Should the NFL change the 53 man roster size?

SmashMouth · 08-16-2010, 06:18 PM

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?

foreverfan · 08-16-2010, 06:57 PM

63

Srgt. Hulka · 08-16-2010, 06:58 PM

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.

pumpkindriver · 08-17-2010, 12:36 AM

Originally Posted by Srgt. Hulka

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.

MatthewT · 08-17-2010, 07:11 AM

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.

neugey · 08-17-2010, 08:48 AM

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.

saintsfan1976 · 08-17-2010, 09:36 AM

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.

BIGEASY504 · 08-17-2010, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by Srgt. Hulka

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.

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

saintsfan1976 · 08-17-2010, 09:50 AM

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.

Euphoria · 08-17-2010, 10:00 AM

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.

08-17-2010, 12:36 AM	#4
pumpkindriver 500th Post Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Killeen, Tx. Posts: 932	Originally Posted by Srgt. Hulka 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.

08-17-2010, 09:44 AM	#8
BIGEASY504 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 487	Originally Posted by Srgt. Hulka 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. 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
BIGEASY504 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 487

08-17-2010, 10:00 AM	#10
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	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.
	E U P H O R I A

08-16-2010, 06:18 PM	#1
SmashMouth I donated, did you? Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Mandeville, LA Posts: 38,201 Blog Entries: 29	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?

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

08-16-2010, 06:57 PM	#2
foreverfan 12,000 BS Posts Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Metairie, LA Posts: 13,457 Blog Entries: 5	63

08-16-2010, 06:58 PM	#3
Srgt. Hulka 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Shreveport, LA Posts: 4,417	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.

08-17-2010, 07:11 AM	#5
MatthewT 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Mississippi Posts: 2,729	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.

08-17-2010, 08:48 AM	#6
neugey Hu Dat! Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 6,717 Blog Entries: 13	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.

08-17-2010, 09:36 AM	#7
saintsfan1976 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Atlanta Posts: 10,846 Blog Entries: 3	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.

08-17-2010, 09:50 AM	#9
saintsfan1976 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Atlanta Posts: 10,846 Blog Entries: 3	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.