12 Comments

This is off-topic but I think one interesting story for fans at this time of year would be a “training camp primer”—i.e., what are the different camp phases and what should we expect to happen at each phase and how the process leads to the “final” 53-man roster. Could also highlight how the Lions’ camp is different or unique from other team’s camps.

Expand full comment
founding

The Training Camp/ Preseason Game gauntlet seems more than ever about simple survival. Looks like we're headed to a two-game exhibition season soon. And of course an 18 Game regular season to follow that if the Union can be convinced.

Expand full comment
author

I'm so conflicted on an 18-game season. On one hand, I hate the preseason and love the possible reduction. Replace games with joint practices, wherever possible. They're far more valuable. As for an 18-game season, yay, more football. But when you consider the toll that takes on the human body, and knowing many of these guys on a personal level through limited professional interactions, you see the downside.

Expand full comment
Jul 25·edited Jul 25

The hypocrisy of Goodell to advocate for an 18 game season while giving lip service to player safety is astounding. A preseason game is not the same as a regular season game, so I think it's disingenuous of Goodell to conflate the two as a 1:1 replacement. A second bye would help at least though.

Expand full comment
founding
Jul 24Liked by Justin Rogers

Perhaps with two bye weeks and roster expansion, you can limit the impact on individual players ... that is, unless coaching refuses to adapt and considers players who play 91% of the snaps and all 18 games the ideal prototype (my biggest and really only criticism of AG and DC).

Expand full comment

I thought about this a bit. I’d be curious how much roster expansion the NFL and the NFLPA would want. More players = less money on average (but maybe that is mitigated by the revenue of the 18th game). I think having 3 QBs on the active roster plus 3 additional players (total of 57) would probably be acceptable by both sides. Dressing an extra OL, CB/S, and DL would have done wonders last year.

Expand full comment

I like that they are being cautious with the starters. Training camp is more important for rookies and depth players.

Expand full comment
Jul 24Liked by Justin Rogers

"Fell short on conditioning" seems wild to me for presumed starters. How common is that to start training camp? I want to get paid by my employer while not being prepared to work. LOL

Expand full comment
author

Note, I did not say it happened, only that it's occasionally the reason. With this roster, in particular, it strikes me as unlikely. I'd say you see one or two a year, on average. The conditioning test is brutal. It's a good idea to get the details for a quick story.

Expand full comment
Jul 24Liked by Justin Rogers

Oh, I didn't necessarily presume that's what happened for Davis/Robertson - but just the idea in general for someone expected to start to come in with poor conditioning... Seems Jamarcus-esque ;)

Expand full comment
author

Yeah, often happens with young guys, or in the initial stages of a new coaching regime. If I learned Manu failed it, I wouldn't be surprised. That dude is obviously in great shape, but maybe the level of conditioning and cardio exceeded even what he expected. Terrion was on socials talking with Ennis about how the conditioning test whooped their ass. Now imagine going through it at 325 pounds.

Expand full comment

Did past regimes deal with conditioning issues any differently than the current group?

Expand full comment