Official cut down to 75

[GrimCoconut]

2 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Right, but my point is that just because he starts hurt on the active roster doesn't mean he stays hurt on the active roster. Him not playing isn't necessarily a reflection of him being injured, particularly when you're a reserve player who isn't particularly needed at that time.

I'm not suggesting that we put every single player who is injured for a week or two on IR for the full year. That's not even remotely the point. My point is that I don't know how the FO feels about keeping a 4th injured RB on the active roster for what will probably be at least 2-3 regular season games. In particular, a rookie at that.

 

Yeah, but we've done it before with talent taken later. I think it's all about how much we like that player and if we want to risk it. It's a risk putting him on IR and it's a risk subjecting them to waivers to go on the PS or even keeping them on the 53. 

[sibelius]

29 minutes ago, GrimCoconut said:

Yeah, but we've done it before with talent taken later. I think it's all about how much we like that player and if we want to risk it. It's a risk putting him on IR and it's a risk subjecting them to waivers to go on the PS or even keeping them on the 53. 

He's not going to IR, barring a setback. I agree. 

[January J]

3 hours ago, rmw10 said:

We went half the season with Perriman as a weekly inactive last year.  If they think Dixon will be back, he'll be on the 53 man.  I don't see him going on IR unless he has a setback, even with the return option.  They can afford a roster spot on him, even if it takes a few weeks.

 

2 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

I think they're expecting WAY more from Dixon at this point since he's actually be on the field. 

He came in the game after just 2 carries from Forsett and was the primary ball carrier from that point on until injury. That says all you need to know about their intentions.

Reports are he should be ready week 3... week 4 latest. He won't be IR'ed.

 

2 hours ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

With 4 RBs making the roster, I'd imagine on game day you'd have 1 RB inactive as it is. So, why not use it on the injured guy? Otherwise, if you IR him with designation he cant return until after week 8.

Plus, in the fine print of the rules it states the injury must be severe enough that player cannot physically practice for a minimum of 6 weeks.

Idk how strictly that rule is upheld, but the 4 week time frame given may preclude him from that designation. Either way, a guy they were clearly planning on being the #2 back, wiht the upside of taking over the starting role (he's been our best back, and its not really that close) that should be back by week 2-4 isnt getting shelved for half the season.

Just dont see it.

--

Plus Dixon wouldnt affect anything with the cut down to 53. My understanding is that in order to be eligible for designation to return, he would initially have to make the 53, and not be IRed until after 4pm on the Tuesday 53 cutdown. So we'd have to risk cutting someone that we'd want to bring back anyways, and then we're also risking missing 4-6 weeks of healthy Dixon, who might be our best back.

Just dont see it.

Exactly the way I see it. The time table we were given doesnt warrant him being IRd and too risky to use the return designation. That would be a waste anyway when he could potentially be back in week 3 anyway.

36 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Right, but my point is that just because he starts hurt on the active roster doesn't mean he stays hurt on the active roster. Him not playing isn't necessarily a reflection of him being injured, particularly when you're a reserve player who isn't particularly needed at that time.

I'm not suggesting that we put every single player who is injured for a week or two on IR for the full year. That's not even remotely the point. My point is that I don't know how the FO feels about keeping a 4th injured RB on the active roster for what will probably be at least 2-3 regular season games. In particular, a rookie at that.

 

If we planned on keeping 4 and one is usually inactive on gameday anyway then why not? Makes perfect sense.

[rmcjacket23]

3 minutes ago, January J said:

 

 

Exactly the way I see it. The time table we were given doesnt warrant him being IRd and too risky to use the return designation. That would be a waste anyway when he could potentially be back in week 3 anyway.

If we planned on keeping 4 and one is usually inactive on gameday anyway then why not? Makes perfect sense.

1. Because I'm not 100% convinced we were going to keep 4, though some injuries at other positions likely increased that chance. I personally didn't think West was going to make the team. 

2. For lack of better term, people use IR for various things not necessarily related to "injuries". We put Kyle Arrington on IR... nobody really thinks his concussion (though unpredictable) was going to keep him out until January. Same thing with Elam... entirely possibly he may have only missed a month or so of the season, but we don't have the luxury of waiting around to find out. IR is used frequently on players who have 2-4 week injuries... mostly for players who are reserve players or who don't offer as much value as a starter does.

