Surprise Cuts?

[Superman]

Reggie has the most drops in the preseason. I think his job is in jeopardy, baby.... Oooooh oh ooooh...

(Anyone? Band name?)

 

Smokey Robinson and the Miracles.

[Gavin]

I don't know.  He has shown a lot of potential as a rusher, and I think he could be valuable as a special teamer.  However, he still looks lost to me and lacking fundamentals when he has a job to do other than rush the passer.  If he cracks our 53, I cannot see him being more than a ST'er and blitzer on 3rd and long.  I certainly would not feel comfortable with him as an every down LB'er, and wonder if he would even see the field much as a pass-rush specialist.  He has not played against first-stringers and I kind of feel like Mathis and Bjoern are ahead of him on the depth chart as pass-rushers on 3rd and long.  I cannot imagine Rayford being a good pass-rush specialist coming up the middle - I think he is strictly built to come off the end -- I guess it could be interesting to see if we rush Bjoern up the middle with Rayford and Mathis on the outside...

 

I am not sure how many DL and LB we will keep on the 53.  I have heard a lot of people saying 8-9 LB:  Right now I would say our locks at OLB are Mathis, Bjoern and Walden (3), ILB Freeman, Angerer, Sheppard, Conner (4, to bring total to 7).  So if we are going to keep 1 or 2 more LB's we are looking between Rayford, Adango, Simmons, Harvey, Louiseau, and McNary.

 

I will take Adango out of the running and put him on PS (at best).  I think McNary is unlikely to do more than make our PS.  Now we are stuck between Rayford, Harvey, Simmons, and Louiseau.

 

I think that Harvey might be the most complete LB of that group, so I would say if we were going to go with 8 LB's, he would be our 8th over Rayford.  If we go with 9, I would predict that Rayford will make it -- but I am unsure.  I think a Harvey or Simmons could play either ILB or OLB better than Rayford overall (not as good of pass-rushers, but less vulnerable if relied on for all other LB duties).  I don't think that Rayford has the potential to play ILB.  Given Angerer's health issues in the past, that might be something to take into account.

 

As much as it is great to see some of Rayford's pass-rush potential, I still am skeptical about him vs. first-teamers and think that there are multiple other LBs on our squad right now that are more versatile, fundamentally-sound, and who I would feel more comfortable with if injury struck and we needed a guy from the bench to play every down.  Given the fact that we have Mathis and Bjoern as locks to make this team, I am unsure that the coaching staff will take Rayford's pass-rush specialty over more consistency from other LBs.

 

I am in no way trying to be a 'Rayford-hater', I just have yet to gain confidence in him that he could step in during the regular season and not be a major liability on non-obvious passing downs. 

 

Regardless, I think it is a good problem to have -- tough choices for cuts usually means that we had good competition and will be fielding a strong team (or at least a strong LB corps)

He is 3 games into his NFL career and he has done what he was brought into do and thats be a pass rushing nightmare(Rayford), Why would you take a guy (Adongo) whos barely even heard of football before and is at the very least a year away from contributing with any signifigence? over a guy whos done nothing but give QB's nightmares in there sleep after the game who Pagano raved about saying he has always asking the right questions

[Hoosiernsavga]

I don't know.  He has shown a lot of potential as a rusher, and I think he could be valuable as a special teamer.  However, he still looks lost to me and lacking fundamentals when he has a job to do other than rush the passer.  If he cracks our 53, I cannot see him being more than a ST'er and blitzer on 3rd and long.  I certainly would not feel comfortable with him as an every down LB'er, and wonder if he would even see the field much as a pass-rush specialist.  He has not played against first-stringers and I kind of feel like Mathis and Bjoern are ahead of him on the depth chart as pass-rushers on 3rd and long.  I cannot imagine Rayford being a good pass-rush specialist coming up the middle - I think he is strictly built to come off the end -- I guess it could be interesting to see if we rush Bjoern up the middle with Rayford and Mathis on the outside...

 

I am not sure how many DL and LB we will keep on the 53.  I have heard a lot of people saying 8-9 LB:  Right now I would say our locks at OLB are Mathis, Bjoern and Walden (3), ILB Freeman, Angerer, Sheppard, Conner (4, to bring total to 7).  So if we are going to keep 1 or 2 more LB's we are looking between Rayford, Adango, Simmons, Harvey, Louiseau, and McNary.

