Goodell reviewing sitting starters...

[channtheman]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/goodell-review-sitting-starters-010310

I recall in a topic here some posters had the idea that winning your division should ONLY ensure that you make the playoffs and not guarantee that you host a playoff game. I agree with this and think that playoff spots should be seeded by record and other tiebreakers after you have found the 6 playoff teams. While this wouldn't have changed the Colts decision as they already had homefield locked those up, the Cardinals most certainly would have played their starters and tried to win the game today.

[packers11]

Tell that to Patriot fans today :shock:

[channtheman]

Tell that to Patriot fans today :shock:

Football is a violent game. Welker and Brady could have gotten hurt any week of the year. Just because it was in a "meaningless" (no such thing) game doesn't make it a bad decision to play them.

[MJZiggy]

Brady got hurt too?

[channtheman]

Brady got hurt too?

Maybe it wasn't in this game. I heard he has at least one broken rib and a broken index finger on his throwing hand.

[GBRulz]

I also wouldn't mind seeing the league implementing a rule where conference teams cannot play each other during the last week of the regular season. Case in point: next week, we're gonna see two games of the same teams at the same place as we did this week. I know this isn't a common occurrence, but I just hate the idea of us having to face the same team again immediately in the playoffs.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Tell that to Patriot fans today :shock:

Football is a violent game. Welker and Brady could have gotten hurt any week of the year. Just because it was in a "meaningless" (no such thing) game doesn't make it a bad decision to play them.

Sure it does. You minimize risk. Teams do it all the time. A player is injured and plays because without him the team might miss the playoffs. Or the team doesn't play an injured player because they don't need him to win or make the playoffs...or believe that losing one game is less important than having that player healthy for an extended time.

And, yes, there are meaningless games. Once you are out of the playoffs, the games are meaningless.

[channtheman]

Tell that to Patriot fans today :shock:

Football is a violent game. Welker and Brady could have gotten hurt any week of the year. Just because it was in a "meaningless" (no such thing) game doesn't make it a bad decision to play them.

Sure it does. You minimize risk. Teams do it all the time. A player is injured and plays because without him the team might miss the playoffs. Or the team doesn't play an injured player because they don't need him to win or make the playoffs...or believe that losing one game is less important than having that player healthy for an extended time.

And, yes, there are meaningless games. Once you are out of the playoffs, the games are meaningless.

I actually thought about that on the way home from the game today. I don't know why those teams still put out their best players though. Don't want them to get hurt so badly it turns into one of those 2 year injuries. Once statistically eliminated, teams should just forfeit the rest of their games.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Tell that to Patriot fans today :shock:

Football is a violent game. Welker and Brady could have gotten hurt any week of the year. Just because it was in a "meaningless" (no such thing) game doesn't make it a bad decision to play them.

Sure it does. You minimize risk. Teams do it all the time. A player is injured and plays because without him the team might miss the playoffs. Or the team doesn't play an injured player because they don't need him to win or make the playoffs...or believe that losing one game is less important than having that player healthy for an extended time.

And, yes, there are meaningless games. Once you are out of the playoffs, the games are meaningless.

I actually thought about that on the way home from the game today. I don't know why those teams still put out their best players though. Don't want them to get hurt so badly it turns into one of those 2 year injuries. Once statistically eliminated, teams should just forfeit the rest of their games.

Well, they aren't meaningless for the org. You implement offense/defense. You evaluate players, you develop young players, etc.

They would't forfeit....gotta pay salaries and the NFL has a tv contract both local and national.

[bobblehead]

Tell that to Patriot fans today :shock:

Football is a violent game. Welker and Brady could have gotten hurt any week of the year. Just because it was in a "meaningless" (no such thing) game doesn't make it a bad decision to play them.

and going for it on 4th and one backed up to your own red zone is brilliant.

[sharpe1027]

Tell that to Patriot fans today :shock:

Football is a violent game. Welker and Brady could have gotten hurt any week of the year. Just because it was in a "meaningless" (no such thing) game doesn't make it a bad decision to play them.

Welker didn't get hurt "any week of the year." He got hurt in a meaningless game. These games don't count much more than preseason games.

The Packers sat Woodson after he got dinged up. I would be willing to bet that if the NFL tries to enforce something, a lot of star players will develop minor injuries and not play much.

A team can only sit players when they are doing well enough to have clinched early. Basically, fans are complaining because their team is playing too well. Just shutup and enjoy that your team has the luxury of resting and protecting their best players. I would be pissed as hell if Rodgers played in the 4th Quarter and got hurt.

[Scott Campbell]

Tell that to Patriot fans today :shock:

Football is a violent game. Welker and Brady could have gotten hurt any week of the year. Just because it was in a "meaningless" (no such thing) game doesn't make it a bad decision to play them.

Sure it does. You minimize risk. Teams do it all the time. A player is injured and plays because without him the team might miss the playoffs. Or the team doesn't play an injured player because they don't need him to win or make the playoffs...or believe that losing one game is less important than having that player healthy for an extended time.

And, yes, there are meaningless games. Once you are out of the playoffs, the games are meaningless.

They're meaningful in the sense that every game you lose after elimination moves you up in the draft.

Hopefully this will remind everyone why an 18 game season is a bad idea.

[Badgerinmaine]

Wes Welker's injury was not the result of contact; he was trying to make a sharp cut and hurt his knee without anyone from Houston so much as laying a finger on him. That klind of injury could happen just as easily in practice, and I think one should be a little cautious overgeneralizing from his unfortunate injury.

