Thread: NFL Ammends Rules on Trades and IR...............

The IR thing is interesting. No mention of it being restricted to after week X or anything, so this could be a way for someone not eligible for the PUP (because they played in PS or practiced w/ the team) to be "PUP'd".

As the article says these were rule changes which the owners approved before but which needed union approval.

I'm not certain how much a change in the trading deadline will make since we seldom see trades done after the beginning of the season anyway but it does allow a little more flexibility for teams who might be dealing with injury problems.

I think the big one though is the change allowing one player who was placed on IR early in the season or prior to back on the active roster without that player needing to clear waivers. Now you can take a top vet who may be nursing an injury sustained in camp and allow him the 4-6 weeks he needs to heal from a minor surgery or an slow healing muscle pull or sprain and place him on IR to begin the season and still know that you can bring him back later in the season.

This can free up an important roster spot in September when teams are struggling to set their 53 many squads and a guy who might have been cut makes the team instead.

One other thing relative to IR and the 53 man roster that I should clarify is that if a player makes the initial 53 man roster his salary is guaranteed for that season.

This may be something new that came from the way the current CBA was negotiated. Prior to that it was my understanding that players salaries were guaranteed only on a game by game basis and that if cut after the season began they would receive pay only for the games played up to that point. This explains why the Bears didn't place DeCicco on the IR which would have in my opinion obligated them to pay him for the entire season.

Originally Posted by BearStuff

The IR thing is interesting. No mention of it being restricted to after week X or anything, so this could be a way for someone not eligible for the PUP (because they played in PS or practiced w/ the team) to be "PUP'd".

In a way it is similar at least in terms of reactivating the guy. As far as the Bears are concerned it means they could put Podlesh on the IR if it will take a month or longer for him to heal completely and not have to hold a roster spot open for him.

Or if Urlacher plays a game of two but simply needs more time to heal from the surgery they could do the same and free up a roster spot to add another player until he returned. This is the way I think we'll see this rule change used.

Originally Posted by soulman

In a way it is similar at least in terms of reactivating the guy. As far as the Bears are concerned it means they could put Podlesh on the IR if it will take a month or longer for him to heal completely and not have to hold a roster spot open for him.

Or if Urlacher plays a game of two but simply needs more time to heal from the surgery they could do the same and free up a roster spot to add another player until he returned. This is the way I think we'll see this rule change used.

You could have just said "Ditto". lol

Originally Posted by BearStuff

You could have just said "Ditto". lol

When have I ever used just "one" word when "fifty" would do?

Originally Posted by soulman

When have I ever used just "one" word when "fifty" would do?

I feel ya man. My wife says that I am QUITE wordy when I write (which I do a lot of in my occupation and she helps). I tell her it's only because I can't get a word in when we talk. She usually shuts up after that...for awhile.

Originally Posted by 4DaBERS

I feel ya man. My wife says that I am QUITE wordy when I write (which I do a lot of in my occupation and she helps). I tell her it's only because I can't get a word in when we talk. She usually shuts up after that...for awhile.

...as in:
(You) What's for dinner?
(Her) .............

Does this mean Brandon Hardin could play some games after all?