IF the idea was to not have 4 RBs active each week, then rather than using an inactive spot on one, you could IR them and allow you at least that time to get another player on the roster at a different position of weakness. 

What I fear is a setback. Any setback will delay the recovery timeline, basically forcing you to put him on IR at that point. And if that happens, you've essentially wasted an active roster spot for multiple weeks that point.

[January J]

5 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

1. Because I'm not 100% convinced we were going to keep 4, though some injuries at other positions likely increased that chance. I personally didn't think West was going to make the team. 

2. For lack of better term, people use IR for various things not necessarily related to "injuries". We put Kyle Arrington on IR... nobody really thinks his concussion (though unpredictable) was going to keep him out until January. Same thing with Elam... entirely possibly he may have only missed a month or so of the season, but we don't have the luxury of waiting around to find out. IR is used frequently on players who have 2-4 week injuries... mostly for players who are reserve players or who don't offer as much value as a starter does.

IF the idea was to not have 4 RBs active each week, then rather than using an inactive spot on one, you could IR them and allow you at least that time to get another player on the roster at a different position of weakness. 

What I fear is a setback. Any setback will delay the recovery timeline, basically forcing you to put him on IR at that point. And if that happens, you've essentially wasted an active roster spot for multiple weeks that point.

Well that's a risk that I'm all but sure the FO is willing to take. They did it with perriman last year and it didn't turn out so well- but there's also that chance he makes it back even sooner. I find it strange you don't think west was going to make the roster. IMO he was all but a lock. Forsett and Buck are of similar stature... West will be our bruiser. Not only did he earn the spot in camp- he solidified it in preseason by showing he could make guys miss , by showing good vision and patience, and just overall making positive plays out of nothing.

[rmcjacket23]

Just now, January J said:

Well that's a risk that I'm all but sure the FO is willing to take. They did it with perriman last year and it didn't turn out so well- but there's also that chance he makes it back even sooner. I find it strange you don't think west was going to make the roster. IMO he was all but a lock. Forsett and Buck are of similar stature... West will be our bruiser. Not only did he earn the spot in camp- he solidified it in preseason by showing he could make guys miss , by showing good vision and patience, and just overall making positive plays out of nothing.

Well, in the event they had already decided they didn't want to carry 4 RBs, West has the least amount of time/value invested in, and I think he's the least likely of the four for us to be upset about losing and him going and thriving elsewhere.

Had a great camp, no doubt about it. But there will be multiple players who had great camps that won't make this team, and I think West was solely competing with Buck Allen for the #3 RB role on this team. I don't think he would have been guaranteed goal line work or anything like that.

As for the Perriman comparison, as I said earlier, I don't think the comparisons are that similar. The expectations for immediate contributions were much higher for Perriman last season, and he was more or less going to be handed a starting role if he was healthy. Far more depth at the RB position this season than we had at WR last season.

[BmoreBird22]

9 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Well, in the event they had already decided they didn't want to carry 4 RBs, West has the least amount of time/value invested in, and I think he's the least likely of the four for us to be upset about losing and him going and thriving elsewhere.

Had a great camp, no doubt about it. But there will be multiple players who had great camps that won't make this team, and I think West was solely competing with Buck Allen for the #3 RB role on this team. I don't think he would have been guaranteed goal line work or anything like that.

As for the Perriman comparison, as I said earlier, I don't think the comparisons are that similar. The expectations for immediate contributions were much higher for Perriman last season, and he was more or less going to be handed a starting role if he was healthy. Far more depth at the RB position this season than we had at WR last season.

I don't even think the running back depth is that strong now without Dixon.

Forsett had one good year where he handled a full time role and even then, I felt the majority of his yards in several games came in the fourth quarter. I also think he was helped immensely by an offensive line that played out of its mind. I know he's only had seven carries this preseason, but he's looked very mediocre and goes down way too easily in an offense that emphasizes inside runs.

Buck Allen showed last year and this PS that he's nothing special and really shouldn't be trusted. Hell, I know a lot of people hyped up his receiving skills, but he's only really shown to be a check down option.

I know it's only preseason, but at least West is showing up. 

I would have thought Allen would have gotten cut had Dixon stayed healthy.