[mraynrand]

Tell that to Patriot fans today :shock:

Football is a violent game. Welker and Brady could have gotten hurt any week of the year. Just because it was in a "meaningless" (no such thing) game doesn't make it a bad decision to play them.

Sure it does. You minimize risk. Teams do it all the time. A player is injured and plays because without him the team might miss the playoffs. Or the team doesn't play an injured player because they don't need him to win or make the playoffs...or believe that losing one game is less important than having that player healthy for an extended time.

And, yes, there are meaningless games. Once you are out of the playoffs, the games are meaningless.

They're meaningful in the sense that every game you lose after elimination moves you up in the draft.

Hopefully this will remind everyone why an 18 game season is a bad idea.

Scott, everyone wants to see two more Detroit Lions and St. Louis Rams games - well, at least the teams playing them would.

[mraynrand]

Wes Welker's injury was not the result of contact; he was trying to make a sharp cut and hurt his knee without anyone from Houston so much as laying a finger on him. That klind of injury could happen just as easily in practice, and I think one should be a little cautious overgeneralizing from his unfortunate injury.

I proposed the NFL ban planting and cutting a few weeks ago and was ignored. Who is laughing now?

[sharpe1027]

Wes Welker's injury was not the result of contact; he was trying to make a sharp cut and hurt his knee without anyone from Houston so much as laying a finger on him. That klind of injury could happen just as easily in practice, and I think one should be a little cautious overgeneralizing from his unfortunate injury.

It could have, but it didn't. No generalization needed.

Fans pay money for preseason games and the starters only play a little bit in those games. Since injuries could happen at anytime and people are paying good money to see their team, teams should also be penalized for not playing their starters the entire preseason games. :roll:

I really don't see the issue. If you own season tickets, you know that preseason games won't have the starters play the full game. If you own season tickets you should know that if you team is good enough, you may get a game or two that your starters won't play the entire game.

If you don't like it, don't buy the tickets. If you are a Packer season ticket holder, many of us would really appreciate it as the wait is very long.

[mraynrand]

As a fan, you should wish to be so damn lucky to have your team faced with the awful decision of whether or not to rest starters.

Instead of complaining about it, you should be sending a hot dog and brewski down to your resting QB on the sideline.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Tell that to Patriot fans today :shock:

Football is a violent game. Welker and Brady could have gotten hurt any week of the year. Just because it was in a "meaningless" (no such thing) game doesn't make it a bad decision to play them.

Sure it does. You minimize risk. Teams do it all the time. A player is injured and plays because without him the team might miss the playoffs. Or the team doesn't play an injured player because they don't need him to win or make the playoffs...or believe that losing one game is less important than having that player healthy for an extended time.

And, yes, there are meaningless games. Once you are out of the playoffs, the games are meaningless.

They're meaningful in the sense that every game you lose after elimination moves you up in the draft.

Hopefully this will remind everyone why an 18 game season is a bad idea.

True. The games are meaningless for the goal of the season, but not meaningless for the organization. Ty stated this later on.

[MJZiggy]

Tell that to Patriot fans today :shock:

Football is a violent game. Welker and Brady could have gotten hurt any week of the year. Just because it was in a "meaningless" (no such thing) game doesn't make it a bad decision to play them.

Sure it does. You minimize risk. Teams do it all the time. A player is injured and plays because without him the team might miss the playoffs. Or the team doesn't play an injured player because they don't need him to win or make the playoffs...or believe that losing one game is less important than having that player healthy for an extended time.

And, yes, there are meaningless games. Once you are out of the playoffs, the games are meaningless.

They're meaningful in the sense that every game you lose after elimination moves you up in the draft.

Hopefully this will remind everyone why an 18 game season is a bad idea.

Scott, everyone wants to see two more Detroit Lions and St. Louis Rams games - well, at least the teams playing them would.

But wait. This offers us the possibility for new NFL records!! Who would be the first team to go 0-18? Does this mean the Lions are off the hook?

[The Leaper]

I doubt what the NFL will offer will truly be enough to entice a team to risk playoff success by playing their starters the entire 60 minutes of a meaningless game.

[pbmax]

As a fan, you should wish to be so damn lucky to have your team faced with the awful decision of whether or not to rest starters.

Instead of complaining about it, you should be sending a hot dog and brewski down to your resting QB on the sideline.\
This is how it used to be greeted. But the Colts fans felt they were being deprived of witnessing history (unbeaten and untied) in the game against the Jets. The Colts aren't helping matters by publicly claiming that 18-0 wasn't historically significant but Manning's starting streak and Wayne/Clark's 100 receptions for the year are.

If the NFL wanted to solve this problem, they would up the minimum salary that can be spent by teams and take other measures aimed at getting the worst franchises to do something instead of simply appreciate in value. It has long been an unspoken problem in the NFL that same franchises are happy to lose while gaining value. The problem has been terrible this year. Ironically, the Cardinals used to be among the chief culprits before Bidwell's son got involved.

The Union has a memo out that Mortenson reported on ESPN about. If you consider all revenue, NFL teams payed 51% to player costs this year. Not the 59.2% that would be allowed under the CBA. It will be worse next year. While money is no substitute for smarts, this is clearly an indication that not everyone is committed to excellence.

[pbmax]

Well, the supporters of Status Quo have Wes Welker on their side. And now we have Charles Grant, out for the postseason with an arm injury suffered versus Carolina.

http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2010/01/new_orleans_saints_defensive_e_11.html