This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

National Football League Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject National Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject National Football LeagueNational Football League articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Florida Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Can I put the header advertising the 2010 Pro Bowl from nfl.com? Southwood Paul ( talk) 23:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC) reply

im watching the NFL network as they announce the roster for the 2010 Pro Bowl. they announced the roster for the NFC and are starting on the AFC. why is the FULL AFC roster on here but not the NFC?

We're working on it, relax. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:44, 30 December 2009 (UTC) reply

God this is confusing, with injury replacements, and Super Bowl replacements to come. Do we anticipate having simply a gameday roster, that shows only the players who actually played in the game? We can keep a table like it is now, showing everybody, but there could be a better way to organize. Grsz ¹¹ 00:57, 22 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Well, looking over it again, perhaps we could somehow better notate who actually played, maybe bold? Grsz ¹¹ 01:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC) reply

That would break from tradition. We'll see. Pats1 ^T/ C 01:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Ha, well in that case, this year's system is a break from tradition. Nor is that a particularly worthy reason to not improve something. Grsz ¹¹ 01:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Ha, wow, hopefully this doesn't carry on too long. Matt Schaub will start as the fourth selection. Grsz ¹¹ 03:42, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

I'm leaning towards the bold idea. This is getting wild. Pats1 ^T/ C 22:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Or perhaps more than just two columns. Starters, Reserves, Alternates. I don't even know, it's just nuts. Grsz ¹¹ 22:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Well, for one thing, it isn't worth listing Randy Moss in the table, as it can be done in a note like Roethlisberge and Palmer. Grsz ¹¹ 22:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Moss is a different situation though. As far as I know (basing this off the Patriots' official season-ending press release), Moss was selected to the Pro Bowl, then bowed out. Both Palmer and Roethlisberger simply declined the invitation in the first place (like Brady did in 2006, because he had a golf tournament). There's a differnce; Moss will be credited with a Pro Bowl, while Roethlisberger and Palmer won't.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pats1 ( talk • contribs) 23:29, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Got it. I wasn't sure how it transpired. Grsz ¹¹ 23:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

What if we eliminated players that are getting replaced entirely, and keep the players that are actually playing in the game at the top. Then add a section with a table at the bottom of the article with all of the replacements like:

That way, the rosters will be less confusing but still acknowledge the players that were selected but couldn't play for whatever reason. sorebearmat ( ^T/ _C) 00:50, 26 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Too complicated. Pats1 ^T/ C 00:56, 26 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Well, however it's done, here is the updated roster denoting who is going to start, alternates, and who wont play. Edit: The players denoted as starters in that link were also announced at the game as starters. It just doesn't make sense to me to keep players not playing listed as starter. The current article doesn't acknowledge that Matt Schaub, for instance, started in the actual game. sorebearmat ( ^T/ _C) 23:10, 30 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Yes it does. That's the [c] note. Pats1 ^T/ C 00:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Oh, sorry didn't see that. sorebearmat ( ^T/ _C) 00:59, 1 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Possible alternate format

Perhaps since there are so many alternate selections, we could use a format that lists those separate. We could still probably use the notes the same. Then we could bold players who actually play, and futher notate the starters, maybe Matt Schaub* That way, we know for sure and without question who was selected as the starter and the reserves (that is the point of the All-Star game afterall), and then who actually ended up played. Grsz ¹¹ 22:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

I think that's a good idea. ~ Richmond96 t • c 23:26, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

Yeah, makes sense to me. Pats1 ^T/ C 23:28, 25 January 2010 (UTC) reply

{{editsemiprotected}} Tomas Regalado tossed the coin and tossed tails. AFC called tails and chose to receive.

 Done Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:19, 1 February 2010 (UTC) reply