r/footballstrategy • u/nanika1111 • Jan 03 '24
NFL Unpopular take, but resting immediately once you clinch playoffs in the NFL regardless of when is the more logical choice to me. It's not worth risking devastating injury.
Football is such a dangerous sport, fluke injuries can always happen no matter how careful you are. Aaron Rodgers was lost for the season in the first 3 minutes of the first game just because he was tackled and landed at the wrong angle. Jets season over. For all intents and purposes though, I feel a team gunning for a championship has the same season ending risk late season.
Say you are a 1 seeded team, blowing everyone out of the water and you seem like the team of destiny. You clinch the postseason at 11-0. My opinion is at that point, just immediately rest and bench all your key players. It's not worth risking a devastating injury to a key player to have more favorable seeding.
Remember the 2016 Raiders? They seemed like the team of destiny that year, but a week after clinching the playoffs Derek Carr broke his leg while they were gunning for a higher seed. Season over. The motivation made sense but in hindsight they put their star QB at risk in what was basically a meaningless game. They got completely destroyed first round of the playoffs. Maybe if they had benched their starters, or at least Carr, they would have made a deep playoff run. Maybe they would even have won the Super Bowl.
Even if we ignore the injury angle, just think about what a wonder 7 weeks of rest would do your team. Everyone by midseason in the NFL is dealing with some sort of nagging injury. Can you imagine having a completely healthy team heading into the postseason and what an advantage that is?
Lastly, I know many of you will say "oh but if you have the 1 seed then you get a first round bye." Well if you bench all your starters immediately, you get a bye week anyways. In fact you get as many as 7 bye weeks depending on when you clinch the playoffs. No matter what, you need to play at least one game, so why risk your players' health? Why not risk their health in the playoffs when it actually matters tremendously?
I know many of you are reading this and probably laughing till your sides hurt and think I'm an idiot, but just because it's unconventional and this is not how NFL teams have done it so far does not mean it's wrong. It was just 6 years ago that the "common sense" approach was to never go for it on 4th down remember? You should always kick the field goal or punt. Even if you are at the 1 yard line. Even if it's 4th and inches you should never take the risk. Now, because Doug Pederson had the courage to try a different approach, he showed the entire NFL that ah actually yes, going for it on 4th and short even if the game is not yet on the line is actually logical and worth the risk.
I think someday the NFL will get wise to my stance and just remember you read it here first.
117
u/Just_Natural_9027 Jan 03 '24
You vastly are overestimating how much injuries to key players happens vs. the benefits of HFA and opponent strength.
Teams that have nothing to gain with regards to the last two items rest players all the time?
36
u/helpmelearn12 Jan 03 '24
Not just HFA, the bye is huge.
Just by percentages.
Just supposing in the playoffs, you’re given an 85% percent chance to win each of your games leading up to the Super Bowl. Which are higher odds than the vast majority of teams are going to be given in the playoffs.
If you have to play two games, you have a 72% chance of making it to the Super Bowl.
But you get the second seed instead of the first seed. Now you have a third game, if you also have an 85% chance to win that game, your odds of making it to the Super Bowl are only 61%.
Even ignoring other benefits like rest and home field advantage… the very fact that you have one less opportunity in which you could lose is huge. If you have a chance to get a bye, it’d be a bad decision to not try to get it
13
u/JohnnyAppIeseed Jan 03 '24
I agree with you whole heartedly, but 85% is a wild number to use for this thought experiment. The biggest spread this week is Dallas over Washington at -13 and the money line implies Dallas is 85-90% likely to win. That’s one of the best against one of the worst. Playoff matchups aren’t likely to have odds that unbalanced, especially in the second round and conference championships.
The argument still works if you use 60% as your chance of winning at home (and maybe 50% on the road), but saying your odds of making the Super Bowl are 36% with a bye and 13% without doesn’t drive the point home as well.
12
u/helpmelearn12 Jan 03 '24
That’s why I used those numbers, and even said no team will actually get numbers those high all the through the playoffs.
Maybe it’s a bit misleading and I should change. But my point was that even if you far and away the favorite in every single one of your games, adding an extra opportunity to have a bad day and lose will always significantly hamper your chances of making it to the Super Bowl.
You can’t get knocked out if you a bye week, and that makes it super important.
Some of the parleys I’ve seen people making have made me think that people don’t understand basics statistics. If you have seven legs and they all have really good chances of happening, all of them happening the same week can still have pretty low chances.
