Friday, July 10, 2009

By The Numbers

So, Ralph in Michigan asked me if I knew how the roster on opening day in 2008 broke down by position. Well, I didn't know for certain off the top of my head for every position, but generally certain teams will almost always carry the same number at most positions. For example, there are usually two backups for each position. But that can sound misleading.

Let's take a couple of examples: Most teams carry two backup Quarterbacks. So you end up with 3 total. Most teams also carry 2 backups for each position on the offensive line. Now that statement makes it sound like there are fifteen o-linemen on the team, but obviously this is not the case. You have five starters, but only 3 positions, Tackle, Guard and Center. Do the math on that and you end up with 9 total offensive linemen.

This is how the 2008 Dolphins' roster broke down entering the season:

QB: 3
RB: 5
WR: 6
TE: 3
OL: 9

DL: 8
LB: 7
CB: 6
S: 3

K: 1
LS: 1
P: 1

It should be noted that shortly after the season started, the Dolphins cut a running back, replaced a wide receiver with a linebacker and replaced a cornerback with a safety. They ended up replacing both a WR (Camarillo) and an OL (Smiley) with linebackers as well to bring our final roster to 10 LBs, 4 WRs, and 4 RBs.

That was how we did it last year. Coming up next week we'll look at how a player can make an impact (and the roster) on special teams, which may result in some alterations to the breakdown, but considering the players we have right now and thinking only of base offense/defense, this is how I believe 2009's roster will break down on opening day:

QB: 3
RB: 4
WR: 6
TE: 3
OL: 9

DL: 8
LB: 8
CB: 5
S: 4

K: 1
LS: 1
P: 1

Based on these preliminary numbers, the Offensive Line and the Linebacker competitions are going to be fierce.


  1. Where are the big brown balls? False advertising? lol. JK.

    Nice write-up. But I find it hard to believe the Phins will carry 6 WRs on the active roster... But then again, there might not be any additional players at the other positions worth carrying.

  2. I guess these are this years Cheer Leaders for the Dolphins ?  I was wondering if what I saw is true !!  Are all the Women kneeling wearing Knee pads ?  If so that really puts a smile on my face :) .  As for the players what ever you say Tin that's good with me, but I really like my girls on your site !!

  3. FANG,I believe those are the girl's from two teams in the lingerie league...   Spitters vs Swallowers... I'll take the petite blonde front row,on the baby blue side,YUUUMMMMMMYYYYY...GOSWALLOWERS!!

  4. I think they'll go 5 WR's,and 10 OL,unless PW(u know the rest)..

  5. TIN,do you think we'll carry 7 WRs,IF PW does(u know the rest)..
    Or do you think that spot will go elsewhere,(like myself)??

  6. For those who don't have it on tape!!  FINS @ blahh

    AFC East divisional clincher,NFLN Sun 4,and 11:30pm est..

  7. My Wife wanted to know if any if them played for the deep throat gulpers ? :)

  8. not on the active roster, but on the 53. we did it last year and we have
    better receivers this year.

  9. 2 deep at every position would be my thoughts. but i'm to lazy to do the math to see if it works out correctly.  I would have to think last years team set the bar at where they want more depth.  Of course the quality of players in certain positions may be a determinating factor.

    Some fans think if we let go of a player that has some potential, they will go to another team and haunt us.  I feel on occasion that will happen, but the most important thing to me is the improvment of this team.  We shouldn't be thinking of what could happen we should think about this team.  I trust in the Trifecta if they think one player is better for us than another then so be it no matter what happens.  They will be right more times then they are wrong.  Hasn't that been the case so far ?

  10. only if one of the seven can long-snap or kick field goals...

  11. I changed my mind!!
    Your right TIN we'll likely keep @least 6..
    Camarillo might be brittle,and we'll need insurance for those types of instances..

    Wish AA were as BIG as BL,(I don't think BL realizes the NFL opportunity he has here)..
    He's sure to quickly fall out of favor IF he doesn't impress in camp..

    BP likes gyz that live,breathe,and bleed football!!
    Don't know how BL can think that he can focus elsewhere,knowing that it wasn't a positive thing in the case of a superstar #99..

    IF BL doesn't know the playbook come camp,and is making mental mistakes,TriTuna will know the reason why..

    IF BL doesn't soon figure-out what his priorities should be,that'd leave only PT @ over 6-2,200lbs..
    MAYBE Wilford's more in play than most think,it's not likely we'll go w'only one WR over 200#s,IMHO..

