Question of the Day: 12/17 "AFC South Champions"

[sb41champs]

   Several years ago - Colts fans and the local pundits - were outraged when former President & GM Bill Polian ordered that players be "rested" for the playoffs - rather than have the team work toward a possible "undefeated" season.

 

 

   Coach Chuck Pagano has indicated that he takes the opposite view - playing his healthy starters the final two weeks of the season.

 

 

   Agree with Polian "rest" - or - Pagano "no rust" ??

[jvan1973]

The two situations are completely different. This team hasnt locked in its playoff seed yet. They have to continue playing

[Bravo]

Play unless there is a injury to be concerned about.

[sfergson727]

Keep playing.

[Smonroe]

Play unless there is a injury to be concerned about.

Agreed. my complaint would be if they play but don't gameplan or play vanilla because they don't want to show anything.

Sort of like how KC played us in the regular season last year. If you're going to play the game, then play the game.

[jskinnz]

Jvan wins the thread because the circumstances are not the same.  Their seed has not yet been determined and there is potential, remote as it is, to move up to get a bye.  They have to play to win with their best players.

[Ja'Crispy]

Keep playing. Locked up a playoff spot, haven't locked up a seed.

[shakedownstreet]

[Valpo2004]

The two situations are completely different. This team hasnt locked in its playoff seed yet. They have to continue playing

 

At this point you are right. . . but remember in 2012 we played starters and beat the Texans in Week 17 even though we where locked into the #5 seed.

 

So playing starters during the regular season even if there is no gain to be had in the playoffs is a part of Pagano's MO.  And he hasn't given any indication that his view on that has changed.

[Tsarquise]

The Colts, under Bill Polian, in the same situation as now, did not rest their starters either. When the Pagano lead Colts wrap up the number one seed early, come back with this comparison.

[JPFolks]

The real problem I had with Polian was they let Manning and Wayne and Clark play in an Ice Storm the final game and throw screen passes over and over to both to get their reception numbers over 100 each for the year.  They risked all three of their key players to chase STATS, but then were hypocritical when it came to winning the games and going undefeated saying they were worried about possible injuries.  It was the worst of both worlds.  If they meant it, they wouldn't have been chasing the stats in the ice storm.  So "stats" are worth risking your players over, but not an undefeated season.  After they intentionally tanked both games, the sense of invincibility around that team was gone along with all momentum and sure enough they got spanked by New Orleans in the Super Bowl.  Polian had already jumped the shark by then grooming his less qualified son to take over as many suspected.  We had to suffer through the 2-14 season before they could finally get rid of the lot of them.  It showed how untalented the remaining roster really was once you removed Manning from it.  Similarly I wonder how brutal this team would be right now without Luck at the helm.  How many games would we have won this year with Hasselbeck? If New England and Denver win one of their remaining game or we lose one, we'll be the #3 seed regardless.  Our week 17 game against Tennessee may well be entirely meaningless.  I guess we'll see what they do then.  

[sb41champs]

   In my humble opinion - I feel it is best to play your best players for every single game of the season - being mindful not to play injured players.  Giving the team an extra day off - following a victory - toward the end of the season is a good move toward resting players.  "You play to win the game" !!!!!