Our WR Corps in 2019

[Poppa San]

If the Packers do not use the short-term designation, then they do not have to release him. Thus they retain his rights, he is never cut, he is never waived.

The rub is short-term vs not.

There is no such thing as a short term designation. Player goes to IR. After X weeks on IR everyone is eligible to return. If the player is on IR before the final 53, he never comes eligible this season. A healthy player on IR can demand to be released if he wants to play this season. The team can release him at which point he is a FA and after Y weeks resign him to the active roster or PS if he is still a FA. If he made the 53 initially, the team can bring him back anytime after X weeks. He cannot go back to IR for the same injury in that season though. Only for a new injury otherwise other teams can file with the league. (Bears did this with AR a few seasons back. League said ...uh no.) Injured players can also be waived from IR but that is another discussion.

ETA: tl;dr everyone is arguing from the same points and everyone is getting caught by the generic and gotchas of the other debaters.

 

[mradtke66]

There is no such thing as a short term designation. Player goes to IR. After X weeks on IR everyone is eligible to return. If the player is on IR before the final 53, he never comes eligible this season. A healthy player on IR can demand to be released if he wants to play this season. The team can release him at which point he is a FA and after Y weeks resign him to the active roster or PS if he is still a FA.

There is indeed short-term IR, it just isn't that interesting...

You have regular IR, which most people more or less understand. Should the team wish to move on from the player, they can negotiate an injury settlement. This works out to 1/N game checks, or weeks, and should line up with how many weeks it will take for the player to become healthy. It is negotiated between the player and team.

No one can sign the player until his injury settlement time runs out. IE, 4 game checks==no one can sign him for 4 weeks. The team to originally reach the settlement has to wait an additional 2 games (I'm not sure of the actual time. It escapes me right now. 2 weeks sounds right though.)

Then we have making the 53, then getting IR-ed. Or getting put IR instead of making the 53. We agree here.

Short-term(or minor injury IR) IR is NOT the same as designated to return or any such thing. It's for a situation where a player has a minor injury, the team doesn't want him to count agains the roster limit, but he's injured and they cannot cut him.

Basically, in this situation, the team plans to cut him. And the player will be cut once healthy.

A brief article on this: https://www.dailynorseman.com/2014/8/30/6086379/a-brief-explanation-of-short-term-injured-reserve

Again, I don't expect the Packers to do this, as there is no advantage for them to do so--St. Brown is, at minimum, a cheap camp body for 2020 that they own his rights until the end of the 2021 season.

BUT, if St. Brown is healthy and wants to play this season, the can start the process.

 

[Poppa San]

A brief article on this

You reference a 5 year old article to defend your point in a section of the rule book that has had multiple modifications since then?

Short term IR is what happens, it is not a specific designation. Basically appears to me to be reporter shorthand for the process that occurs in regards to an injured player with minor injuries. Player returns to roster or is waived injured or is waived after healing. Short term. BTW vested veterans are released, not waived for those in the peanut gallery waiting to pounce.

 

[Dantés]

I believe the original IR-Return designation was a specific label teams had to use if they wanted to bring a guy back, but since then they've changed the rule. Now it is as Poppa described. That's my understanding.

 

[mradtke66]

Short term IR is what happens, it is not a specific designation. Basically appears to me to be reporter shorthand for the process that occurs in regards to an injured player with minor injuries. Player returns to roster or is waived injured or is waived after healing. Short term. BTW vested veterans are released, not waived for those in the peanut gallery waiting to pounce.

It's an odd happening, but it does happen.

How often does it happen that player gets hurt, but not majorly, the team intends to part ways with him, but they cannot negotiate an injury settlement? From what I can tell, that's only way this weird trigger is executed.

I'm not, in any way, conflating this with returning to the roster. If he goes on IR before the 53 is set, he'll either stay there all year, cut an injury settlement, or be on the minor injury IR list. If he ends up on the latter, he's immediately released once he can pass a physical. And then the Packers will be unable to re-sign him.

This was all in response to post #35:

EQB is basically done as a Packer, unless they keep him on the 53 at cut downs and then IR him or if they cut him and nobody signs him.

(Sorry to invoke you, PB2000)

He seems to be worried that the Packers have to cut St. Brown if we put him on IR now/at final cutdown and the only way we don't have to cut him is if he makes it to the 53.

