Should the NFL change the 53 man roster size?
 

The owners and players are meeting soon to discuss a myriad of issues, none less important than the upcoming likely 18 game regular season schedule. That will IMHO necessitate a larger roster from the current 53 in light of the increased load on the bodies and thus injuries. I sure hope they will increase roster size as I can see Sean Payton and Greg Williams specialize the offense and the defense, respectively, and make just that much more difficult to game-plan for.

So what is the ideal roster size 55? 58? Or keep it the same and dress every player?

If I had to venture a guess, I would say 57. You could keep a third string QB and get enough depth at other positions.

What say you?

63

In my opinion, keep the 16 game schedule and keep the roster the current size. There is absolutely no reason for an 18 game season. Oh, except the networks make more money. You're just going to have more players have career ending injuries each year. Keep it the way it is.

I agree completely, plus, it would mean 4 or 5 meaningless games for the #1 seeds, instead of 2 or 3.

I say keep the 16 game schedule and the 53 man roster, only thing I would do different is to let the entire roster be eligible to dress and play on game day.

They should increase the roster size to 59 and up the active limit by 5 as it is. If they go to a 18-game schedule, then add another 5 to each on top of that.

C'mon fellas you all know this means more revenue from top to bottom in the NFL. They'll add games to add dollars and keep the players from locking out.

We will loose game integrity. With only two preseason games to evaluate rookies, free agents etc. Then (IMO) football will be like basketball and baseball with it’s long drawn out seasons, I don’t watch baseball and I stop watching basketball around midseason and pick up for playoffs. So no to an 18 game season but they may want to increase the roster size. With increased games a team may not have chance of an undefeated season. And with the Saints and Colts resting players last year we may see more of that

Will some teams rest players? Sure, the top two or three probably will.

BUT that doesn't mean there won't be plenty of games with implications during that stretch.

Like I said - it's about revenue. Top teams sitting players won't keep the league from changing it.

The real issue I think is the 4 pre-season games. Is it really worth it? Can they get by with only 2 instead of 4. I say yes. so with those extra 2 weeks do they just do away with them or add them to the regular season. I don't see who it hurts by adding it to the regular season. Networks make more money? Ok, no problem there. Players may make more money? Ok no problem there. Increase roster sure 56. The fans get 2 more weeks of real football? ok win there.
Whats the problem?

There is not problem.

Totally agree, but cutting preseason won't happen - not any less than 3 pre games imo.

Let's look at just how much preseason has grown in terms of attendance and revenue over the past 10 years. That's in direct relation to the success of the regular season. I think it's more of the fans crying for less preseason anyway...

If they want to extend the season, keep the games at 16 and add a couple more bye weeks and allow the injured players more time to heal. There is extended TV coverage, more revenue for the networks and the NFL, and everybody is happy. IMO

I salute you Sgt. on your out-of-the-box thinking!! But extra bye weeks should mean more games, don't ya think??

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...-7GrFoNF5flhI=

Additional games should mean additional bye weeks.

what he said

Increases in roster size favors the specialists, decreasing roster size would benefit the do-it-all types.

How about keeping it at 53, but increase practice squads and lighten up a bit on PS rules?

Definitely do-able imo. Also like the ability to dress more players for game day.

Mandated by the NFL, pre-season tickets cost the same as regular season tickets, and all teams force season ticket holders to buy them.
Contrary to what someone posted, PS attendance isn't great- a lot of season ticket holders give PS tix away or eat them, and some teams (ATL, for example) sell them for as low as $5.

What's my point? well, changing a pre-season game to a regular season game increases the value of the season ticket package by 10-12%. Should this extra revenue go to bigger rosters? Definitely

The flip side is roster size now. I can see a ST gunner, a pass-rush specialist, and maybe even a third down back, but some teams carry a second kicker, or a guy who can only long-snap, and/or positions that are too specialized. Leave it at 53 and make the GMs manage it

How about let us fans play on the bye weeks...

You're forgetting to acknowledge the TV contracts and sponsors for preseason. IT doesn't matter what season ticket holders do with their tickets - they've already PAID for them...

Besides, EVERY preseason game is watched more than in years past bc the NFL audience is bigger than before.

I have thought really long and hard on this subject. I have spoken to several people in the NFL about my plan. They seemed to like it.

My plan is to incorperate the the profit findings in the current NFL franchises and bkjhdsjahn..........

Keep the four pre-season games for evaluation, keep the 16 game season, keep the 53 and tweak the rules to let the teams dress the healthiest 53 active or reserves.

Everything he just said.

Agreed ... a couple of buy weeks would certainly help with the extra two games, as well as increase active roster size. We're already in February for the Super Bowl. Since we're going to play a cold weather Super Bowl in the future, you'd want to make sure it does not suck as much with the cold weather.

I like that idea. Every team gets an extra bye week. Maybe then cut down the pre-season from 4 to 3 games.

And consider adding a 2 to 3 game developmental league in June-July for the rookies, UDFA and marginal/backup players to get some work in. Kinda like the NBA does.