- Joined
- Apr 7, 2013
- Messages
- 120,043
Rosters could expand to 55
Posted by Mike Florio on March 1, 2015, 1:46 PM EST
The Competition Committee’s annual pre-league meeting get-together includes, for 2015, examination of roster size.
Per a source with knowledge of the situation, the Competition Committee is considering expanding rosters from 53 to 55.
Opposition to larger rosters previously came from the fact that more than a few teams were having trouble staying under a salary cap that was flat and/or “smoothing.” In recent years, the salary cap has been increasing more quickly. Coupled with the impact of the rookie wage scale on the market for veterans (many are paid less and less because quality rookies are cheaper than ever), there’s plenty of extra cash available under the cap to pay two more players per team.
The NFL Players Association would have a voice in roster expansion. At one level, the union should welcome it; more roster spots means more jobs. More jobs means more employees. More employees means the union grows.
But more jobs under a hard cap means fewer available dollars per employees. That said, expanding the pool of full-time workers from 1,696 to 1,760 shouldn’t have much of a total impact on employees sharing a maximum available annual payroll of more than $4.5 billion, and climbing.
Posted by Mike Florio on March 1, 2015, 1:46 PM EST
The Competition Committee’s annual pre-league meeting get-together includes, for 2015, examination of roster size.
Per a source with knowledge of the situation, the Competition Committee is considering expanding rosters from 53 to 55.
Opposition to larger rosters previously came from the fact that more than a few teams were having trouble staying under a salary cap that was flat and/or “smoothing.” In recent years, the salary cap has been increasing more quickly. Coupled with the impact of the rookie wage scale on the market for veterans (many are paid less and less because quality rookies are cheaper than ever), there’s plenty of extra cash available under the cap to pay two more players per team.
The NFL Players Association would have a voice in roster expansion. At one level, the union should welcome it; more roster spots means more jobs. More jobs means more employees. More employees means the union grows.
But more jobs under a hard cap means fewer available dollars per employees. That said, expanding the pool of full-time workers from 1,696 to 1,760 shouldn’t have much of a total impact on employees sharing a maximum available annual payroll of more than $4.5 billion, and climbing.