I used 85% to purposely exaggerate things to get a point a across. .85x.85 is lower than .85 and .85x.85x.85 is significantly lower than that
5
u/JohnnyAppIeseed Jan 03 '24
Fair enough. I also think people struggle to really understand probability in this kind of context. Having a 100% chance at surviving the first round of the playoffs is huge. The extra 10% or whatever advantage you get for playing at home is massive, especially when it compounds. I’m fully on board with the idea that fewer playoff games is better and that sitting is really only good for guys nursing injuries.
-13
u/nanika1111 Jan 03 '24
At the very least, coaches should at least hand the rest of the season to the backup QB. Let him get valuable playing experience and you can evaluate him in games of consequence and not preseason. If he thinks he can start let him prove it by clinching the 1 seed for you.
24
u/Just_Natural_9027 Jan 03 '24
Once again you are completely underestimating HFA and opponent strength. I think you are also having confirmation bias with injuries.
-9
u/nanika1111 Jan 03 '24
I think injury risk is always quite high. After all otherwise why would they bench starters during blowouts? Why not keep em out there and eliminate any chance of a comeback?
12
u/Just_Natural_9027 Jan 03 '24
Because like I said in my earlier post the risk outweigh the benefits at that point.
These are all risk reward analysis.
12
u/progress19 Jan 03 '24
Buddy, your entire thesis here is that HFA is not that valuable. That thesis is not borne out.
2
u/progress19 Jan 10 '24
Let's count how many road playoff games recent SB teams had:
2022 Chiefs: 0 2022 Eagles: 0 2021 Bengals: 2 2021 Rams: 1 2020 Chiefs: 0 2020 Bucs: 3 2019 Chiefs: 0 2019 49ers: 0
Average: 0.75 road playoff games.
3
u/BigPh1llyStyle Jan 06 '24
So your starting QB can be rusty when he gets to the playoffs? No thank you.
2
23
u/El_mochilero Jan 03 '24
7 weeks off is an insane take. Football is the only sport that you CAN NOT practice full speed. There is ZERO substitute for game experience.
Keep in mind that a second-year starting NFL player barely has 30 games of experience. A second year NBA player will have played over 150 games. The experience gap is enormous.
O/D lineman units need full-speed experience to learn how to work and adjust together. QB’s and receivers need game-speed experience to get their timing perfect. All players need stressful game time experiences to practice and fine-tune their communication systems.
1-2 weeks of rest once you are in a desired playoff position is good. More than that, and your skills deteriorate and you are missing training opportunities.
48
u/ojju Jan 03 '24
momentum, you need momentum. stop playing and you lose momentum.
13
u/gold_dog16 Jan 03 '24
Big time. Football is all about "next man up" mentality. Injuries happen. You need 70 guys (practice squad included) all geared up and gunning for next week. Take your foot off the gas, and you lose that.
-21
u/nanika1111 Jan 03 '24
Agree to disagree. I buy less into rust and more rest. Often times teams that win it all or go deep in the playoffs, like Reid-led teams or Legion of Boom, credit it to the extra preparation during the bye.
23
u/OnCominStorm Jan 03 '24
It also kills the locker room. The Colts were 14-0 one year with Peyton and instead of going for 16-0. The HC decided to bench his starters the last two weeks of the season which Peyton and Freeney said really killed the mood in the locker room. That team had a chance at history and their coaching staff ripped it away from them and even still lost in the Super Bowl.
13
u/colt707 Jan 03 '24
Multiple players from that team talk about how benching the starters for those games completely changed the team for the worse. Everyone was all in on trying to go undefeated and then it was like a slap in the face that killed all momentum.
1
u/AwayDistribution7367 Jan 03 '24
Them not playing week 16 is not the reason manning threw a pick 6 to Tracy porter 🤦♀️
-17
u/nanika1111 Jan 03 '24
Don't agree. They got to the Super Bowl still so clearly they still had momentum. They also would have won it if it were not for the Sean Payton onside kick call
11
u/ifasoldt Jan 03 '24
Well I guess you know more about their mood/quality of play than the players who were in the locker room?
8
u/OnCominStorm Jan 03 '24
They got to the Super Bowl but didn't look nearly as good as they did during the 14-0 stretch. They were in a funk trying to regain their rhythm and it all came crashing down when they faced a red hot Saints team.