 

I will take Adango out of the running and put him on PS (at best).  I think McNary is unlikely to do more than make our PS.  Now we are stuck between Rayford, Harvey, Simmons, and Louiseau.

 

I think that Harvey might be the most complete LB of that group, so I would say if we were going to go with 8 LB's, he would be our 8th over Rayford.  If we go with 9, I would predict that Rayford will make it -- but I am unsure.  I think a Harvey or Simmons could play either ILB or OLB better than Rayford overall (not as good of pass-rushers, but less vulnerable if relied on for all other LB duties).  I don't think that Rayford has the potential to play ILB.  Given Angerer's health issues in the past, that might be something to take into account.

 

As much as it is great to see some of Rayford's pass-rush potential, I still am skeptical about him vs. first-teamers and think that there are multiple other LBs on our squad right now that are more versatile, fundamentally-sound, and who I would feel more comfortable with if injury struck and we needed a guy from the bench to play every down.  Given the fact that we have Mathis and Bjoern as locks to make this team, I am unsure that the coaching staff will take Rayford's pass-rush specialty over more consistency from other LBs.

 

I am in no way trying to be a 'Rayford-hater', I just have yet to gain confidence in him that he could step in during the regular season and not be a major liability on non-obvious passing downs. 

 

Regardless, I think it is a good problem to have -- tough choices for cuts usually means that we had good competition and will be fielding a strong team (or at least a strong LB corps)

I agree with a lot of this post but at the same time pass rush may be where this Defense will need the most help with all the holes we filled to stop the run we drafted BW in the FIRST rd to do what Rayford has done all pre season. I think he makes the team.

[Jason_]

He is 3 games into his NFL career and he has done what he was brought into do and thats be a pass rushing nightmare(Rayford), Why would you take a guy (Adongo) whos barely even heard of football before and is at the very least a year away from contributing with any signifigence? over a guy whos done nothing but give QB's nightmares in there sleep after the game who Pagano raved about saying he has always asking the right questions

 

Maybe he's rightfully assuming that Rayford probably wouldn't last long if we tried to stash him on the PS.  So I don't think he was necessarily saying he would take Adongo over Rayford but rather that, realistically speaking, we would be more likely to be able to keep Adongo on the PS whereas Rayford is kind of a tweener at the moment between being too good for the PS but maybe not quite good enough for the final 53.

 

 

that said, I do think Rayford makes the team, especially with Sidbury and Hickman on IR.  I think we keep at least 4 OLB's and after Mathis, Werner and Walden, Rayford seems like the logical choice.  

 

On a related note, I bet this is why Werner was playing SamLB quite a bit in the 3rd quarter of the browns game.  Sidbury was originally listed as Walden's primary backup, but now that he's on IR, Walden's primary backup is kind of up in the air.   Yes, I know Mathis played SamLB last year but I'd personally rather see Werner learning the position because I think he can and will be better against the run than Mathis.  Another option..maybe they have Harvey play both ILB and SamLB, or try out Conner at SamLB.  

[ColtsFanMikeC]

He is 3 games into his NFL career and he has done what he was brought into do and thats be a pass rushing nightmare(Rayford), Why would you take a guy (Adongo) whos barely even heard of football before and is at the very least a year away from contributing with any signifigence? over a guy whos done nothing but give QB's nightmares in there sleep after the game who Pagano raved about saying he has always asking the right questions

 

Maybe he's rightfully assuming that Rayford probably wouldn't last long if we tried to stash him on the PS.  So I don't think he was necessarily saying he would take Adongo over Rayford but rather that, realistically speaking, we would be more likely to be able to keep Adongo on the PS whereas Rayford is kind of a tweener at the moment between being too good for the PS but maybe not quite good enough for the final 53.

Gavin, I think Adongo is at best a PS player right now.  And Jason_S is right -- I think Rayford has a way better shot to make our 53, and if he doesn't, I see him on PS, too.  However, I think Adongo would clear waivers and remain on PS (if he even makes it there).  Rayford, I think would get snagged up almost instantly by a team that has room to house someone who is purely a pass-rush specialist.

