It seems to me, though it is only been two weeks, that there are more and more injuries in the NFL every season, especially in 2023.
In KRFL, if a player is injured (or even if he isn't) a KRFL can sign a free agent. However, to sign a free agent, a current team player needs to be released and his salary continues to be counted against the team's salary cap. For the 2024 KRFL season and beyond, I wonder if we should modify that rule. I seems to me we may need to use more players than we current do to get though a season. This is not a new issue. We faced it during our 2021 season (the 2020 NFL "COVID Season") and we voted to increase KRFL Roster size from 52 to 55. If so, some options I can think of are:
- While doing it would be a new administrative burden on me, allow teams to sign a free agent for any player injured for the the duration of the injury, only. So if player X is injured for three games, the team could sign a free agent who would be released after the injured player was healthy again. The salary of the injured player would not count against the team's salary cap. However, if a team releases a healthy player and signs a free agent, the current rule is followed (the free agent player's $0.5M salary counts against the team's salary cap, the released player's salary continues to count against the team's salary cap, and the player is released at the end of the season. - Same as above, but limited it six free agent signings per season, per season so a KRFL team cannot load up on a bunch of part-time players in the free agent draft knowing it can sign an unlimited number of free agent players during the season. or - Increase roster sizes further, say to 60+ players, increase the minimum number of players the team must keep at the annual roster cut-down period from 22 players to, say 30, players, and eliminate signing in-season free agents. Active rosters each game would be limited to 55 (or some other number - like 48 in the NFL). or ????
Well, I think I asked you a few months ago about this. I see that rosters in the NFL are huge for all types of injuries and the team's playing time is screwed.
I know I am just coming back but I think an expanded roster size is the best idea. Along with a max roster on game day.
What about more salary with more players? IS that possible?
I'm happy with current roster size and salary because we KNOW player duration before start of season (contrary to NFL teams) and in my opinion roster management is an important part of each owner's duties.
However, not all teams have players with 10 ratings. I am using my team for example has 5 injuries at this moment. I know the previous ownership was not the greatest. If I have time to run the numbers many a player did not play the full 18.
Agree with Roberto and Mark on status quo. Any change, if considered, should NOT increase roster size.
With no increase in roster size, then I think my proposal of having a minimum number of players with a durability rating of at least 6 at each position (http://www.aaroncraneinstitute.com/football/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?14924) which was voted down 13-10 in March 2023 ought to be reconsidered.
Bump - I think this deserves to be on the ballot. I am all in favor of increasing roster sizes.
I think I did this last year - I checked one team so far - the Buffalo Bills - and 62 players played for Buffalo in real life last year. I think we should have rosters of at least 60 players.
