Jump to content


Photo

Could we keep Aiken on the PS?


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 dhstandard

dhstandard

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,191 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 07:54 PM

I'm curious as to whether or not we could keep him on the practice squad without another team signing him to their 53 man roster.  Campanaro is a lock considering we traded up to get him.  Thompson offers more value on special teams than Aiken does as I have not seen him stand out too much on ST.

 

I don't know if Jacoby has lost a step now that he is in his 30's or what but he does not seem as quick as he did only a season ago.  Campanaro looks pretty good as well but overall Deonte stands out the most as a returner and I would like to see him start.

 

I have doubts that other teams would want to keep Kamar Aiken on their 53 man roster.  He hasn't done much at all preseason, only standing out in practice.  While roster decisions tend to be made before the final game, I think if Deonte makes a few grabs in the 4th preseason game and Aiken doesn't do anything more than he has, Deonte will make this team.

 

 

I just want opinions from all you guys.  What do you think?  Obviously we feel highly because he is on our team and we read every practice note and tweet, but do you really think someone would pick him up off our practice squad when the most he offers is future potential and not much on special teams?


Edited by dhstandard, 25 August 2014 - 07:55 PM.

  • 0

2yno6dx.png


#2 GrimCoconut

GrimCoconut

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,747 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 07:59 PM

No, he's out of eligibility. /thread.

 

Edit: Just in case you want proof: 

 

http://www.chatsport...outs-1-10181521

 

 

 

The former practice squad player has to make the 53-man roster or he may be out of football.

 

And a direct quote from Aiken himself...

 

 

"To me, my back is against the wall,” Aiken said. “There’s no more practice squad eligibility. It’s the 53 or that’s it.”

Edited by GrimCoconut, 25 August 2014 - 08:01 PM.

  • 0

#3 rmw10

rmw10

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,941 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Womb

Posted 25 August 2014 - 08:01 PM

No, he's out of eligibility. /thread.

 

They did change the rules to allow someone that has more than 2 years of NFL experience to stay on the practice squad for another year, but there are a whole bunch of other little rules in there.  It's not confirmed but I believe that he's still ineligible.


  • 0

#4 GrimCoconut

GrimCoconut

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,747 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 08:10 PM

They did change the rules to allow someone that has more than 2 years of NFL experience to stay on the practice squad for another year, but there are a whole bunch of other little rules in there.  It's not confirmed but I believe that he's still ineligible.

Ahh, yes, that update. They really made that convoluted. It was easy to understand before. Now it's all muddled. I'd really need to look into it very deep and cross-reference a few things to determine whether he's eligible under the new provision. 

 

FWIW, Steve Biscotti (our owner) had a lovely idea for the PS, one of which I think I've seen floated around here if I am not mistaken. Pretty much he said that every team could have 1 or 2 protected players they could place on the PS (players who were drafted by the team, IIRC) so that they wouldn't have to cut valuable veterans to make room for developmental prospects they don't want to lose whom they drafted. He suggested that they get paid more money than a regular PS player, perhaps closer to the pay of an active roster player. It's a really interesting proposition and it's one I really hope gains traction and is implemented. 


  • 0

#5 GrimCoconut

GrimCoconut

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,747 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 08:19 PM

Based upon reading the new changes, I think he might be eligible. If so, I say bring him aboard. I'm not sure if he's worth a spot on the 53 either. We seem to like him, maybe it's the size aspect. Not sure. I haven't seen anything special from him yet. Apparently, a PS season is accrued by being on it for six games. I think he was on the PS for 2011 and 2012, but 2013 is a bit muddled. The Patriots appeared to have released him in August, and we seemed to sign him in 2013 though I can't yet find out when we signed him. 


Edited by GrimCoconut, 25 August 2014 - 08:38 PM.

  • 0

#6 Bruce_Almty

Bruce_Almty

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,230 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 08:31 PM

With draftable players coming out of college a year or 2 early Bisciotti's PS idea has merit. These young players are foregoing college development but most are not ready to step on an NFL field their rookie year. A year or 2 on the now 10-player PS, in a protected status, makes sense.

 

And having only 45 players dress for a game makes no sense except to penalize teams with greater depth.


  • 0




#7 dhstandard

dhstandard

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,191 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 08:35 PM

Based upon reading the new changes, I think he might be eligible. If so, I say bring him aboard. I'm not sure if he's worth a spot on the 53 either. We seem to like him, maybe it's the size aspect. Not sure. I haven't seen anything special from him yet. Apparently, a PS season is accrued by being on it for six games. I think he was on the PS for 2011 and 2012, but 2013 is a bit muddled. The Patriots appeared to have released him in August, and we seemed to sign him in 2013 though I can't yet find out when we signed him. 

