David Bell
The new territory for players has invigorated me to again write about Roster Expansion. You ask, Why? To get to the postseason this year, teams will have played 20 games. That’s rough in today’s game which is more challenging, faster, increasingly more violent, and more turbulent in terms of social issues across the board since the beginning of the modern era. If a team goes deep in the playoffs, they will likely add at least three games. That’s 23. In some ways, an NFL Season is an endurance contest to get to the playoffs with a reasonable degree of healthy players who can be integral to the cast of players with every team working on getting to the Super Bowl.
One thing that has happened is the NFL changed the number of Practice Squad players from 10 to 16. At the same time, it changed the rules on how many could be protected and how many times a single player could be promoted and demoted. That is all good things to happen. But, unfortunately, for the owners, all wealthy billionaires or nearly that type of big money owner groups, they are penny-pinching at times to extraordinary lengths. I am sure that anyone following the NFL gets that view of several owners who rake in cash but are misers regarding player personnel and monies.
Foolish Owners
I also think owners can do foolish things regarding their involvement in player personnel acquisitions. Two Texas owners come to the forefront of my mind when I make this statement: Jerry Jones-Cowboys, and Cal McNair-Texans. Don’t get me wrong – I want owners interested and involved in their teams.
No, I am not talking about the “Foolish Club” though that outfit has two of the most ignominious owners among its cadre: the departed Al Davis and Bud Adams. Now? Dan Snyder, Jerry Jones, and Cal McNair, would top the list!
I don’t see a significant advantage when it comes to players to draft or acquire in trades or Free Agent signings. However, it seems they often are a detriment to their staff: from the GM down to Head Coaches, Coordinators, and position coaches.
I am not a fan of having the HC report directly to the owner. It is my view that the HC should be subordinate to the GM. However, right now in KC, the two work as a team in building the player roster that wins under Clark Hunt. So for the Chiefs, that organizing principle is working.
At the same time, Andy pulled Brett Veach with him from Philadelphia. So you might say that Reid was the “Gravity” that attracted our GM to the time of his experience and growth in football operations and that he was precisely the right candidate to take on the GM role once John Dorsey was fired.
Keep in mind that I thought that John Dorsey was the right fit for the Chiefs. I think he was when he was hired from the Thompson Green Bay tree. At the same time, I thought his management of team capital was, at times, laden with poor decisions. It’s a tough job to wear that hat and simultaneously work to build a team that can compete for the postseason each year in succession. Andy Reid’s tenure as Head Coach has shown me that he knows how to manage personalities and keep everybody focused on the prizes –> a Division Title, a Conference championship, and the biggest prize of all, competing for the Lombardi Trophy.
So due to a conversation with Laddie Morse, I decided to broach the topic again. It has been something ArrowheadOne has discussed multiple times across a span of perhaps five years. There is a good article about the roster development history of the NFL at HogsHaven called: “A Brief History of Roster Sizes in the NFL.” Take a look.
The First Expansion – to 55 players
For 32 teams, it would mean their roster expands by 2, so that means there would be 64 new NFL Roster jobs. There is no way the NFLPA would oppose this. The NFL, indeed, has this Expansion under consideration. The bottom-of-the-roster players are not a big salary hit that the owners should fight. According to NFL sources, the Competition Committee has this under deliberation. From statista.com comes this data:
.
“In 2021, the 32 teams of the NFL generated
revenue of 17.19 billion U.S. dollars.”
.
That averages out to more than half a Billion dollars per team (more than $537.187M to be exact). Now, we all know that 2021 was a Covid-19 year and the amount the owners made was not max dollars. My point is that each team has a growing amount of capital to use for player salaries. It is expanding each year, with the only drawback being the lack of monies in the Covid-19 time-frame as a percentage of growth in the NFL Cap. Mike Florio of NBC Sports revealed the information about the reporter expansion recently. The Average NFL Rookie salary is $660K. The most money paid to a rookie in 2022 was 6,600,000. Below is how the basic Salary Averages project for a 5-year Time Frame:
For the NFL to expand the roster by 2, the cost, at the minimum, would be $1,320,000 per team. Of course, my idea is that the Expansion need not be rookies. If the Competition committee added $4M per team to their salary cap for the two-player Expansion, it would cover Veteran additions who would fit the bottom third of the cost of a roster player, giving the active roster viable reserves to rotate in on a game-day active list, and thus expanded in a corresponding manner. Currently, each team has a Game Day Active list of 46 players.
Roster expansion to 55 players has already occurred, but needs permanence
Due to the Covid-19 panic, and the roster was expanded to 55 players. This happened due to the 2019 CBA. The game day roster grew from 44 to 46, and the PS was expanded to 14 and then to 16 players.