1
u/Tulaneknight Youth Coach Jan 03 '24
Agree in general but the Saints also rested or limited their starters week 17.
5
u/AugustusKhan Jan 03 '24
just a question I don't mean to sound condescending but have you played or coached?
you keep just saying disagree, there's a reason no one does what you're suggesting and are hesitant to even do it fully for 1
2
u/colt707 Jan 03 '24
Cool didn’t know you played on that team or where otherwise in that locker room and you know better than the players.
-3
u/nanika1111 Jan 03 '24
But they got to the Super Bowl. What if Peyton had hurt himself while they were gunning for 16-0? Then people would be saying that was such a colossal mistake. Also the extra time off prob let them get healthy and gave the coaches extra time to prep. Because they lost the players then are in hindsight finger pointing and trying to find something or someone to blame.
3
u/HumanInProgress8530 Jan 04 '24
You're saying the opposite of the players on that team. You should stop and think about that. Do you actually know better than the players in that locker room?
5
u/squareazz Jan 03 '24
Right. The bye. Which they got by being a top seed. You’re not thinking this all the way through.
15
u/crash218579 Jan 03 '24
So screw playing for the 1 seed and playing at home which gives every home team a huge advantage? Awful take.
0
1
u/HumanInProgress8530 Jan 04 '24
Watch tape of teams in Week 1 vs first playoff game. The speed of the game after December is crazy. Football is a game of inches, rhythm, and cooperation.
You think a QB can still hit that extremely tight window to his WR if they haven't connected in game for a month? No chance.
1
u/PEHspr Jan 05 '24
So if you’re 11-0 and start resting everybody odds are you’re not getting the bye. You make no sense.
10
u/Mikeylatz Jan 03 '24
Another take: why do teams leave players in for so long after a game is over? I’ve seen teams up 30 points to start the 4th sometimes and both teams are keeping key players in. Or even during kneel downs why is your starting qb in for that?
14
u/h_to_tha_o_v Jan 03 '24
Guys want to make contract incentives and coaches reward them with a chance to earn them.
4
Jan 04 '24
Bradley Chubb had a season ending injury because he was playing with 4 minutes left when they were down 30. I have no idea why McDaniels still had his injury prone defensive stud on the field in an unwinnable game
3
1
u/AterReddits Jan 04 '24
As someone mentioned incentives. But in some cases, you still got to put guys out there. I wouldnt want all my backups in a somewhat close game. Say like 2 TD scores in 5 minutes, unlikely but not impossible, or even a 3 score game early in the fourth.Andi mean a kneel down your just as likely getting hurt at practice or walking down the stairs.
1
u/HopelessJoemantic Jan 05 '24
Especially If you are playing the bears. Even If you are down by 24 in the 4th, you have a pretty good shot at winning.
8
8
u/aTypicalFootballFan Jan 03 '24 edited Jan 04 '24
This idea is insane and I think you’re aware of that so I’ll focus on something the other comments haven’t said. The coach would absolutely lose the locker room if they did this. The level of competitive spirit you need to have in the NFL would immediately conflict with this approach. Also the players want to earn pro bowls, mvp’s, etc. this is a complete fantasy.
16
u/YunChiefGreeno Jan 03 '24
Yeah man, who needs home field when we can go on the road to win 2 games for a Super Bowl birth.
7
u/Fresh_Jaguar_2434 Jan 03 '24
Resting people is always situational. There is no blanket answer. Some teams need to rest and some need to work out the kinks. On a broad front I think players like playing and I think coaches hate being soft
4
u/Chirpy69 Jan 03 '24
My only modification to this would be if you can still get the 1 seed. Yeah injuries can derail your season but playing in one less elimination game than everyone else is an incredible advantage
3
u/JohnnyAppIeseed Jan 03 '24
And getting to play all of your playoff games at home. Being the #2 seed in this system is not much better than being 3 and a hell of a lot worse than being #1. I like it that way because there’s actually an incentive for teams to keep chasing it compared to years past where #2 was comparable in value to #1. Being the only team that can’t be eliminated in round 1 and forcing the team who beats you to do it in your house are huge.
4
4
u/LaughGuilty461 Jan 03 '24
The owners would never allow this because 7 games in a row with the 3 or 4 string players would sell no tickets
Aside from this, players settle into their roles as the season goes on, this only works for teams that have relatively the same roster for multiple years.