 

I am not saying Rayford definitely won't make our 53 -- the OP asked for who we thought could be a surprise cut.  I have no idea how things will shake out quite yet, we may have more injuries in our last game of preseason, or someone might do something spectacular or really boneheaded to make things easier on the coaching staff when narrowing it down to the last group.  The reason that I put Rayford as a 'surprise' cut is that I have seen several posts since the Browns game saying Rayford is a 'lock' to make our squad.  Notice, if you read Pagano's full interview, he says Rayford is always asking the right questions and then follows it up with 'we will be faced with very tough choices'.  That, to me, says that outside of our top 6-7 LBs, we don't have any 'locks'. 

 

Given Mathis' tenure, I would say he is going to be counted upon on 3rd and long to be our primary rush specialist.  I think part of the reason why we took Bjoern was b/c they think we can develop him into a complete LB, but right now it seems to me like applying pressure is where he is best.  Being that he has seen reps with the 1st-teamers, and Rayford has not, I assume that Bjoern may also be ahead on the depth chart (if this was actually included in our depth chart) as a 3rd down LB.

 

My point is this:  Rayford has shown incredible pass-rush potential (you are probably right, that is mainly what he was brought in for), but he doesn't seem to be a complete LB right now.  Given Angerer's injury history, and a bit of uncertainty on our LB unit -- I think a lot of factors will be considered when trimming our final roster.  Rayford's pass-rush potential is great - and it is always good to have pass-rushers.  However, I think Rayford, at this point, would still be considered our 3rd rushing LB behind Mathis and Werner.  That means, I don't think Rayford would see the field a whole lot outside of special teams -- barring injury.  A question that the coaches and front office will be asking is -- will it be more valuable to have a guy that might (still haven't seen him with the 1st team) excel at rushing the passer but could be more of a liability in coverage, run support, etc. than a guy that might not be a great pass-rusher but we have more faith in all other aspects of his game?

[Gavin]

Maybe he's rightfully assuming that Rayford probably wouldn't last long if we tried to stash him on the PS.  So I don't think he was necessarily saying he would take Adongo over Rayford but rather that, realistically speaking, we would be more likely to be able to keep Adongo on the PS whereas Rayford is kind of a tweener at the moment between being too good for the PS but maybe not quite good enough for the final 53.

 

 

that said, I do think Rayford makes the team, especially with Sidbury and Hickman on IR.  I think we keep at least 4 OLB's and after Mathis, Werner and Walden, Rayford seems like the logical choice.  

 

On a related note, I bet this is why Werner was playing SamLB quite a bit in the 3rd quarter of the browns game.  Sidbury was originally listed as Walden's primary backup, but now that he's on IR, Walden's primary backup is kind of up in the air.   Yes, I know Mathis played SamLB last year but I'd personally rather see Werner learning the position because I think he can and will be better against the run than Mathis.  Another option..maybe they have Harvey play both ILB and SamLB, or try out Conner at SamLB.  

I see what your saying but in all honesty as to your first paragraph relating to Rayford not being quite good enough for the 53....did Werner at any time show he was good enough to the on the 53? I would say thats just about as much of a toss up (if you diregard draft positioning...thinking outside that box) as Rayford, both have shown talent but both have things that can be worked on, Adongo has not done anything......Your 3rd paragraph I like the idea of Werner playing Sam Backer and think he will do well but not right away, I do however agree 100 percent if e put Adongo on the PS instead of Rayford then Adongo would last longer....probably much much longer...But I would just as soon pick up another OLB whos up to speed with the basic concepts of what will be asked of him

[Dark Superman]

I wish we cut Satele..

We really need to upgrade that position.

[Goodtimes]

Based on what I've seen or haven't seen yes. 

 

I agree with you. Fleener hasn't shown me much either.....

[jamesie jr]

My surprise which i could kind of see happening is R.Mathews or M.Green

[TKnight24]

I wish we cut Satele..

We really need to upgrade that position.

