What Is The Point Of Declaring Inactives For Games? Deep Thoughts

[GonzoLays]

I never understood what was the benefit of making teams declare 7-8 players inactive for the game. How does this benefit the sport? Players do not make less by being declared inactive...hence the owners do not save money. You have 53 guys on the roster, so you should be able to play 53 guys. Any solid reasoning behind this?

[Hulamau]

Head Coach Mike Shanahan declared the following players inactive prior to the game: wide receivers David Terrell and Todd Devoe, running back Quentin Griffin, cornerback Karl Paymah , defensive tackle Monsanto Pope, tight ends Wesley Duke and Nate Jackson and defensive end Marco Coleman.

So much for Q making a surprise return.

Lets hope Bell is totally readyd to rumble and can rall ysruprise the cheifs They arent really expecting him.

I was hoping either Nate Jackson or Terrel would have been read to go too. And Devoe is not there for ST even which he is good at.

[OrangeDoofus]

Originally Posted by GonzoLays

I never understood what was the benefit of making teams declare 7-8 players inactive for the game. How does this benefit the sport? Players do not make less by being declared inactive...hence the owners do not save money. You have 53 guys on the roster, so you should be able to play 53 guys. Any solid reasoning behind this?

Nothing I can think of. If there's a good reason behind it I'd be interested to hear it, but it smells to me like one of those rules that's been around forever for no particular reason.

[GonzoLays]

See, nobody understands why? Somebody has to understand why they do this.

[bloodsunday]

Must be some sort of competitive thing. Mini-roster decisions within a season I guess.

[Ray Finkle]

Just the man trying to keep you down....that's all....

[2KBack]

I don't remember why they do this, by I know it is a rule that the address almost every offseason. I've read articles in the past that mention Shanny as a supporter of having full rosters on game days. The rule never gets changed for some reason though.

[redrage]

Originally Posted by GonzoLays

I never understood what was the benefit of making teams declare 7-8 players inactive for the game. How does this benefit the sport? Players do not make less by being declared inactive...hence the owners do not save money. You have 53 guys on the roster, so you should be able to play 53 guys. Any solid reasoning behind this?

We had this discussion on CP before since Vermiel is really outspoken about it. Here is the reasoning I gave there.

If you have the current system, it allows a team to deactivate injured players without putting them on IR, PUP, or cutting them all together. In doing so, the team goes into each contest knowing it has the same number of available players as the opposing team.

If all 53 players were eligible to dress then, given each teams injury situation, one team may go into a game with more players available than the opposing team.

I imgaine a better system could be thought of, but that is all I could think of as to WHY the system is what it is.

[GonzoLays]

The ONLY thing that I can think of is the eligibility for practice squad players. Something to do with you can sign a player to your regular season roster and if you declare him in inactive and he doesn't suit for the games, he becomes eligible for your practice squad the next season. Something to that effect.

But if THAT is the only reason for the rule, then it is STUPID rule to have because less than 10 percent of practice squad players make NFL teams.

[GonzoLays]

Originally Posted by redrage

We had this discussion on CP before since Vermiel is really outspoken about it. Here is the reasoning I gave there.

If you have the current system, it allows a team to deactivate injured players without putting them on IR, PUP, or cutting them all together. In doing so, the team goes into each contest knowing it has the same number of available players as the opposing team.

If all 53 players were eligible to dress then, given each teams injury situation, one team may go into a game with more players available than the opposing team.

I imgaine a better system could be thought of, but that is all I could think of as to WHY the system is what it is.

Just like Family Feud, "Goood Answer!" And the survey says...the number one answer! Redrage, your family takes the board...