PDA

View Full Version : Going undefeated versus "resting starters".


Rain Man
12-09-2005, 11:16 AM
As a hypothetical situation, let's say that your team is undefeated after 13 games. You've got three games left, including a couple of tough ones. Assume that you've already clinched home field.

At what point do you start sitting people out to avoid injuries and stuff?

THE RULES OF THIS POLL.

1. Answer the question for EACH record: 13-0, 14-0, and 15-0.

2. Your answer to the previous record WILL impact your potential answers to subsequent records.

Okay, hang on while I make the poll.

Ari Chi3fs
12-09-2005, 11:20 AM
Yes! In before the Poll is listed... this is such a great honor... knowing that as I type, Kevin is plotting and typing his poll masterpiece.

mwha ahah

jjjayb
12-09-2005, 11:21 AM
Yes! In before the Poll is listed... this is such a great honor... knowing that as I type, Kevin is plotting and typing his poll masterpiece.

mwha ahah


Last one in before the poll. :)

Cormac
12-09-2005, 11:21 AM
Yes! In before the Poll is listed... this is such a great honor... knowing that as I type, Kevin is plotting and typing his poll masterpiece.

mwha ahah

Damn, dude. You're living a dream!

siberian khatru
12-09-2005, 11:21 AM
What a stupid hypothetical. That situation would never arise.

Rain Man
12-09-2005, 11:26 AM
What a stupid hypothetical. That situation would never arise.

What can I say? It's hard to come up with good topics in the offseason.

Mr. Laz
12-09-2005, 11:29 AM
play all my starters unless they have some kind of injury that could be made worse by playing.


go for the undefeated record all the way.



Especially since many times resting your players ends up hurting your mometum for the playoffs as well.


undefeated record and keeping momentum

vrs

injury risk that could happen anytime anyway.



clear choice imo

Ari Chi3fs
12-09-2005, 11:33 AM
yeah, go for it... when you sit your starters, you are just scared... play scared = losses and injuries to your second stringers...

htismaqe
12-09-2005, 11:35 AM
play all my starters unless they have some kind of injury that could be made worse by playing.


go for the undefeated record all the way.



Especially since many times resting your players ends up hurting your mometum for the playoffs as well.


undefeated record and keeping momentum

vrs

injury risk that could happen anytime anyway.



clear choice imo

I absolutely agree. Never **** with the big MO.

NJ Chief Fan
12-09-2005, 11:43 AM
theyll go 16-0 but will go 1-1 when it matters

BigRedChief
12-09-2005, 11:50 AM
I absolutely agree. Never **** with the big MO.

Yep, You mess the MO you usually get something put on your azz.

Amnorix
12-09-2005, 11:52 AM
I would play all starters until #1 seed was locked up.

After that, I'd play my starters at least for the first half of each game after that. If they play ok, then they come out. if they are looking sloppy, they stay in.

Keep in mind, resting "starters" really means "resting the star players". An NFL team isn't a college team. You can't bench the primary offensive and defensive players because that's more than half your team (22 starters plus key situational players, plus special teams gurus).

Example: Indy can't bench it's top 3 WRs. That would leave at most 2 WRs, and WRs aren't usually on the field for EVERY snap. Also, no NFL team carries 10 offensive linemen.

cdcox
12-09-2005, 11:57 AM
19-0, baby! You only get a shot at history once.

Plus, I'm not convinced that a bye month would be very condusive to playoff success.

I would tend to play James and Freeny a little less in each game, and take Manning out when the game is not in doubt.

Sully
12-09-2005, 12:13 PM
I would start a sort of re-do of the preseason, with the starters playing more and more until game 16, where they play most of the game.

Rain Man
12-09-2005, 12:22 PM
Somebody mentioned this point on a thread a while back, and I really liked it. They said that people tend to remember Super Bowl winners, but an undefeated team would be talked about for decades (e.g., 1972 Dolphins).

In my opinion, going undefeated is well worth the risk to your starters. Plus, I think a team owes it to the game to make that effort. As a football fan, I'd be annoyed if they lose their last game because they're playing some fourth-string backup punter at quarterback.

CoMoChief
12-09-2005, 12:23 PM
when u have a chance to make history you do it.

When you are such a dominant team like the Colts you can adfford to do these things.

chiefsfaninNC
12-09-2005, 12:31 PM
You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. If you go for the undefeated season and Peyton or one of the stars get hurt you get blasted for not seeing the big picture which is winning the Superbowl. If you rest your starters for a couple weeks and bow out early in the playoffs you get blasted for being too conservative. I say go for the wins in every game. Easier to explain that situation if something goes wrong. You were going for history.

Extra Point
12-09-2005, 12:41 PM
Start everyone. Let the scoring machine rack up a three TD lead, sit 'em and let the stringers have fun.

Hydrae
12-09-2005, 12:41 PM
I voted to sit them the first two weeks but if you get to 15-0 you have to go for it the last week. And although I voted to sit them I really mean they should sit the second half of games. I do not want my guys not playing at all just enough to keep sharp while limiting the chances for injury.

Extra Point
12-09-2005, 12:42 PM
WHEN (not if) Marty chokes, I will go outside and kick a football, wide left, go back in the house, and drink three beers.

Otter
12-09-2005, 01:18 PM
Not often an opportunity to be part of an undefeated team comes in a lifetime.

Go for it and don't look back.

Psyko Tek
12-09-2005, 02:32 PM
I would run it like a preseason game
until the last one and then play it for real

with the bye they'ld have like a month off
a get real "cold"

edit
after reading rain man's post I've changed my mind
play'em straight through
you owe it to the fans...
nay, you owe it to history