luxury roster spots

[rayzor]

getting ready for the big cuts today and i was thinking of some positions that we have that are more luxuries and might have to be sacrificed. we are really deep in a few positions and have a good bit of talent and are a bit weak and thin in others. something is going to have to give. it's just a matter of what.

here are things that i see as luxuries that we might not be able to afford:

3 QBs...it would be scary to try and go with just 2 active QBs after 2007 but a third rarely, if ever gets used. do we really want to carry 3 if there is a bigger need somewhere else that will be used more?

2 FBs...we have gotten by with just one for years. hoover is getting older but he is also one of the best in the business. fiammetta is young but very green. do we keep both?

4 WRs...we only use three at the most. 3rd rarely is used. last year the 3rd active receiver was jarrett and hackett who alternated weeks being active. is having 4 really necessary? the fourth last year was mark jones. if we have goodson, munnerlyn, and moore returning kicks do we need that 4th receiver (aka, jarrett)

3 TES...sure we are using the TE in more passing situations. do wee need three, though? lots of 2 TE sets are going on. it would be nice to have 3 to rotate in but is it really necessary?

5 DEs...we could probably get by with 4. 5 would be nice but could that 5th spot be used for something else. does that mean that taylor is out the door if it is?

7 LBs...6 is plenty. unless they were going to be running lots of 4-4 formations, there isn't really a need for a seventh. if we do go with 6 who do we cut? imo, it's a choice between anderson, leman, and landon johnson keeping two. only reason to keep johnson is his contract being so big. do we get rid of talent because an untalented and/or constantly hurt player has too big of a contract? it's happened before.

kickoff specialist...lloyd is great at what he does. he helps out special teams quite a bit because of his taking the KR guy out of the picture. when you are a team that is struggling with tackling it is a nice thing to have but can we get by without it?

return specialist...we don't really have one right now but we did last year. seeing that our three return options all have problems holding on to the ball we need help there. is having someone who's sole job is as a returner worth having?

what else? what are the most expendable positions and what are the most crucial?

who makes the cut? we can't keep them all, or can we? if we do, what do we sacrifice by doing it?

[panther4life]

3 qb's

2 fb's

3 rb's

4 wr's

2 kickers

1 punter

5 DE's

4 DT's

5 CB's

6 LB'S

3 Safetys

9 Offensive line men

3 TE'S

1 Long snapper

thats only 51 and u still have 2 to spare...i think were ok..not like were gonna be cutting much talent this year..not as deep as years previous

[rayzor]

so do we go with 7 LBs and 4 safeties?

do we bring in a return specialist?

[CatMan72]

I know Hoover is approaching the end of his career, but I think carrying two FB's is a luxury we can't afford right now. I'd like to see us use that roster slot on another DT or CB. If Hoover goes down we can sign someone decent to fill that role off the street, or adjust our play calling to a single-back system, but if either Gamble or D. Lewis go down we're in BIG trouble.

I also think we should just carry two QB's, and put Moore on the practice squad. This would free up another slot we could use to bring in a veteran WR that could help us in the slot (not sold on either Jarrett or Moore at this point).

[CatMan72]

^ Nevermind on Moore, forgot the rules for the practice squad - he's not eligible.