can someone explain why we couldn't have put him on the PUP? As I understand PUP he'd be out for 8 weeks or so, and if not better then we could put him on IR. And we wouldn't have to hold a roster spot for him in the interim.
What am I missing?

IF a player starts training camp and starts to practice with the team, he can't be put on the PUP list.

That is the way I understand it. Maybe someone else understands the rule better. It's kinda confusing but that is my understanding of the rule.

if so that's a dumb rule. they need a middle ground for people who get seriously hurt but who can come back before the year is out. I remember way back when when IR was not for the whole season

When the 18 game season starts in 2012, all of these rules will change. Only 2 preseason games. 58 man rosters. And like in MLB a Disabled list where you can put guys on for 6 or 8 weeks and then get them back later in the year. PUP will go away.

Only one more year, then the landcape is changing

Why isn't Sidney rice on IR, he is out till week 7

maybe they are keeping a roster spot open for him and making him inactive. kinda what we should have done with allen, who is apparently pissed bc he thinks he'd be ready to go in just a few weeks. They pulled this same move last year with D Martin and it didn't work then either.

ranger1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why isn't Sidney rice on IR, he is out till week 7


Didn't Sidney start camp with them though? Then they decided on surgery a little bit into camp?? I haven't been following that too closely and know all the details. I am assuming they gave him a roster spot and will just keep him inactive till he is ready or until they see he can't play then put him on IR.

The only players eligible for the "reserve PUP" list are ones who are put on the "active PUP" list at the start of training camp. So, if a guy is healthy at the start of camp, PUP is not an option. You either have to keep that player on your 53 man roster, or put him on IR. It really is kind of a silly rule in a league where injuries are so prevalent. They need something like a "30-day disabled list."

MikeO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ..... like in MLB a Disabled list
> where you can put guys on for 6 or 8 weeks and
> then get them back later in the year...

def. agree with this, whether the season is 16 o 18 games.

JC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MikeO Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ..... like in MLB a Disabled list
> > where you can put guys on for 6 or 8 weeks and
> > then get them back later in the year...
>
> def. agree with this, whether the season is 16 o
> 18 games.


Well its gonna be 18 games thats all but been decided. Owners call that shot. Now the NFLPA will submit a list of their demands, like expanded rosters (more jobs for players and more union dues for the union), a disabled list like in MLB so guys can come back during the seaon, and probably the removal of all or at most only 1 offseason mini-camp. So the players have the offseaon to themselves.

But the 18 game thing is all but a done deal. And it's probably the one thing that will prevent a lockout this offseason.

I heard that also, the owners are gonna push the 18 game sched. to get a deal done with NFLPA

MikeO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JC Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > MikeO Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > ..... like in MLB a Disabled list
> > > where you can put guys on for 6 or 8 weeks
> and
> > > then get them back later in the year...
> >
> > def. agree with this, whether the season is 16
> o
> > 18 games.
>
>
> Well its gonna be 18 games thats all but been
> decided. Owners call that shot.....


Yes, I agree. It wasn't until a couple weeks ago that I realized that it really was a done deal, when I heard that even the current deal with the union allows a longer season (i.e., the owners could have approved it even before the current deal expired).

What I meant by 'whether it's 16 or 18 games' is, they should have the disabled-list as an option already. There's been a need for it for at least the past 10 years.

I think it will be interesting to see how this plays out in light of the new CBA. An 18-game schedule isn't a very good fit for the players.

Rick

There used to be an injured reserve list that players could come back from throughout the year.I think it used to be 4 games, and then they could return (like the 30 day disabled list). I never understood why they changed that, it seemed to be the right way the IR should be used.Here's hoping they retrun to a similar IR list once the new CBA is ratified with the changes for the 18 game season.

Maybe there were teams hiding healthy players on that previous IR list, something would have to be done about that

BobT Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There used to be an injured reserve list that
> players could come back from throughout the year.I
> think it used to be 4 games, and then they could
> return (like the 30 day disabled list). I never
> understood why they changed that, it seemed to be
> the right way the IR should be used.Here's hoping
> they retrun to a similar IR list once the new CBA
> is ratified with the changes for the 18 game
> season.

When the 18 game season starts in 2012 I think you will see a lot of changes for the better throughout the league.

Reports are the Patriots are interested in Will Allen once Allen becomes available on the open market within the next 2 or 3 weeks.

They lost their starting CB Leigh Bodden and need more CB's with some experience

man I just posted a new thread at the exact same time as this!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2010 02:26PM by berkeley223.

the fiasco of putting him on IR is likely to get worse. apparently he thinks he will be healthy in just 3 weeks and if he is, MIA is not allowed to stash him on IR. He will file a greivance and if he wins it, he will have to be released. Then he is free to sign with any team and guess who needs help in the secondary? New England. So in all likelihood he will be playing for the Pats against us this year.

so not only did the team not show any patience in waiting to put him on IR, despite the fact we have huge need in our secondary, they apparently thought they could stash him on IR and prevent him from signing with another team this year. Which shows me both that they are not very fair to their players and don't understand the rules very well.

another thing---this spate of moves with injured vets, not sure what message this is supposed to send to the players. don't get hurt? I don't think they can control that; certainly no one is trying to get injured. play when you're hurt? that can certainly be counterproductive.

why would a player want to give his all for this team when he knows if he gets injured they will toss him like yesterday's news and try to make it so he can't even sign with another team?

yeah I just posted this in the other thread. New England is ready to pounce on Will Allen in a couple weeks.