Resting Starters week 17

[New England Pride]

Was anyone shocked that Belichick elected to rest his starters in week 17 last year? Was this situational or is it perhaps a change in bis philosophy? I remember them doing it in 2005 but it made a big of sense that year as we were playing in the wild card round and a loss gave us a far easier opponent. Last year the team had a bye week but Bill rested Gronk, pulled Brady and just about as many starters as he could.

If the team wins this week and next, wich isn't given but in my opinion it is likely, how will Bill choose to handle week 17? I'm a fan of winning every game. Football players play football and injuries are a part of the game. Any thoughts here?

 

[chasa]

depends on homefield throughout the playoffs, as well as how much heart the dolphins look like they have.

I wouldn't expect a full game by gronk or brady

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I think if the Pats have the 1 seed locked up, then, yes, they'll rest the starters; I also think that BB may not see a bye as more important than 1 or 2 per se.

 

[I.M. Fletcher]

I think having Suh the psycho on the field should give the coaching staff a ton of pause. He is capable of doing just about anything out there.

 

[JJDChE]

I don't like to see them rest the starters in week 17. I'd rather see them prepare for the game and at least get some PT in. I don't mind benching starters in the second half but I don't like the idea of them getting out of the weekly prep routine for mare than a week.

Look at college bowl games, they have 3-4 weeks off and the games are almost always blowouts and there are tons of upsets. The NCAA pre-bowl layoff is one of the dumbest things in sports.

 

[BobDigital]

I think it is entirely situational.

However there are certain types of teams BB seems more likely to rest starters on and types of starters he is more inclined to rest.

I noticed when he rest players generally he likes to rest starting units as opposed to single stars unless there is a good reason not to.

Also he is more likely to rest a vet than a young player who has a chance to learn and improve from the experience.

If we reach week 17 and it means nothing to use i expect the Patriots to rest a lot of players this year. Particularly if Edelman plays a bit vs the Jets.

I expect Gronk/Edelman/Brady/Amendola to all take a seat (Amendola comes out after the other 3 though).

The starting offensive line will be left in as it needs time to gel and you can't put in all backups anyway and you don't want players getting mixed up with playing next to new people right before the playoffs.

RB we will see but probably not.

On defense Collins/Hightower both sit. They will not gain anything from playing at this point likely.

On the DL you have a lot of young guys on the interior so you probably play them without exception. I think Jones/Nink/Sheard get the day off though. This is a good chance for Brown to get extended snaps and see what Grissom brings.

At DB it is an odd situation cause of McCourty but i expect that unit to play mostly. I think Ryan and particularly butler still has room to improve and Harmon being a back up (kinda) you may as well give him wire to wire reps. Maybe you sit Chung and put in Richardson though.

 

[New England Pride]

Wasn't home field wrapped up in 2010 and 2011 and they played everyone anyway? 2012 I don't feel feel like we had anything to gain or lose by winning and we still played it out. Can anyone correct me here?

 

[Fencer]

I think it is entirely situational.

However there are certain types of teams BB seems more likely to rest starters on and types of starters he is more inclined to rest.

I noticed when he rest players generally he likes to rest starting units as opposed to single stars unless there is a good reason not to.

Also he is more likely to rest a vet than a young player who has a chance to learn and improve from the experience.

If we reach week 17 and it means nothing to use i expect the Patriots to rest a lot of players this year. Particularly if Edelman plays a bit vs the Jets.

I expect Gronk/Edelman/Brady/Amendola to all take a seat (Amendola comes out after the other 3 though).

The starting offensive line will be left in as it needs time to gel and you can't put in all backups anyway and you don't want players getting mixed up with playing next to new people right before the playoffs.

RB we will see but probably not.

On defense Collins/Hightower both sit. They will not gain anything from playing at this point likely.

On the DL you have a lot of young guys on the interior so you probably play them without exception. I think Jones/Nink/Sheard get the day off though. This is a good chance for Brown to get extended snaps and see what Grissom brings.