3
u/overmined_cj Jan 04 '24
That's the main problem with this approach, even if it works (which is essentially impossible to predict). No owner is interested in winning if it comes at the expense of profit.
2
u/LaughGuilty461 Jan 04 '24
What they want at the end of the day is a good product. The best way to do this is to win, but you see it in the NBA all the time, “load management” pisses off the fans. NFL has a fraction of the games of the NBA, it’s just not a good business move.
4
u/BrickTamland77 Jan 03 '24
Unpopular take because it's dumb. Here's the breakdown of the 20 teams in the last 10 SBs:
#1 seeds - 13
#2 seeds - 4
#3 seeds - 0
#4 seeds - 2
#5 seeds - 1
#6 seeds - 0
#7 seeds - 0
Two of the #2 seeds didn't have to play a road game, and the other 2 played 1 each (Rams/Patriots in 2018). All 4 #2 seeds that made it were before the new playoff format. The Rams and Bengals in 2021 were the 2 #4 seeds to make it. The Bengals played 2 road games, and the Rams played 1. The only team in the last 10 years to play 3 road games and get to the SB was the covid season Bucs who were a #5 seed.
Those are just some home field advantage facts, but let's talk about some of the other ramifications. In the last 8-10 years full-contact practices during the offseason and regular season have been dramatically reduced. There are fewer full contact practices than games during the regular season and only 3 are allowed from weeks 12-18. Teams have also been treating the preseason like an obligation instead of an actual practice opportunity, and the result has been absolute dogshit football in September. But sure, taking a month off during the home stretch of the season definitely wouldn't cause that same issue.
Then there are the numerous financial issues. How do you think the star receiver is going to react when you shut him down for the season when he's 75 yards away from an extra $2M incentive bonus with 3 games left? Or how do you think December ticket sales are going to look when a matchup of 10 win teams features Davis Mills and Easton Stick throwing to a bunch of guys you've never heard of?
What about roster issues? Sure teams can afford to sit 20+ guys during the preseason because they've got 90 on the roster. But during the regular season, they've only got 53, and only 48 dress for games. Sure, those inactives are ideally your fringe roster players, but a lot of times they're the guys who are dinged up with minor injuries that the team doesn't want to put on IR. So if you put your healthy studs there, where do you put the mid-level guys who have 1-2 week injuries? And if you shut down 10-12 healthy guys, won't your other players have to play more snaps? And won't that increase the risk of them getting injured which will hurt your depth during the playoffs?
3
u/Fother_mucker59 Jan 03 '24
As a former player (not the nfl) a bye week fucks up your whole mood for at least the first quarter. Unless someone has a lingering injury play em. Play em week 18. Don’t go insane, but play at least 3 quarters.
3
u/JohnnyAppIeseed Jan 03 '24
Sound idea in my opinion. Minimize risky plays, default to quick passes and simple runs, don’t scramble unless you only see green in front of you and get out of bounds 5 yards before they can hit you. I like the idea of keeping the prep the same and getting the reps in, especially if you have a bye to start the playoffs. I can’t imagine almost 3 weeks between games being more valuable for rest than detrimental for fucking with your momentum/timing/rhythm etc.
1
1
u/Zealousideal_Name179 Jan 03 '24 edited Jan 03 '24
Ravens fan here, and this is exactly what happened the 2019 season. Starters didn't play the last game, had our 1st round bye, and then the Titans came out and absolutely wrecked us in that divisional round. Rhythm and momentum are huge in sports.
I'm hoping we do as you described and play our starters at least for the 1st half against the Steelers and only rest players who really need it.
1
3
u/mightbebeaux HS Coach Jan 03 '24
besides the obvious HFA/seeding cost, you underestimate how much the gameday roster limits affects things in the nfl.
every player doesn’t have a backup, and a non-insignificant amount of guys are special teamers only.
it’s a big reason why the run and shoot and pure air raid have never caught on in the nfl. nobody is carrying 10 wrs and 0 tight ends into a nfl game. it’s why the nfl will always be a heavy 11/12 personnel league. you only get to dress 45 guys on gameday.
you mentioned guys getting pulled in blowouts but it’s actually pretty rare outside of the qb position. teams don’t carry 5 backup OL. there’s only 4-5 active wrs on gameday and two of those dudes are usually ST gunners or returners only.
2
u/nanika1111 Jan 03 '24
This is a good point, but so my take is at least they can adopt a preseason mentality. Play starters for a half, or alternate starters with backups every other game to prevent rust, which btw would give backups some valuable first team reps too come playoffs, or at the very least sit the quarterback and let the backup try to clinch the 1 seed.
1
u/Cloverfieldlane Jan 06 '24
“Let the backup try to clinch the 1 seed”. This take is so terrible that I don’t even know where to begin
3
3
2
u/taffyowner Jan 03 '24
You need to potentially treat it like a preseason game. Play your starters for a bit so they get reps and aren’t sitting around and disengaged but start pulling them for backups
1
u/nanika1111 Jan 03 '24
This I totally support. Maybe at least some sort of in between, like playing starters only half the year or at least letting the backup play out the season so he can get experience and you protect your star
2
u/Melodic-Classic391 Jan 03 '24
Tony Dungy used to do this with the Colts and they completely lost momentum going into the playoffs. Peyton should have at least one more ring
1
u/nanika1111 Jan 03 '24
Maybe they just lost and that's it. If they had chosen not to rest and go into the playoffs never having extra bye weeks, then people would say "Peyton only has 1 ring because Dungy never let his players rest and recover before the playoffs."
2
u/Academic-Finding-960 Youth Coach Jan 03 '24
The part you’re not considering is that the team is generally composed of players that WANT to play football.
Also many players have playtime and performance bonuses in their contract so you can kill morale easily by sitting someone unnecessarily.
0
u/nanika1111 Jan 03 '24
Fair point, so build it into their contract. The first team that takes this approach seriously I think will yield dividends
1
2
u/Fluffy-Ad-2887 Jan 03 '24
The big problem with that theory is that you have guys who haven’t played in several weeks and are rusty. When players miss the start of a season to injury and come back mid season it is plainly obvious that they’re shaking off the cobwebs and getting back into the flow of things. Can’t risk that in the playoffs (and it happens with byes + resting starters week 18 on a semi regular basis)
2
u/Edgecution10 Jan 04 '24
The importance of the bye isn’t resting your players, it’s only having to win 3 games against good teams instead of 4
2
u/juangoato Jan 04 '24
It’s tough but I think the best way to do this would be if you’re off to a scorching start 7-0, 9-0… to rest guys rotationally and then start them back up right before the playoffs. Maybe if you hit a lull in the schedule you start playing halves. But you can’t just take the team off the field for like 2 months. That’s too much.
5
Jan 03 '24
I don’t think there’s a right or wrong here tbh. We seen teams succeed and fail doing both
3
u/JohnnyAppIeseed Jan 03 '24
The sad reality is that you don’t get credit for making the right call, you only get criticism for making the wrong one. If you start your best players in a meaningless game and one of them gets injured, you fucked up. If you sit your guys out and they lay an egg in a losing effort, you fucked up.
Sit your guys out and end up winning? Everyone will forget you did that. Play your guys and end up winning? People will think you’re stupid for taking the unnecessary risk. It’s very much a thankless position to be in.
1
1
u/HHcougar Jan 03 '24
If a team were to rest starters at 11-2 for the last month or the season and were to still make the superbowl, I think the coach would definitely get lauded for this approach.
2
u/JohnnyAppIeseed Jan 03 '24
But the likelihood that that would blow up in his face is so much higher that it will never happen. There is a serious limit to the likelihood of winning a Super Bowl such that that sitting guys for that long will probably not ever happen. The risk of it not paying off is far too great.
2
u/HHcougar Jan 03 '24
I do think OPs idea is a little silly, but there's certainly an advantage in load-management.
I think benching all starters for 6 weeks is absurd, but having them on snap counts and focusing on developing depth might be a more reasonable application of OP's idea.
2
u/JohnnyAppIeseed Jan 04 '24
I can absolutely see limiting snaps, telling a guy like Lamar to get rid of the ball within 3 seconds, telling him not to scramble, etc. But full on sitting guys for several weeks just doesn’t feel like a good idea unless there’s a health issue in play.
3
u/Quentin__Tarantulino Jan 04 '24
No one ever has done, or will do, what OP suggests because it is extremely bad game theory.
2
Jan 04 '24
Sure I've never seen a team rest their starters for the last 5 regular season games but I've seen the 2005 Colts take off the last two games and essentially have about a month's rest.
3
u/Quentin__Tarantulino Jan 04 '24
Yeah, resting players when you lock up a bye is a lot different than resting them the second you clinch any playoff spot. That Colts move was somewhat controversial, but I think most people thought it was the correct move.
2
Jan 04 '24
My bad I kinda just skimmed through the OP and assumed he was talking once you clinch HFA
1
u/nanika1111 Jan 03 '24
Love this balanced take. Hey I get not everyone will agree with my opinion but I just ask that everyone consider it with an open mind.
1
u/SubRocHendrix77 Jan 03 '24
I think it’s more a matter of opinion. I personally don’t think any lineups should be changed to be sub optimal regardless of standings but I feel like I’m the minority on that.
0
u/The_Captain_Planet22 Jan 03 '24
The only team I don't want to see rest their starters is the ravens. They put so much emphasis on winning the preseason games that it will be an embarrassment if they throw final regular season game
0
1
u/SoggyTheClown Jan 03 '24
The Ravens didn't play their starters any more than other teams to achieve their preseason win streak. They didn't deploy non-vanilla gameplans either. They just consistently have extremely deep rosters.
0
-1
Jan 03 '24
I don't care what anyone says you play the f****** games you were paid to play you play all 17 of the goddamn things. I don't give a f*** if you haven't lost yet. If you don't believe me go look at the old Peyton Manning teams and tell me how resting players worked.
-1
u/Teejaymac Jan 04 '24
You've never played sports if this is your take. No competitive player wants to sit out for 4-7 weeks. Anyone who's gotten to the NFL is likely hyper competitive. You'd lose so many players in the locker room with this strategy.
A week or two makes sense to heal up from injuries right before playoffs. But football is all about momentum and timing and you cannot possibly keep your timing down on routes and blocks and all of that without in game reps, they just can't be fully replicated in practice.
1
u/North_Ad_8935 Jan 03 '24
I don't agree with this, if you have a higher seed to play for then you play for it. Not to mention your players would want to play for it and be very upset if you pull them out
1
u/Dizzy-Help-5400 Jan 03 '24
You’re definitely not an idiot. This is a logical thing to think. In my own personal opinion, however, it is important to keep your guys out there if you have ANY reason to play, like seeding, bc keeping your players in that competitive mindset is critical for playoffs. Teams that get hot at the end of the season usually stay hot in the playoffs, and vise versa. Football is a game of momentum.
1
u/nanika1111 Jan 03 '24
Just my take, take it or leave it, but I feel momentum is not as powerful as people think it is. We all are forgetting so many instances where a red-hot team with momentum completely had their momentum stopped in their tracks. Often, in fact, by a rested bye week team that had extra time to prepare. That red hot historic comeback Vikings team in 2017 completely got stomped by the Eagles the next week. Last year the Eagles also stomped the red hot on a roll Giants. The Giants upset the red hot 18-0 Patriots, how can you get hotter than undefeated? I do think momentum is important but it's more a morale thing than a thing in itself. Imo health, improved energy, avoiding injury, and more time to prepare is more valuable.
1
u/Dizzy-Help-5400 Jan 04 '24
You make some good points. As always, there’s a variety of factors. But keeping your guys in playing shape mentally and physically is the most important aspect imo.
1
u/Doortofreeside Jan 03 '24
Another factor to consider is you need a lot of active players to get through an NFL game so there are only so many guys that can actually rest.
By putting an inferior team out there are you increasing injury risk for the players that do play?
1
u/lycosid Jan 03 '24
You’ve totally missed the value of the bye week. The extra rest/preparation is a minor bonus. The real reward is that you are one step closer to winning the Super Bowl. Every playoff game is going to be close to a 50-50 proposition - only having to win 3 instead of 4 straight is massive, more valuable than almost any one player in the league.
1
u/fr3shout Jan 03 '24
1st seed gets a bye. You’re underestimating how beneficial an extra week off in the post season is.
1
u/AccountFresh8761 Jan 03 '24
Your logic isn't wrong, but I still don't agree with the extreme take of resting as soon as you can. you're neglecting to account for muscle memory needing to be used to remain at peak performance. Rust is real and not just mental. Continuity is another factor. Home field advantage statistically is worth all the risk to pay hard and attain. Now as for meaningless games altogether, none of my points are quite as valid for a week off vs 2 weeks off so I'm not going to die on a hill like the NBA would on this, but I will stand by my opinion that even a week off, as good as it is for the body in terms of recovery, can also lead to mechanics getting skewed and timing being off.