[GrimCoconut]

28 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I don't even think the running back depth is that strong now without Dixon.

Forsett had one good year where he handled a full time role and even then, I felt the majority of his yards in several games came in the fourth quarter. I also think he was helped immensely by an offensive line that played out of its mind. I know he's only had seven carries this preseason, but he's looked very mediocre and goes down way too easily in an offense that emphasizes inside runs.

Buck Allen showed last year and this PS that he's nothing special and really shouldn't be trusted. Hell, I know a lot of people hyped up his receiving skills, but he's only really shown to be a check down option.

I know it's only preseason, but at least West is showing up. 

I would have thought Allen would have gotten cut had Dixon stayed healthy.

I am a fan of Allen but he has been a major disappointment. He could be cut, absolutely. It would suck, but we've cut guys before such as John Simon. He never did much and we cut him. He turned out to be a decent player, in all honesty, but that's sometimes the gamble you take. Allen hasn't really done the best job. He looks OK out there. I wouldn't say he is great but he isn't bad either. He's average, and that's a tad disappointing since he has a lot of potential. West looks hungry, though, and Allen looks a bit complacent to me. 

[RaineV1]

40 minutes ago, GrimCoconut said:

I am a fan of Allen but he has been a major disappointment. He could be cut, absolutely. It would suck, but we've cut guys before such as John Simon. He never did much and we cut him. He turned out to be a decent player, in all honesty, but that's sometimes the gamble you take. Allen hasn't really done the best job. He looks OK out there. I wouldn't say he is great but he isn't bad either. He's average, and that's a tad disappointing since he has a lot of potential. West looks hungry, though, and Allen looks a bit complacent to me. 

That's the way I see it too. I liked Allen a lot but it just doesn't seem like he's playing as hard as West and doesn't have Dixon's potential. I can see him as a surprise cut in the final cut down, with Dixon being the backup and eventual starter and West as 3rd string depth for now.

[ellicottraven]

Asa Jackson has been cut by Arizona. He was a decent returner for us when he held on to the ball. Any chance we may reach out to him if Camps gets hurt again? Or are we going to trust Reynolds with the punt return duties?

[Filmstudy]

1 hour ago, ellicottraven said:

Asa Jackson has been cut by Arizona. He was a decent returner for us when he held on to the ball. Any chance we may reach out to him if Camps gets hurt again? Or are we going to trust Reynolds with the punt return duties?

I'm going to go out on a limb and say "neither".  Reynolds has a very slim chance to make the team, but he's going to need an injury to another receiver, IMO.  I don't see any reason the Ravens would want Asa back unless they thought he can play corner.  If he couldn't the last time they had him, I doubt they'll find anything on tape indicating he can now.

The Ravens have the cap space to sign a high-profile player, but they also need to think about signing players like BWilliams, Wagner, and Juice who will be UFA after the season.

Edited August 30, 2016 by Filmstudy

[FerrariFan87]

7 hours ago, ellicottraven said:

Asa Jackson has been cut by Arizona. He was a decent returner for us when he held on to the ball. Any chance we may reach out to him if Camps gets hurt again? Or are we going to trust Reynolds with the punt return duties?

Doubtful re: Asa Jackson. Been there, done that. I think Campanaro is going to be our PR, assuming he stays healthy.

[rmcjacket23]

9 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I don't even think the running back depth is that strong now without Dixon.

Forsett had one good year where he handled a full time role and even then, I felt the majority of his yards in several games came in the fourth quarter. I also think he was helped immensely by an offensive line that played out of its mind. I know he's only had seven carries this preseason, but he's looked very mediocre and goes down way too easily in an offense that emphasizes inside runs.

Buck Allen showed last year and this PS that he's nothing special and really shouldn't be trusted. Hell, I know a lot of people hyped up his receiving skills, but he's only really shown to be a check down option.

I know it's only preseason, but at least West is showing up. 

I would have thought Allen would have gotten cut had Dixon stayed healthy.

Draft status likely keeps him around. 4th round pick from last year, had a decent showing last season in a feature back role.

I agree he's 3rd on the depth chart at best at this point, but the FO has less invested in West than Allen.

In theory, I agree that Allen has been the worst of the 4 RBs, but I don't necessarily think that means he would be the one getting cut.