We don't, but there is the corner case we might. Should we need or want IR him before he makes the 53, I suspect the most likely outcome is we waive him injured, pretty unlikely anyone claims him, so he'll revert to IR, and still be on the roster come minicamp 2020 time.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

(Sorry to invoke you, PB2000)

He seems to be worried that the Packers have to cut St. Brown if we put him on IR now/at final cutdown and the only way we don't have to cut him is if he makes it to the 53.

Actually, what I said is that if we IR him before the final 53, we most likely lose him to another team when he is healthy in 4-6 weeks, his estimated injury time. At the time he is declared fit to play (not sure of actual procedures there), he would have to come off the Packer IR and be put on waivers, available for any team to sign. Then if no team claims him, I believe there is a waiting period before the Packers could resign him. So my point was, if the EQB is in the Packers future, they would need to put him on the 53 and THEN put him on IR. Then after 6 weeks, if he is ready to go, he is still a Packer.

This is all moot if no other teams are interested in him, but as I said, I think after 3-5 NFL games, due to injuries, teams are going to be looking for a player just like EQB.

BTW, I think you are confusing the old "Short term IR designation", which is no longer used. This was a designation you could slap on one player a year, a guy you felt would be ready to go after 6 weeks, but didn't want him to count on your roster. Now, anyone who goes on IR, after being on the 53, is eligible to return after 6 weeks, but each team can only do that twice in a season. Last season the Packers did it with Kumerow and Davis.

 

[mradtke66]

Thus, he will probably be healthy enough to play say mid October. At that time, he would have to come off the Packer IR and be put on waivers, available for any team to sign. \

That is the part that is not true.

He'll be subjected to waives on the way to IR. Once there, he stays. There's no "coming off IR when you're healthy," (except for those who make it to the 53 and are then reactivated after 6+ weeks.)

IR is supposed to be reserved for injuries that will last prevents practice or play for 6 weeks. (Though from what I can tell, it doesn't distinguish between pre and regular season, so with a 6 week diagnosis, it seems the Packers could put him on IR in completely good faith.)

The "minor injury" designation is for just that--minor injuries. The trade off is, you lose the player when he's healthy. So, for example, if the Packers decide that St. Brown is NOT in the plans and intend to cut him, but he's only going to injured for 2 weeks or so, then we end up in this weird spot of him leaving the roster when healthy/able to pass a physical.

You can't cut an injured player. So you either negotiate an injury settlement or keep-to-healthy-then-cut-from-IR the guy.

The advantage for the player is you stay with a team to get treatment and as soon as you can pass a physical, you're signing with a new team. So, very advantageous for the player.

If you get an injury settlement, you've got to sit out those weeks AND you're not getting treatment in the meantime.

The other way we end up with the minor-injury designation is when a player doesn't want an injury settlement. They don't have to accept one and will continue to get paid as their contract says.

Of course, the team will likely be happy to cut bait with those players. If they approach players with such an option, they likely want them gone. OR previously hoped to resign them once the injury settlement timer runs out, but by not taking the settlement, they revert back to the first category.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

As for replacing Bolton, I don't personally get how those FA options would fit. Martinez, Crawford, and Summers are all naturally better fits as the MIKE in this defense. They need a WILL. The FA options out there seem like more of what the Packers already have.

I was just throwing names out there of current top FA ILB's that the Packers could try to sign right now. All 3 might be better suited at playing the MIKE, but I think all 3 are going to at least be better at playing the WILL than Summers or Crawford and backing up the MIKE (Martinez). Crawford really looks lost out there and Summers, just not ready.

 

[AmishMafia]

From what i have seen, the pecking order is something like this:

Adams
GMo
Davis
Kumerow
Lazard
MVS
EQ
Shepard

I think we keep 7 and stash EQ on IR

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That is the part that is not true.

He'll be subjected to waives on the way to IR. Once there, he stays. There's no "coming off IR when you're healthy," (except for those who make it to the 53 and are then reactivated after 6+ weeks.)

IR is supposed to be reserved for injuries that will last prevents practice or play for 6 weeks. (Though from what I can tell, it doesn't distinguish between pre and regular season, so with a 6 week diagnosis, it seems the Packers could put him on IR in completely good faith.)

The "minor injury" designation is for just that--minor injuries. The trade off is, you lose the player when he's healthy. So, for example, if the Packers decide that St. Brown is NOT in the plans and intend to cut him, but he's only going to injured for 2 weeks or so, then we end up in this weird spot of him leaving the roster when healthy/able to pass a physical.