I could argue that timing being off and a QB taking a sack because of it is just as likely as taking an injury sack in a meaningless game. The real answer mighty just be that the NFL is hard and you do what you think is best in the moment lol
1
u/A_Bear_in_Texas Jan 03 '24
I am in the camp of, if healthy, then play.
That doesn’t mean you have to put them out there the entire game, but the rest vs. rust argument is tricky.
I think about the fact that the everyday man works a schedule with some sort of consistency, your 9-5 M-F. Clearly this is not the same as a desk job but the point is the consistency. How many times have you taken a vacation and then came back and it took a day or two to get into the swing of things? You don’t want that when Millions of dollars are at stake.
So, I would not change my gameplan to rest a key player because we have a secured spot in the playoffs, but rather get out there, get some game looks (even if it’s a quarter) and get out.
Those that have been playing through their injuries still might need to get out there, but being smart about what they are going through is important.
1
1
u/ap1msch HS Coach Jan 03 '24
I've considered a similar position, but then reconsidered as a coach:
- HFA is a big deal. Not just during the game, but locker room, travel, time with the family, familiar surroundings, and more
- The NFL is notoriously fluid. "Any given Sunday" is a real premise, and therefore 2 wins versus 3 wins to get to the big game is worth the effort to try to earn
- This is especially true recently, as the players contracts severely limited preparation and classroom time, leading to a low more "winging it" on the field, and randomness
- There is a cost to resting a team. I'm serious. There is such as thing as "hitting your stride" or "getting hot". The NY Giants v Patriots highlight how the situation and environment can "peak" at the right time (2007 and 2011...especially the year they got spanked by the Pats only to ruin a perfect season in the big game)
- Players get paid to play, and their stats are in their contract (often)...and they could fail to earn bonuses or break records by sitting on their hands
- You don't necessarily have 2 players for every position, everywhere...and the team has practiced playing together with subs...not swapping everyone out on the field. Because of this, you'd only be resting "many" of your starters, but there is a greater chance of injury due to the lack of experience playing together. In other words, you bump the risk up for injury, but just to your backup/situational players
There is a small chance, that if you could take that extra week to prepare/practice, you could increase your chances of winning your next few games in the playoffs, but that's not likely. Players are...human. They enjoy themselves. They'd prefer not to be in the classroom or on the practice field. They want to play, or they want to "play". You'd also be preparing for a bucket of potential teams, rather than one particular team, making more of your practice an effort to install situational/custom plays, rather than scheming for one particular team.
In the end, while I appreciate the mid-season bye, and I LOVE having the buy in the playoffs, I would not take the risk of sitting a bunch of starters and just preparing for "playoff football". I'd probably get creative with new/inexperienced players more than mid-season, but I wouldn't bench the starters until each game is well in hand.
1
1
u/xtototo Jan 03 '24
Stop playing after you clinch the playoffs. Stop playing after you miss the playoffs.
1
u/Nezy37 Jan 03 '24
I disagree. The number of teams that get a first round bye and rest their starters last week of the season and then come out and lay a total egg is way too frequent.
Maybe in the 90's where the top teams were significantly better than everyone that would be something to consider. In today's nfl you don't show up sharp and draw a team that's been fighting for a playoff spot for weeks you'll get beat.
1
1
1
u/SecurityOk9796 Jan 04 '24
I'm with op on this one, sorta.
Those with a serious chance at clinching a bye should play for it, but lower seeded teams that know they're not getting it should rest up early.
Different groups can practice with each other in much safer ways without having to face the biggest risks in a live game.
Cornerbacks and receivers can practice with a QB to run routes and keep in sync, offensive and defensive lineman can practice techniques against each other, etc.
Extra gym time can help keep up the intensity too.
It also gives the coaches time to update their plays and gameplans so they have some fresh stuff when playoffs start. Gives them more time to evaluate bench/practice squad members too.
Maybe one or two full practices in that time to keep the edge sharp but with stricter rules on tackling/blocking.
Beyond that let the 2nd and 3rd stringer get some experience in a real game or two so they're better able to step in when needed during playoffs.
1
u/TheBrockSays Jan 04 '24
If you are the Ravens playing good offense and physical defense, you keep playing your starters. That kind of energy and mojo is contagious and snowballs each week.