The two players came from the PS weekly. There were still only 46 players on the game-day roster. That also included the addition of up to six vested veterans on practice squads as opposed to players that hadn’t yet accrued four NFL seasons, and allowed multiple promotions from the PS to the active roster for three different occasions. That Teams could sign Veterans to the PS was an important factor, allowing for team necessity for various positions. For example, a team could sign a defensive and offensive lineman to counter injury considerations.
We see league-wide how deeply teams are affected by injuries to significant contributors to their team’s capability. For example, in 2022, the Chiefs have been plagued by injuries, but the team is healthy with the early bye by in week 9. If we go back to the 2020 season, we catch a better glimpse of how injuries affect team success. In that year, the Chiefs suffered injuries and the loss of both Offensive tackles as the team again made it to the Super Bowl and lost the game to the Brady-led Bucs by a wide margin, primarily due to team injuries. We must also consider the Covid-19 panic that existed over two years.
Charles Goldman of USA Today Sports, Chiefswire, has an article about his Expansion in August called: “Expansion of NFL roster size is overdue.” In it he says this about the cut down day that happens each year around September first:
.
“864 players will be told they’re not good enough because of an arbitrary number that could and should be changed in order to provide more players with opportunities.”
.
This is my point about a permanent expansion to 55 players, and as I discuss below, I think it should be 56 players.
Today’s game should expand the Active Roster to 56 players and 48 game-day Active Players!
From the overhead view, expanding the roster by one more player expands the roster to 56, adding one more player to the table above, so the cost per team would be $1,980,000 (If those players were rookies, which is likely).
The protection of players and player development are critical points of my consideration. If Teams then had an expanded cap space corresponding to the $4M per team, for example, $6M, then of the three players added, they could sign a significant player to the roster who could be an essential addition, thus protecting the investment the teams make-up. In this consideration, that player could be a Veteran Offensive Tackle. After all, teams and the NFL have taken drastic action on roughing the passer flags.
Side Note: Topic Revisited: Roughing Passer Flag review – Immediate, from a New Overhead Official
Pictured above: one of the worst roughing the passer penalties – you guessed it, called on Chris Jones.
Now! I view the current wave of protecting QBs, has gone too far. I also think such calls made against players on defense at full speed should have immediate review by an overhead official used for such calls — automatic review with immediacy. Worldwide Soccer Federations and Leagues use VAR (Video Assistant Referee) and so should the NFL more extensively than they do already. BTW, if a DL or a LB has hit the ball out of a QBs hand and then recovers it, that should raise the question: is the QB just like any other defender trying to tackle the ball carrier? For me, the answer is, yes.
The review would be as transparent to the game and the call from the unseen official to be made in a time span of 10 or 15 seconds of the end of the play. Fans see that video in less than 10 seconds and fans can see the obvious. In the Chris Jones penalty called two weeks ago, it was a travesty of justice –> Carl Cheffers can say what he will (and he did), but I call his judgment “wrong” and demand an NFL overhead official to review such plays. As noted, we at home can see the film replay and make a good penalty call or negate it. Surely the NFL can handle this with aplomb and ensure that it is essentially transparent to the fans in the stadium and the television audience simultaneously.
arcamax photo credit
I am not mainly in support of replay review. Hence, I suggest it occur within 10-15 seconds of the play’s end. Zebras are calling penalties left and right on this. They should not be making such calls, potentially game-changing plays, and doing so willy-nilly. It’s ridiculous.
I think the protection of QBs is essential. However, the calls being levied against the defense are highly suspect to fans. The game is a physical, violent sport, and changing the nature of the game is the –> ABSOLUTE WRONG THING TO DO. QBs are part of that game. They can’t be perceived as incapable of being a player above all other players on the field. I am not alone in this opinion. I know Laddie agrees with me. Once Again, the NFL has made the wrong decision about the problem. In your memory, do you recall the hoopla about ruling what is, and what is not, a catch? For me, it’s the same kind of problem. Zebras should not determine any game’s outcome –> that’s my pure and straightforward response to the current controversy.
Future Roster Expansion: 60 players
This subject is a futures-type subject. Call me nutty, but with all this extended football and travel, perhaps the number of active roster players should be 60 overall. The active game Roster and Practice Squad has already been mentioned above and could be adjusted accordingly. The only thing I worry about is the dilution of the talent pool. Maybe that gets resolved with an NFL Minor league or a viable alternative football league. I keep in mind that the viable age for the NFL is probably 20-25, and note that careers are generally only five years long. I think an expansion league needs to be developed and supported.
The Practice Squad
Teams should be able to maintain players to account for both sides of the ball –> a complete unit of 11 players on both sides of the ball. At the same time, two specialist positions should be maintained: a Place Kicker and a Punter. Expanding to this level of support for the expanded Active Roster would mean each team has a roster of 78 players.