You can't cut an injured player. So you either negotiate an injury settlement or keep-to-healthy-then-cut-from-IR the guy.

The advantage for the player is you stay with a team to get treatment and as soon as you can pass a physical, you're signing with a new team. So, very advantageous for the player.

If you get an injury settlement, you've got to sit out those weeks AND you're not getting treatment in the meantime.

The other way we end up with the minor-injury designation is when a player doesn't want an injury settlement. They don't have to accept one and will continue to get paid as their contract says.

Of course, the team will likely be happy to cut bait with those players. If they approach players with such an option, they likely want them gone. OR previously hoped to resign them once the injury settlement timer runs out, but by not taking the settlement, they revert back to the first category.

Slice it up how you want to.

The bottom line the Packers really have three choices.

1. Keep EQB on the 53 and maintain him on the roster or IR him after he is on the roster. If they IR, he can then start practicing after 6 weeks and play after 8.
2. IR him now and hope the injury keeps him from being healthy enough to play again this season. Otherwise, he can petition for his release when healthy.
3. Waive him with an injury settlement.

Scenarios 2 and 3 most likely mean his time in Green Bay is up. Scenario 1 keeps him.

I haven't even looked at all the implications on salary, the cap and the medical costs. But I am thinking your "short term injury IR designation" plays into that those things.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

From what i have seen, the pecking order is something like this:

Adams
GMo
Davis
Kumerow
Lazard
MVS
EQ
Shepard

I think we keep 7 and stash EQ on IR

I think that is pretty close. But if they decide to keep 6, its going to be an epic battle between Lazard and Shepherd against the Chiefs.

 

[Dantés]

From what i have seen, the pecking order is something like this:

Adams
GMo
Davis
Kumerow
Lazard
MVS
EQ
Shepard

I think we keep 7 and stash EQ on IR

MVS has been the starter across from Adams throughout camp. Why would he be behind all those guys?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

MVS has been the starter across from Adams throughout camp. Why would he be behind all those guys?

He used the Amish Alphabet to put them in order?

 

[mradtke66]

Slice it up how you want to.

The bottom line the Packers really have three choices.

1. Keep EQB on the 53 and maintain him on the roster or IR him after he is on the roster. If they IR, he can then start practicing after 6 weeks and play after 8.
2. IR him now and hope the injury keeps him from being healthy enough to play again this season. Otherwise, he can petition for his release when healthy.
3. Waive him with an injury settlement.

Scenarios 2 and 3 most likely mean his time in Green Bay is up. Scenario 1 keeps him.

Situation 3 is really a sub-option of situation 2. And I disagree option is an end to his time in Green Bay, although it certainly posses some risk.

They have three options, though one is strikes me as foolish:

1a) Do nothing, keep him on the 53.

2a) Keep him on the 53, then IR after day 1, allowing them the option bring him back after 6 weeks.

3a) IR him before he makes it to the 53.

Option 3 is a misnomer, because that's not what happens. He'll get Waived-Injured.

Once Waived-Injured, it's either:

1b) Another team claims him and good bye.

2b) Another team does not claim him (This strikes me as likely, as he's not that great of a player and he's injured.)

Assuming another team doesn't claim him, he reverts to our regular IR.

Once on our regular IR our options are:

1c) Do nothing. He's on IR. We retain his rights.

2c) Reach an injury settlement

3c) He enters the minor injury designation pergatory. IE, once healthy, he's cut.

2c and 3c only happen if the Packers no longer want him. Certainly possible, but why would you throw away a cheap rookie when you could have him 2 more years?

2c also allows them the option to bring him back later in the season freely without playing return from IR games. Risk being someone else could snag him once healthy.

3c is the nuke option. If that happens, the Packers are not allowed to re-sign him. (Exactly for how long, I'm not sure. The rest of the league year? Not until another team signs and cuts him? I cannot find the rules for this spelled out.)

Now, if we end up down the decision tree at 1c and he's on our IR, we have his rights, the next steps are:

1d) Do nothing. He stays on IR.

2d) St. Brown asks for his release.

3d) St. Brown files a grievance with the league saying he was placed on IR incorrectly.

4d) St. Brown thinks he was placed on IR incorrectly is fine with it.

2d can happen with any player anytime. If the team wants to keep you, they'll just say no. If he's healthy, and the Packers choose to grant his release, we revert to 3c.