Pagano think Khaled Holmes will be healthy enough to make his NFL debut Thursday vs the Bengals

[Jason_]

I see what your saying but in all honesty as to your first paragraph relating to Rayford not being quite good enough for the 53....did Werner at any time show he was good enough to the on the 53? I would say thats just about as much of a toss up (if you diregard draft positioning...thinking outside that box) as Rayford, both have shown talent but both have things that can be worked on, Adongo has not done anything......Your 3rd paragraph I like the idea of Werner playing Sam Backer and think he will do well but not right away, I do however agree 100 percent if e put Adongo on the PS instead of Rayford then Adongo would last longer....probably much much longer...But I would just as soon pick up another OLB whos up to speed with the basic concepts of what will be asked of him

 

 

I highly disagree and it's not about draft positioning at all.  First, though Werner hasn't gotten his first sack yet, he has gotten pressure on the QB and forced poor throws, scrambles etc against first teamers.  Yes, Rayford had a good play, maybe 2 against the Browns first team, I'd have to go back and watch again, but I don't recall him really making a big impact until the Browns second and third teamers came in.  Werner has looked much better in coverage than Rayford...not great mind you, but not really bad either, especially for a rookie.  Plus, though he did have a couple of poor plays in run defense early in the giants game, he showed quite a bit of improvement in that regard later in that game, and he continued to show improvement in the Browns game in run defense.  Rayford, as of right now, is a one trick pony.  He's a rush specialist that can get to the QB with relative ease against other teams' 2nd and 3rd string players.  Werner has had a lot more thrown at him in the same amount of time and he's shown improvement in a short time in the areas of run defense and playing in coverage.  He's far from a finished product, but he's already shown potential to be a great all around OLB.

 

heck, I'll go you one better and say, if fully healthy, I would still take Sidbury over Rayford on the final 53 at this point.  I have absolutely nothing against rayford at all and hope he can continue to improve and still be a consistent pass rush terror against other teams' first string players, but as of right now all he has proven to be is a preseason 2nd and 3rd team star (many of these guys have come and gone over the years) who just now, after a few years playing arena ball, had a GM decide he was worth taking a chance on for a pro team.  

 

Once again, just to emphasize, I like Rayford and hope we keep him to see what he can turn into.  but as of right now, no I still don't think it's a lock that he makes the team and comparing him to Werner is a bit silly considering how much more has been thrown at and asked of Werner in comparison.

[TKnight24]

Some of the names listed here are just

Coby Fleener

Bejorn Werner

Seriously? They're not going anywhere

[Dark Superman]

Pagano think Khaled Holmes will be healthy enough to make his NFL debut Thursday vs the Bengals

Haven't seen anything from Holmes to make me believe he's an upgrade over Satele.

[BOTT]

I wish we cut Satele..

We really need to upgrade that position.

Cutting him at this point isn't going to get the Colts something better

[Dark Superman]

Cutting him at this point isn't going to get the Colts something better

It was clear sarcasm.

[Jason_]

It was clear sarcasm.

'

um, no not really.  

[Dark Superman]

'

um, no not really.

Sure was. Why would we cut Satele when we have no depth behind him?

We don't know what we have in Holmes..

[MTC]

No one.

[Jason_]

Sure was. Why would we cut Satele when we have no depth behind him?

We don't know what we have in Holmes..

 

why would we cut the majority of the players that have been mentioned in this thread?  there was absolutely nothing in your post that indicated sarcasm.  Thinking sarcasm in your head while typing a post does not magically make that sarcasm translate to written word. ;)

[AllYouNeedIsLuck]

Luck. That guys garbage

[GoColts8818]

Coby Fleener

They aren't going to cut Fleener in year two of a rookie contract.  He might not have been as good as we would have liked coming out of college and drops are a real issue with him but he has produced enough that you can't justify giving up on him after one year if you are being realistic about this. 

[superrep1967]

They aren't going to cut Fleener in year two of a rookie contract.  He might not have been as good as we would have liked coming out of college and drops are a real issue with him but he has produced enough that you can't justify giving up on him after one year if you are being realistic about this. 

I am!! But I know they won't cut him it would have to be something catastrophic for them to cut him. But I am frustrated with him.  

[GoColts8818]

I am!! But I know they won't cut him it would have to be something catastrophic for them to cut him. But I am frustrated with him.  

No you aren't, if you were you would understand they aren't going to cut their second round draft pick after his rookie year when he started games for them last year and had some production even if it wasn't as much as some fans would have liked.  Also, it's not like Cunningham and Jones have played so well they are challenging him for his roster spot.  They aren't going to go into the year with just Allen at tightend. 

 

You are exactly what you said at the end.  You are frustrated with him which is keeping you from being objective about this.  Again, it's why fans, myself included, don't need to make personal moves we let our emotions and personal like or dislikes of a guy get in the way. 