    Perhaps we can get better depth after the final cut's,but we're pretty-far down the waiver-order list,should a substantial rec become available,so that's unlikely..Maybe after the 1st cut's??

    Unless BL,or EW find another gear,it look's like"OUR"TE's
    will be good redzone threats,in FF this yr!!
    MAYBE Fasano WILL be good for 9+ TDs!!??

    C'MON Brandon/Ernest/Some BIG fast F'er!!

  12. Home SuperBowl 2010July 11, 2009 at 5:27 AM

    Like the looks of the new ALL FISH team

  13. "<span style="">Most teams also carry 2 backups for each position on the offensive line. Now that statement makes it sound like there are fifteen o-linemen on the team, but obviously this is not the case. You have five starters, but only 3 positions, Tackle, Guard and Center. Do the math on that and you end up with 9 total offensive linemen." tin</span>

    <span style=""> ...5 +2 +2 +2 = 11 ...time to re-do that math, eh.</span>
    <span style="">...actually, I think 9 is probably right, maybe 10 w/the injury record of our starters.</span>

  14. HEY GYZ I'm watching PW vs Pitt on ESPNU(614 Directv) till 9,SSmith till mdnght,and PTurner @ mdnght... InCase your interested!!
    Guess I shoulda told twitter,but I rarily go there.. 

  15. Only need 1 back-up C and a G that could be the 3rd,while most the G's can likely play either-side,and even some T,sooooo I don't know how many that equal's(too confusing),but I'm going w'10 to be safe,but 9 should do the job..

  16. More specifically!! But even more confusing :)

    5 starters + 3 G/C + 2 T's = 10,suits my taste!!

    Both bkup C's are also bkup G's or vise-versa,
    (JG's the only designated pure C).. = 2 bkups

    So that leaves two bkup T's(my preference)..= 2
    5 + 2 + 2 equaling TINs 9,
    (or even 2 BKUP G/C,1 T,and a G that can play T)equaling TINs 9..
    NOT my preference cuz I like Gardner...

    W'the versatility mentioned above,I'm still goin w'10,(cuz I also like FRYE)!!

    I doubt TIN was suggesting we'd carry 2 pure bcup C's(DUHH),cuz he's OBVIOUSLY AWARE of the OL's versatility...

    My 5 bkups are G/C's Berger,Alleman(BACK??)IKE,and T/G's Frye,Gardner...
    Garner IF Alleman can't recover 100%..

  17. AWWWW CRAPPP,I confused IOWA w'UTAH,NO SS 4 me.. :( >:o

  18. wow i've never schooled anyone in math before...3 positions, two backups
    each = 3 + 3 + 3 = 9

  19. i don't get espnU anymore ;(

  20. best be doin' some home-schoolin' in semantics tin me boy ...there are FIVE (5) starters for THREE (3) positions, not THREE (3) starters for THREE (3) positions, eh! when YOU say there will be TWO (2) backups for each of the THREE (3) positions the numbers come out this way:

    FIVE (5) Starters
    TWO (2) Backup Centers
    TWO (2) Backup Guards
    TWO (2) Backup Tackles

    ...add 'em up and I get ELEVEN (11), not NINE (9)

    ...its clear by now what you meant to say ...and I'd agree to a point I said, 9 total OL doesn't feel right considering that three of the starters have recent injury histories ...and, imnsho, a Parcels run offense tends to put more wear and tear on the OL than a pass oriented one does ...but that's just my take and you could just as easily defend your 9.

  21. lemmus, if you're going to bring up semantics, then you should read the article more carefully, lol.

    "<span style=""><span style="font-family: verdana;">Most teams also carry 2 backups for each position on the offensive line. </span></span><span style=""><span style="font-family: verdana;">You have five starters, but only 3 positions, Tackle, Guard and Center. Do the math on that and you end up with 9 total offensive linemen."</span></span>

    I don't know why you keep trying to put words in my mouth/keyboard.  I said exactly what I meant to say.  3 positions, 2 backups for each position = 9 TOTAL. 

    I suppose the confusion is that the number of positions does not necessarily equal the number of starters.  Another example is wide receiver.  There are three WR positions, but usually only two starters.  Same for cornerback.