 

Interesting to see if he is eligible.  At this point, with what I have seen from him, he isn't worth a spot on the 53 man roster.  Only because he has been in the league for a while and is the same age as Deonte.  They are both starting to reach their peak and Deonte looks like he may offer some value especially at the return position.

 

Aiken will only get so much better.  Who knows...he could be a late bloomer like Corey Graham.  He just isn't worth the risk at the moment seeing as he offers very little and will probably never see the field.


  • 0

2yno6dx.png


#8 rmw10

rmw10

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,941 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Womb

Posted 25 August 2014 - 08:36 PM

With draftable players coming out of college a year or 2 early Bisciotti's PS idea has merit. These young players are foregoing college development but most are not ready to step on an NFL field their rookie year. A year or 2 on the now 10-player PS, in a protected status, makes sense.

 

And having only 45 players dress for a game makes no sense except to penalize teams with greater depth.

 

They limit the amount that are active per game to even the playing field, not penalize teams.  Because there is no "DL" in football, teams have to keep injured players on their active roster.  There's really no other option.  If one team has 0 injuries and another has 6, the team with 0 injuries gets an advantage because they have more players to rotate.  The only real option to even the playing field if all 53 were active is to release an injured player, which we all know isn't realistic.


  • 0

#9 GrimCoconut

GrimCoconut

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,747 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 08:40 PM

Interesting to see if he is eligible.  At this point, with what I have seen from him, he isn't worth a spot on the 53 man roster.  Only because he has been in the league for a while and is the same age as Deonte.  They are both starting to reach their peak and Deonte looks like he may offer some value especially at the return position.

 

Aiken will only get so much better.  Who knows...he could be a late bloomer like Corey Graham.  He just isn't worth the risk at the moment seeing as he offers very little and will probably never see the field.

I agree. I don't see what he brings to the 53. But, since you asked, and I wasn't entirely sure either, I looked into a bit for the both of us. Here's his history since he entered the league (I abbreviated it and omitted his stint in Chicago). 

 

2013 BALTIMORE PS: 9 games

SIGNED TO PS: 10/30/13 (CLE, CIN, CHI, NYJ, PIT, MIN, DET, NE, CIN)

 

2012 NEW ENGLAND PS:  6 games

SIGNED TO PS: 11/12/12 (IND, NYJ, MIA, HOU, SF) 5 games

ACTIVATED: 12/22/12 (JAX)

SIGNED TO PS: 12/26/12 (MIA) 1 game

 

2011 BUFFALO PS: 10 games

SIGNED TO PS: 9/4/11 (KC, OAK, NE, CIN, PHI, NYG, WAS, NYJ, DAL, MIA) 10 games

ACTIVATED: 11/22/11 (NYJ, TEN, SD, MIA, DEN, NE)

 

 

 

A player can only be on the practice squad for three years. Previously, a player would accrue a season towards that if they were on the practice squad for three games or more. Now they have to be on the practice squad for six games for it to count as an accrued season.

 

I'm thinking he's lost his eligibility since he has three full seasons where he was on the PS for 6 games or more. Lol, he has NE to thank for that one. 


  • 0

#10 rmw10

rmw10

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,941 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Womb

Posted 25 August 2014 - 08:43 PM

Yep that would make him a no go for the PS.  So now...

 

 

/thread


  • 0

#11 dhstandard

dhstandard

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,191 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 08:45 PM

I agree. I don't see what he brings to the 53. But, since you asked, and I wasn't entirely sure either, I looked into a bit for the both of us. Here's his history since he entered the league (I abbreviated it and omitted his stint in Chicago). 

 

2013 BALTIMORE PS: 9 games

SIGNED TO PS: 10/30/13 (CLE, CIN, CHI, NYJ, PIT, MIN, DET, NE, CIN)

 

2012 NEW ENGLAND PS:  6 games

SIGNED TO PS: 11/12/12 (IND, NYJ, MIA, HOU, SF) 5 games

ACTIVATED: 12/22/12 (JAX)

SIGNED TO PS: 12/26/12 (MIA) 1 game

 

2011 BUFFALO PS: 10 games

SIGNED TO PS: 9/4/11 (KC, OAK, NE, CIN, PHI, NYG, WAS, NYJ, DAL, MIA) 10 games

ACTIVATED: 11/22/11 (NYJ, TEN, SD, MIA, DEN, NE)

 

 

I'm thinking he's lost his eligibility since he has three full seasons where he was on the PS for 6 games or more. Lol, he has NE to thank for that one. 

A shame.  


