Rookie Draft

[bonscott]

This league isn't meant to be able to pick up a guy week 4 and plug him as a starter. It's more build your team up thru the draft, off-season free agents and trades. In-season is more filler.

Now that is an interesting perspective that I had not considered. If that is how this league is supposed to be run then I would say we need to increase our roster size even more.

That's how I've always saw the league anyway. I mean with 16 teams and 20 roster spots (plus 2 more rookies) one can't expect to find much of anything free agent wise in season, in my view anyway. I find it hard enough to find good free agents in my "standard" 12 team, 17 man roster league. I'll never count on finding anything useful in season in this league no matter if we increase roster size or not.

[braven112]

I don't think the plan was ever to not allow in season pickups but I think its more the nature of a 16 team league. I wanted a little bit more of a challenging league and I think 16 teams allows for that . To bonscotts point any league with this many teams is going to have a hard time encouraging a lot of in-season waiver activity.

In regards to the minimum on a roster we may want to tweak that as well. Right now the minimum is set at 20 with 2 optional PS spots. If the vote passes a team could have anywhere from 20-25 players rostered including the PS spots. Certainly something we should consider looking at.

[bonscott]

In regards to the minimum on a roster we may want to tweak that as well. Right now the minimum is set at 20 with 2 optional PS spots. If the vote passes a team could have anywhere from 20-25 players rostered including the PS spots. Certainly something we should consider looking at.

Isn't it minimum of 18, max of 20...plus the PS spots?

So if this passes as it stands right now it would be a minimum of 18 and a max of 22 plus PS.

[braven112]

In regards to the minimum on a roster we may want to tweak that as well. Right now the minimum is set at 20 with 2 optional PS spots. If the vote passes a team could have anywhere from 20-25 players rostered including the PS spots. Certainly something we should consider looking at.

Isn't it minimum of 18, max of 20...plus the PS spots?

So if this passes as it stands right now it would be a minimum of 18 and a max of 22 plus PS.

Here is the rules section regarding team rosters from the constitution:

Team Rosters

* Each team will have a maximum of 20 players on their active roster and an additional 2 practice squad (taxi squad) spots.
* Teams are required to have 20 players under contract from the first game of the season until the last game of the year, Week 17
* Rosters may consist of any combination of the following positions; QB,RB,WR,TE,PK,DEF
* Teams have the option of placing 2 Rookies onto the Practice Squad at a rate of 50% base salary against the cap.
* Only rookies are eligible for the practice squad.
* During the off season (defined on league calender) teams may be below the required 20-man roster.
* All teams must have 20 players under contract at the conclusion of the Off-Season Free Agency Period.
* At the beginning of each season all players that finished the previous year on the IR or Practice squad must be removed and placed on the active roster. Teams have until Feb 22nd to meet this requirement.

[bonscott]

Correct, but you could have 18 on the active roster and 2 on the PR for a total of 20. I think that is what he was referring to, that 18 is the minimum active roster.

[LV Elite]

This league isn't meant to be able to pick up a guy week 4 and plug him as a starter. It's more build your team up thru the draft, off-season free agents and trades. In-season is more filler.

However, contrary to an earlier post, I would want to see that every roster would have to carry the 25 or 26 players (or in the case of the current rule proposal, of 22 roster spots). When you have a salary cap league I feel that it is important that all teams manage to the same salary cap expectations.

I think I agree with this.

[bonscott]

I think it's been posted before but I'd be all for no roster limits period and just let the salary cap handle things. If you want 15 high priced players and I want 25 cheap players then so be it. The cap will keep things in line and we all live by the same rules so it's "fair" in that sense. Many salary cap leagues are run that way.

[joe.commish]

My preference would be to have a minimum and a maximum roster number required so that as long as you were in the range you'd be good. I just like the flexibility that provides.

That said, it is not at all a big deal to me, just a preference. I'm happy to follow any set of rules we have in place, but when it comes time to place my vote that would be the direction I would be looking in.

[braven112]

Easy way to settle it for me is, what does the NFL do? I know that 53 is the max but had a hard time finding an answer for the minimum since no team would really every do that.