NFL Schedules... WDYT of this...

BlueCuracao

Did anyone else notice this with the schedules?

In an effort to make late-season games more meaningful and avoid teams sitting out regulars once they have clinched a playoff berth, the NFL set up all intradivision matchups for the final Sunday, Jan. 2.

I'm feeling torn.  I think it's fair to want key players rested for the playoffs.  As a fan, I would prefer that my team took advantage of an opportunity to rest starters.  I see it as a reward to be able to rest players in that final game (you did a great job all season, and now we're in a situation where it isn't critical that you play the entire game).  If your team stumbled all season, tough crap that you have to play your way in... Those are the consequences of not playing well all season.

I also liked that those situations allowed backup players to get on the field for a half or so.  It's never a bad idea to let backups get out and play...  Especially right before the playoffs.

Do you think the league did this because Colts fans were so pissed when they benched their starters and lost?    Why not let the coaching staffs make this decision? 

Sports Center just said something about the fate of NFC North not riding on the outcome of the Vikings-Lions game on Jan 2.  Haha I'd say the Vikes lucked out with that matchup (please don't make me eat these words...).

mrsbecky07

Eh, I think it's a good idea, I guess.  We'll see. I'm not a big fan of the whole resting-the-starters thing though, unless the team is dominating in that particular game.

IIRC, the Jets made it to the playoffs precisely because the Colts essentially gave up on that game. It altered the entire playoffs picture. So I can understand the desire to avoid that happening again. 

tamarajean

I also feel torn about this, but I am leaning towards thinking it might be a better idea. 

And, hey now!  There are SOME Lions fans out there, like me, haha, it's my home team, what can I say?

OSUWifey09

I'm kinda torn on it, too. It seems like the NFL's stepping in to make a change that wasn't that big of a deal [like the OT rule, which still bugs me]. If a team wants to rest their players at the end of the season because they're already in the playoffs, so be it. That's their team, their choice. I didn't see an issue with the scheduling before.

It'll make for an interesting last week, which is great for any football fan - and I think it'll make teams work harder so that their playoff hopes don't come down to a final game with a rival. But...I'm not that big of a fan of it. We'll see.

BlueCuracao

mrsbecky07:

Eh, I think it's a good idea, I guess.  We'll see. I'm not a big fan of the whole resting-the-starters thing though, unless the team is dominating in that particular game.

IIRC, the Jets made it to the playoffs precisely because the Colts essentially gave up on that game. It altered the entire playoffs picture. So I can understand the desire to avoid that happening again. 

Maybe, but maybe not.  It's really hard to argue that when you don't know what the outcome might have been if the starters weren't benched.  Look at what happened in the SB.  It was close, and then all of a sudden the Colts didn't have a chance. 

It was the coaches decision to make, and I really don't see why the league feels the need to police that.

mrsbecky07

BlueCuracao:

mrsbecky07:

Eh, I think it's a good idea, I guess.  We'll see. I'm not a big fan of the whole resting-the-starters thing though, unless the team is dominating in that particular game.

IIRC, the Jets made it to the playoffs precisely because the Colts essentially gave up on that game. It altered the entire playoffs picture. So I can understand the desire to avoid that happening again. 

Maybe, but maybe not.  It's really hard to argue that when you don't know what the outcome might have been if the starters weren't benched.  Look at what happened in the SB.  It was close, and then all of a sudden the Colts didn't have a chance. 

It was the coaches decision to make, and I really don't see why the league feels the need to police that.

Exactly.  We don't know what would have happened. The Jets might have still won.  But honestly, it did kind of leave a stigma on their record imo - not a huge one, not a really bad one, but different commentators, bloggers, people we know, etc. - all kind of had the same feeling - at least I was hearing it - "well what would have happened?"  If I were a Jets fan I'd want to have had my team won with none of those doubts, ya know?   I feel kind of the same way about the Ravens playing the Steelers while Roethlisberger is out - I don't want to have to hear "well they didn't have Roethlisberger so Baltimore had a better chance." I want us to win flat out.

Now, obviously it is the coach's decision to bench players, and I feel like some teams will still do that if they have a playoff berth assured, etc.

CurbsideProphet

This is the first I have heard of it, but I am okay with it. I see nothing wrong with having meaningful games at the end of the season. If your team is good enough to win it all it should not matter.