Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

NFL Approves Emergency QB


Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, CamWhoaaCam said:

That is a lie!

 

I said he would be the 3rd QB behind Darnold and that he probably wants a chance to compete for a starting job on another team that gives him a better opportunity.

 

That's when people started talking about how he might can compete with BY for the starting job. Like I said this sub gives me a good laugh. 

 

SB_P1_68_-_Two-Face.jpg

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shocker said:

This rule was definitely needed without question.  I can’t wait for some team to grab and extra cookie from the jar somewhere and ruin it for everyone else.  It feels like this is an extra roster spot at QB which is fine but someone will exploit this somehow.

Maybe this means 32 less free agents available in a crunch.  Interesting to see where this goes

I believe if you read any article explaining the rule your fears would subside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Carolina Cajun said:

So I saw the story going around about them allowing an emergency qb after the 49ers had to use McCaffery briefly at QB then going back to a guy who legitimately couldn't throw.

I mention this because I think this all but guarantees that the panthers will keep Corral on the roster at least.  If you're gonna have your inactive list, why not narrow that inactive list down by one and allow for the 3rds string QB in emergency without worrying about losing an active day roster spot.  Anyone else get that feeling after seeing that this rule change happened?

I'll do you one better.

Why in the world does the NFL insist demanding that every game, each team must designate seven players, all of whom are under contract, being paid, and presumably practiced and attended meetings just like all their teammates, who cannot participate in the game?

Forget just the 3rd string qb, the whole concept of the inactive list has always struck me as pointless. Yes the NFL has injuries, lots of them, but since the inactive list doesn't alter your overall roster size in any way, it's still 53, it serves no useful purpose.

  • Beer 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

... the whole concept of the inactive list has always struck me as pointless. Yes the NFL has injuries, lots of them, but since the inactive list doesn't alter your overall roster size in any way, it's still 53, it serves no useful purpose.

Should be all hands on deck with the expanded regular season.  There might have been some rational years ago for an inactive roster, but in today's multi-billion dollar NFL, it is hard to justify leaving any players sitting at home on gameday. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

I'll do you one better.

Why in the world does the NFL insist demanding that every game, each team must designate seven players, all of whom are under contract, being paid, and presumably practiced and attended meetings just like all their teammates, who cannot participate in the game?

Forget just the 3rd string qb, the whole concept of the inactive list has always struck me as pointless. Yes the NFL has injuries, lots of them, but since the inactive list doesn't alter your overall roster size in any way, it's still 53, it serves no useful purpose.

dude, I've thought this for a while and Im shocked that the players didnt fight for this when they expanded to 17.  The active roster has desperately needed to be expanded for a while.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

I'll do you one better.

Why in the world does the NFL insist demanding that every game, each team must designate seven players, all of whom are under contract, being paid, and presumably practiced and attended meetings just like all their teammates, who cannot participate in the game?

Forget just the 3rd string qb, the whole concept of the inactive list has always struck me as pointless. Yes the NFL has injuries, lots of them, but since the inactive list doesn't alter your overall roster size in any way, it's still 53, it serves no useful purpose.

The point of the inactive list is  due to injuries. It allows for each team to have the same number of available players.

 

If one team has 8 injured players and the other none then there is less pressure for teams to play guys who aren't ready to return.  It creates a status for injured players that is between playing and off the roster.

 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

Should be all hands on deck with the expanded regular season.  There might have been some rational years ago for an inactive roster, but in today's multi-billion dollar NFL, it is hard to justify leaving any players sitting at home on gameday. 

Nothing has changed in regards to the reason it exists. It's as valid now as ever.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Carolina Cajun said:

dude, I've thought this for a while and Im shocked that the players didnt fight for this when they expanded to 17.  The active roster has desperately needed to be expanded for a while.

It benefits the players more than anyone 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Shocker said:

This rule was definitely needed without question.  I can’t wait for some team to grab and extra cookie from the jar somewhere and ruin it for everyone else.  It feels like this is an extra roster spot at QB which is fine but someone will exploit this somehow.

Maybe this means 32 less free agents available in a crunch.  Interesting to see where this goes

But he still has to count towards the 53. I dont see how this helps that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, csx said:

It benefits the players more than anyone 

Eh, I think the players could have pushed for a full active roster and more flexible IR situation IE have like 3 or so Weekly IR positions to allow for healthier players and less forced use of injured players.  I mean Baseball in a much less physical sport has 15 day IR for short term injuries while the NFL is like a month long IR for "short term".

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yeah and I am doubtful he can offer that consistently. I don’t have many years left at my age and in my view we have wasted two and this whole exercise with him was always a three year minimum.  I am out on that with a guy I don’t believe in, and never believed in, it has sucked. To me it is a costly detour off the right track. Years.    But I am not so rigid that I can’t see excellence. He needs to display it though, consistently before I change my outlook.  
    • No, when I said rage, I meant rage, which only applies to certain fans on this board. Your timeline of trying to assess whether he is the future or not is really tied to the discussions surrounding his second contract. If this team is going to commit to some monster contract while he has shown nothing but glimpses of brilliance would be deservedly worrisome, so the clock is genuinely ticking for him to settle into something resembling his final form. Perhaps a best case scenario is that he plays well, the team succeeds, but he does so with a more limited role that makes the rest of the league view him as a game manager, and his second contract value reflects that. Then he continues to improve and becomes a bargain comparatively while not handicapping the team around him, and we enter an era of consistent championship competitiveness that the fanbase has craved for decades and has never really experienced before. But that requires many, many things to go right and for Bryce himself to facilitate that if he ends up being the quarterback of the future.
    • Exactly. And the flame throwers as well, get location benefits from not going all out. But they have it in reserve.  Not sure how much Greg had but he was an artist.  There was a YouTube I came across last year or maybe even 2023 and I don’t how to even find now but it had two NFL QBs I want say one was Carr from the Raiders but I don’t really remember  The point of it is they stood side by side throwing identical distances to identical targets. Radar gun was used.  They threw the normal effort (not all out) and it was measured etc. Then they were asked to throw their ‘fastball’. They were missing and most often they were missing high. It demonstrated the same principle.    edit: and applying that to arm strength, give me the guy that doesn’t need max effort to have good velocity. The margins are so narrow with less velocity in tne NFL the defenders can Close on it and this is a league where they value down to the 100th of a second level. It is that tight 
×
×
  • Create New...