Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I thought this was quite interesting, especially the many discussions we have about the subject:

quote:
...When a team sets its final roster, it examines its scheme and determines its numbers for the final 53: five or six receivers, three or four running backs, etc. These numbers ultimately determine final roster spots as much as or more than performance.


Although the author makes it sound like these are set in stone, surely the team has to be be flexible. Injuries are unpredictable. And I agree with you, Hungry, a mention of how these 'fringe' players' ability to play ST and/or multiple positions can factor into roster decisions would have been appropriate.
This is the part that does get overlooked.
"3. Draft position and money matter

We would like to believe that the best players will make the team regardless of draft position or the size of contracts. And there are a few nice stories of undrafted free agents overcoming the odds and making rosters every year.

However, the reality is that there are reputations at stake here, and I don't mean reputations of players. Scouts and general managers want their draft picks to pan out; those players are given much more latitude than players not drafted or acquired by the current regime. Front offices want their player acquisitions to succeed; these players are given every benefit of the doubt.

This can exacerbate clashes between personnel staff and coaches. Scouts think one player should be playing and coaches like another. Debates can become heated, even physical. This happens every year in every training camp"

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×