Teams have TWO options for camp roster sizes

why wouldn't a team go with the split squad?

split squad. One, you keep more players around a little longer. Two, you probably reduce the chance of spreading the virus with a split squad. Three, and most importantly, they get more time to mold these rookies individually with all the time missed.

The negatives would be longer hours for coaches, maybe not one clear message for the team, maybe there is an adjustment when it comes back to one full group, etc. Still, those are things you work though for the positives. More reps with the young guys is a huge advantage.

In comment 14938162 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

why wouldn't a team go with the split squad?

Have to ask the question, what is more important in a strange season like this?

More bodies or player chemistry?

sucks because the coaches can't determine the split squads. For example, Andrew Thomas would not be allowed to participate in walk-thrus with the veteran guards.

In comment 14938168 Ben in Tampa said:

Quote:

In comment 14938162 robbieballs2003 said: Quote: why wouldn't a team go with the split squad? Have to ask the question, what is more important in a strange season like this? More bodies or player chemistry?

There won't be real practices until a later date. I forgot the date but as Eric alluded to it is only really walk throughs.

In comment 14938171 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

sucks because the coaches can't determine the split squads. For example, Andrew Thomas would not be allowed to participate in walk-thrus with the veteran guards.

I really don't see that as an issue. If he was missing time hitting our first string DL then I could understand but they arent.

Except don't discount the walk-thrus, OL blocking combinations are choreographed and this is a good time for players to communicate with one another and develop a rapport.

Andrew Thomas is starting off on the right side, he has to get his footwork/hands down again (it's been a while since he played RT).

In comment 14938177 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

Except don't discount the walk-thrus, OL blocking combinations are choreographed and this is a good time for players to communicate with one another and develop a rapport.

But they'll still be having zoom meetings as a team/group where they can watch film together and discuss.

OL of the future...Thomas-WH-Gates-Lemiex-Peart

OL of the current...Solder-Hernandez-Pulley-Zeitler-Flemming

Is better than more bodies. Thomas is one example, but you want to see peart and lemieux get acclimated too. I think it's also important for darnay Holmes and McKinney to integrate with the veterans in the secondary. Communication and coordination is important.

It will be interesting to see what judge does as a first year coach with a young roster.

In comment 14938193 TrueBlue56 said:

Quote:

Is better than more bodies. Thomas is one example, but you want to see peart and lemieux get acclimated too. I think it's also important for darnay Holmes and McKinney to integrate with the veterans in the secondary. Communication and coordination is important. It will be interesting to see what judge does as a first year coach with a young roster.

But walkthroughs are basically Zoom meetings on grass. I get the chemistry angle but that doesn't really happen until you get live reps. Padded practices don't start until day 21 of camp. I'm assuming that when padded practices start that is when a split squad would no longer be an option. The individual coaching can help make up for some of the lost time.

Who thinks this stuff up? Do they have contests at NFL HQ on who can come up with the next lamebrain idea? Dear Roger and company, K.I.S.S.

Who thinks this up? You have 32 with owners and coaches so there is a lot of people without even looking at the players. Teams with new coaches and rookies lost so much offseason time that this is a way to get more time with them. If you have a veteran team like NO, with the same HC, and limited draft picks then it makes sense to go with 80 players and keel them all together. When you are the Giants with a young team, new coaching staff, and a ton of first year players then any opportunity to get more tike with them should be taken advantage of.

I think the league should just let teams keep 90 this year. They won't, but when guys start getting sick and missing time, teams are gonna need replacement players.

And ALL teams are gonna have guys go down -- and those who down will likely be out a MINIMUM of a month.

Wouldn't it be better to have guys who at least know the team playbook, and have been practicing? If you care about the quality of the product on the field?


Way too sensible for the NFL.

In comment 14938201 David B. said:

Quote:

I think the league should just let teams keep 90 this year. They won't, but when guys start getting sick and missing time, teams are gonna need replacement players. And ALL teams are gonna have guys go down -- and those who down will likely be out a MINIMUM of a month. Wouldn't it be better to have guys who at least know the team playbook, and have been practicing? If you care about the quality of the product on the field? Way too sensible for the NFL.

I am pretty sure the NFLPA wants it down to 80 to be more safe.

Players are going to miss time. The less players that know your system the more likely it is that teams will find adequate replacements in a moments notice.

...

I think not. 10 more guys isn't going to impact the safety factor much. Especially if they're splitting squads.

Besides. The league doesn't give a REAL shit about being safe. It's just lip service for better optics.

