Should we rest starters ? (1 Viewer)

Peat breaking his hand in the last game of the year last season really screwed us. Imagine trying to block Fletcher Cox and Aaron Donald with a broken hand
 
#2 vs #3 seed comes down to SF@SEA . do we rest and not risk anyone getting banged up ?(keep in mind we wold be playing the next week should SF win regardless if we beat Carolina or not ) O r do we go all out and hope the Lions have a highly unlikely win in them ...
I say rest .
A life lived in fear is no life at all.
 
Seattle has a decent chance to win that game vs San Fran so play to win. Lions also have a small chance to win. I think we at worst have a 40% chance one of the Packers or 49ers lose next week.
 
Ain't no time for rest. Need to win regardless. Going hot into the playoffs is key. The starters play and those who really need to get healthy sit down, then hopefully the score gets ran up where you can let the starters sit later in the game. The #2 spot even the #1 ?. Hoping 49ers lose or pack lose or both lose. Man need it
 
Screenshot_20191224-010140.png
3 out of the 4 ways to improve our seeding require us to win. You play to win this game.
This is interesting, we need SF to lose no matter what, so we if we win, we need GB to lose (to get the 1) or if we lose we need GB to win (to get the 2). Maybe we should lose on purpose because the help we would need to get first rd bye is far more likely to happen?
 
The Seahawks were just embarrassed by the Cards at home. There’s reason to believe they can beat the 49ers at home, although them beating the 49ers earlier in the season makes that less likely. Still, they play to win.
 
Absolutely no way Packers lose.

Seattle without it’s top 3 RBs and tackle? I highly doubt they can win.
 
I’m usually one to say the opera’s not over til the fat lady sings. As long as there is a chance, you give it your all, HOWEVER, in this case with the way the tiebreakers weirdly fall:
This is interesting, we need SF to lose no matter what, so we if we win, we need GB to lose (to get the 1) or if we lose we need GB to win (to get the 2). Maybe we should lose on purpose because the help we would need to get first rd bye is far more likely to happen?
If we win we have to pull for Lions but if we lose we have to pull for GB. The games are simultaneous, so maybe keep it close and keep an eye on the packers. If they’re gonna win, pull your starters and play for the loss, if they're gonna lose then keep playing to win.
 
Last edited:
How about we do it both ways like our defense in the 49ers game...they were on the field but weren’t really playing.
 
The way Carolina been playing, can our backups beat them? I think they can. We couldn't rest all our starters, but we can treat next week as a bye for some of our starters to get healthy.
we play to win the game but I feel we could still beat Carolina with some of our starters resting. Great the playoffs as a new season of four games if we don't get the bye.
 
This is interesting, we need SF to lose no matter what, so we if we win, we need GB to lose (to get the 1) or if we lose we need GB to win (to get the 2). Maybe we should lose on purpose because the help we would need to get first rd bye is far more likely to happen?

Huh? We are not required to lose for a Green Bay win to help us in getting the #2 seed. That scenario just doesn't depend on our games outcome.
 
I hope Seattle will have sufficient motivation to win Sunday night after the outcome of the early games. I’m not sure how much better the #3 seed is than the #5, especially when the 5 most likely gets you Philly. Seattle might prefer to rest some of their key starters since a bye likely will not be on the line for them. The NFL did us no favors flexing that game to SNF.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom