Friday, January 22, 2010
Poll Results
It's time to close out our poll, 'Are NFL teams obligated to play at 100% thru the entire season'? Our final count showed that 58% voted No. I guess I find it peculiar that most people find it O.K. to pull starters the last two weeks of the season when it can effect the playoff picture for other teams involved, yet will not find a problem in leaving a 40 year old quarterback in to throw a 'run up the score' TD pass in a already decided playoff game. It would have been very interesting if a frustrated Cowboy defender had gotten a clean shot on Favre causing him an unnecessary injury. I just find things a little inconsistent at times.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I do not understand how you can conclude your comments by saying things are somewhat “inconsistent at times “. I have re-read the article numerous times and I still don’t understand the comparison between a team resting players versus a team running up a score versus a player possibly getting leveled by a frustrated player. The whole analogous reference is too convoluted.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I find NO problem with a team resting starters once they have maximized their position in the standings. Forget about the Wes Welker example, let’s look at this in a different light. I would venture to guess that if a team were to have the choice of the defending Super Bowl champs (Pittsburgh) make the playoffs versus the Jets, they would opt for the lesser team – that being the Jets. Their playoff run not withstanding, the fact that the Colts, to a certain extent, controlled the fate of the Jets is fine – the Colts, with their 14-0 start – earned the right to do so.
Furthermore, did ANYONE, namely the author of the article I am referencing (C. Agresta) bother to complain when LeBron wore a suit to the Cavaliers final regular season home game last year? I think not. Sure, it sucked for the paying public – but we ALL were in agreement that while it would have been nice to conclude with a 41-1 home record, the playoffs that awaited were of greater importance. Moreover, the fact that the 76er’s won the game actually IMPROVED their playoff ranking. So in the end, the Cavaliers decision had a direct impact on the playoffs, just like the Colts lack of effort did.
The fact that there is outrage in some circles over what the Colts did, yet there were no complaints in Miami, Boston or Orlando (the teams that were affected by the Cavaliers decision last year) – THAT is the definition of “inconsistent”.
Doc, let me simplify this. If a person feels it is OK to rest a starting QB for the last one or two games of the year for fear of injury. That same person can not defend Favre dropping back to pass in a playoff game that has already been decided. Logic would conclude that he should have been out of the game, or at the least, handing the ball off. That would be consistent.
ReplyDeleteYour basketball comparison is not relevant. The Sixers improving from a seven seed to a six seed to me is not material. Now, if another teams playoff life was at stake and James along with other starters did not play at all, I would take issue.