Roster Cuts and Moves

[Ruzious]

Just curious - Did anyone watch Indiana vs Maryland last year and come away thinking Sudfeld did not have the ability to play in the NFL?

Have any un-signed developmental QBs shown the ability to be 6'6 240 with a good downfield arm and good feet in the pocket?

 

[Sharkinva]

My argument isn't that they shouldn't have kept him, my argument is that I believe there was little risk that he would have been claimed off of the waiver wire and added to another teams 53 man squad. He showed nothing in preseason that could lead anyone to believe that he is NFL ready (or maybe will ever be). In fact, most experts feel he was drafted way too high. I recognize that driskell was claimed by the 49ers which, IMO, was a stupid move. If he was picked up, there are always a slew of developmental QBs we could sign. Honestly, sudfield has shown me nothing this preseason so if we did lose him, I don't see it as a big loss.

Again I think you are discounting the investment already made. Sure if he was claimed, we could have just gone out and signed a body off the street to the practice squad. On the off chance that this guy is required to play in a game, would you rather have some one with 4 months of experience in the system, or some one we signed three days ago. I agree Sudfeld was nothing spectacular. but I think he did enough to show he could be developed. BUt to assume no one would have claimed him is questionable.

 

[Caliskinsfan]

Here's Jays thoughts from Rich Tandler

On keeping three quarterbacks:

“I think that was pretty much the plan. You want to have three. Some teams go with two and a practice squad guy. We thought that Nate [Sudfeld] showed enough in the preseason where somebody might give him a chance.”

I go back and forth on this on the wisdom of using a roster spot for your third, developmental QB. But I think the bottom line is that if you want to keep him don’t risk losing him and the 53rd spot on a roster when you can only activate 46 on game days is an acceptable cost for doing so. We saw the value of a quarterback when the Vikings gave up a first and a fourth for career mediocrity Sam Bradford. It’s supply and demand and if you have a guy you think can be a competent QB in a year or two you should hold on to him.

 

[Caliskinsfan]

I think it's a solid strategy to have 3 QBs on the roster, 1 of whom you are developing at all times.

Given the scarcity/cost of QBs these days, if you see qualities/traits you like, makes sense to keep the player and develop them.

Don't think there's any doubt that Jay and co have bought into Nate's potential for now.

 

[j_y19]

Again I think you are discounting the investment already made. Sure if he was claimed, we could have just gone out and signed a body off the street to the practice squad. On the off chance that this guy is required to play in a game, would you rather have some one with 4 months of experience in the system, or some one we signed three days ago. I agree Sudfeld was nothing spectacular. but I think he did enough to show he could be developed. BUt to assume no one would have claimed him is questionable.

From what I've seen of Sudfield, which is limited I admit, I dont think it would make any difference. While he may know the playbook better that a scrub off the streets, he didn't show me he could execute with any proficiency yet. So if we were required to use our 3rd QB today, my bet is the results would be the same. Losses, wether it was Nate or a street scrub. Having said this, clearly Jay has more visibility than I do into Sudfield and his abilities. But I still stand by my original argument. No one would have claimed him if we would have cut him with the intentions of signing him to the practice squad for this year. It is my opinion that this is where he belongs in 2016.

 

[Sharkinva]

From what I've seen of Sudfield, which is limited I admit, I dont think it would make any difference. While he may know the playbook better that a scrub off the streets, he didn't show me he could execute with any proficiency yet. So if we were required to use our 3rd QB today, my bet is the results would be the same. Losses, wether it was Nate or a street scrub. Having said this, clearly Jay has more visibility than I do into Sudfield and his abilities. But I still stand by my original argument. No one would have claimed him if we would have cut him with the intentions of signing him to the practice squad for this year. It is my opinion that this is where he belongs in 2016.

Dont get me wrong, I agree with you that the odds are that no one would have claimed him. BUt on the off chance we were wrong... I would rather use the roster spot on a QB who will likely not be active on game day, over another spot who still wont be active on game day and likely ended up on the PS any way. Only guy I think should have made it over Nate was Mack Brown... and no one claimed him and he is on our PS... so Im good with it.

 

[j_y19]

Dont get me wrong, I agree with you that the odds are that no one would have claimed him. BUt on the off chance we were wrong... I would rather use the roster spot on a QB who will likely not be active on game day, over another spot who still wont be active on game day and likely ended up on the PS any way. Only guy I think should have made it over Nate was Mack Brown... and no one claimed him and he is on our PS... so Im good with it.

