The NFL’s emergency third quarterback rule will still exist this season, but not in the form the league intended. The NFLPA will block the updated rule from taking effect, NFL.com’s Tom Pelissero tweets.
This offseason’s update was set to allow teams an unlimited number of practice squad elevations for a third quarterback, effectively giving clubs a player they could continue to stash on the practice squad before moving him up to gameday rosters without using waivers. The union will stand in the way of this. Doing so at this juncture certainly stands to affect teams’ roster decisions, as clubs have until 3pm CT Tuesday to set 53-man rosters.
Since the 2020 CBA revamped the practice squad, clubs have three elevations per player at their disposals. That means a practice squad player can be elevated to a gameday roster up to three times; this allows teams to get around the waiver process for a bit. The NFL sought to have an emergency third quarterback be eligible for elevation throughout the season. This would have given teams flexibility regarding QB depth charts.
Instead, the union is seeking to prevent teams from stashing QBs on practice squads throughout a season, Pelissero adds. The rule will revert to its 2023 form, which came about because of the developments in the 2022 NFC championship game. The NFL reintroduced the emergency QB rule during the 2023 offseason, after the 49ers saw their two dressed QBs — Brock Purdy and Josh Johnson — each suffer injuries.
The rule’s 2023 form stipulated teams could designate their emergency passer 90 minutes before kickoff. Teams must have their QB3 on their 55-man gameday roster, meaning the Saturday-afternoon deadline for transactions during game weeks will likely involve some quarterback moves. Though, teams now must be more strategic in how they set up their depth charts, as they must factor waivers into the equation once again.
After a player is elevated three times, he must be signed to the active roster. Teams would then need to cut their QB3s in order to move them back to practice squads, injecting risk for clubs aiming to carry just two QBs on their active rosters during the regular season.
Clubs may now be more open to carrying three quarterbacks on their active rosters, which would affect depth at other positions. The union understandably wants to see reserve QBs potentially have upward mobility elsewhere, via waivers, rather than be trapped as a third-stringer on teams who have designated them as the emergency option.
Not sure why the union would block this. Now there will be more QB’s sitting on there couch awaiting a phone call for a job opposed to at least being on the practice squad roster and getting a paycheck. Most teams won’t roster that 3rd QB.
The fact that the NFLPA pulled this stunt the day before the cutdown deadline, says that something has really pissed them off.
Likely due to the fact that one of those couch QB’s will make more than all of these artificially low emergency practice salaries combined if they get the call in-season. Seems like a reasonable pro-labor stance, especially considering recent history of QB injuries that elevated Josh Dobbs and Dresser Winn into our lives with shockingly common occurrence.
Yeah pro labor, cost a bunch of people jobs to benefit a select few. Sounds about ar for the course for union logic.
Oh I see Donald Dementia has stopped by with an uneducated opinion.
32 potential jobs….is that a bunch? a QB jumping from team to team during the season has little chance to develop. Better off as a 3rd stringer taking a roster spot. find a 4th stringer for the practice squad.
Why wouldn’t the NFLPA want this? Seems like it would help backup quarterback preparedness and young quarterback development, both of which have been pretty serious problems in the NFL.
The article states why. It allows teams to hold their QB3 on the PS indefinitely. It’s pretty darn rare that the QB3 would actually play so I think if anything this rule has 0 impact on QB development.
If I’m not mistaken, other teams can poach PS players to go on their 53-man roster, so they are not really stuck there unless no one else needs them.
Yes, except teams can protect 4 players each week. So not a guarantee, but high likelihood the QB would have been stuck if other jobs open up.
Speaking of rules I’ve got a stupid question. With the new “Kickoff Rule’ Exactly how would somebody execute an onside kick? Are they over? Do you have to say ” ONSIDE KICK” Beforehand? I guess the surprise 2nd half onside kick is out? So many questions. I was hoping somebody would try one but I haven’t seen it
Yes you have to notify officials
Also can only occur in the 4th quarter by the losing team
So what if I say onside kick and change my mind and kick it deep because I have 3 TO’s left. Do I – Go to the Penalty Box and be ashamed?
I don’t have an opinion overall yet on the kickoff tule, but I heavily dislike the new onside restrictions of it.
Must have been a lively meeting at NFLPA headquarters – “how can we stick it to the league and owners this season?”
considering how the league and owners stick it to the players as often as they do, this is a rare win for the players.
I think the NFLPAs position is that they’d rather them be on the active roster instead of stuck on the PS. If someone really wants to keep that third QB, then they’ll just carry 3 on the roster.
This is like passing a crazy high minimum wage law and then being surprised when hours get cut and staff gets laid off. Unions are the dumbest organizations on the planet.
First, this is nothing like the scenario you laid out. The scenario you laid out also doesn’t have to happen because people get raises, it’s just what corporations would like people to believe. But that is a different discussion for a different platform.
More to the point, you seem up in arms because, say, a WR might get cut for an emergency QB. How is that any different than the moves teams often make weekly where they swap one player for another? NFL rosters are constantly churning. It isn’t as if teams are suddenly going to start carrying 50 man rosters because they have to carry an emergency QB.
It was a good stance by the union.
It benefits the quarterbacks who could moved up and down, but hurts the other players who might get cut to accommodate the new player. Having three “free” elevations seems to be the buffer to mediate the difference and placate the teams and the “other” guys who before were in no danger if a team decided to play elevator with its quarterbacks. I understand both arguments, personally, in terms of the quarterbacks are being jostled around and the players who now have to worry again about being let go to make room.
