Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
why is there a roster limit (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter flc735
- Start date
wiscstlatlmia
Footballguy
Because teams like the Patriots would exploit that to no end if there weren't restrictions
Last edited by a moderator:
identikit
Footballguy
Exactly.In the interests of parity.
DawnBTVS
Footballguy
Also teams could hoard undrafted free agents/rookies they like and if they uncover a gem (ala Donald Driver) they can pay them a low salary for 3-5 years of their career. Teams like New England would be rostering 15-25 players, essentially "red-shirting" them for Year 1 and then seeing if they had anything in Year 2.
Statcruncher
Footballguy
Plus I'm sure owners want to pay as few players as possible.
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
It's a legit question IMO. The "easy" answer is competitive balance, but I'm not sure I really buy it 100%.
There is still a cap to manage, and realistically, how many non-playing guys can you carry before it has an real effect on your cap number? The minimum salaries would add up. Say you have 10 guys at 500k/year (roughly the avg min for young guys), that's 5M/year for guys who won't be active. Teams might prefer to spend that 5M/year somewhere else. And if they don't, great, that's just another element of your team strategy.
There is still a cap to manage, and realistically, how many non-playing guys can you carry before it has an real effect on your cap number? The minimum salaries would add up. Say you have 10 guys at 500k/year (roughly the avg min for young guys), that's 5M/year for guys who won't be active. Teams might prefer to spend that 5M/year somewhere else. And if they don't, great, that's just another element of your team strategy.
coolnerd
Footballguy
It would be interesting to see if there was not roster limits (either cap nor floor) how some teams would do it. I could see "cheap" teams handling it the two opposite ways. some would only have like 40 dudes on the team with virtuely no specialists, while some other organization would keep like 65-70 cheap guys with few established stars they are paying large money.
bostonfred
Footballguy
It would be fun to have a huge bench full of specialists and decide which ones to play based on your matchup each week. You'd get better play on special teams, and probably a better pass rush because you could rotate the hell out of your d line. Injuries would be less of an issue, too. The problem is that top teams could get a ton of guys to play for the vet minimum, so you'd get a handful of super teams who had old vets playing 20 great snaps a game for cheap money against a team with a bunch of street free agents.
flc735
Footballguy
wouldn't everyone try to get as many players to their camp the same way as the 'patriots' would?
if i were an undrafted wr, i would much rather tryout for a team with 7 wr's than for a team with 11 wr's. this would naturally limit and prevent a team from signing 100+ players...right?
this would open the door for more exotic strategies because of player specialization, which i think is good for the nfl.
if i were an undrafted wr, i would much rather tryout for a team with 7 wr's than for a team with 11 wr's. this would naturally limit and prevent a team from signing 100+ players...right?
this would open the door for more exotic strategies because of player specialization, which i think is good for the nfl.