At DB it is an odd situation cause of McCourty but i expect that unit to play mostly. I think Ryan and particularly butler still has room to improve and Harmon being a back up (kinda) you may as well give him wire to wire reps. Maybe you sit Chung and put in Richardson though.

Well analyzed.

Gronk, Edelman and Amendola have taken a lot of hits this season. Even if they can play, sitting them makes sense.

If they sit, the QB is likely to absorb a lot of hits. So Brady should sit too.

Battered or not, the OL needs the practice playing together. They'll probably do the same things that would make sense if the game mattered.

You did make one small error when you suggested that everybody who can rush the passer would sit. Actually, SOMEBODY has to play in that role ...

 

[Two Eight]

The Broncos will have to drop one of the next 2 (@ Steelers or vsBengals) otherwise we'll have to play Miami to win for the #1 seed because the Broncos week 17 game (vs Chargers) is at 4:30.

 

[New England Pride]

The Broncos will have to drop one of the next 2 (@ Steelers or vsBengals) otherwise we'll have to play Miami to win for the #1 seed because the Broncos week 17 game (vs Chargers) is at 4:30.

Sounds weird but I'd like to have to win in miami. I like going full steam ahead. I know we wkn a championship last year by backing off but I wouldn't mind the pressure at all.

 

[dannydyn]

If we have the jackpot locked (AKA #1 seed), I see them playing the starters no more than a quarter or two - MAX. Given the atrocious situation with injuries this year, I can't imagine BB risking anyone any further than needed.

 

[aluminum seats]

If there's nothing to play for, Gronk sits. That is all.

 

[deters]

If we have #1 seed locked up, pull starters after 1 quarter.

 

[fnordcircle]

Resting in week 7 + a bye means up to 20 days without playing a football game. Think it depends on how dinged up people are and who the coaches want to give more game time to .

But I always though the Colts ended up looking rusty when they did this in the mid 2000s after winning the illustrious regular season super bowl.

 

[meatface]

Resting in week 7 + a bye means up to 20 days without playing a football game. Think it depends on how dinged up people are and who the coaches want to give more game time to .

But I always though the Colts ended up looking rusty when they did this in the mid 2000s after winning the illustrious regular season super bowl.

Pats did it last year, they did alright in the playoffs

 

[supafly]

If the team wins this week and next, wich isn't given but in my opinion it is likely, how will Bill choose to handle week 17? I'm a fan of winning every game. Football players play football and injuries are a part of the game. Any thoughts here?

I think we're all fans of winning every game, but why risk your whole season in a meaningless week 17 game?

As far as last year goes, I believe that some of the starters who were banged up were allowed to rest, while others like Brady played up until halftime.

 

[supafly]

Pats did it last year, they did alright in the playoffs

Colts did it in 2009 too, instead of going for the perfect season. While they didn't end up winning due to a late game interception return by Porter, they obviously made it to the SB and competed at a high level.

 

[supafly]

Wasn't home field wrapped up in 2010 and 2011 and they played everyone anyway? 2012 I don't feel feel like we had anything to gain or lose by winning and we still played it out. Can anyone correct me here?

It seems that some years they've chosen to pull starters like Brady, and some they haven't.

2010--10 completions
2013--14 completions
2014-- 8 completions

2011 and 2012 seemed to have been normal circumstances where he stayed in the game.

 

[titletownpats]

Pats did it last year, they did alright in the playoffs

I always thought they usually don't rest players so I was surprised in the Buffalo game last year. After reading this thread, it seems like there is no definite pattern. They did come out flat against Baltimore though. Not sure how much that had to do with resting key starters in week 17. Hopefully the team can lock up a one seed and this can be a real conversation in the future

 

[venecol]

I think they all (except injured or in recovery) play and if they build up a nice lead, they start pulling key starters. Pats were up 19-0 at the half in their first meet.