  • 0

2yno6dx.png





#12 Bruce_Almty

Bruce_Almty

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,230 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 08:56 PM

They limit the amount that are active per game to even the playing field, not penalize teams.  Because there is no "DL" in football, teams have to keep injured players on their active roster.  There's really no other option.  If one team has 0 injuries and another has 6, the team with 0 injuries gets an advantage because they have more players to rotate.  The only real option to even the playing field if all 53 were active is to release an injured player, which we all know isn't realistic.

Just winging it now, but this sounds like the time to rotate injured for healthy players off the PS. Teams should replace injured players, not just do without. IMO.


Edited by Bruce_Almty, 25 August 2014 - 08:57 PM.

  • 0

#13 rmw10

rmw10

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,941 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Womb

Posted 25 August 2014 - 09:00 PM

Just winging it now, but this sounds like the time to rotate injured for healthy players off the PS. Teams should replace injured players, not just do without. IMO.

 

It would be nice to have something like a DL in baseball.  Make it 2-3 games or whatever and let you call up and send down a PS player without exposing them to waivers once the injured player is back.  There are obviously quite a few details you'd have to figure into something like this, but as a general framework, I've always wanted something that allows an injured player to recover and return midseason.  They made a step in the right direction with the IR-DTR but that's still flawed.


  • 0

#14 Bruce_Almty

Bruce_Almty

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,230 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 09:10 PM

It would be nice to have something like a DL in baseball.  Make it 2-3 games or whatever and let you call up and send down a PS player without exposing them to waivers once the injured player is back.  There are obviously quite a few details you'd have to figure into something like this, but as a general framework, I've always wanted something that allows an injured player to recover and return midseason.  They made a step in the right direction with the IR-DTR but that's still flawed.

When they go to 18 game season and 16 team playoff maybe then there will be changes. (I know it's 12-->14 but as soon as it's 14 it will be 14-->16)


  • 0

#15 Ravenseconbeast

Ravenseconbeast

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,821 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gaithersburg

Posted 25 August 2014 - 09:39 PM

I agree. I don't see what he brings to the 53. But, since you asked, and I wasn't entirely sure either, I looked into a bit for the both of us. Here's his history since he entered the league (I abbreviated it and omitted his stint in Chicago). 
 
2013 BALTIMORE PS: 9 games
SIGNED TO PS: 10/30/13 (CLE, CIN, CHI, NYJ, PIT, MIN, DET, NE, CIN)
 
2012 NEW ENGLAND PS:  6 games
SIGNED TO PS: 11/12/12 (IND, NYJ, MIA, HOU, SF) 5 games
ACTIVATED: 12/22/12 (JAX)
SIGNED TO PS: 12/26/12 (MIA) 1 game
 
2011 BUFFALO PS: 10 games
SIGNED TO PS: 9/4/11 (KC, OAK, NE, CIN, PHI, NYG, WAS, NYJ, DAL, MIA) 10 games
ACTIVATED: 11/22/11 (NYJ, TEN, SD, MIA, DEN, NE)
 

 
I'm thinking he's lost his eligibility since he has three full seasons where he was on the PS for 6 games or more. Lol, he has NE to thank for that one.


Deonte and Kamar wont do much of anything in PS or in reg season. All hype and no real production from either of them.

We are going to stick with Torrey & Steve. The rest(Marlon as endzone threat amd Jacoby as the 30yr old deep threat) is at very best 'contibutors'...just being brutally honest.
  • 0

#16 GrimCoconut

GrimCoconut

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,747 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 09:52 PM

Deonte and Kamar wont do much of anything in PS or in reg season. All hype and no real production from either of them.

We are going to stick with Torrey & Steve. The rest(Marlon as endzone threat amd Jacoby as the 30yr old deep threat) is at very best 'contibutors'...just being brutally honest.

You won't hear any arguments from me. Seems pretty obvious only the Smiths will see a lot of reps, with Jones, Brown and possibly Campanaro coming in to just catch a few passes here and there. 


  • 0




#17 Bruce_Almty

Bruce_Almty

    Pro Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,230 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 August 2014 - 10:03 PM

Deonte and Kamar wont do much of anything in PS or in reg season. All hype and no real production from either of them.

We are going to stick with Torrey & Steve. The rest(Marlon as endzone threat amd Jacoby as the 30yr old deep threat) is at very best 'contibutors'...just being brutally honest.

Deonte's opportunities have come and gone & we have others with the same assets he has, less the speed. Kamar has played musical PSs with 4 teams and IMO Jeremy Butler is a better candidate to develop.


  • 0

#18 757RavensFan

757RavensFan

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,289 posts

Posted 26 August 2014 - 04:57 AM

If Aiken is cut the next round the Ravens did him a disservice by not cutting him yesterday. If they cut him Fri/Sat knowing he's not PS eligible they didn't give him a few days to work out with another team. I'm sure the Panthers could use him.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users