[GoColts8818]

So seeing as how Cuts are rolling in left and right and that we have time to kill before the 4pm deadline tomorrow, Does anyone have a surprise cut, or if you had to pick 1 surprise cut who would that be, I'd have to say Kavell Conner. He was benched eventually in favor of Freeman and Angerer and now was outshined by Sheppard

Conner is their top back up at MLB and given Angerer's health status there is no way they are going to cut him.  I don't think Shepard has out played him at all.  Even if he has there is room for both on the final roster.  Harvey is about the only other guy at MLB who has shown anything in the pre-season as MLB and he's done it in really one game and against has done it against other teams back ups and third stringers so I don't think he's going to take push Conner for his job.  If anything I think it'll come down to Shepard vs Harvey for a spot and heck if Harvey is playing special teams well there MIGHT be room for all of them on the final roster depending on what they have to do at other positions. 

 

Also, he didn't get benched for Angerer and Freeman.  Those two were the starters going into this year with Conner being the back up.  Freeman proved himself to be a starter last year and the last time Angerer played fully healthy he had a 100+ tackle season even if it was in different defense so they were the starters going in.  Due to Angerer's injury last year he started and the plan probably was to start him a head for Freeman last year but when Freeman earned his spot he just kept his top back up spot but again because of Angerer's foot and being a snap count when he did play Conner started most of the games.  Now that Angerer is healthy he just returned to the starting line up.  So if anything he got "benched" last year but with his experience starting and as well as he's played in the past when he's been in there I don't see how they leave him off the final roster. 

[superrep1967]

No you aren't, if you were you would understand they aren't going to cut their second round draft pick after his rookie year when he started games for them last year and had some production even if it wasn't as much as some fans would have liked.  Also, it's not like Cunningham and Jones have played so well they are challenging him for his roster spot.  They aren't going to go into the year with just Allen at tightend. 

 

You are exactly what you said at the end.  You are frustrated with him which is keeping you from being objective about this.  Again, it's why fans, myself included, don't need to make personal moves we let our emotions and personal like or dislikes of a guy get in the way. 

He just hasn't showed me anything but drops and injuries. A TE needs to be tough as he's playing a very tough position. 

[GoColts8818]

He just hasn't showed me anything but drops and injuries. A TE needs to be tough as he's playing a very tough position. 

I know it ended in a fumble but his catch and run and making a tackler miss in the Bills game didn't show you his athletic ability that he has and it's something that frankly none of the other tightends, Allen included, have on the Colts roster.  It's what made him a second round pick.

 

No question drops a problem and if he was a fourth or fifth year player and it was still this big of an issue yes it would put his roster spot in jeopardy but he's not.  He's a second year guy that is still developing.  Also, last year he had 26 catches with a couple of Touchdowns while missing part of the year.  Not bad for a rookie tightend stats.  No they aren't great compared to Allen's but Allen had a good year for a tightend, not just a rookie tightend but for a tigthend period.  By rookie tightend standards he had a fantastic year.  To give you an idea Fleener's rookie year went about like Dallas Clark's rookie year.  Dallas had three more catches than Fleener for a few more years but one less TD and he also missed games due to an injury, he also had the advantage of playing in an offense run by Peyton Manning in his prime vs Luck as a rookie. 

 

Fleener has proven himself worthy of hanging on to and developing.  Rookies are not finished products when they come out of college and without question the biggest thing Fleener has to work on is his hands but they aren't going to lead to him being cut after one season. 

[superrep1967]

I know it ended in a fumble but his catch and run and making a tackler miss in the Bills game didn't show you his athletic ability that he has and it's something that frankly none of the other tightends, Allen included, have on the Colts roster.  It's what made him a second round pick.

 

No question drops a problem and if he was a fourth or fifth year player and it was still this big of an issue yes it would put his roster spot in jeopardy but he's not.  He's a second year guy that is still developing.  Also, last year he had 26 catches with a couple of Touchdowns while missing part of the year.  Not bad for a rookie tightend stats.  No they aren't great compared to Allen's but Allen had a good year for a tightend, not just a rookie tightend but for a tigthend period.  By rookie tightend standards he had a fantastic year.  To give you an idea Fleener's rookie year went about like Dallas Clark's rookie year.  Dallas had three more catches than Fleener for a few more years but one less TD and he also missed games due to an injury, he also had the advantage of playing in an offense run by Peyton Manning in his prime vs Luck as a rookie. 

