The Roster List (53 Man)

Originally posted by NickSh49:

Originally posted by showtime49:
Could someone clarify the waiver/practice squad procedure for me?

Would we put in a claim - let's say for Sheets - and then we could put him on the practice squad the same day? Or if another team puts a claim on him, would it go to the team with the worst record?

Does Sheets have any say in it?

Sheets has no say while he is on waivers.

I'm not sure of how the waiver order works, but if a team claims him, they must put him on the active roster of 53 guys... not their practice squad.

So don't bet on Sheets getting picked up.

i heard the browns may show interest, but its not likely.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by kezar49er:
Should we be looking at Pashos from the jags? We really need a RT

Yes

Pashos = Sims

Nobody could be worse then Sims, Pashos is bigger and younger.

Sims played acceptably well in the final 5 games last year as well as PS games this year. You are going too much on his performance in the Martz offense. Sims is a decent backup but the team still needs another OT.

Sorry dj, but Sims was garbage during preseason. Just garbage.

I personally think Sims gets bashed too much, but if we can replace him with a waiver wire pickup of Mark Taucher, Levi Jones, or Tony Pashos, then so be it.

I'd be much happier if we can upgrade from Sims. And, ofcourse, Crabtree for Spurlock would help

It'll be a toss up to see if we can get a good enough blocking TE from the waivers. Else, an extra lineman isn't necessarily such a bad idea.

Rest of the roster looks spot on.

Originally posted by Hopper:
We should have cut Curtis Taylor and kept Sheets, but no other complaints.

Perhaps the Lewis injury played into this.

I can't imagine why a team would place Taylor on their 53. But Sheets has a chance of getting picked up.

Most likely he won't, but why risk it?

Taylor isn't going to help us this year unless we have a bunch of injuries. Maybe he is good at special teams?

Hmm, ya, that was probably it. They probably plan on using Taylor's athleticism on special teams.

Its too bad for him, if Sheets had no "character" issues, he would have been picked up in the 3rd or 4th round and would be in the NFL right now.

I'm glad RJF made the team. He will help us this year more than most people realize.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Hopper:
We should have cut Curtis Taylor and kept Sheets, but no other complaints.

The two are not related at all.

Taylor stayed because he is big, fast, hit hard, and because Michael Lewis has had two concussions in two weeks. Once a player gets to that point, their career could be over with the next hard hit. Remember Steve Young?

Also, the 49ers are just waiting for someone to take over Mark Roman's spot. The 49ers allowed him to shop around the league last summer and NO team was willing to sign him. That should tell you why Taylor is on the team.

As to Sheets, keeping a #3 running back who will rarely see the field while cutting a guy who may be a starter at safety this season doesn't make sense.

I have to agree with DJ, although I was hoping Sheets would make the cut. Sheets might make it through wavers, but I think Sing (knowing that Sheets wouldn't play much) thinks he deserves a shot at making the roster some place where he can actually get on the field.

A couple of surprises...Sheets, Finley and Pascoe. I think blocking, or lack thereof was a key factor with all 3 guys. Singletary wants players who are more complete. I like that we kept Briggs, RJF, Taylor & Spurlock. Remember, Mac will in all likelihood sign another TE, FB and OT, so three of the 53 will get cut, unless there's a trade.

Here's my PS...subject to change as they sign other players.

Mitchell
Spanos
Finley/Pascoe
B. Miller
Sheets
Boone
Lambert
Roland/Zeigler

Originally posted by RonMexico:
How do some of you not work for NFL teams?

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
s

Originally posted by Crown:

Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Per Sing:


"The overarching theme behind the roster decisions for Singletary and his coaching staff was work ethic.

“You want guys on the team that have a common denominator – that football is important to them and they have a great work ethic,” Singletary said. “As a coach, I was pleasantly surprised that all of these guys had a great work ethic. Certain guys just stepped up in certain areas and did things that made you look twice. Whether it be Spurlock, Jean Francois or Curtis [Taylor], I just think they did a good job. As we sat down as a staff, their names just kept coming up.”

Sweet, we should win the Superbowl if we're ever measured by our work ethic! f**k that, I want guys who show up on game day, not just the clowns who try extra hard to work out in practice to make up for their lack of talent. Yes discipline and worth ethic is important, but at the end of the day I want a gamer.

I am stunned that you are not an exec on an NFL team

That makes two of us.....I dont think I would do much worst than the Niners the last 6 years......


BTW, I'm very disappointed with our current roster. We have not upgraded at all fom last year. The Marvel Smith fiasco is unacceptable....unacceptable! As some have pointed out, the guy was never even cleared to fully practice from TEAM DOCTOR - YES, TEAM DOCTORS! That means they had a pretty good idea how things could end up. There is no way we should have bet on this guy being our starter. Bring him in fine, but no back up?

I say if we suffer another losing season Scotty needs to lose his job. I'll make myself available to take over.....

There were other bodies out there that are called ROTs, but Smith was the best available. The 49ers invested very little money in the guy. McC did his job in the way the contract was written.
You can't just go out and get a starter via FA. No team is going to just release a starting offensive tackle in this league.

There are a lot of other OTs out there. Right after Smith retired, McC indicated they would be watching the waiver wire closely to find a good option to replace him.

