Dan Quinn wants the NFL to expand game day active rosters beyond 46 players

Getty Images

Every NFL team has 53 players on the active roster. But only 46 of them are declared active for each game. Falcons coach Dan Quinn thinks that’s a waste.

Quinn wants the NFL to change its eligibility rules to make more players available to play each game.

“If I had to say one thing how do we do it better, I would say I hope at some point we expand the rosters to get even bigger,” Quinn said. “No pressure if a guy is out to say, ‘OK, here’s another guy that’s up.’ So 46 is good. And maybe in years to come, 10 years from now when we’re sitting here, ‘OK, remember back in the day when you had 46 guys?’ Maybe it goes to 50 or something along those lines and gets more opportunities for guys because without a developmental league, we’re hopeful that maybe the roster size gains by a few spots, that we can incorporate that. And I think it’d be safer, too, to have more guys available to play.”

Quinn’s idea makes sense, and it’s actually a little surprising that NFL owners haven’t expanded the game day rosters already. After all, the owners are paying the players anyway, so why not make them all available to take the field? As the NFL’s focus on player safety includes pulling more players off the field for concussion evaluations and possibly ejecting more players for leading with the helmet, the league might need more players available. It won’t be surprising if Quinn’s proposal picks up steam.

48 responses to “Dan Quinn wants the NFL to expand game day active rosters beyond 46 players

  1. Yes! I’ve also long supported expanding the 53-man roster a couple of spots to have a little more wiggle room given the high rate of injury. But that would cost owners more money. At this point, just having more active players would be a great improvement.

  2. an NFL game day roster should be 70 players…a starter and 2 backups at each spot (66) Kicker, Punter, Long Snapper, and a free spot for a Developmental QB or whoever a coach sees fit to fill it

  3. You are paying 53 guys, but you can only play 46 guys on sunday. THAT MAKES NO SENSE AT ALL!! What business does that??

  4. mm556 says:
    March 31, 2018 at 4:10 pm

    Why does there need to be an active list? Just have a roster and then everyone one it can play, job done.

    ………………..

    I’ve always wondered why they do this inactive thing …. anybody know the reasoning?

  5. You would have to think that play overall would go up. Roster spots like a 4th or 5th wr right now that are decided by who can play special teams would mean maybe a vet is that 4th wr because the other player can still play special teams and might be a corner more adept at tqckling instead of a wr now. Just 1 example.

  6. That’s a very well reasoned and well stated argument. Therefore the NFL will never even consider doing so.

  7. I’ve always wondered why they do this inactive thing …. anybody know the reasoning?

    ——————————————-

    The reasoning (at least one of) has been that a team may have 53 active players, but 7 are too injured to play (but not on IR). So if you just allowed all active roster players one team would have 46 versus the others 53….this way the NFL has determined evens the playing field.

  8. Won’t be done until the next NFLP contract is up. The owners will use it as a barginning chip. Will probably also use if for larger rosters.

  9. The entire roster that is not injured should be available for game day. It is just stupid to have anything less available to teams.

  10. “Who are the 2 people voting thumbs down??”

    Lolz dude welcome to the internet and PFT. You can have a current of former player or coach pass away in the most tragic of circumstances and there will be people thumbs downing condolences posts.

  11. “Why does there need to be an active list? Just have a roster and then everyone one it can play, job done.”

    Then you force teams to make really difficult decisions with players with minor injuries – do you cut them or play short handed? On average each team has between 5 – 7 players unable to play each week.

    This doesn’t stop the NFL expanding rosters of course – you could have 57 man rosters with 50 active players for instance.

  12. I do agree but I also don’t want the game to change anymore then it has , to me it’s not fair to past teams and there success who won the game so if they make rosters more expandable they should of done it quite some time ago so it would be fair because the more the rules change I see it they didn’t win in the “ tough era” of football , so there not great to me

  13. Nothing mysterious about this rule at all. It wouldn’t be fair to have all 53 active on game day. What if one team has five guys that can’t play because of injury while the other team is completely healthy? The healthy team would have five more players available to them. With the 45 man roster teams are forced to play on a level playing field. I think the 57/50 suggestion makes sense.

  14. PFT should provide both sides of the argument. If one team has 7 banged up players and the other doesn’t then it would be 53 available vs. 46. Too many commenters aren’t smart enough to figure that out and just pile on the NFL with whatever PFT posts.

  15. Better idea:
    Get rid of the players and charge the season ticket holders more to allow them to play. Skins versus shirts. No need for expensive uniforms either.

  16. Like everyone else here, I’m wondering why teams have to deactivare any players. Let the entire roster suit up, since they’re all getting paid. Whose idea was it to only allow teams to suit up 46 players?

  17. jackedupboonie says:
    March 31, 2018 at 5:42 pm
    The fact they won’t cap West Coast teams at 3 10 am their time game starts tells you everything about this league. $$$$$$$$$

    ——–

    Why? Because 10:00am is “too early”? Time for the west coast snowflakes to put on their big boy pants

  18. This should be no-brainer. Adding more players to the rosters would improve the quality of play and add depth. My disagreement would be that his proposal doesn’t go far enough. They should add even more if they really care about injuries and the quality of play.

  19. ROSMITH51 says:
    March 31, 2018 at 7:43 pm
    It’s not even clear to me why you need a roster limit if you have a salary cap.

    The salary cap is only calculated on the top 51 salaries.
    They could change that rule, but until they do…. not having a cap on the roster size would mean a team could have 120+ players if #52 – #120+ were all at the minimum salary.
    That is a little excessive, and would basically help nullify the parody that the cap helps create.

    I do agree that a larger roster and more active players would make for a better product on the field. The NFLPA may fight it a bit because the higher paid players would ultimately lose some earning power assuming the same cap number and a higher number players counting against it (i.e. more than 51).

  20. Entire roster should be active on Game Day – especially with concussion protocol and injuries taking out 2 or 3 players per game minimum – Practice Squad should have at least 1/2 the spots protected so team can develop players like Offensive Linemen in the same system

  21. phunnypharm22 says:

    “The salary cap is only calculated on the top 51 salaries.. They could change that rule, but until they do…. not having a cap on the roster size would mean a team could have 120+ players if #52 – #120+ were all at the minimum salary.”
    ————————————————————-

    That’s incomplete knowledge on your part.

    Top 51 is only during the off-season so teams can have plenty of guys in training camp.

    On what is currently 53-man cut-down day, all players salaries count against the cap.

  22. You guys are missing the point on why it is at 46 players currently…

    Say two teams play each other where Team A has 100% healthy roster with all 53 guys available to play. Team B has a bunch of injuries and only 47 are available to play.

    If you increase the game day roster to 50-53 players instead of the current 46, then Team A has a huge advantage now over Team B.
    However, at the current 46 number, there is no advantage gained by Team A.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!