How to prevent NFL teams from tanking in the last weeks of the season

[oddball]

Here is the solution to the problem; there isn't one.

There's always a solution to the problem, but unlike algebra problems, the solution may cause other unintended problems. That's what you have to weigh. I like the idea of playing all division games at the end of the schedule.

Oh and Hedley obviously hasn't heard of the internet or online shopping. Why go out to shop, when they can send it to you and you can sit on your butt and watch the Colts rest their entire starting team? lol

[HedleyLamarr]

Oh and Hedley obviously hasn't heard of the internet or online shopping. Why go out to shop, when they can send it to you and you can sit on your butt and watch the Colts rest their entire starting team? lol

Four words: Victoria's Secret Dressing Room. Yeah c'mon!

The only time I can tolerate shopping is when it's the Christmas season, when fellow shoppers are generally in a happier mood. I also get to converse with other guys as our ladies take their sweet-ass time in non-manly stores.

It's become a bit of a tradition for us to dedicate a day to holiday shopping...with our busy schedules, it gets us into the holiday spirit.

[rams80]

The Saints did the same thing the Colts did in the last three games and then beat the Colts for the championship. You think Saints and Colts fans gave a damn about the last three games?

The difference with the Saints is they did not wrap up home field throughout the playoffs until Minnesota lost to Chicago on Monday Night Football in Week 16 (one day after the Saints inexplicably lost to the Bucs). So in two of the three Saints' losses, they were actually trying to win those games -- unlike the Colts, who essentially lost their last two games on purpose.

And if they had won either of those two games they lost, you can rest assured the starters would have been coming out early in their remaining games.

Bottom line, both the Colts and Saints got to the Super Bowl. Evidently rust wasn't a problem.

The issue with the Colts resting their starters is that had they not lost the game to the Jets, the Jets would have missed the playoffs.

You mean a team that made it to the Conference Finals? Let's not pretend they were a completely undeserving joke shop of a team that was obliterated in their first playoff game. The Jets might have pulled off a W with the Colts starters in-it was pretty close when Manning went out.

[See Red]

The Saints did the same thing the Colts did in the last three games and then beat the Colts for the championship. You think Saints and Colts fans gave a damn about the last three games?

The difference with the Saints is they did not wrap up home field throughout the playoffs until Minnesota lost to Chicago on Monday Night Football in Week 16 (one day after the Saints inexplicably lost to the Bucs). So in two of the three Saints' losses, they were actually trying to win those games -- unlike the Colts, who essentially lost their last two games on purpose.

And if they had won either of those two games they lost, you can rest assured the starters would have been coming out early in their remaining games.

Bottom line, both the Colts and Saints got to the Super Bowl. Evidently rust wasn't a problem.

The issue with the Colts resting their starters is that had they not lost the game to the Jets, the Jets would have missed the playoffs.

You mean a team that made it to the Conference Finals? Let's not pretend they were a completely undeserving joke shop of a team that was obliterated in their first playoff game. The Jets might have pulled off a W with the Colts starters in-it was pretty close when Manning went out.

Yeah, the 9-7 New York Jets, the ones who more than likely would have been 8-8 and on the outside of the playoffs looking in had the League's MVP not been pulled from the game. The Colts tried twice against the Titans, twice against the Jaguars, twice against the Texans, and once against the Broncos, all of those teams finished 8-8 or 9-7 and missed the playoffs thanks in part to the fact that they were unlucky enough to play the Colts when the Colts tried to win football games. Why should the Jets have benefitted from the fact that the Colts were good enough for their last two games to be completely meaningless and that they were just lucky enough to play them in one of those?

[Viper]

Wait, I thought we were talking about tanking. To prevent tanking in the last weeks of the season, then don't automatically give the first pick in the draft to the team with the worse record. Of course, having to give a $50 million guaranteed contract to a guy that's never taken one NFL snap might work, too.

There is tanking (as in intentionally trying to lose in order to, say, secure a better draft position next year) and then there is tanking (as in resting key players and keeping them out of harm's way in games where the outcome is irrelevant, in preparation for the playoffs). This thread is more about the latter variety.

I like the idea of playing all interconference games in September and all division games in December; it kind of gives the NFL schedule a college feel to it. And now that most NFL teams don't share their stadium with an MLB or any other team anymore, it should be a lot easier to arrange this sort of structured schedule league-wide than it was 10-20 years ago.

[infrared41]

Here is the solution to the problem; there isn't one.

There's always a solution to the problem, but unlike algebra problems, the solution may cause other unintended problems. That's what you have to weigh. I like the idea of playing all division games at the end of the schedule.

