I don't want this to unfold in this way, but it remains a possibility, so I wanted to kick this around on the board to see what you guys think.
Suppose New England beats Pittsburgh and wins out, and the tacks collapse and lose to the Rams, making us division champs before the tack game.
Knowing we won't get the bye and the 3rd seed would be locked up for us, would you be in favor of resting starters on week 17 against the tacks?
Why or why not?
Yes. Absolutely. Without question I rest players at first chance.
Wow I was literally about to make this same exact thread lol
I would say rest. And I’m talking like not even have guys dressed for the game. No Ramsey, Bouye, Telvin, Yannick, Campbell, Gipson, Church, Robinson, Parnell, Linder etc. Let that be our bye week.
I’d have guys playing both sides in that game lol
Definitely rest starters and enjoy the humiliation the titans feel upon losing to Henne and second stringers.
Of course, they can't rest everyone and still field a team, so I would still like our chances.
(12-13-2017, 01:57 PM)Bullseye Wrote: [ -> ]I don't want this to unfold in this way, but it remains a possibility, so I wanted to kick this around on the board to see what you guys think.
Suppose New England beats Pittsburgh and wins out, and the tacks collapse and lose to the Rams, making us division champs before the tack game.
Knowing we won't get the bye and the 3rd seed would be locked up for us, would you be in favor of resting starters on week 17 against the tacks?
Why or why not?
I would approach it like the Giants did the Pats in the final game of that one season. They technically had it all locked up on their end. Coughlin decided to rest injured guys and start the starters and see how they game played out. If it was close at half he was leaving the starters in.
It was a very competitive game that the Giants ultimately lost to the then undefeated Pats. But seemingly it gave them a boost and possibly a lil blueprint when they would late face off in the SB.
Under your scenario I'd like us to rest guys that have hurts. Fournette and his ankle/quad whatever... Any linemen or WRs playing thru injuries.
Healthy guys should start and if the game is within reach you should always go for the win and the momentum, imo.
Now if NE wins and both Pitts and NE lose during week.16 and 17 we can clinch #1 how about that ?
Win Everyday
tacks would still be playing for wildcard, getting blasted by the tacks would leave a bad taste heading into the playoffs
But I could see rotations happening sooner and lasting longer. Being a little bit more protective of the injured players.
If we are talking about being locked into # 3, definitely rest the starters and use this game to evaluate younger/fringe players for next year. See what Brown has at MLB. Start Colvin outside. Field an O-Line of Walls/Reed/Shatley/Poehls and someone else (Sorry Chad). Be a good chance to evaluate how deep our depth is.
No, because techinically if New England beats Pittsburgh and we win out we just need either Pittsburgh or New England to lose one of their last two games.
If one loses another game then we get their bye. If both lose a game the we get homefield advantage throughout the playoffs.
We hold the tiebreakers on both New England and Pittsburgh.
(12-13-2017, 02:41 PM)NCJag Wrote: [ -> ]If we are talking about being locked into # 3, definitely rest the starters and use this game to evaluate younger/fringe players for next year. See what Brown has at MLB. Start Colvin outside. Field an O-Line of Walls/Reed/Shatley/Poehls and someone else (Sorry Chad). Be a good chance to evaluate how deep our depth is.
(12-13-2017, 02:42 PM)DangerousBoy Wrote: [ -> ]No, because techinically if New England beats Pittsburgh and we win out we just need either Pittsburgh or New England to lose one of their last two games.
If one loses another game then we get their bye. If both lose a game the we get homefield advantage throughout the playoffs.
We hold the tiebreakers on both New England and Pittsburgh.
So no matter who wins the Pitt vs Pats game, as long as the Jags win their next 2, the last game of the season is going to be crucial for just about everyone.
(12-13-2017, 02:44 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (12-13-2017, 02:42 PM)DangerousBoy Wrote: [ -> ]No, because techinically if New England beats Pittsburgh and we win out we just need either Pittsburgh or New England to lose one of their last two games.
If one loses another game then we get their bye. If both lose a game the we get homefield advantage throughout the playoffs.
We hold the tiebreakers on both New England and Pittsburgh.
So no matter who wins the Pitt vs Pats game, as long as the Jags win their next 2, the last game of the season is going to be crucial for just about everyone.
Pretty much. Even though Pittsburgh plays Cleveland in Week 17 you can never count out Division games. Just look at New England v Miami. The truth is we have a decent chance of getting a bye.
Our best chance is pitts to beat NE and we win out. I think the way pitts is playing I see this happening alot easier than both losing a game in week 16,17.
But even if NE wins they both have 3 loses and we have to finish all 3 reguardles. This isn't the year to slow down and rest players unless we lose 1 more and tenn loses two more before week 17.
Rest injured starters but play like it’s any game. Slowing down sounds good on the surface but I’m a firm believer in momentum and staying as close to routine as possible.
Tbh I feel like there's a strong possibility the Titans lose this week in San Fran, get crushed by Rams, and beat down by Jags. Resulting in 8-8 and on the outside looking in. The Afc playoff picture for those wildcard spots are WIDE OPEN. 6-7 teams are just a game back for 6 spot.
The only way you have it locked up and know it going into the game is if we get flexed to Sunday night in week 17 (or to the 4 pm slot with the Pats and Steelers games remaining at 1 pm) and already know what the scenarios are. Otherwise, Pittsburgh and New England could still lose their season finales (unlikely I know), meanwhile the Jags rest their starters for a 1 pm game against the tacks in tacky valley and lose and miss out on the 2 or even 1 seed.
Also, I'm not sure the league would appreciate us resting starters if they decided to flex us to the Sunday night game. I don't know how much of the rest of the country outside of our home market and our 2017 opponents home markets has even seen the Jags play this year. If that Jags/tacks week 17 game has any meaning at all, I could see them wanting to put it there not only because it has playoff implications but also so the whole country could get a look at the Jags prior to the playoffs. How many markets showed our 4 pm game against the Rams earlier in the year? I know only the Jags and Seahawks markets got last weekend's game with the Rams/Eagles being shown everywhere else.
If we're locked into the 3, it would depend if we lose to titans do they become the 5 instead of 6 seed and avoid us first round? Depending on who it would help become the 6 seed aka: the chargers I might want to smack the tacks week 17 to ensure we get them at home in playoffs rather than face a deadlier opponent. Also rest LF27 so the ankle is 100% come playoffs same with Ramsey etc. Might be a good game to see myrick at nickel so we get a peek of 2018 w/o colvin.
Play to win, the players can rest on the bye!
I would only rest the players that need it.