Win or Lose? @Washington or Vs. Seattle/Minnesota for Playoffs

[woodbuck27]

This team has sucked all optimism out of me; If you could give me a playoff win regardless of circumstance I really don't care.

I will admit that I also cheered for GB to lose at the end of their season when they ended up with the second pick in the draft. I was pissed when we won our last game and lost out on Troy Aikman. Then I was more pissed when they drafted Tony Mandarich over Derrick Thomas (my preference) and Barry Sanders (my second choice). Deon Sanders was the 5th pick that year. We really got boned with our pick

[woodbuck27]

I see where you're coming from. Probably in your example about the Vikings and Seattle, I was just being too extreme. I generally have the same wishes when rivals play each other - to get the outcome best for the Packers. If the Vikings play the Bears for example, I'll want both teams to look horrible, and have the home team win, unless the home team is closer than the other team to the Packers in the standings. Probably my reaction to the Vikings Seattle game (is that the one?) was just a visceral reaction to the idea of 'rooting for' the Vikings.

I want the Packers to play to win this weekend, but if it makes more sense to keep some injured guys out to better their playoff chances, I'm OK with it.

Ala....the political wiggle.

If winning a game is a desired outcome and generally in the NFL that means:

Relying on your normal starters Vs using backups.

Do you elect to go with backups and realistically expect to win?

My Boolean Algebra says:

NO.

[Rutnstrut]

If you don't think the back ups are adequate to get you a win or two in a pinch. Why are those back ups even on the team? Come on people trust in stubby and TT, they know all. If they choose to rest players and play back ups, then that is obviously the best move.

[mraynrand]

If you don't think the back ups are adequate to get you a win or two in a pinch. Why are those back ups even on the team? Come on people trust in stubby and TT, they know all. If they choose to rest players and play back ups, then that is obviously the best move.

Yes, and if they choose not to rest them, that will also be the best plan. Everything TT and Stubby will be for the best, Dr. Pangloss.

[pbmax]

Ala....the political wiggle.

If winning a game is a desired outcome and generally in the NFL that means:

Relying on your normal starters Vs using backups.

Do you elect to go with backups and realistically expect to win?

My Boolean Algebra says:

NO.

I would hope your Boolean Operators tell you True or False or you have a faulty implementation.

But you have mis-identified the point. Its not a wiggle, its a clear statement of preferred outcomes, in their desired order. To wit:

1. Better health
2. Weaker opponent
3. Increase odds of playoff run
4. Home game
5. Get offense straightened out
6. Momentum

A win is important as everyone will feel better. But like the emotion to start a game, a win will get you exactly Zero points the next week. So momentum is unworthy to chase.

A win would get you a home game, but the Packers record at home this year is not marvelous. They have lost to lesser teams already. A home game, while the fans definitely deserve it, offers little in the hope of an extended playoff run. Its one game at a place that has not delivered this year like it has in years past.

Get offense straightened out. One more game is less likely to do the trick than all the other games since Week 6 where they have been trying to fix this mess. A far better ameliorative option is to get the O line healthy. The best way to do that is an extra week of rest with no game. Sit the injured starters.

Do the choosers of Lose want to lose? No.

But we are prepared to accept that outcome (and the scheduling benefits) to make the team better for a playoff run. Yes.

The rest of you Win Now meatheads can go run into a concrete wall with you head and helmet to prove how tough you are. Like Gus Ferrotte, you will be hospitalized while the winners collect the trophy for most postseason success.

So suck it poseurs. And Happy New Year.

[esoxx]

And with that, Fritz Shurmur just rolled over in his grave.

Well done pb.

[pbmax]

And with that, Fritz Shurmur just rolled over in his grave.

Well done pb.

Fritz was more forward thinking than you credit him. You don't dream up the 2-5 Eagle by being Chuck Knox.

[esoxx]

He also would be violently opposed to your view on this game.

[smuggler]

Haha, holy shit.

Thrice as funny. Shit's basically anatomically accurate, since most avians shit, piss, and drop eggs from the same hole. And, it does pretty well cover some Rats and their opinions on sandbagging.

[denverYooper]

Yes, and if they choose not to rest them, that will also be the best plan. Everything TT and Stubby will be for the best, Dr. Pangloss.

That's candid.

[denverYooper]

I would hope your Boolean Operators tell you True or False or you have a faulty implementation.

But you have mis-identified the point. Its not a wiggle, its a clear statement of preferred outcomes, in their desired order. To wit:

1. Better health
2. Weaker opponent
3. Increase odds of playoff run
4. Home game
5. Get offense straightened out
6. Momentum

A win is important as everyone will feel better. But like the emotion to start a game, a win will get you exactly Zero points the next week. So momentum is unworthy to chase.

A win would get you a home game, but the Packers record at home this year is not marvelous. They have lost to lesser teams already. A home game, while the fans definitely deserve it, offers little in the hope of an extended playoff run. Its one game at a place that has not delivered this year like it has in years past.

Get offense straightened out. One more game is less likely to do the trick than all the other games since Week 6 where they have been trying to fix this mess. A far better ameliorative option is to get the O line healthy. The best way to do that is an extra week of rest with no game. Sit the injured starters.

Do the choosers of Lose want to lose? No.

But we are prepared to accept that outcome (and the scheduling benefits) to make the team better for a playoff run. Yes.

The rest of you Win Now meatheads can go run into a concrete wall with you head and helmet to prove how tough you are. Like Gus Ferrotte, you will be hospitalized while the winners collect the trophy for most postseason success.

So suck it poseurs. And Happy New Year.

For some reason, that reminded me of this:

[Fosco33]

Blow them out so you can rest some folks in 2nd half, get some momentum, etc.

Playing minny back-back weeks or Seattle again are tough games... But newsflash - it's the playoffs stupid.

[pbmax]

Wouldn't Sean Connery want to sex up the Queen, not just the Prom Queen?

[pbmax]

ProFootballTalk @ProFootballTalk 12m12 minutes ago
Dont'a Hightower, Chandler Jones won't play in regular season finale http://wp.me/p14QSB-9X7S

Belichick gets it.

[mraynrand]

^^^^. I'm sure runtnstunt will point out the obvious and monumental differences in circumstances. In any case, Stubby needs to go because any other coach would have already won 7 super bowls with a QB like Rodgers.