PDA

View Full Version : new trade deadline?


DBroncos4life
05-22-2012, 11:23 AM
their meetings in March, the NFL team owners tabled seven bylaw proposals, four that would have significant impacts on the 2012 season.

Owners hold their spring meeting this week and might vote in some long-awaited upgrades to the game. One of those proposals was the increase to the 90-player roster in the offseason, which has already been implemented.

However, the most interesting proposal back on the table this week will be extending the trade deadline. Critics have complained for years the deadline ends too early. Under current rules, no trades can be executed past the Tuesday after the sixth week of the season.

In baseball terms, the NFL trade deadline would be the equivalent of going 61 games into a 162-game season. On a baseball calendar, trades would be stopped around June 8 or 9, and that's too early to see which teams are good or bad.

The proposal is to move the trade deadline back two weeks to allow eight games to be played before the trade deadline. That's a good start, although it wouldn't hurt to move it back another week or two.

Another well-thought proposal is allowing teams to bring back one player from the injured reserve list before the end of the season. Let's say Tom Brady or a marquee player suffers a serious injury before the start of the season. That player could be placed on the injured reserve list by Sept. 11 under a special designation.

The player would be able to return to practice after six weeks and be eligible to return to the active roster after eight weeks. Current rules force teams to place an injured player on IR and then lose him for the season.

The third most interesting bylaw involves players who suffered a concussion. It would allow a team to gain a roster spot for a game if a player with a concussion hasn't been cleared by doctors. Current rules allow for teams to designate seven inactive players. As long as the player with the concussion misses at least one game, he can be designated as inactive and become the eighth inactive player and it would free up a roster spot for that game for a replacement.
http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=7952011

Beantown Bronco
05-22-2012, 11:32 AM
I would be in favor of all those changes.

NFLBRONCO
05-22-2012, 11:35 AM
I think deadline should be week 10

Garcia Bronco
05-22-2012, 11:37 AM
I think it should up until the CC games

BroncoMan4ever
05-22-2012, 11:41 AM
as much as i like the trade deadline idea of moving it back a couple weeks, it tends to be a moot point as trades don't happen all that much during the regular season. if the deadline were like baseball, basketball, or hockey where names are brought up as being available and teams are trying to dump expensive players onto contenders and contenders are trying to make themselves better, i'd be all for it, but since it doesn't happen that way in the NFL, i kind of have the, "what's the point" attitude for it.

DBroncos4life
05-22-2012, 11:44 AM
as much as i like the trade deadline idea of moving it back a couple weeks, it tends to be a moot point as trades don't happen all that much during the regular season. if the deadline were like baseball, basketball, or hockey where names are brought up as being available and teams are trying to dump expensive players onto contenders and contenders are trying to make themselves better, i'd be all for it, but since it doesn't happen that way in the NFL, i kind of have the, "what's the point" attitude for it.

I think that is the point of moving it back. By week 6 no one really knows who is in it or who is out. Teams don't want to give up players if they still think they can make the playoffs.

BroncoMan4ever
05-22-2012, 11:48 AM
I think that is the point of moving it back. By week 6 no one really knows who is in it or who is out. Teams don't want to give up players if they still think they can make the playoffs.

true, but look at even the offseason, trades aren't happening all that much.

Beantown Bronco
05-22-2012, 12:27 PM
true, but look at even the offseason, trades aren't happening all that much.

Because in the offseason, everyone thinks they have a chance. Teams aren't as desperate to make moves. Week 7-10 of the regular season? That's another story.

gyldenlove
05-22-2012, 12:38 PM
I would like the trade deadline to be Wednesday after week 12 games are played. All teams will have played 11 games, you will have some idea of who is definitely in and who is definitely out and around that time you will get some injuries that people might try to cover with trades.

baja
05-22-2012, 12:47 PM
true, but look at even the offseason, trades aren't happening all that much.

One word; Injuries.

Kaylore
05-22-2012, 12:55 PM
I would be in favor of all those changes.

This.

Kaylore
05-22-2012, 12:57 PM
true, but look at even the offseason, trades aren't happening all that much.

They might if a team is in a playoff hunt and lost a key player and another is totally out of it and wants to unload their aging players and work towards a rebuild. This would allow for both teams to benefit.

baja
05-22-2012, 01:00 PM
They might if a team is in a playoff hunt and lost a key player and another is totally out of it and wants to unload their aging players and work towards a rebuild. This would allow for both teams to benefit.

The argument is going to be, but but but what about parity?

WolfpackGuy
05-22-2012, 01:24 PM
What about bringing coaches (even terrible ones) onto your staff for the playoffs?

Tombstone RJ
05-22-2012, 02:34 PM
I would be in favor of all those changes.

I agree. All of this stuff makes sense. I like the idea of moving the trade deadline back because of injuries and the fact that by week 10 or so some teams are making a push for the playoffs while other teams are cashing in their season so a playoff team will be willing to trade for a player while a team going nowhere and perhaps wanting to start over will be willing to trade a current player for a draft pick.

I really like the IR option too. The concussion thing makes a lot of sense too. I'd also like the teams to expand the roster from 53 to 55 for the regular season and then to like 58 for the post season.

BroncoMan4ever
05-22-2012, 05:08 PM
They might if a team is in a playoff hunt and lost a key player and another is totally out of it and wants to unload their aging players and work towards a rebuild. This would allow for both teams to benefit.
it would be interesting to see if it did have an affect on the number of trades getting done.

R8R H8R
05-22-2012, 05:53 PM
I am ok with all of these proposals. However, I am surprised that they haven't proposed a reduction on game-day inactives. I think the number is 8 or something, and I have always felt they needed to reduce that number to about 4 or 5.

This is something that doesn't cost the owners any more money, so I don't know why they are still holding on to this outdated figure.

SPORTSWRITER
05-23-2012, 04:02 AM
This.

That.;D