I've been putting the onus on the poster here for two reasons:
1) It is stated by virtually everyone as fact when I've never seen or been able to construct a legitimate argument to support it.
2) Because the counter is obvious. It either decreases your likelihood of winning or it doesn't. It's an argument without much nuance.
I suspect if you search my comment history, this is the only topic I've ever challenged without offering a lengthy rebuttal. It may seem like more simply because I've asked now on three separate threads.
FWIW, I have responded a little on the topic. For instance, I offered that Indy has two blatant "rest the starters" seasons, 2005 and 2009, neither of which support the notion. In 2005, they ran into a Pitt team that was actually better than them in the regular season when Ben was healthy and they made the SB in 2009. GB in 2011 gets brought up a lot, but they were dealing with the death of their OC's son.
Denver in 1996 is another obvious one, but that team had the first seed locked up with three weeks to go, so they it wasn't just resting the final week, they had literally played meaningless games for a month.
Again, if it were a single person making the claim, I'd just ignore it. Instead, it is stated everywhere and I'm just genuinely desirous in seeing whether there is more substance behind it.