They only really care about the wallet factor for the owners -- who view the players as expendable and have no problem forging on, and putting them at risk.

In comment 14938201 David B. said:

Quote:

I think the league should just let teams keep 90 this year. They won't, but when guys start getting sick and missing time, teams are gonna need replacement players. And ALL teams are gonna have guys go down -- and those who down will likely be out a MINIMUM of a month. Wouldn't it be better to have guys who at least know the team playbook, and have been practicing? If you care about the quality of the product on the field? Way too sensible for the NFL.

Not so simple, revenue and cap complications.

Dan Duggan
@DDuggan21
·
37m
Seems crazy to jump through all the hoops necessary to carry 90 players (Option 2 here) just to keep 10 players that have to be cut before the first padded practice anyway. Makes much more sense to just carry 80 so rookies can work with the rest of the team immediately

They need some of these rookies to work with the veterans especially Thomas, McKinney, Lemieux, Holmes and Peart.

In comment 14938277 Jay on the Island said:

Quote:

They need some of these rookies to work with the veterans especially Thomas, McKinney, Lemieux, Holmes and Peart.

What work? There are no real practices.

This is the wrong way to look at it with that tweet. Teams are jumping through hoops to keep 10 extra players for a couple of weeks. The point of this option is to make up for all the lost time.

In comment 14938171 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

sucks because the coaches can't determine the split squads. For example, Andrew Thomas would not be allowed to participate in walk-thrus with the veteran guards.

I was thinking the same thing. Splitting the squads gets reps for the younger guys but if they’re going to be counting on players like Andrew Thomas and McKinney to be contributing on opening night they need to be out there with the starters. With the absence of OTAs and the whole team leading a new system with a new staff I say cut it down to 80 when the vets show up.

In comment 14938280 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

In comment 14938277 Jay on the Island said: Quote: They need some of these rookies to work with the veterans especially Thomas, McKinney, Lemieux, Holmes and Peart. What work? There are no real practices. This is the wrong way to look at it with that tweet. Teams are jumping through hoops to keep 10 extra players for a couple of weeks. The point of this option is to make up for all the lost time.

There may not be real practices, but there is walkthroughs. This is where teams can work on coordination, communication and techniques. I think there is something to be gained from working with and watching the veterans. Also remember that this team has not been together physically this year. Yes, they have talked to each other virtually, but it does not replace the ability to interact on the field, in the locker rooms and in meetings to build chemistry.

Both options has its advantages and disadvantages. Each team will decide what is best for their team and we will see what Judge decides to do.

Coaching, especially for a HC who was going to delegate a lot of responsibility to his coordinators and experienced teachers.

Maybe a veteran team with a set lineup can get some advantage from having the 80-man squad, but Teaching is more important for the Giants right now.

Besides, it is only until Aug. 16.

Is best why keep players your only going to cut to gain less chances to see those you will be keeping. There is no time for third stringers you got to go with your starters and next man up very little time to groom others plus there is no preseason. Will the first game be like preseason no it’s win or loose a real game your players need to be ready for a full game.

Quote:

Less Is best. Why keep players your only going to cut to gain less chances to see those you will be keeping.

Because when normal, relatively healthy people get COVID, it takes 3-4 weeks to get over it (in non fatal cases). And people lose weight and strength during the illness.

Let's assume you're a young NFL athlete in better shape than the general public. MAYBE you get over it a little quicker, but how long will it take you get your football strength and shape back?

I think they're gonna need more bodies than normal.

Quote:

Not so simple, revenue and cap complications.

I was under the impression the league can do pretty much whatever it wants if they get NFLPA buy-in.

Sounds like you can start at 90 and cut down to 80 and combine at anytime before the deadline. So essentially you can create a rookie (new player/injury recovery) mini-camp and then combine them with the vets before Aug 16th if they prefer

players between the active roster and practice squad implying there will be less movement between teams than in past years. When we get to September there will be 53+16 +IR guys per team ... I think you keep the 90 for as long as you can, unless someone shows they really don’t belong ...

have already dropped to 80. The Washington Football Team is at 84. I hope the Giants stay at 90. It does not sound like they are having that much actual preseason physical practice before mid-August anyways. Also they can switch to 80 at any time if they have seen enough to make those decisions. Give the UDFAs and fringe players a fighting chance. Otherwise you may let go a diamond in the rough.

Let the young players learn what they can from the vets. This offseason puts them at a huge disadvantage. I wouldn't want to separate the team in that fashion.