Brown is the perfect example of a guy that we could use on the 53 man roster. Sure, he wouldn't dress every game, but there is a real possibility that we will need him this year given the injury prone RBs we have. But since he is on the PS, he cannot help us this year. He could also contribute on STs. Sudfield (I hope) will never wear a uniform this year.

 

[Sharkinva]

Brown is the perfect example of a guy that we could use on the 53 man roster. Sure, he wouldn't dress every game, but there is a real possibility that we will need him this year given the injury prone RBs we have. But since he is on the PS, he cannot help us this year. He could also contribute on STs. Sudfield (I hope) will never wear a uniform this year.

Why cant Brown help us this year?? If something happens to Jones, Brown gets activated. Also think about this, its alot easier to slip a guy to the PS during the season than it is right after roster cuts have been made. My thinking is, Brown gets promoted to the Active Roster come week two and Nate gets sent to the PS..... after most teams have decided on a course of action.

 

[Ruzious]

Ben Standig explains why it was smart to keep Sudfeld on the active roster and let Brown go to the practice squad: Yeah, Keeping Nate Sudfeld Worked Out

And he's right.

 

[j_y19]

Why cant Brown help us this year?? If something happens to Jones, Brown gets activated. Also think about this, its alot easier to slip a guy to the PS during the season than it is right after roster cuts have been made. My thinking is, Brown gets promoted to the Active Roster come week two and Nate gets sent to the PS..... after most teams have decided on a course of action.

I didn't realize you could do that? I though once on the PS, you had to stay the entire year? If you can move players from the active roster to the PS and vice versa, then I am OK with the keeping of Subfield. Are you sure that is the case?

 

[Sharkinva]

I didn't realize you could do that? I though once on the PS, you had to stay the entire year? If you can move players from the active roster to the PS and vice versa, then I am OK with the keeping of Subfield. Are you sure that is the case?

Positive. The danger of the practice squad is, another team can come in and claim a player from your practice squad by putting them on their active roster. So say the Chiefs have major injuries at RB... they could claim Brown by putting them on the active roster.

If we released Suds today, and he cleared waivers, we could then add him to our practice squad. But then some one could offer him a spot on their active roster and we would have to decide to match the offer and put him on OUR active roster, or let him go.

 

[Sharkinva]

The reason to have a guy on the practice squad is, he can still practice with the team, attend position meetings. And he can be activated at any point during the season. The danger is, another team can activate him to their roster and you lose the player unless you make him a better offer.

 

[j_y19]

Positive. The danger of the practice squad is, another team can come in and claim a player from your practice squad by putting them on their active roster. So say the Chiefs have major injuries at RB... they could claim Brown by putting them on the active roster.

If we released Suds today, and he cleared waivers, we could then add him to our practice squad. But then some one could offer him a spot on their active roster and we would have to decide to match the offer and put him on OUR active roster, or let him go.

OK. Well that makes the handling of Sudfield a bit more sense to me.

 

[Caliskinsfan]

Cofield to Seattle PS

 

[Sportster 72]

Unless someone claims Brown he is there if you need him. What's the difference in him or Sudfeld being on the 53 but not dressing on game day?

 

[Sharkinva]

Unless someone claims Brown he is there if you need him. What's the difference in him or Sudfeld being on the 53 but not dressing on game day?

Neither of them will dress on game day. The only difference is, if another team comes up short at RB and wants to claim Brown, the only way we can stop them is to give him a better offer and put him on our 53 man roster.

Another team cant claim Suds right now.

 

[Ruzious]

The Skins believe Sudfeld would be more likely to be claimed than Brown, and they're probably right. There's simply a bigger supply of guys like Brown available than there are of guys like Sudfeld.

 

[skinsdad62]

Hey we have both so let's be happy . If suds doesn't work out you get another guy

 

[Sportster 72]

Neither of them will dress on game day. The only difference is, if another team comes up short at RB and wants to claim Brown, the only way we can stop them is to give him a better offer and put him on our 53 man roster.

Another team cant claim Suds right now.

I understand how it works, my point is that neither will be dressing on game day.

 

[Sharkinva]

I understand how it works, my point is that neither will be dressing on game day.

That was more for the ones who might have been confused more than any thing.