[BmoreBird22]

1 minute ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Draft status likely keeps him around. 4th round pick from last year, had a decent showing last season in a feature back role.

I agree he's 3rd on the depth chart at best at this point, but the FO has less invested in West than Allen.

In theory, I agree that Allen has been the worst of the 4 RBs, but I don't necessarily think that means he would be the one getting cut.

John Simon got waived in his second season in the NFL and he was a fourth round pick. 

I'm also not even sure if he plays on ST's, which when you're the third (soon to be fourth) RB on a roster, you better be good at. I don't see a place for Allen when Dixon comes back.

[rmw10]

Assuming Kaufusi goes to IR today, Elam gets waived at some point, Taliaferro officially transfers to the Reserve/PUP, and Boyle and Waller both go on the suspended list, that will put us down at 74 players rather easily.  The suspensions have to wait of course, but I think you could see the other 3 moves happen today.

Even with all of those moves, that's still 21 players that have to be cut between now and Saturday.

[rmcjacket23]

2 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

John Simon got waived in his second season in the NFL and he was a fourth round pick. 

I'm also not even sure if he plays on ST's, which when you're the third (soon to be fourth) RB on a roster, you better be good at. I don't see a place for Allen when Dixon comes back.

OK? John Simon played a total of 3 defensive snaps in his rookie season. He was a ST player and not a particularly good one at that. 

Buck Allen played 393 snaps his rookie season on offense, and averaged nearly 4 YPC. Not great numbers, but they are backup RB-type numbers, which is what he is.

He only played 20 ST snaps last season, but my guess is he didn't play any once he became the starter. 

The other kicker here is that when there's 4 RBs healthy, one of them will likely sit on gamedays, since I doubt we carry 4 on the 46 man roster. Allen would likely be the guy who sits when Dixon comes back and is healthy.

Good enough to make the team, but not necessarily good enough to be active on gamedays.

Cutting Allen also exposes you to the risk that you may not have a decent backup RB heading into 2017, and would pretty much guarantee that Dixon is the starter. West is an RFA and I don't think anybody expects Forsett to return next year.

[rmcjacket23]

7 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

Assuming Kaufusi goes to IR today, Elam gets waived at some point, Taliaferro officially transfers to the Reserve/PUP, and Boyle and Waller both go on the suspended list, that will put us down at 74 players rather easily.  The suspensions have to wait of course, but I think you could see the other 3 moves happen today.

Even with all of those moves, that's still 21 players that have to be cut between now and Saturday.

Yeah still a little confused why some of those moves weren't made yesterday, since it seems like there's still several "procedural" moves that were held off on for some reason.

[BmoreBird22]

41 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

OK? John Simon played a total of 3 defensive snaps in his rookie season. He was a ST player and not a particularly good one at that. 

Buck Allen played 393 snaps his rookie season on offense, and averaged nearly 4 YPC. Not great numbers, but they are backup RB-type numbers, which is what he is.

He only played 20 ST snaps last season, but my guess is he didn't play any once he became the starter. 

The other kicker here is that when there's 4 RBs healthy, one of them will likely sit on gamedays, since I doubt we carry 4 on the 46 man roster. Allen would likely be the guy who sits when Dixon comes back and is healthy.

Good enough to make the team, but not necessarily good enough to be active on gamedays.

Cutting Allen also exposes you to the risk that you may not have a decent backup RB heading into 2017, and would pretty much guarantee that Dixon is the starter. West is an RFA and I don't think anybody expects Forsett to return next year.

I'm merely pointing out that "having more invested in them" doesn't equate to instant roster spot if you just can't play and contribute on ST's once you're low on the depth chart. 

He started a from week 12 on, so a grand total of six games. Assuming he played ST's for the 10 games prior to being a starter, that's a whole two ST's snaps per game. I'm also not even sure he's been on any first team units for ST's this preseason, so that's not helping his case any.

It's all great that he played a whole 393 snaps last year (and didn't look that good), but the fact of the matter is that he wouldn't play nearly that many if injuries (Tali and Forsett) didn't force the Ravens hand. Realistically, with no injuries, he's a change of pace receiving back at best, but I'd say Dixon is more dynamic there and Forsett is still a capable receiver. 

