A solution to the "sitting starters" in Week 16/17?

[OnTheWarpath15]

I think the draft pick idea is ridiculous, and could never work.

How can you reward good teams with extra draft picks, and widen the balance between the haves and the have nots?

I heard this proposal by a listener to Sirius NFL Radio:

Schedule all non-conference and non-division games at the beginning of the year, and backload all the division games over the last 6 weeks of the season.

Division titles would likely still be on the line, and teams would have much more to play for at the end of the season.

Thoughts?

[-King-]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I think the draft pick idea is ridiculous, and could never work.

How can you reward good teams with extra draft picks, and widen the balance between the haves and the have nots?

I heard this proposal by a listener to Sirius NFL Radio:

Schedule all non-conference and non-division games at the beginning of the year, and backload all the division games over the last 6 weeks of the season.

Division titles would likely still be on the line, and teams would have much more to play for at the end of the season.

Thoughts?

I don't like backloading ALL of the division games at the end. That would make the beginning of the season boring and the end too brutal. Teams do say that division games are harder and more hard hitting so putting them 6 weeks in a row is asking for injuries and a more worn down team come playoffs.
Posted via Mobile Device

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

That's the thing:

You can't force coaches to play these guys, but you sure as hell can make the decision to sit them tougher.

The only problem with that is the NFLPA would throw a fit.

The only other solution is that the NFL makes a rule stating that if a player starts for the team for more than 14 games throughout the season...and you sit him when he's healthy.....he is required to sit for a minimum of 2 games.

[Buck]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Good teams often start at home the next season anyway.

And honestly, that's not much of an incentive.

Hey, Jim Caldwell - play Peyton Manning in Week 17 and we'll let you open at home next year.

I think he'd have to try damn hard not to laugh.

Okay how about this. This is pretty drastic, but I think it would work to have teams want to win.

-Change each Conference to 8 teams in the playoffs.

-Backload the Schedule w/ Division Games

-Team w/ best Division Record (regardless of W/L record) makes the playoffs.

-Next best 4 records in Conference Make the Playoffs as well

- Best division record among 4 teams with most wins get 1-4 seeds

- Best overall record determines 5-8 seeds

[kstater]

I say do nothing at all. If a coach thinks that resting players gives his teams the best chance to win the SB, then that's his choice.

[Micjones]

Losing in the post-season because you've lost rhythm and momentum is incentive enough to play through.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Micjones

Losing in the post-season because you've lost rhythm and momentum is incentive enough to play through.

Apparently not, as some of these coaches haven't learned their lesson.

They years the Colts have rested starters, they've been knocked out.

The one year they played it out, they won the SB.

I'll be curious to see what happens with Cincinnati this year, as the last time they rested players (against us at Arrowhead) they were a one-and-done.

Just two examples.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

True, but that's an exception, and certainly not the rule.

Unless you expect there to be 2-3 teams every year that go on a Colts/Saints-like run.

In theory, wouldn't a team have to have at least a 6 game lead in the division for the last 6 games, all in the division, not to matter?

What are the odds of a team being 10-0 and the other 3 teams being 4-6 or worse?

All I'm stating is that it's highly possible that teams have their playoff berths wrapped up, regardless of the final two weeks.

It happens nearly every year.

[Micjones]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Apparently not, as some of these coaches haven't learned their lesson.

They years the Colts have rested starters, they've been knocked out.

The one year they played it out, they won the SB.

I'll be curious to see what happens with Cincinnati this year, as the last time they rested players (against us at Arrowhead) they were a one-and-done.

Just two examples.

Difference being that this season a team forfeited a chance at an undefeated season to rest starters. The stakes are much higher this time around. It'll be hard for the Colts brass to live this one down if they don't win out in the post-season. Be that criticism fair or unfair.

[Mile High Mania]

In theory, it sounds like a fairly reasonable idea... but, there's always going to be "something". Dane brought up a scenario that would present an opportunity where a team could still be in the situation they're trying to avoid in the final week or two.

Rewarding teams with home games? I don't see how that works... let's say it becomes impossible to schedule that one, what's the process for determining which team gets screwed?

[JD10367]

I think the "sitting starters" discussion is ridiculous. Perhaps that's because I'm also a fan of the only team (Patriots) that took a serious hit by playing starters. Wes Welker's career might be over, and the Patriots' playoff hopes have certainly dimmed.

Here's the thing: the only teams who complain about it, are the teams on the bubble looking for help. Hey! Steelers, Texans, and Broncos... may I have your attention please? You don't want to have to worry about teams lying down for the Jets and handing them a playoff spot? I have a solution.






















WIN YOUR OWN F**KING GAMES!!

[Buck]

Originally Posted by BuckinKaeding

Okay how about this. This is pretty drastic, but I think it would work to have teams want to win.

-Change each Conference to 8 teams in the playoffs.

-Backload the Schedule w/ Division Games

-Team w/ best Division Record (regardless of W/L record) makes the playoffs.

-Next best 4 records in Conference Make the Playoffs as well

- Best division record among 4 teams with most wins get 1-4 seeds

- Best overall record determines 5-8 seeds

You could also just make the final 3 games of the year Division games w/ the other 3 spread out. Every year you would flip flop which teams get 2 home games and 1 away to end the season.

I am actually liking this idea except for the fact that we could potentially see a 4-12 team make the playoffs.

[Bugeater]

Originally Posted by CaliforniaChief

The Fantasyfootballification of the NFL continues...

I hope to god fantasy football isn't weighing into this decision in any way.

[DBOSHO]

while i think its cheap for the fans to have to pay to see backups, they get to see their team in the playoffs.

i dont think you should HAVE to play your players if you want to rest them.

[jidar]

I don't see how this is really that big of a problem. At most a few games are affected by this at the end of the season, big freaking deal.

[tooge]

You could say if you sit a player with X number of games left this season, then you have to sit the same player with X number of games next year. That should do it.