    Anyway, the reason why I consider it only 3 positions on the OL, is because you don't usually see a team carry a RT and two backup RTs, a RG, and two backup RGs etc.  They usually carry a RT, a LT and one backup tackle.  A RG, LG and one backup G/T.  A C and two backup C/Gs.  That leaves you with nine.  You can carry ten, but then you'd have to drop someone from somewhere else.  Who would you cut?  a WR?  TE? the kicker?

  22. Ralph In MichiganJuly 13, 2009 at 9:21 AM


    Thanks for looking the info up. If I remember correctly I read on the SS that Jason Taylor could serve as the LS to free up one more player to carry. That could be interesting but doubtful.

  23. JT may be considered the backup long snapper, but I doubt they'd let John
    Denney go and use JT full time at that position. Long-snapper is an
    underrated position. No one notices when you do your job well, only when
    you screw up! lol


    QB   PENNE, Henne, White


    RB  RONNIE, Ricky, Cobbs

    WR  GINN, CAM, Bess, Turner, Hartline, (London or Armstrong?)

    TE  FASANO, Haynos, (Martin or Bronson?)

           Frye,    IKE,    , Berger,             , Gardner
        (Garner?),                   ,(Alleman?) 

            Starks,      Soliai,  (McDanial?)
           Dotson,      Cohen, (Wright ?)

            JT,       Torbor,
         Walden, (OMartin?)

          Vontae,      JAllen
         (Jones?),    (Green?)

    S   WILSON,    YBELL
        Clemons,  Culver

    I have 12 question marks,ONLY 5 make the 53!!

    (From MY LIST!!!)
    PRESENTLY,I'd LEAN toward's,
    WR London's size

    TE  Bronson's upside,vs DMarts age/o10 FA status(but DM'd likely get the nod)

    OL  Versatile Alleman(IF HEALTHY!!), T Garner IF NOT!!
    Frye(already on MY 53 is a versatile G/T),IF AA's not 100% recovered.

    DL  (?? Wright, OR McDanial)DON'T KNOW!!, Ellis(PS?)

    LB   OMartin(PS?)or eliminate the 5th CB

    CB  Green,(cuz of Jones' o10 FA status)

    ANY contributory thought's??? *DONT_KNOW*


  25. lol!

    ...ANY confusion is based in your obtusity, not mine.
    ...there are five starter slots for three position types
    ...ANY count starts with those five bodies, not three bodies

    THEN ...after first writing down the five starting slots add the backups.

    ...according to you your own words ...there are two backups for each of the three position types (guard/tackle/center)

    ...2x3=6 ...or at least it does in my math your's it apparently = 4 ...which I'd guess explains why you're not an engineer or a mathematician

    ...5 starters plus 6 bus = 11 slots, not 9

    ...unless you're into fuzzy math ...which you keep trying to pass off as the real thing're probably in sales of some kind ...they like those fuzzy numbers :)

  26. ...Denney screwed up big time at least twice last year, one leading directly to a loss iirc.

    ...there's no doubt its a skill position and critical to our success ...but its only used on kos and punts what if JT could actually do the job and do it as well as Denney? ...could it extend JT's career? ...could they then use JT as an extra pass rushing specialist as well as the LS ...suit up one less LB at game time?

  27. you cut Cameron Wake already?

    Offense/25 slots

    ...2 QBs, not 3

    ...1 Slot Back (PW)

    ...1 FB

    ...2 RBs, not 3 (R/R)

    ...3 TEs (Fasano/Wilford/Haynos)

    ...6 WRs

    ...10 OL, not 9 due to injury history

  28. Lemmus,
    I actually am an engineer, and I clearly stated 3 positions with two backups
    each. that means 3 bodies at each of the three positions. 3 x 3 = 9. I
    resent you calling me obtuse on this. I don't know any other way to say 3
    time 3 is 9.

  29. yeah, sure, if he can do it well. do we know how good of a LS JT is? if he
    is VERY good, then it would solve a lot of issues with getting the roster
    down to 53.

  30. You cut Patrick Cobbs and Lousaka Polite?

  31. ...sanitation or maintenance? ...resent away, its a blog and obtuse is obtuse ...and your original phrasing was obtuse ...backups are backups, not starters ...but you've now sufficiently clarified your original phrasing take a cold shower and move on ...from one engineer to another, eh :)

  32. clue ...but the media reports mentioned it more than once over the otas so he must be good enough to be worth a serious look.