What I will wonder is how many teams, instead of just having one guy to be their default third quarterback, will choose instead to elevate a new guy and avoid the roster elevation requirement. They may decide that, at that point, any quarterback is equivalent to any other as the third string guy, or just really, really want to avoid roster adjustments and just suck up the difference on the field by acquiring a new “fresh” quarterback.
Yes, if a team is on QB3, the season is pretty much done (unless it’s just a week or two).
NFL should just fire back and go back to the old taxi squad where you did not qualify if you had appeared in so many games.
Let those vets who got jobs go back to the couch
It’s not going to stop teams from doing it. They’ll just use a guy 3 games and put him on waivers. If somebody claims him they’ll just sign another one and move on. I think the other guy was right. This is just the Union sticking to the league about something else that’s bugging them.
You act as if it’s easy to just flip flop QBs. The guy might be a 3rd string QB but he does have to know your system. The fact that guys won’t be up to speed might be the one thing that helps them slip through waivers
Bears need to protect Austin Reed, who looked every bit as talented if not more than Bagent, otherwise he will be claimed tomorrow by another team. Imagine the Bests going into the season with two rookie QBs and a second year backup!!
He’s going to go through waivers and end up on the practice squad. It’s a lot different looking good against other teams bottom feeders than going against All Pro’s. They have 15 cuts to go( 12:15 CTD) and still have to cut the extra punter so 14 really depending on if Bates has to go on IR. Looks like Murray and Pryor have made the O Line with Kramers fate hinging on Bates I imagine. I still say Blasingame can go and depending on Borom’s injury he could be an IR case and later cut if they don’t want to waste the move. These last few cuts should be interesting.
You were right, Reed got cut. Wonder if the Titans claim him? I’d like to see both Murray & Prior make the cut, they seem like upgrades over last year’s backup lineman.
Smart play by the NFLPA to get more 3rd QBs a spot on active rosters.
and force them to cut another. Sucks to be that guy…
Will not hurt my fantasy teams as I didn’t draft any 3rd stringers
Seems like a perfect opportunity to negotiate a 54 man roster.
With the ever expanding schedule, it is really confusing to me why the NFL hasn’t expanded rosters accordingly to accommodate it.
Gotta make more room on the practice squad for those QBs who win MVP honors in the XFL 🙂
Rule kinda sounds like the NBAs 10day contracts you con only sign 2 players to 10day contracts after that you have to sign them for the rest of the season or they can’t sign them again for the rest of the season
“upward mobility” is not really a thing at the QB position. I am trying to think of recent examples: Geno Smith, Brock Purdy maybe??
If a team wants a new QB, they wait until the draft and reach for a guy they like. They don’t look at waiver wire.
As the headline indicates the rule only applies to emergency situations. The draft is of no help in December if you’re roster has been ravaged by injuries.
If the league would expand rosters this wouldn’t have to be an issue. Their restricted roster numbers put pressure on teams to try and get through the season with only 2 QBs, and like most soulless corporations trying to squeeze each red cent out of their product, they shot themselves in the foot with the 49ers playoff game fiasco. The greedy NFL forced an entire half of a PLAYOFF game to be played with no functional QB, one of the most publicly viewed and consequential games of the entire season.
This emergency 3rd QB infinite practice squad call ups and call downs was just another greedy solution to protect their product from the SF playoff debacle, with another professional QB being available by rule, but not by salary.
The people who are blaming the league for not expanding rosters effective immediately have it right. You could even have mandated teams must carry 3QBs. Whatever thirty 3rd string QBs are costing the league in revenue, they save more by not having a playoff game go 30 mins of game time and 2hours of real time with one team not having a competent player at the most important position.
The commenters union bashing are the same ones complaining about rising salaries. They lack an understanding of basic math. When the cap goes up and roster spots stay the same, salary increases. If you feel better with CeeDee Lamb making 31 million per year instead of 34, have two more guaranteed roster spots and I guarantee his salary is less. I can promise those people looking into the wallets of Lamb and Chase and then logging on here to complain about their greed in holding out, stand to gain nothing personally or professionally by stating their useless opinions.
If you stick around the comments long enough you see all the bad faith arguments are so tired and shallow, and are devoid of any critical thinking. Buzz words and hot topics just elicit regurgitated talking points, from mostly the same people, that serve no purpose but to sway the inexperienced and uninitiated. Anyone who has even tangential experience with negotiated labor or unions knows exactly why this type of procedural greed isn’t in the best interest of the players, and only serves to protect the on field product without having to pay for it.
You had me agreeing with you until you started bashing others comments.
You want to stand on the shoulders of others to feel tall then go for it.
But if you are that deprived of intelligent banter that meets your standards you should find another board to post on.
Yes clearly we are all competent enough to comment on the intricacies of billion dollar labor mediation and what that means for all unions across the global workforce, but not competent enough to criticize one another.
Well first off the league has already announced that roster limits will be expanded when the 18 game schedule comes into play (within the next 2 years). Also you are talking about one playoff situation that presented a problem out of hundreds that didn’t. So the rule will effectively impact maybe one half of one percent of games played. Lightning strikes more often than that.
Actual roster numbers or just adding more practice squad bodies?
I’d post for expanding both and an extra ‘round’ in the draft!
Day 1 – rounds 1 & 2
Day 2 – “ 3, 4 & 5
Day 3 – “. 6, 7 & 8