Has the rest vs. play debate finally been settled?

[t-rex]

Think about this.

 

Coach Andy Reid is known to rest his players once his playoff seed is finalized. He coached the Eagles for years. He fielded good teams, often conference leading #1 seeds. But the Eagles always came up short in the Playoffs. The Eagles never won a Super Bowl.

 

In the prior era the Colts became notorious for resting players. One year the Colts voluntarily gave up a perfect season in the name of "rest". The Colts like the Eagles became well known for playoff failures. Slow starts were usually to blame. The one year the Colts won the Super Bowl they did not sit any starters at the end of the season and played wildcard weekend. I don't think that's coincidence.

 

 

During week 17, Andy Reid, now the coach of the Chiefs rested his players. The Colts under Chuck Pagano and a new regime did not.

 

The Colts and Chiefs met in the playoffs.

 

The Colts won.

 

But not only did they win. They looked like the fresher, younger team. They were stronger in the 4th quarter than the well rested Chiefs. In addition, the number of injuries suffered by the Chiefs during the game seemed way out of the norm. I wonder if this was because the team was coming off of an artificial bye. I wonder if the Chiefs would have suffered all of those in game injuries if they had played a normal game for week 17.

 

 

I think this result finally settles the issue of the rest/play debate at the end of the season. The evidence is clear. Teams are better off playing out the schedule instead of trying to "game" the system for extra rest. Momentum trumps time off.

[Coffeedrinker]

What about in 2009 when the Colts rested their starters for a week and half, had a first round bye and then beat Baltimore 20-3.  It seems the evidence is not so clear and should really be made on a case by case basis for each team.

 

Plus the situation this year for the Colts and Chiefs were different, the Chiefs were the #5 seed no matter what.  The Colts still had a chance at a #2 or #3 seed, so it would not have made sense to rest the starters.

[open window]

Nope, anecdotal information at best. I submit Welker v Texans 2009, rest would have been much better than a torn ACL.

[buck_hunter21]

Best teams during that day wins. Not who has had more rest or the most reps. 

[BOTT]

Only problem I have with resting starters is when a team has a first round bye. Seems to make offenses rusty

[jskinnz]

Not close to closing this argument.  You don't have to dig too hard at all to find supporting evidence both ways.  This is a case by case and team by team decision.  Just look at Andy Reid who you used to support your theory.  Not sure of the exact #'s but he had a very successful record after resting his players before this game. 

 

And the injuries - seriously?  How did the rest impact the concussions the Chiefs got?  Would Charles' head been tough enough to bounce off the turf if he had played in the regular season finale?

[BrentMc11]

I have to agree with the above comments....the jury is still 'way out' on this!!!

 

I think all we have to do is look at Saturday's game......it WAS 31-10......Who looked rusty????

[BPM_Colt]

Don't think there is a clear cut decision either way.

 

If a team does rest players & win, it's a great decision. And the same way if a team doesn't rest guys and win the game.

 

However, I'm not really in favor of resting guys unless they are a little banged up

[chad72]

It would probably not even be a huge debate if not for the performances of Peyton and Eli this decade.

 

Peyton lost in 1999, 2005, 2007 and 2012 following a bye week winning only in 2009, 1-4

 

Brady won in 2001, 2003, 2004, 2007, and 2011 following a bye week losing only in 2010, 5-1

 

Other marquee QBs:

 

Brees won in 2006 and 2009, Favre and Kurt Warner won more in the divisional round with a bye week.

 

History has not been kind to #1 seeds going against lower seeds but the same history shows #2 seeds have fared well once they get to the SB, the same #2 seeds that have the bye week too.

 

 

Peyton, by losing with all his bye weeks, and Eli, by being a road warrior have contributed in tandem to this stat being more lop sided the last decade than any other 2 QBs, IMO.

 

A big factor, IMO, the last decade, is the evolution of timing based offenses with so many domes in the league and pass friendly rules. In the past, teams had more balance, it seemed like and you could win with a game manager like Brad Johnson or Trent Dilfer. Not anymore. So, rhythm based offenses seem to be the ones that struggle most with a bye week and the ones that make it through have better plan B offenses to execute, IMO.

[alawai]

You should keep your starters game ready - not saying rested nor playing the full game but game ready. Like the last pre-season game, do you play the starters?  Possibly a quarter or maybe not but keep the starters sharp and game ready.  The last pre-season game has no bearing on the standings but the next game (first season game) has.  On the last game of the season, if the season is locked up then it has no bearing but again the next game has (play-offs) so the team/player must be ready.

 

Another example is practice week, full pads or walk through?  Is it rest and prevention? Preparation and game ready?

 

As a coach you make the call.  Personally I'd like to have the starters in at minimum to break sweat gives them a reason to shower!  lol!  Give them about a quarter then substitute freely.  Oh yes on this, even with the 2nd/3rd team you always coach to win!

[Ja'Crispy]

I don't see this debate ever being settled.

[t-rex]

In retrospect I think this is a more an even fifty/fifty split. No right or wrong answers. But I still think playing last week was an advantage for the Colts.

[ÅÐØNϧ 1]

As far as the Colts go more often then not resting or a bye week generally ended our playoff dreams with a 1 & done    .

 

IMO 18 as good as he is in the regular season playing every week when he gets the time off just is'nt the same. The weekly grind & rhythm that the team had established & been accustomed too has been broken IMO  Peyton Manning needs to play every week to stay sharp thats why IMO Denver will once again be 1 & done  the hungrier team  is the Chargers who have momentum ..

 

When the leagues worst defense made it to the playoffs they got on a roll starting with the wildcard game ending with a Lombardi . Time for rest is after the SB not before IMO ..

[21isSuperman]

I don't think it has been put to rest.  The momentum thing is one thing I don't like.  I think momentum is something you see more in a schedule on paper than actually on the field.  These games aren't played back to back, so momentum doesn't account for much.  They guys have an entire week before the next game, and a thousand different things could happen that could affect how they perform.  I've personally been a fan of having some of both.  Play your starters for the first half, then rest them.  You get the game action and the game speed, but you also get some rest.

[WastedColt]

Personally I have always thought that resting players was a terrible idea. Allowing your team to lose while the starters watch helplessly from the bench seems to break teams mentally. I was ready to burn all of my Colts stuff when they gave up on the perfect season

[pacolts56]

IMO....a player recovering from a significant injury is the only reason to rest someone in Week 17.

 

Healthy players should play at least thru the first half.

 

If, and only if the score permits....such as in our last regular season game versus Jacksonville....then I'm okay with pulling healthy starters in the 3rd or 4th quarter in the final regular season game.