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

[PatsFanSince74]

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.

And your point is?
"But there's always a first time?"
or
"So, it would never happen here?"

 

[mosslost]

Neither can I

There has definitely been back up QBs in Super Bowls, but the couple examples I can think of are not the "OMG we played him in a meaningless game" thing. That has happened in pre-season though.

 

[mosslost]

And your point is?
"But there's always a first time?"
or
"So, it would never happen here?"

My point is obvious and it is ridiculously straight forward to have generated such a question from you.

 

[sb1]

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.

The Pats were certainly not a 14-2 team that year but Welker in that Texans game?

 

[mosslost]

The Pats were certainly not a 14-2 team that year but Welker in that Texans game?

yeah forgot that one

 

[Tony2046]

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

Could be. I just looked it up and they rested their players in the second half of their final regular season game.

Anyways as far as the Pats are concerned they still have something to play for which is a guaranteed 1 seed. Why leave it up to chance?

 

[jbb9s]

Neither can I

The Welker injury was terrible and week 17.

 

[dannydyn]

I say play to build a big enough of a lead then pull the starters out. That way you minimize rust and risk of injuries.

 

[Patstopia]

If you have injuries that can heal with rest then rest.

If you let healthy players sit for 2 or more weeks, just to have them sit then I think they lose their edge.

How many teams do you see rest players and then come out flat and take half the game to start playing better. Usually by then they are one and done.

Why risk the loss of everything the team has worked for the entire season by dulling the edge that they have worked so hard to develop. Yes, there is a chance of injury on every play, and if your team is built solely on a single players health excluding QB, then it is an uphill battle to begin with.

This game is a great time to get Floyd into the game and playing with Brady to get their timing down. Might be a good time to get Amendola back into game shape if he is ready.

 

[rookBoston]

You play to win every game. It's a mindset thing, and not something you can turn on and off. Keep focused and execute, same as always. If someone is injured, they should be inactive. But that's no different from any other week.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

My point is obvious and it is ridiculously straight forward to have generated such a question from you.

OK. So, your point is that, since it's never happened before, it won't/can't happen now?

I disagree with that and I think my question was more than reasonable.

If you were trying to be sarcastic (which I'd respect), you should have used a icon.

If you had an example in mind, which I was too dense to know, you might have said so.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

Our passing offense is about rythum and timing. Our guys perform better when they are sharp and in sync.

Fear of injury is real. But weather it comes in week 17 or the first quarter of a playoff game, the next man has to step up. So much the better if it never happens.

Now defense is a little different and if a guy is banged up, then normally I would say rest him, but we have next week off.

So because we have next week off, I say only the guys that are materially hampered by injury (which we do not appear to have any of those types) should rest.

 

[doesntmatter1]

Injuries happen, but I am only really concerned about players that have too steep of a dropoff to their backup. Mainly Edelman, Dion Lewis, and Bennett.

 

[deroc5050]

Play the first half like a normal game and maybe start the 3rd quarter depending on the situation. I would rest players that need rest to heal up though. Like Bennett for instance, he seems like he could use a couple weeks off to heal up. But what the hell do I know..

 

[Jlaff]

I just wanted to say, I'm not surprised the NFL had the Pats playing in an early game in week 17, and the Broncos playing later in the afternoon.

 

[deroc5050]

The Welker injury was terrible and week 17.

Brady to Welker was the offense that year. When he went down it was like season is over. And then the Pats got the doors blown off them in WC weekend vs Baltimore. Bradys first year back from his major knee injury.. it wasn't a very good Pats team anyway. They weren't going all the way that season. Welker was the nail in the coffin.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't really get the issue here. Teams have won/lost when they've played/rested players. There's no set formula. This is one of those things were a coach has to read his team right, while not getting screwed by the misfortune of a bad injury.

 

[Nikolai]

I'm pretty sure the message has been "no taking the foot off the pedal like last year". I expect that we may see the usual precautions like resting Hightower, but I fully expect the Pats to try and wax the Lolphins.
If we're up by enough, I'm sure we'll see Jimmy G and friends, but that's about it.

 

[MassPats38]

I doubt a week off would matter. Historically, it would seem the first round byes who give healthy players 2 or 3 weeks off before the first playoff game in order to avoid injury can create issues. That creates rust. The '96 Donkeys steamrolling the NFL and then losing to the upstart Jaguars in Denver would appear to be the case study for that.

Last year with the Pats, BB appeared to weigh in favor of holding players out if they were damaged at the time. That time is for healing from less than optimal condition in the hope the individual is in a better condition to play when it matters. Last year's loss in Denver may have happened in New England if the Pats went all out, played the injured players in desperation mode to win home field, and lost players like JE and Gronk. There may have been no right answer given the state of health of the team.

As for playing to the end, I believe BB once said, more or less, "if I knew the guy was going to get injured on a play, then I wouldn't have had him in on the play." Players get hurt in practice and they get hurt in games. If all is going well for a team, and you want the reps to keep that going, then they play. There is no bubble wrap that avoids injury.

 

[mosslost]

OK. So, your point is that, since it's never happened before, it won't/can't happen now?

I disagree with that and I think my question was more than reasonable.

If you were trying to be sarcastic (which I'd respect), you should have used a icon.

If you had an example in mind, which I was too dense to know, you might have said so.

I'm a grumpy old fan and I know nothing of your icons.