No Rule Disclosure: Allow Players Returning From Injury To Be Kept On IR? (1 Viewer)

[the lone star]

How many boards are you posting these threads on? 10? 20? You are everywhere!

How many boards you on?

 

[Dezbelief]

How many boards you on?

Plenty. I don't go around posting the same things on all of them. I wish you would stop posting these threads here in the Shark Pool. Try here

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/forum/4-footballguys-free-for-all/

Or here

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/forum/46-the-assistant-coach/

 

[Gally]

I like how people are misunderstanding this as me trying to exploit the rules.

That is how you are presenting many of your cases.   I think it is clear everyone is of the same mind that the Commish shouldn't change rules mid season but you keep asking questions about using loopholes in the rules that the Commish is trying to close. 

 

[the lone star]

That is how you are presenting many of your cases.   I think it is clear everyone is of the same mind that the Commish shouldn't change rules mid season but you keep asking questions about using loopholes in the rules that the Commish is trying to close. 

Or in the alternative, trying to figure out if it is an abuse of discretion and/or power. Seems like straight up manipulation to me.

 

[the lone star]

Plenty. I don't go around posting the same things on all of them. I wish you would stop posting these threads here in the Shark Pool. Try here

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/forum/4-footballguys-free-for-all/

Or here

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/forum/46-the-assistant-coach/

Thanks.

 

[the lone star]

That is how you are presenting many of your cases.   I think it is clear everyone is of the same mind that the Commish shouldn't change rules mid season but you keep asking questions about using loopholes in the rules that the Commish is trying to close. 

Also, I'm not so sure about the part in bold. The results of the poll seem to contradict that.

 

[Gally]

Also, I'm not so sure about the part in bold. The results of the poll seem to contradict that.

Your polls don't identify the timing of the changes. Almost all of the responses I have read seem to be in agreement that changing rules mid season is an issue in most circumstances.

 

[the lone star]

Your polls don't identify the timing of the changes. Almost all of the responses I have read seem to be in agreement that changing rules mid season is an issue in most circumstances.

Yeah, possibly people trolling the poll too.

 

[the lone star]

Had to change the wording up of the answer choices to avoid confusion.

 

[Dismattle]

So let's say a league allowed owners to keep non-injured players on the IR in previous seasons. However, last season, the commish and vice commish agreed to not allow such a tactic. Although they decided on this, they did not disclose a rule change to the owners. Instead, a new rule for designating a player to return from IR actually implied that the owner had a choice to keep a non-injured player on IR or not. This is because the commish explicitly stated that "you can activate an injured player off of IR, if you want."

A few weeks had already been played at the time, so players wound up on IR. Yet, the commish wanted to enforce IR rules in accordance with how he and the vice-commish intended. If the commish did this though, teams that have already placed players on IR would be forced to cut someone and take a cap penalty as well.   

Given The Facts, Should The Commish Have Allowed Owners To Keep Non-Injured Player On IR? Why or why not?

It took me a few reads but I finally seen the keyword "imply"  Its like you may have had a hunch but instead of posing a question you just decided to test the waters  So while I cant be sure of the exact wording to elicit a response like "if you want"  But it sorta sounds like once the player is not on IR in the NFL no matter where you have him slotted that he counts for your team max players  It could also be like yeah you don't have to cut him you could just go ahead and activate while cutting lose another player 

It is a shame that the comish needed to make a rule for using IR  It really shouldn't be so hard to comprehend how IR is supposed to work

 

[the lone star]

It took me a few reads but I finally seen the keyword "imply"  Its like you may have had a hunch but instead of posing a question you just decided to test the waters  So while I cant be sure of the exact wording to elicit a response like "if you want"  But it sorta sounds like once the player is not on IR in the NFL no matter where you have him slotted that he counts for your team max players  It could also be like yeah you don't have to cut him you could just go ahead and activate while cutting lose another player 

It is a shame that the comish needed to make a rule for using IR  It really shouldn't be so hard to comprehend how IR is supposed to work

Well in previous years in the league, once a guy was IRd, you couldn't activate him, regardless of him being healthy. Every league is different. I've played in several in the past where you could keep a guy on IR even if he had returned to the playing field. Of course, that means you can't start him, but conversely, you can't lose him or anybody else on the team either.

 

[cobalt_27]

Something strikes me as really unstable and concerning about all this.