Internal development of players could simultaneously compete with roster players of other teams –> a sort of “minor league.” Joined to that unit could be a minor league set of players built to supplement player development and competition among this “Secondary Player Staff” competing with other teams. It could be the NFL expands to a minor league function with 32 teams who compete separately from the NFL teams. That competition is a separate subject, but I do think that fans would appreciate a short season to see players trying to get up to the NFL game level standard of play.
What am I seeking?
- The ability to protect any given team’s active roster without suffering a complete breakdown and the ability to compete in the NFL.
- Protecting Players in injury situations, medical intervention, surgical needs, And Adequate recovery and rehabilitation time.
- Ensuring appropriate time is taken to evaluate injuries and assure the players they are protected simultaneously – Concussion Protocol is my first thought in this regard.
- Protection of the fan investment, the fans are the reason the game exists, and every aspect is profitable — fans protection at the same time.
- Considering travel time each year, especially with travel to European destinations, is another reason to implement the 55-man active roster now rather than later.
I haven’t thought all of this through to completion yet. So instead, I am responding to what I am witnessing about the game of football in the NFL. The structure may differ, with a separate “minor league system” that could provide international competition in the process. It could expand from that point onward to NFL Expansion to Foreign Cities.
NFL Expansion Consideration?
Maurice Jones-Drew, second right, and Victor Cruz, right, attending the
International Series Fan Forum, hosted by Neil Reynolds, left, in
London, Saturday, Oct. 8, 2022. (AP Photo/Alberto Pezzali)
This topic is also interesting enough that you may want to review issues about International NFL Expansion at gridironheroics.com as there’s an article there called: “How A Massive Expansion Could Work.“
Commissioner Roger Goodell was in London on October 8th. Currently, there are several US and Canada Considerations. St. Louis is a prime candidate, as is Oakland. Consider also San Diego. All three cities lost NFL franchises over the past few years. Other locales, such as San Antonio and Salt Lake, are also a consideration, as well as Honolulu. The NFL could dip into Toronto for football in Canada or consider cities like Montreal and Ottawa. As much as I think such would work, Mexico City is a venue I see has potential and would be a significant venue for the NFL. I think it would work. There is a heavy following of the NFL in Mexico. I have friends who live in Mexico who are NFL Nuts –> especially for the Chiefs.
As I have found, the NFL is also considering Western Europe (see the above captioned photo). The UK and Germany, both countries have a solid NFL fandom. Roger Goodell has already publicly discussed a complete Western Europe expansion a four-team European Division, which means that the NFL is seriously considering such a format. He did observe that the result of playing games in London proves the popularity.
Suppose you had an entire division in Europe. Each team would get to stay in Europe for 11 or 12 of its 17 games. So, each team would get eight games with that format. Each European team would still have to play five games in the United States, but that could be solved by giving each team one two-game and one three-game road trip, so they have two trips overseas to the US. I know our current owner, Clark Hunt, is involved with the investigation of the European Expansion.
The way that would work is as follows: individually, a single team creates a nightmare travel problem, but a 4 team division solves those problems. The proposal then would have 8 division games played in Europe among the new division foes. The team would stay in Europe for eight games and home games against other NFL Divisions. They would play 11 or 12 games in Europe and travel to the US twice for the remaining 5 or 6 games. With the Expansion, team scheduling by the NFL would change. Teams would get 8 or 9 home games, with the remaining games played away. Teams that traveled to Europe would have a two-game schedule in Europe.
The fact that Goodell was willing to publicly acknowledge the idea of putting four teams in Europe means it’s likely something the NFL is seriously considering for implementation in the next decade. One of the biggest problems with putting a team in London is that it could be a traveling nightmare, but putting an entire division in Europe would help alleviate that issue.
Teams playing away from the US would only make one flight for the paired game road trip. Adding Mexico City to the complex of NFL teams would create other logistical problems, but that would also be resolved with scheduling. It appears to me that there are a dozen logical sites in consideration.
Expanding to Europe & Adding a 2nd Bye
With added travel, an added Bye Week becomes essential, specifically for the teams heading across the pond would be necessary. I don’t see any way the players union disapproves of this since it gives their players added time off during the season. Nor can I see that the NFL would disapprove of such. It adds another week of Television revenue. I noted about the Chiefs Bye Week that the team had healed up several players — to the benefit of both Reid and Mahomes being successful coming off the Bye Week. An additional Bye Week would help everyone overall and only adds the scheduled time, not additional games.
This Expansion is likely beyond my lifetime at a 10-year time frame, but it seems likely as I read the tea leaves. The observation I would make here is that having a European Division makes Expansion more practical. I suppose that Expansion to Mexico City and other US or Canadian cities would likewise create another division, if that of four franchise locations. The second added division would result in a completely new division or possibly a division realignment. This is where I think a team location in Mexico City could find its way into the mix.
These thoughts have sprung into my thinking since yesterday’s conversation with Laddie Morse of ArrowheadOne. What do you think?
.
David Bell — ArrowheadOne
.