Why are so many teams keeping four QBs on roster?
Chris Simms and Mike Florio discuss the teams that are rolling with four quarterbacks on the 53-man roster, examining why the trend in 2026 is "unheard of."
Video Transcript
Pft Live, August 31.
All right.
It's rare that a team keeps four quarterbacks on the 53-man roster.
We've talked about that because we saw it coming for the Pittsburgh Steelers.
We weren't sure they were gonna do it.
They did it.
Most famously, the Patriots did it back in 2000 'cause they didn't wanna expose Thomas What's his middle name?
Doesn't he have two middle names?
Thomas Patrick Edward Brady.
I don't know.
Anyway, they didn't wanna expose Brady to waivers, so they carried four.
Yeah.
So the Steelers didn't want to expose Will Howard or Drew Aller to waivers.
They kept both of them.
But they're not alone.
They're not alone.
The Browns kept four.
Now, Dillon Gabriel quickly was placed on short-term injured reserve.
The Eagles kept four.
The Vikings kept four.
And there's a fifth that didn't make the graphic.
The Falcons, in their none of the above quarterback competition, they kept four.
It's unheard of.
I mean, w- I And when's the last time we had four or five teams keep four rece- quarterbacks?
It feels like the old days again.
And, you know, a- I think a little of it is, maybe some unintended consequences, maybe some young guys being better than what they thought they were gonna be.
But I think the biggest thing is just they're g- you know, these teams believe in the value of the quarterback position.
They believe in the value of these assets.
They're gonna keep the four because, yeah, there's, you know, hey, one guy's a veteran that we know can help out and if he, if somebody gets hurt right now.
Another guy's, ooh, could be the future.
There's some things we like.
Another guy might be kept just because, ooh, team might need a backup or reevaluate their roster here soon, and maybe wanna trade for our guy to make their backup or third-stringer in a daisy one.
And I think these teams are going, "We're gonna take that route and see where it goes," rather than, you know, have him clear waivers for a day, get screwed over, and not have him ever again or get anything for it.
And I think that's kind of where we're at.
Just shows you the value of quarterbacks in the NFL.
I think what's, that's what it all comes down to.
You have five teams that had a surplus of quarterbacks, and they would've liked to have slipped one or two of them onto the practice squad.
And the problem is, for anybody who's got fewer than four years of service, they have to go through waivers.
Now, I thought the Steelers may try to pull that with Mason Rudolph, but I heard over the weekend, and I didn't write this, I just filed it away because I assumed it wasn't gonna happen.
But Rudolph wouldn't have He wouldn't have waited around.
No.
He wouldn't have played that game.
He would've got an offer.
He wouldn't have done the- Yeah yeah, he wouldn't have done the 54-man roster trick.
He would've gone to another team if they had cut him.
Totally.
I, you, there's enough teams that I think out there that have gotta feel a little dicey about their backup quarterback situation where they would've gone, "Hey, you know, we got a backup.
We kinda like him, but is he ready yet?
Now, let's get Mason Rudolph here just to make sure we have an insurance policy, and maybe we'll pay him a little bit more money than just the veteran minimum or something like that."
So yeah, I think his services would've been going somewhere else if they tried to pull that move with Mason R- Rudolph
