NFL teams keeping 4 quarterbacks isn't a big deal, and here's why

There was a question for a few NFL teams with four quarterbacks worth rostering for Week 1 about how they would handle that conundrum, considering almost every team keeps either two or three.

The answer ended up being pretty easy: Keep all four.

Four teams kept four quarterbacks on cutdown day . The reaction for some was disbelief. That's not what most teams have done, after all. (One of those teams, the Vikings, cut down to three when they released Max Brosmer on Monday afternoon, according to NFL Media .)

It makes perfect sense, though. And maybe it will become a new trend. After all, quarterback is the most important position in sports. Maybe it's time to approach it differently.

The answer for what to do with four quarterbacks was different in Cleveland. Browns second-year quarterback Dillon Gabriel, who looked very good in a preseason game on Thursday, was so injured by Sunday that he had to go on injured reserve with a back injury. How convenient.

Other teams didn't have a fourth quarterback come down with a sudden injury right before they had to make roster decisions. The Pittsburgh Steelers, Atlanta Falcons, Minnesota Vikings and Philadelphia Eagles kept four QBs on cutdown day, though the Vikings pared down to three on Monday. It's rare to see one or two teams keep that many. And the Browns magically got out of making that inevitable decision.

The easiest explanation is that the opportunity cost of keeping a fourth quarterback is low. Up to seven players are inactive on gameday in the NFL. Some of those spots are used on players who are injured and can't play that week, but there generally is an extra safety, linebacker, tight end, running back or some other position on that list. Every team believes that the rest of the league can't wait to pounce on their sixth linebacker if he is released, but that generally isn't the case. Teams can and maybe should use the 53rd spot on an extra quarterback, which has the highest potential payoff down the road if one hits.

Teams keeping four quarterbacks will still function the same. It will all work out just fine for them.

The NFL can be uncreative. It took decades for teams to feel empowered enough to go for it on fourth down in their opponents' territory. The way teams approached the preseason was the same across the league until Rams head coach Sean McVay started holding out his starters, and other teams followed. There are numerous other examples. There are few outliers when it comes to things like roster building in the NFL. Everyone does the same thing.

It's OK to think about things differently, especially if you're a franchise that hasn't won much. Keeping four quarterbacks isn't as radical as you think, but look around at some of the aghast reactions to it. That's why teams don't often go out of the box.

For something like keeping four quarterbacks, it's a very small risk to be different. In Pittsburgh, the Steelers need to figure out if they have a successor to Aaron Rodgers. For the Falcons and Eagles, their fourth quarterbacks fill a role. Atlanta's Jack Strand can be used on quarterback sneaks and maybe some other gadget plays, and Philadelphia's Cole Payton saw some snaps on special teams in the preseason.

If keeping a fourth quarterback leads a team to find its future starter or even a valuable QB2, it's much more valuable than keeping around a spare linebacker who was going to be inactive on Sundays.