Its not about the money. I could care less if they gave him the kind of money Craptree wants. It's the about the probability of him playing. The fact that he hardly made it through practice tells me his back was a huge problem. Either he totally lied to us and the Dr.'s didn't catch it or Scotty just gambled on our whole season and just roled a snake eyes. But Smith isn't the only problem. How do we go into the season with Simms as our swing man? The guy has proven over and over again that he can't play. Are you telling me we couldn't of at least upgraded him? Seriously? By my count we needed at least two legit back ups/starters going into the offseason. There is no excuse for being in this position.

Staley, Snyder (oft injured), Simms (not oft injured enough).

Originally posted by showtime49:

Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:

Originally posted by showtime49:

Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:
Of the 53, 23 are offense and 26 defense. It's clear which squad Singletary believes will be on the field more often.

I don't follow your logic.

Defense needs more players in rotation than the offense. How often are we subbing out the Quarterback, Running back, Tackles in comparison to D line, DBs and LBs?

Need more people to go from 3-4 to Nickel to Dime.

Originally posted by WheresWaldo:

Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:
Of the 53, 23 are offense and 26 defense. It's clear which squad Singletary believes will be on the field more often.

lol what the heck? Terrible logic.

LOGIC:
Premise 1: The defense will be on the field more often than the offense.
Premise 2: The defense will need more subs, because the starters will be gassed.
Conclusion: Therefore, there should be more players on defense.

You can try to frame it like you're teaching a LSAT class if you want, but the assumptions you use to build your syllogism are just plain wrong.
Your conclusion is that Singletary sees our offense being inept and our defense unable to get off the field, so he figures he'll have to carry more defensive players than offensive ones. You base this off of the earliest 53-man roster released.

I don't think it takes too much of a leap of faith to guess that there are more realistic reasons why we kept more defensive players. As I said before, which you completely ignored, defensive players more than likely get subbed more often than offensive players. I don't see how hard that is to believe. I don't think you can say what Singletary believes about our offense or defense based on roster counts. That's asinine.

Defenses have to carry more players as they shift formations to deal with various situations. I'm not denying that offenses do as well, but I think that defenses do move more personnel around than offenses so they probably need more people on the roster to satisfy that need.

You need more DBs for Nickel and Dime, but you also need pass rushing specialists to come in on passing downs, but you also need more D-Line/LBs for goalline situations. Not to mention the rotation of D-linemen is particularly important in a 3-4, so there's another need. How often do you see Staley or Heitman subbing out because they get tired?

So let me ask you: Which is more likely?
1) Singletary figures we need more defensive players for versatility/depth or there is simply more talent he wants to keep on the 53-man on defense
-or-
2) Singletary already lost faith in our offense to control the ball and/or the defense to be able to get off the field on third downs.

The 49ers have traditionally had an equal number of offensive vs. defensive players, even with a 3-4 defense. Certainly, a difference of three is significant. I'm saying fatigue will be another reason to sub more often on defense. After seeing our offense in pre-season, it seems like a smart (logical) conclusion.

Originally posted by Paul_Hofer:


The 49ers have traditionally had an equal number of offensive vs. defensive players, even with a 3-4 defense. Certainly, a difference of three is significant. I'm saying fatigue will be another reason to sub more often on defense. After seeing our offense in pre-season, it seems like a smart (logical) conclusion.

I absolutely agree with you that fatigue is a reason we would sub D players in. What I do not agree with is your conclusion that Singletary's already resigned himself to seeing our defense on the field for 40 minutes a game, with your sole evidence being the lack of a perfectly balanced roster and one preseason game (The fourth one no less!). If we wanted to draw ANY conclusions from a preseason game for whatever reason, it should be the third one against Dallas.

TOP was about equal in that game.

At the end of the day, who knows what's going to happen. Even if you're completely right, which I refuse to concede
, our roster is probably going to undergo some changes as we head into waivers/Week One anyway.

[ Edited by showtime49 on Sep 6, 2009 at 08:57:01 ]

This is so hilarious.

I just can't believe that these guys are serious. I mean nobody can really think that you should keep #4 RB and let #2 safety go. They must be joking.

And do these people really think that this is the final roster? No, they are just fooling around. Nobody can be that stupid.

From MM's twitter:
Person close to Kory Sheets says it's in his best interest to go unclaimed & return to 49ers practice squad. He might not be quite ready.

If this is true, it definitely sounds like good news to me. Means he might like what the Niners offer and he's not some ...diva who thinks he's automatically ready for the NFL based on his college accolades.

At first I was surprised at Sheets getting cut, but then I realized this happens every year:
-A 3rd-4th string RB has a good preseason
-Everyone starts talking about how he can be a contributor
-He gets cut and everyone is shocked and hopes he lasts to our PS
-No teams show interest and he makes our PS

Although I don't remember their names, this pattern predates Clayton.

Lewis' concussion probably had something to do with Taylor making the team, but he looked like our best DB when he was in the game against SD. He is fysical and is always around the football. I can't say what his cover skills are like, but he can take on a RB as well as any DB we have. His future might be at SS.

Right now Roman is our backup SS. Not only is that a positon that doesn't fit his skillset, he also sucks.

why can't kickers punt as well? that would save a roster spot. i don't know why this irks me

do other teams have long snappers that don't do anything but long snap? this kind of irks me too