But as far as next year is concerned, I don't think Forsett will be back, but Dixon, who looked like the best RB on the roster, will be back, West can be tendered at an extremely low price, and RB's are a dime a dozen in the draft, especially since the Ravens would be looking for a third back who can play ST's, mostly.

Edited August 30, 2016 by BmoreBird22

[rmw10]

10 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Yeah still a little confused why some of those moves weren't made yesterday, since it seems like there's still several "procedural" moves that were held off on for some reason.

I think the whole waivers thing officially goes out the window today, so it makes sense. 

[rmw10]

 

[rmw10]

If the above is correct, we're down to only 4 UDFAs remaining: Matt Skura, Michael Pierce, Victor Ochi, Patrick Onwuasor.

[January J]

10 hours ago, ellicottraven said:

Asa Jackson has been cut by Arizona. He was a decent returner for us when he held on to the ball. Any chance we may reach out to him if Camps gets hurt again? Or are we going to trust Reynolds with the punt return duties?

Highly unlikely.

Also heard browner was released. I know as soon as anybody's released everybody always says " bring him in!" But he may actually be a good addition to play opposite jimmy since shareece has looked pretty underwhelming. We def can afford it and everybody has been complaining about the cb position being weak. Wright would be great depth behind him.

 

I can't believe any of you think cutting buck is actually even an option. Yes he's probably last on the depth chart but there is absolutely no way we would've cut ties with him whether Dixon got injured or not. He has been a lock. I thought It was a known thing we were going with 4 regardless. West was originally the only question mark but he forced his way onto the roster and earned it with his relentless effort. Showed up to camp in great shape and just kept stacking good days left and right and basically gave them no choice. If he keeps it up he could surpass forsett very quickly as the lead back. 

[rmcjacket23]

3 minutes ago, January J said:

Highly unlikely.

Also heard browner was released. I know as soon as anybody's released everybody always says " bring him in!" But he may actually be a good addition to play opposite jimmy since shareece has looked pretty underwhelming. We def can afford it and everybody has been complaining about the cb position being weak. Wright would be great depth behind him.

 

I can't believe any of you think cutting buck is actually even an option. Yes he's probably last on the depth chart but there is absolutely no way we would've cut ties with him whether Dixon got injured or not. He has been a lock. I thought It was a known thing we were going with 4 regardless. West was originally the only question mark but he forced his way onto the roster and earned it with his relentless effort. Showed up to camp in great shape and just kept stacking good days left and right and basically gave them no choice. If he keeps it up he could surpass forsett very quickly as the lead back. 

Want nothing to do with Brandon Browner. Legitimately one of the worst cornerbacks in the league the last few years. We got like 8 guys in camp I'd rather have.

[Cawtious]

22 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Yes but that also begs the question that, if they actually needed him to play, would he have?

I think the general consensus was that he was over his injury during the season and just wasn't active because he wasn't good enough to play on gameday.

He had a Jones Fracture in his foot.  He had some relapse issues with the bone knitting together and it didn't heal as quickly as they believed it would.  If I remember correctly he wasn't really available until the last couple of games that year.  Kind of pointless risking him at that point.  He then had issues with Apnea the following season and was cut and cleared waivers to the P/S.  He eventually saw the field during Pittsburgh playoff game on ST that year. 

[redlobster]

1 hour ago, rmw10 said:

 

what does this say? my work blocks twitter , etc.

[Moderator 3]

1 minute ago, redlobster said:

what does this say? my work blocks twitter , etc.

Undrafted free agent K Wil Lutz and UDFA OT Stephane Nembot not practicing for Ravens. Likely part of 4 roster moves team has to make by 4

[berad]

1 minute ago, redlobster said:

what does this say? my work blocks twitter , etc.

Kicker Lutz and OT Nembot not practicing, likely cut

[rmw10]

 

[Daft Classic]

2 hours ago, rmw10 said:

If the above is correct, we're down to only 4 UDFAs remaining: Matt Skura, Michael Pierce, Victor Ochi, Patrick Onwuasor.

Ochi is really the only one with a chance right?

[allblackraven]

4 minutes ago, Daft Classic said:

Ochi is really the only one with a chance right?

Pierce.

Onwuasor might have an outside chance. Neither him or Ochi would clear waivers, so if we don't give them roster spot, the only way to keep them would be IR.

Edited August 30, 2016 by allblackraven