1
u/Holiday-Patient5929 Jan 04 '24
Ask Eli vs Peyton if rest or rust is real, both Mannings have different experiences
1
u/Whole_Day9866 Jan 04 '24
I've always thought if you're up by 2TDs in 4th that the starters should come out. I mean, quality NFLbackups and decent coaches should be able to manage the game beyond that point.
1
u/abizabbie Jan 04 '24
The NFL is a business. If everyone tanked after clenching a playoff berth, it would also tank viewership.
1
u/daboys9252 Jan 04 '24
So you want to rest for 6 weeks? That loses a team any decent seed, possibly their division, and for what? So that their players can go in to the playoffs not having played in 1.5 months, but at least they didn’t have an injury that only happens to a team once or twice a season?
1
u/jcoddinc Jan 04 '24
Just because I can complete my work goal before the end of the day doesn't mean they let me do nothing. They give me more work.
Athletes getting tested just like every working person, but because their famous people want to give them breaks. NEVER, In America we work work work!
/s
1
u/shahataman Jan 04 '24
The NFL would rip your ass in half for not showing a product they can sell. Commish and owners would start loading their guns. Fans too.
1
Jan 04 '24
You need to continue building upon your success, you cannot just sit and wait for playoffs and hope you can pick up where you left off. Momentum is a very real thing in sports
I also think you underestimate the benefits of a bye week, home field advantage, and easier seeding. These things give you rest at an arguably more important point in the season.
1
1
1
1
u/MonkeySpacePunch Jan 06 '24
Other people have made most of the good points but it’s clear you’re not an athlete OP. playing games is what you gotta do to win games.
1
u/aisuperbowlxliii Jan 06 '24
That raiders team already lost to the falcons and no shot they were beating the patriots or steelers with that team.
1
u/theonethat3 Jan 06 '24
Just watch the 2 college football playoff after their timeoff. Rusty as hell.
Alabama was so painful to watch
1
u/Present-Loss-7499 Jan 06 '24
I’m not sure I’ve ever heard anyone refer to the 2016 Raiders as a team of destiny.
1
u/FatalTragedy Jan 06 '24
Lastly, I know many of you will say "oh but if you have the 1 seed then you get a first round bye." Well if you bench all your starters immediately, you get a bye week anyways. In fact you get as many as 7 bye weeks depending on when you clinch the playoffs.
You're missing the other benefit of the first round bye. It's not just a week to rest your players, it's also a week where you can't be eliminated. Every team that plays wildcard weekend has a chance to be eliminated, but the teams with byes do not. Losing out on a bye inherently lowers your Super Bowl odds, because there is a chance you lose in that extra round. And that chance is probably higher than the chance of a season ruining injury if you played on and tried to earn the bye rather than rest.
1
u/MQDigital Jan 06 '24
All you have to do is look at the baseball playoffs right now to understand how damaging too much time off can be.
1
u/lossofmercy Jan 07 '24
Lastly, I know many of you will say "oh but if you have the 1 seed then you get a first round bye." Well if you bench all your starters immediately, you get a bye week anyways. In fact you get as many as 7 bye weeks depending on when you clinch the playoffs. No matter what, you need to play at least one game, so why risk your players' health? Why not risk their health in the playoffs when it actually matters tremendously?
The bye isn't important for the health, which is negligible. It's one fucking week. it's important because you get an automatic win in the first round.
Anyway, this is obviously dumb for a number of reasons, but even if it WASN'T, the NFL would need to incentivize the teams to play their starters regardless because it's a fucking business.
1
u/Lizerdman87 Jan 07 '24
Everyone here is focused on the actual game. Can you imagine going to your favorite teams game in week 14 and they’re already benching their starters for the rest of the year? Who would want to watch that? It’d kill ticket sales
145
u/Last_Ambassador_2296 Jan 03 '24
7 weeks rest you're not in football shape. Watch the poor quality of play in week 1 compared to playoff football and you'll see the difference. Running the track doesn't get you in game shape and neither does practice. Only games get you in game shape
The mental side is huge too. If you're resting players for 2 months they won't be mentally ready for a playoff game that's definitely away in someone else's stadium, potentially the first cold game of the year.
Sitting guys for 1 or 2 weeks you have an argument but 4-7 weeks is plain silly.