Do you think resting players before the playoffs effects post season performance?

[fightingirish595]

This question only applies to team with first round byes. Just wanna get an idea for what you all think. I personally think their is some effect, I can remember some teams who rested players and seemed to be flat in the playoffs. 2014 Pats seemed to be flat, they rested players in week 17. I realize starters played a half, but I wonder what the approach is like during the week when you know .You will only play a half in a game that doesn't mean anything.

In 2011, Aaron Rodgers rested week 17, I do not think he played a snap and they were very flat against the giants. If memory serves me correctly The Patriots despite blowing out Miami in week 17 pulled people after a half. They certainly were not at their best against the Jets.

The Colts started 14-0 in 2009, basically had a month between games they took seriously (for lack of a better word) and despite making the Superbowl, didn't look like the same team. This is not to say that these teams seasons would have ended differently, No one really knows. So what do you all think? Should teams take the foot off the Pedal. If you have any examples that support either side please state them!!!

 

[dafoe2016]

No.

 

[MrNathanDrake]

There's no reason they should be rested considering home field is still on the line!

The last thing we want to do is see KC get the #1 seed and have to go into Arrowhead in January. Do you remember what happened last time in Arrowhead? Probably the worst shellacking Brady and Belichick have ever taken.

 

[Tony2046]

There's no reason they should be rested considering home field is still on the line!

The last thing we want to do is see KC get the #1 seed and have to go into Arrowhead in January. Do you remember what happened last time in Arrowhead? Probably the worst shellacking Brady and Belichick have ever taken.

KC can't get the #1 seed. It's either the Raiders or the Pats.

 

[Doctor DDS]

KC cannot be the one seed as they already have 4 losses. As the Pats have something to play for I would not necessarily rest players (except those where an extra week of rest would improve their health) Play all out in the first half and see what happens.

 

[Deus Irae]

Do you think resting players too much before the playoffs effects post season performance?

The question answers itself.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

if youre on Green bay then you can R-E-S-T... or is it relax...

 

[varjao]

If the player is healthy he should play. I don't know how healthy Marty's ankle is but seems like he is fine or he would not be making the plays he did recently, but it would be nice to have him 100% healthy in the playoffs.

 

[Ring 6]

I believe that what matters most is having the team in sync and peaking. When you already have a bye coming up you take 2 weeks of preparation and game action away from the unit. Obviously you can only rest a few players so you end up with a disjointed group.
I think that the week of preparation is key. If you half ass it because you won't be playing or playing much you lose 2 weeks then in the week before the divisional round you have to flip the switch and prepare again.

I think this gets overlooked. The team that rests players is often better than whoever they see round 1 so sometimes a dramatic change that has the team out of sync goes unnoticed because they pull out a win. See 2014 Pats.

Nothing but anectdotal to back it up but I think the patriots are most vulnerable to an upset when they are mentally stress free and not playing or preparing like football is urgent fit 2 weeks can create that.

 

[Tony2046]

I don't know what the effects are if any but if you have the luxury to rest up a dinged up player you do it.

What it definitely effects is the amount of chit chat fodder the nutbag mediots will have for discussion. If you play a healthy player and he gets hurt, "They should have sat him during a meaningless game". If they rest a player and he has a poor playoff performance, "They should have played them during a meaningless game".

Anyways BB and crew have been through this enough times to know which players to rest etc....

The Cowboys on the other hand have not and it will be interesting to see how they handle this psychologically.

 

[oldrover]

What it definitely effects is the amount of chit chat fodder the nutbag mediots will have for discussion. If you play a healthy player and he gets hurt, "They should have sat him during a meaningless game". If they rest a player and he has a poor playoff performance, "They should have played them during a meaningless game".

"That's right, Mike!!!"

 

[venecol]

How have the Patriots performed in recent years after the bye week? I think they should play whoever can play and limit playing time for those that have injuries. They should not however rest healthy players because of fear of injury imo.

I was for resting players last year at MIA because I thought MIA had checked out already. I was frankly shocked and dissapointed at the loss.

 

[PatsDeb]

We rested last year (because of a lot of injuries) and it left a bad taste as we went into the playoffs on a downslide. Not to mention, it cost us home field, and I believe, a trip to the Super Bowl which I think we would have won. Dallas had nothing to play for last night and rested no one (granted they had 2 games left and would have had a huge layoff if they rested for 3 weeks), and looked like they were continuing on a big momentum-gaining upswing. I think the Pats are trending up too, despite the loss of Gronk, which is big. All of these factors should point towards playing everybody and trying to win. Do what we did last week, if possible, and get up big, then sit guys in the 4th quarter.

If I am Brady, I become more than PO'd if we do anything else. It felt lousy last year and it cost us.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

No, I do not.

 

[fightingirish595]

The question answers itself.

I should probably go change that. Not sure what I was thinking

 

[fightingirish595]

I don't know what the effects are if any but if you have the luxury to rest up a dinged up player you do it.

What it definitely effects is the amount of chit chat fodder the nutbag mediots will have for discussion. If you play a healthy player and he gets hurt, "They should have sat him during a meaningless game". If they rest a player and he has a poor playoff performance, "They should have played them during a meaningless game".

Anyways BB and crew have been through this enough times to know which players to rest etc....

The Cowboys on the other hand have not and it will be interesting to see how they handle this psychologically.

That got me thiking about the cowboys in 2007? were they resting players? Garrett was the OC. Maybe he does not want to ruin the momentum that team has

 

[PatsFanSince74]

It can, if the rest breaks up a team's rhythm.
But if key players are injured, an extra week of rest be a godsend.
So, "it depends."

 

[mosslost]

This question only applies to team with first round byes. Just wanna get an idea for what you all think. I personally think their is some effect, I can remember some teams who rested players and seemed to be flat in the playoffs. 2014 Pats seemed to be flat, they rested players in week 17. I realize starters played a half, but I wonder what the approach is like during the week when you know .You will only play a half in a game that doesn't mean anything.

In 2011, Aaron Rodgers rested week 17, I do not think he played a snap and they were very flat against the giants. If memory serves me correctly The Patriots despite blowing out Miami in week 17 pulled people after a half. They certainly were not at their best against the Jets.

The Colts started 14-0 in 2009, basically had a month between games they took seriously (for lack of a better word) and despite making the Superbowl, didn't look like the same team. This is not to say that these teams seasons would have ended differently, No one really knows. So what do you all think? Should teams take the foot off the Pedal. If you have any examples that support either side please state them!!!

Here is an angle.. question.... "Is there any example (I actually can't think of one) where a 14-2 type team lost their QB or other major player in a meaningless week 17 game?? Honestly curious I can't think of one.

 

[pazrul72]

A lot of other threads asking the same basic question and while I voted no I think the right answer is more of a balance. Rest players who are clearly injured and are at risk of reinjury. The Bennett's Hightower and Amendola of the roster. Where I think teams take it too far is resting key players you just don't want to be injured like Brady, Eldeman, or Butler. Football players play football and needing a win to secure HFA is all the incentive you should need to get everyone to buy in. I would keep in mind that it's possible Miami is our current and next opponent so I would play mostly vanilla schemes and do your best to not show any tendencies or tips. The giants in 07 despite losing week 17 pointed out how much it helped to have seen it in person and know....hey...we can hang with these guys.

So like all good questions there is no right or wrong yes or no the real answer is somewhere in the middle.

 

[fightingirish595]

Here is an angle.. question.... "Is there any example (I actually can't think of one) where a 14-2 type team lost their QB or other major player in a meaningless week 17 game?? Honestly curious I can't think of one.

Neither can I