 

Fleener has proven himself worthy of hanging on to and developing.  Rookies are not finished products when they come out of college and without question the biggest thing Fleener has to work on is his hands but they aren't going to lead to him being cut after one season. 

Point well taken. 

[GoColts8818]

I think the biggest surprise is going to be someone like a Moala or a Lefeged.  The Colts have a lot of depth on the D-line so odds are "name" we know is probably going to end up cut there rather it be a Moala or heck even someone like a Nevis who I would hate to see cut but people keep talking about how he doesn't fit this defense, all I know is that he makes a lot of plays and you win with those kinds of guys on your team so I want him on mine.  You could argue the Colts have enough at the safety position without Lefeged and with his off the field issue still hanging over his head that could make him expendable.  Other than that I am not sure if there is going to be someone we all go oh my gosh they cut so and so I didn't see that one coming.  There might be a guy get cut like a Harvey that we liked and are disappointed to see guy but I don't think we'll be blown away if that happens. 

[Le Neon]

Calvin Johnson. A surprise because we didn't even know he was on our roster. Bad move imo, we could have used him.

[lollygagger8]

If Caesar Rayford is cut, I will revolt!!! 

[Jason_]

I think the biggest surprise is going to be someone like a Moala or a Lefeged.  The Colts have a lot of depth on the D-line so odds are "name" we know is probably going to end up cut there rather it be a Moala or heck even someone like a Nevis who I would hate to see cut but people keep talking about how he doesn't fit this defense, all I know is that he makes a lot of plays and you win with those kinds of guys on your team so I want him on mine.  You could argue the Colts have enough at the safety position without Lefeged and with his off the field issue still hanging over his head that could make him expendable.  Other than that I am not sure if there is going to be someone we all go oh my gosh they cut so and so I didn't see that one coming.  There might be a guy get cut like a Harvey that we liked and are disappointed to see guy but I don't think we'll be blown away if that happens. 

 

I know you're not saying that you think Nevis will be cut..I'm just responding to the mention of him only to say I think Matthews, Guy and Moala would be cut before Nevis.  When you say "people keep talking about how he doesn't fit this defense"...who are those people?  I know a lot of people on here on the forum say it but I'm not sure I've heard anyone from the team, NFL, ESPN or anything like that say it.  Then again, I don't watch many of the analyst shows on TV either, I pretty much only watch the games, so I'm just wondering if you've heard anything like that from one of the professional analysts and if so, hopefully you can remember which one(s).  There are some analysts I listen to everything they say and then there are others that I laugh at everything they say. lol

[Dark Superman]

why would we cut the majority of the players that have been mentioned in this thread?  there was absolutely nothing in your post that indicated sarcasm.  Thinking sarcasm in your head while typing a post does not magically make that sarcasm translate to written word. ;)

I think we should cut Satele, lol JK. Better?

[PrincetonTiger]

Lefeged could be cut

[atapcl]

I think he'll make it thru the 75, but Caesar Rayford is my surprise cut.  I won't be surprised if he gets put on practice squad, but I don't think he is a 'lock' to make our 53 at this point.

I don't believe Rarford makes it to PS. Some team would pick him up as a DE or OLB.

[Jason_]

I think we should cut Satele, lol JK. Better?

 

If you want people to know you're being sarcastic then yes.

[BlueShoe]

So seeing as how Cuts are rolling in left and right and that we have time to kill before the 4pm deadline tomorrow, Does anyone have a surprise cut, or if you had to pick 1 surprise cut who would that be, I'd have to say Kavell Conner. He was benched eventually in favor of Freeman and Angerer and now was outshined by Sheppard

 

I don't believe Conner is going anywhere. The only thing that has surprised me so far is Price making it through the first cut. 

[Valpo2004]

I think he'll make it thru the 75, but Caesar Rayford is my surprise cut.  I won't be surprised if he gets put on practice squad, but I don't think he is a 'lock' to make our 53 at this point.

 

No way he'd clear waivers to get signed to the practice squad.  Someone would snatch him up.  

[Coltswarriors]

Connor has played pretty well this preseason IMO...

[chad72]

Chandler Harnish will be cut, IMO.

 

2 QBs, 4 RBs including FB, 4 TEs, 5 WRs, 9 OLs for 24 on offense

 

8 DL, 8 LBs, 5 safeties, 5 CBs for 26 on defense

 

LS, Punter, and Kicker for ST