Health vs. No. 1

[MainePatsFan26]

As other threads have discussed, getting the #1 seed will require winning out. And even that doesn't guarantee that the Raiders won't go 4-0 down the stretch and clinch the #1 despite us being 14-2.

I see the Raiders or Chiefs going 13-3 and, with the tiebreakers over us, getting the #1 unless we win out. My question thus becomes whether the relative ease of getting the #2 means that we should focus on getting healthy and accept going 3-1 or 2-2 down the stretch. Or should we pull out all the stops to get the #1, but risk playing guys who might be better served resting/recovering. The end goal is winning the Super Bowl, so which of these scenarios gives us the best shot?

Things may change if Oakland and Kansas City lose this weekend, but I have my doubts - they are both legit.

 

[Ring 6]

As other threads have discussed, getting the #1 seed will require winning out. And even that doesn't guarantee that the Raiders won't go 4-0 down the stretch and clinch the #1 despite us being 14-2.

I see the Raiders or Chiefs going 13-3 and, with the tiebreakers over us, getting the #1 unless we win out. My question thus becomes whether the relative ease of getting the #2 means that we should focus on getting healthy and accept going 3-1 or 2-2 down the stretch. Or should we pull out all the stops to get the #1, but risk playing guys who might be better served resting/recovering. The end goal is winning the Super Bowl, so which of these scenarios gives us the best shot?

Things may change if Oakland and Kansas City lose this weekend, but I have my doubts - they are both legit.

If patriots chiefs and raiders are all 13-3 the patriots are the 1 seed so we do not have to win out even in that case.

I say we play every game full tilt no matter the consequences and go into the playoffs trying to peak.

Football players who aren't playing football lose their edge.

 

[fnordcircle]

Hopefully they'll do some weird halfway thing which accomplishes neither like last year.

Like the old story about a pastor who decided the best way to appease the people who wanted wine and the people who wanted grape juice was to do a 50/50 mix for communion.

 

[Bradyking12]

Go for the number 1 seed, everyone remembers what happened last year "Oh if we are going to win the super bowl we can win anywhere", After AFC title game "WTF if we had the number 1 seed we would of won the super bowl" (which I agree not a knock)

 

[TinhWoodhead]

go for #1, injuries happens

 

[fxkane]

Brady's going to play regardless, so why shouldn't everyone else. Going all out almost certainly means at least an extra week of rest--just at a time when it's needed. (If we get safe leads, give starters more rest)

 

[MainePatsFan26]

If patriots chiefs and raiders are all 13-3 the patriots are the 1 seed so we do not have to win out even in that case.

I say we play every game full tilt no matter the consequences and go into the playoffs trying to peak.

Football players who aren't playing football lose their edge.

Good point about the #1 if all three go 13-3 and players losing their edge. I want the team to be fresh. I just don't want the team to play guys who are iffy and risk needless injuries.

 

[borg]

 

[Ring 6]

Good point about the #1 if all three go 13-3 and players losing their edge. I want the team to be fresh. I just don't want the team to play guys who are iffy and risk needless injuries.

I'd rather risk the injury than lose the edge. They can rest during wild card week

 

[MainePatsFan26]

A spartan approach. I like it.

 

[mcmurtry86]

As other threads have discussed, getting the #1 seed will require winning out. And even that doesn't guarantee that the Raiders won't go 4-0 down the stretch and clinch the #1 despite us being 14-2.

I see the Raiders or Chiefs going 13-3 and, with the tiebreakers over us, getting the #1 unless we win out. My question thus becomes whether the relative ease of getting the #2 means that we should focus on getting healthy and accept going 3-1 or 2-2 down the stretch. Or should we pull out all the stops to get the #1, but risk playing guys who might be better served resting/recovering. The end goal is winning the Super Bowl, so which of these scenarios gives us the best shot?

Things may change if Oakland and Kansas City lose this weekend, but I have my doubts - they are both legit.

KC and Oakland both losing this weekend would be quite a feat considering they're playing each other Thursday

 

[MainePatsFan26]

KC and Oakland both losing this weekend would be quite a feat considering they're playing each other Thursday

Ah, I have paid for not looking at the schedule more closely in the playoff machine haha. In Goodell's NFL, however, anything is possible.

 

[Wheelman]

Unfortunately this poll is incomplete. I choose option c, health and No. 1 seed.

 

[deroc5050]

KC and Oakland both losing this weekend would be quite a feat considering they're playing each other Thursday

Well if they ended in a tie that wouldn't be a bad thing.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

KC and Oakland both losing this weekend would be quite a feat considering they're playing each other Thursday

Maybe they can tie!

(In all seriousness, I wonder if that would work out better for us.)

 

[mosslost]

Brady's going to play regardless, so why shouldn't everyone else. Going all out almost certainly means at least an extra week of rest--just at a time when it's needed. (If we get safe leads, give starters more rest)

they will get the same rest either way by getting the 2 seed. But I say get the 1 seed.

 

[mosslost]

Maybe they can tie!

(In all seriousness, I wonder if that would work out better for us.)

it would help us, it is essentially the same as them both losing pace with us.

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

With no Gronk for the rest of the season, I think it's pretty damn important to preserve the health of our weapons on offense....like, really important

Besides, I dont mind playing the AFC title game in Oakland, as much as I do Denver

 

[SammyBlueCat]

Hopefully they'll do some weird halfway thing which accomplishes neither like last year.

Like the old story about a pastor who decided the best way to appease the people who wanted wine and the people who wanted grape juice was to do a 50/50 mix for communion.

You are probably right.

 

[thecore762]

We need #1, no way we settle for anything less.