    ...and you just know Sparano/Parcels are not buying into a LS that costs them games ...I'd think they have to be looking for a better answer there. of those things you might want to invest some time in looking at when you talk about ST ...I never paid any attention to the LS position until he made two costly snaps in one game ...I just assumed it was an automatic ...but your comments and others have made it clear its anything but automatic ...but does every team carry a dedicated LS? ...are there any where the LS slot is doubled-down? you say, it would solve a lot of roster issues ...and not just at the 53 point ...on game day as well.

  33. I can't remember which team it was but I do recall watching a game last year
    and the team had two long snappers. It might have been Pittsburgh...
    Anyway I will definitely include the possibility in the S/T blog. As for
    the costly snaps, one was in the week 17 game vs the Jets, and we won the
    game anyway and the announcer suggested that they might be putting a little
    extra on the ball because of the downward winds. I generally pay no
    attention to the color commentators but this might have been true. Still I
    would think it would be better to low snap it than high snap it because it
    would be shorter motion for the punter....also if there were low winds
    wouldn't it be better to snap it low, i.e. under the wind?
    In any case, Denney doesn't just long snap and then go home, he plays
    coverage as well. He made a huge play last year on coverage...

  34. ...Polite is the FB, just didn't fill in the name, he's a legitimate "sure thing" for Cobbs, its a matter of numbers.'re happy with 9 OL, I'm not ...but in order to get another we have to lose a slot at TE, WR, or RB ...if you insert PW as a slot back then it becomes reasonable to go with one less RB because the SB performs a lot of the same functionality ...AND if there was a serious injury at RB, its the easiest position to fill in a hurry.

    ...Henning's offense features the TE and Sparano put a lot of effort into the Wilford conversion project ...if he performs in pads as well as he did in otas, he stays ...but he remains a ? until game time so Haynos gets a slot as well.

    ...they could go with 5 WRs but that number got them in trouble late last season ...besides which, there is (imnsho) more upside in the players there than in Cobbs at RB ...Armstrong could be a late blooming star ...Cobbs is a journeyman, not a feature back, again imnsho when it comes to crunch time, I think they keep a TE and WR and short a RB ...Cobbs.

    ...that doesn't mean I'm against Cobbs making the roster or that he isn't a good player ...just that I don't think the numbers favor him this time around.

    ...this is of course all spec ...what isn't right now? ...we don't know what Hartline or Wilford will do in pads yet ...or if Armstrong can find a ST role ...all yet to come.

    ...btw, I had to get some sleep before I hit defense but I think Ellis is a probable keeper there, again depending on camp of course ...but Fergie is getting long in the tooth for a NT, Soliai has not demonstrated any consistency or reliability as yet despite his manifest pros unless McDaniels suddenly shows some NT potential, I think they have to commit to developing Ellis as an insurance policy ...and no, they can't put a potential 3-4 NT on the PS ...he'd be snapped up by another team back to my saying Ellis makes the 53 as it stands today.

  35. "In any case, Denney doesn't just long snap and then go home, he plays 
    coverage as well. He made a huge play last year on coverage" tin

    ...good point ...this is one of those bits 'n pieces you keep throwing in re ST that I've mentioned before ...looking forward to you putting the whole picture together.

  36. IF that was directed @ me??
    No actually,I guess Wake ,and Wilford slipped by my eye..
    And that's why I asked for CONTRIBUTORY thought's!!

    I remembered Wilford a few hrs later,but let it be for the plesant people here.. Even on MY list he's ahead of Bronson/Nalbone,so thanx for the reminder..

    WAKE,probably makes the team,so I guess I'd have to let GREEN,JONES,and OMartin go...But,thanx again for the reminder!!

    But why the hell do you need to be soo arrogant??
    That was a tough list,and took alot of effort..
    So I overlooked TWO of 82,I should be hanged,IYNSHO!!

    OFF to work,TILL dark!!

  37. ...why do you take everything so personal, eh? ...I pointed out Wake was missing from your list and then started to walk thtough the offense myself as I thought you'd asked for ...and am thus fully cognizant of the effort involved ...if you see that as arrogant IYNSHO, que sera, sera, eh  :-P

  38. Your first words(LOL),is what struck me as arrogant!!
    As if you thought MY list was a joke..

    For me"LOL"is used when making,or responding to a joke,NOT when critiquing other's reasonable well-intended effort's!!

    Beside's that,I had no problem w'your response to me,but your relentless debate's w'TIN about what 3x3 equaled seemed uncomprimising also...  JMHO!!!  NO BIGGGG!!!  :*       GOFINS!!

    OFF to work, >:o  !!!!