice Squad exception rule of (sic) which a team may have two players. The exception is for players who do not have more than two accrued seasons and who have fewer than three practice squad seasons.

Anyway...

Accrued Seasons
Accrued Seasons determine a players free agency designations (Art. 8, Sec. 1, 34).
In order to accrue a season, a player must be on (or should have been on) full pay status for six or more regular season games.

Of course this came into play Week 17 last year when Gordon was deactivated for game 16.

Still looking for summary of rules governing moves between PS and 53... and back...

"Practice-squad players are allowed to practice with the team throughout the season, but can't play in games unless they are called up to the 45-man game day roster. A player can be signed by another team at any time, provided the new team is going to place the man on their active roster. The only time a practice-squad member can't jump to an active roster is when the upcoming opponent tries to sign him within five days of the game (nine on a bye week)."

@the-gipper said:

Ya, I'm not sure how that works really.

But I also read that Joe Thomas said that before Draughn's hurt his thumb, he would have been in talks to be the lead back as far as he was concerned. That would be a pretty good endorsement in my book.

@the-gipper said:

Pretty sure they can. If you sign someone from another team's PS they have to be on your roster for (I think) 3 weeks, which is how we got stuck with an injured Charles Johnson taking up a space with his torn ACL a while back. Not sure if that applies to your own PS.

@hx214 said:

I thought Draughn was on the PS. They cannot activate someone from the PS, if I am not mistaken.....without keeping him on the 53 man roster the rest of the year.

Isn't that so? They can't just yoyo guys between the PS and the regular roster from week to week, can they?

I have a feeling they will run week one with Draughn (who didn't have a cast on yesterday) activated and the FB as the 3rd string if Duke can't go, and sign someone week 2.

@the-italian-dawgpound said:

I am also concerned about the RB situation. This is a mostly running team. Only two (Not counting the FB) will be worn out halfway through the season. Can't have a running game without legs.

I don't think anyone can possibly consider starting the season with only two RBs in the roster. I'm disappointed by these moves.

@mudfly said:

I think your'e just acting dense..... I simply said the manlove was unprecedented here(my exact words, btw)....and you took it from there....nothing imnplied other than A&M fans are over the top with their admiration for Johnny....which they are....

And, although Ive already let you off the hook for being one of the ones who went off the deep end, you want to defend it anyway

Then I asked a very simple question, using your words,....which you could have just answered, instead of implying I was implying.....

And then. after all that, you go ahead and yeah, we love him extra because of the heisman....which is what I said...except I said it's a bit more than others(true, true, true)....

And, finally, the surprise and getting worked up is a response to it being so over the top and ridiculous(you werent here to see that, remember?)(I was)....

@the-gipper said:

They can cut anyone from Joe Thomas to Richard Pryor.....so its not worth mentioning

@wargograw said:

I think your'e just acting dense..... I simply said the manlove was unprecedented here(my exact words, btw)....and you took it from there....nothing imnplied other than A&M fans are over the top with their admiration for Johnny....which they are....

And, although Ive already let you off the hook for being one of the ones who went off the deep end, you want to defend it anyway

Then I asked a very simple question, using your words,....which you could have just answered, instead of implying I was implying.....

And then. after all that, you go ahead and yeah, we love him extra because of the heisman....which is what I said...except I said it's a bit more than others(true, true, true)....

And, finally, the surprise and getting worked up is a response to it being so over the top and ridiculous(you werent here to see that, remember?)(I was)....

Zombo said:

Yes, I suppose Cribbs spoiled us......but that doesn't mean we should still not thrive for something similar. Moore I think does not get us close to that.

Maybe Duke Johnson can come close....at least in the return side of things if not the gunner.

Hell, maybe Pryor can. He seems as close to a Josh Cribbs type as anyone we have.

Fair to say?

@mudfly said:

Um, no where....now where did I say you said that?......that lil "?" at the end of my question meant I was asking....not stating....

And your very good at the twist.....cause no one said that ....^^^^^^^.....right?

I "asked" simply because that was your answer as to why we had to endure the whole A&M love fest last year(remember when you said that yesterday???).....so my question was simply to see if that same logic(heisman-big school) carried over to play on the field(or was it just an excuse for the manlove?)....

But, based upon your answer above, Ill assume it only applies to the overt manlove thing.....

The ole Mudfly heavily imply something then deny it when called to the carpet move. Alright. Fair enough. Yes, winning a Heisman has an impact on how strongly a guy's college fans will follow his NFL career. I'm not sure why that's a surprise of something to get so worked up over. As you can see given the USM fans, it's not really that abnormal.

@the-gipper said:

Josh Cribbs is the greatest special teams player in the history of the NFL.

So, you might want to curb that Josh thing.

Moore is an excellent gunner and has stayed in the NFL for 5 years because he has become an excellent special teams player.

When Johnny Gilbert is feeling up to it he can take his kick return job away from him, but kick coverage is just as important, and that is where Moore makes his impact. Moore, Poyer and Bademosi are our best coverage guys. The staff obviously loves what he adds to special teams.

If you have somebody else in mind, name him, but Josh Cribbs isn't walking through that door.

Zombo

Zombo said:

I repeat.....he doesn't make me forget Josh Cribbs at either role.

Where can we get someone that is closer to Cribbs?

Who can be our killer KOR and gunner. Moore ain't it.

Edit.....why can't we get Gilbert in there returning kicks.....wasn't he super at that in college.....or did his fucked up brain also cause him to lose that skill as well?

We should try him a least......and try to get some production out of his sorry ass.

Moore averaged 24 yards on KORs......a long of just 32.

We can do better.

@canton-dawg said:

Well, figure this: if we got Pryor for a 4th round draft choice, and signed Mayle as a UDFA....and Mayle was released.....would we think twice about it?

So that is one way to look at it. If our Free agent WR performs well enough to beat out our 4th round QB....and he performs as well as we expect a 4th rounder should.....we got equal value out of things.

Fair to say?

@wargograw said:

They can cut anyone from Joe Thomas to Richard Pryor.....so its not worth mentioning

@wargograw said:

Um, no where....now where did I say you said that?......that lil "?" at the end of my question meant I was asking....not stating....

@wargograw said:

No twisting here. That I said being a Heisman winner makes you a good NFL player is twisting. Run along now.

And your very good at the twist.....cause no one said that ....^^^^^^^.....right?

I "asked" simply because that was your answer as to why we had to endure the whole A&M love fest last year(remember when you said that yesterday???).....so my question was simply to see if that same logic(heisman-big school) carried over to play on the field(or was it just an excuse for the manlove?)....

But, based upon your answer above, Ill assume it only applies to the overt manlove thing.....

@d-bone said:

Have no fear, war will somehow try to twist this...... But like he - and Metallica said, "Nothing else matters".

No twisting here. That I said being a Heisman winner makes you a good NFL player is twisting. Run along now.

@mudfly said:

Just imagine if they did that with your guy Johnny after "his" 2 games last season....hahaha...

Nothing else matters?......So, does that include Heisman winners from big schools???......just wondering.....

Where'd I say winning a Heisman would make you an NFL success? A statement like that would fly in the face of a ton of data. Sorry to burst your bubble but you haven't caught me in any sort of hypocrisy whatsoever.

@tour2ma said:

....something about Housler reminds me of a guy named Lawyer Tillman...........

I'd drop Housler. Just has that Fool's gold feel about him.

Zombo said:

Agree-too valuable to a team that needs every bit of field it can steal.