BarleyNY

Basically that's it. It breaks down specifically like this: Players on Preseason PUP can return anytime during training camp or preseason. Players on PUP when regular season starts must stay on PUP for at least 6 weeks. After week 6 the team has 5 weeks to allow the player to start practicing (player still does not count on active roster). If player doesn't start practicing by week 11 he stays on PUP for season. After player starts practicing the team has 3 weeks to decide whether to activate player, place him on IR or release him. Note: This applies to Lawson. Ragland is not eligible for PUP since he took part in a training camp practice.

The sports media guys out there should know this. When they talk about a "short term IR" they are confusing people. It's not like baseball with a separate 15-day and 60-day disabled lists along with full season IR.

There is no a short term IR in the NFL, they're referring to the DTR rule (designated to return). One player (and only one player per season) who was placed in IR with a major injury can be designated to return after week six of the season. That player isn't allowed to play in a game for two additional weeks. This season the rule was changed (thanks to the Bills) so that the player may be determined at the time of return rather than at the time he was put on IR (which makes a ton of sense). The gist of the situation is that if the Bills think Ragland will miss more than a few weeks, the can put him on IR and then worry about if/when he can come back later.

Crap. Should have read through the rest of the thread. I'm now more concerned with Ragland and Lawson getting healthy and On the field. Missing TC and preseason is a much bigger deal for rookies than vets so I'm no longer counting on help from them this season. 2016 should now be about getting them right physically and getting them some NFL experience, if possible. Then they can come into next season healthy and ready to hit the ground running. Lawson is on PUP, which is important. He must miss at least 6 weeks, but he can return without using our one IR designated-to-return allowance. That can be used for Ragland. Or he can be carried on the active roster if the team thinks he will only miss a few weeks of the regular season. Good luck to the kid this week.

Thanks. That makes sense.

Yeah, I agree. It'd be a tough trade to make, too. Teams wouldn't want to give up anything for him so the Iggles would be better off holding onto him rather than taking a late round pick. Even if you could acquire him, could you really depend on him? You could spend a lot of time and effort teaching him your system and getting him to gel with your OL only to have him get suspended for 2 more seasons. Then all you did was swap a late round pick for a problem.

Yes. Removal of offsets and payment of the full signing bonus in the first season of the contract are the issues. In the five seasons since slotting, every 3rd round pick got one or the other. From what I understand Bosa not looking for both, he is only looking for one or the other. Incidentally Goff and Wentz got both. Their contracts do not have offsets and pay the full signing bonus this season.

Eli's father knew the trainwreck that the Chargers have been and didn't want him to have to deal with that. I thought it was a crummy move at the time, but after watching the Chargers since I don't blame them. I wouldn't want my kid playing there if I could help it.As for Bosa, it's the opposite of what you state. He's only asking for the same thing as other players slotted where he is (and lower) got. The Chargers are trying to remove contractual items that are considered standard for a 3rd overall pick.

I didn't realize Bosa was on the trade block.

That's huge. Here's the breakdown of his contract: http://overthecap.com/player/lane-johnson/2185/

There's really not much of substance going on to discuss, aside from contract stuff with Taylor and Gilmore. What we know for sure is that Ragland has a grade 2 ACL sprain, which is a partially torn ACL. That's pretty much it here. There's been a lot of misinformation and speculation too. I couldn't find anything reliable on whether or not his knee was "loose". That's a big deal because instability in the knee with a grade 2 injury points toward surgery. A stable knee would be unlikely to need it. There's nothing more that has been made public regarding the first opinion so we don't even know if it was conclusive in any way,mother than to confirm the partial tear. We will just have to wait and see. Or we can sit and speculate. It doesn't much matter. We should know the course soon. One question for those who might know. If his knee has some slight instability, could the course of action be to rehab it and see if it responds before having surgery (if needed)? Having surgery now or in 6 weeks really would affect his availability this season and it'd give him a chance to possibly play.

Dray was terrible for Cleveland last season. Don't get your hopes up. There's a lot of room between being a better TE than Mulligan and being good enough to want on the field.

One good thing is that in week one he will be facing Suggs, who is coming off a blown Achilles' tendon. Dummerville is currently on PUP as well. Might catch a break there.

It's the Chargers, not the players.

Lived in both Cleveland and Buffalo. Really similar people and places IMO.

They could be very fun to watch if RG3 does well and stays healthy. If so, the offense has potential to put up a lot of points - and they'll probably need to as the defense looks like it could be very, very bad. There's a real possibility of some very high scoring shootouts.

Newton and Palmer are the only two with a real shot this season. Romo has an outside chance, but the Dallas defense will likely prevent that from happening.

Completely expected. They need to see if they can fix RG3 and reclaim his career. They might as well try. Their other options are McCown, who's an old vet, and a late 3rd round rookie in Kessler. It's a very similar situation to what the Bills faced last year when I said they might as well give Taylor a shot.

I see a competitive team, but we're a middleweight. If we're punching our weight we should be competitive, if we're punching down we should win, but we'll be in trouble when we punch up. That puts us .500-ish. Plus or minus how things break. The good news is that we're better than the Jest, at least as good as the Phish and will get the Cheatriots without Brady at least once. 4-5 division wins aren't unrealistic. That would be a huge help.

I don't think he'd be getting a second opinion if it was stable. I thought I read that there was instability, but I'm not sure the source was reliable. Looking for it.

http://orthoinfo.aaos.org/topic.cfm?topic=a00297 Unfortunately it looks like surgery will be needed. I was reading up on ACL injuries and non-surgical treatment is only for partial ACL tears with no instability. He has instability.

There is no short term IR in NFL. He's not eligible for the PUP list since he's taken part in a practice already. He'd have to be carried on the roster or put on IR. All NFL teams may bring one (and only one) player back from IR. They used to have to designate that player at the time they placed him on IR, but now they can do it at the time they bring the player back.

https://mobile.twitter.com/reggieragland?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor ReggieRagland(mafia) 11m11 minutes ago ReggieRagland(mafia) ‏@reggieragland God makes no mistakes This isn't a great sign. I feel bad for the kid.

Looking at the WRs after Watkins and Woods, the Bills 3rd WR might not even be on the roster right now. If no one steps up and takes the job, then Whaley will have to find a cut/waived WR or trade for one.

That second ILB signing really seals. One could have been something else. Two is because Ragland is out for an extended time. Maybe the delay in telling the world how severe his injury is was so that they could get guys signed. If Ragland was expected back soon they wouldn't have signed two stopgap vets who could start if needed. Maybe one. Maybe. But not two. They won't be expensive, but I'm not sure if either was given more than vet minimum or not.