3d can also be done by any player. You think the team is acting outside of the rules laid out in the CBA. In the case of an improper IR use, that'd be something like slight back tightness and the team put him on IR to stash him.

Once the grievance is filed, whatever their arbitrator clauses is invoked. Either

1e) The IR-placing is ruled improper, and we're back to 3c, player is cut.

2e) The IR-placing is ruled Proper and we're back to 1d, we retain his rights. I suspect this would be the ruling, based on my understanding of IR rules. IR is for major injuries that prevent play and practice for 6 or more weeks. Initial diagnosis has a 6 week time window on it. Thus, likely a proper placing of the player on IR

The final wrinkle in all of this 4d above. If he doesn't want to fight being placed on IR even if he thinks he could return sooner than 6 weeks. This may or may not be a good play on his part.

In short:

• If he's gone early with an injury settlement, the Packers likely don't want to keep him and the injury made the decision easier.

• If he's on IR with us all year, both parties are fine with him sticking around.

• If the team wants to keep him but St Brown wants out, we'll hear about the grievance being filed

• If he's cut later without word of a settlement, he was placed on IR with the intent of cutting him once healthy, ie, minor-injury designation, ie, short-term-IR, ie, 3c above.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I actually don't find keeping him on the 53 as foolish as you do. If he makes it back in 4 weeks, he misses 2 games. Needs 6 weeks? He only misses 4 games. Teams always have to have 7 guys inactive for each game, he just becomes one of those.

If the outlook on his recovery is decent and the plan before last night was to keep him, I am really starting to think the injury doesn't change much. Just might mean the Packers carry 7 WR's (including him). I would run the risk of losing quite a few guys that belong on a PS, then to lose EQB. If they temporarily need the roster spot after cutdowns, then IR him and he will be playing again in 8 weeks.

 

[Poppa San]

in 8 weeks

A nit to pick. 8 games, not 8 weeks.

 

[sschind]

I haven't seen anything about this. Can someone briefly explain how this whole IR thing works as it pertains to players injured during pre season? What exactly are our options with ESB?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I haven't seen anything about this. Can someone briefly explain how this whole IR thing works as it pertains to players injured during pre season? What exactly are our options with ESB?

Appears that explaining how to put a person on the Moon is easier!

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

A nit to pick. 8 games, not 8 weeks.

Actually, everything I have read uses "weeks" not games. "Can't practice with the team for 6 weeks, is eligible to play in a game after 8 weeks."

If they used "games", that might add an extra week of having to wait if a team had a bye during the 8 week stretch.

 

[AmishMafia]

MVS has been the starter across from Adams throughout camp. Why would he be behind all those guys?

I really dont think he has played as well as the others. Is he not getting opportunities because they already know what he can do? Maybe. You would think with a new system he would be getting reps.

 

[sschind]

I really dont think he has played as well as the others. Is he not getting opportunities because they already know what he can do? Maybe. You would think with a new system he would be getting reps.

Hopefully he is picking it up in practice and seeing what the other guys can do in a game is more important. Not saying a new system is easy to learn but much of it is knowing what the plays are and being where you are supposed to be. Much of that can be seen in practice.

 

[Dantés]

I really dont think he has played as well as the others. Is he not getting opportunities because they already know what he can do? Maybe. You would think with a new system he would be getting reps.

You mean preseason reps? Because almost none of the starters have gotten more than a smattering of PS reps.

 

[AmishMafia]

You mean preseason reps? Because almost none of the starters have gotten more than a smattering of PS reps.

No, practice.

I went to 3 practices and i dont know if i saw him make any good plays. Recent comments by AR and others is that AR and MVS connection has not looked well.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

No, practice.

I went to 3 practices and i dont know if i saw him make any good plays. Recent comments by AR and others is that AR and MVS connection has not looked well.

Interesting and that is news to me. I figured Adams, MVS and Allison were entrenched as the top 3 WR's.

Would kind of surprise me if MVS doesn't have a solid season. His rookie numbers were better than Davante's.

MVS: 38 catches 581 yds (15.3/catch) and 2 TD's

Adams: 38 catches 446 yds (11.7/catch) and 3 TD's

 

[Dantés]

No, practice.

I went to 3 practices and i dont know if i saw him make any good plays. Recent comments by AR and others is that AR and MVS connection has not looked well.

Are you referring to them getting the deep ball dialed in?

I would guess that MVS is locked in as a starter, but may see fewer targets than Allison because of his deep role. But that speed threat is really critical to have on the field.