Oh and Hedley obviously hasn't heard of the internet or online shopping. Why go out to shop, when they can send it to you and you can sit on your butt and watch the Colts rest their entire starting team? lol

In other words, there is no solution.

[The_Admiral]

Well, this isn't tanking, it's just a matter of not being terribly concerned with the outcome of a game with no postseason ramifications. I'm sure they wouldn't mind winning with the second string.

What's the worst thing that happens if a 14-0 team sleepwalks through a game? You go do something else with your afternoon?

[rams80]

The Saints did the same thing the Colts did in the last three games and then beat the Colts for the championship. You think Saints and Colts fans gave a damn about the last three games?

The difference with the Saints is they did not wrap up home field throughout the playoffs until Minnesota lost to Chicago on Monday Night Football in Week 16 (one day after the Saints inexplicably lost to the Bucs). So in two of the three Saints' losses, they were actually trying to win those games -- unlike the Colts, who essentially lost their last two games on purpose.

And if they had won either of those two games they lost, you can rest assured the starters would have been coming out early in their remaining games.

Bottom line, both the Colts and Saints got to the Super Bowl. Evidently rust wasn't a problem.

The issue with the Colts resting their starters is that had they not lost the game to the Jets, the Jets would have missed the playoffs.

You mean a team that made it to the Conference Finals? Let's not pretend they were a completely undeserving joke shop of a team that was obliterated in their first playoff game. The Jets might have pulled off a W with the Colts starters in-it was pretty close when Manning went out.

Yeah, the 9-7 New York Jets, the ones who more than likely would have been 8-8 and on the outside of the playoffs looking in had the League's MVP not been pulled from the game. The Colts tried twice against the Titans, twice against the Jaguars, twice against the Texans, and once against the Broncos, all of those teams finished 8-8 or 9-7 and missed the playoffs thanks in part to the fact that they were unlucky enough to play the Colts when the Colts tried to win football games. Why should the Jets have benefitted from the fact that the Colts were good enough for their last two games to be completely meaningless and that they were just lucky enough to play them in one of those?

All of the above teams had plenty of opportunities in the 16 game season to get that critical 9th or 10th win. Rather than sitting around screaming "Woe is Us", Beat somebody. If you take your destiny out of your hands, you can't complain about the results.

EDIT-More importantly, Tennessee and Houston played, but lost to the Jets last season. I believe they have officially cast aside any right to the "Woe is Us" claim.

[BBTV]

Well, this isn't tanking, it's just a matter of not being terribly concerned with the outcome of a game with no postseason ramifications. I'm sure they wouldn't mind winning with the second string.

What's the worst thing that happens if a 14-0 team sleepwalks through a game? You go do something else with your afternoon?

With the Eagles (and I assume most other teams not located in Jacksonville) it is so tough to get an individual-game ticket that there are many in the stands every game who are either there for the first time, spent a ton to get that ticket, may not get a chance to go back for a long time, etc. I think that they deserve to see a competitive game. Like I said in my post that contained my proposal, there's no way to guarantee a meaningful game, but you can reduce the risk of a meaningless one.

[The_Admiral]

Okay, so backload the schedule with divisional games. That's about all you can do. But isn't there some degree of caveat emptor to, say, buying tickets to the last Colts game of the season? I think you almost have to go into a situation like that with the understanding that you're probably not going to see as much Peyton Manning as you may like. I know sports are in the entertainment business, but sending the fans home happy can't be allowed to heavily compromise larger goals.

[oddball]

Here is the solution to the problem; there isn't one.

There's always a solution to the problem, but unlike algebra problems, the solution may cause other unintended problems. That's what you have to weigh. I like the idea of playing all division games at the end of the schedule.

Oh and Hedley obviously hasn't heard of the internet or online shopping. Why go out to shop, when they can send it to you and you can sit on your butt and watch the Colts rest their entire starting team? lol

In other words, there is no solution.

I just have to say this, "Boise State can play in the Big 10!!!" Sorry, had to beat that dead horse!!!

[BaltimoreFan]

The Saints did the same thing the Colts did in the last three games and then beat the Colts for the championship. You think Saints and Colts fans gave a damn about the last three games?

The difference with the Saints is they did not wrap up home field throughout the playoffs until Minnesota lost to Chicago on Monday Night Football in Week 16 (one day after the Saints inexplicably lost to the Bucs). So in two of the three Saints' losses, they were actually trying to win those games -- unlike the Colts, who essentially lost their last two games on purpose.

And if they had won either of those two games they lost, you can rest assured the starters would have been coming out early in their remaining games.

Bottom line, both the Colts and Saints got to the Super Bowl. Evidently rust wasn't a problem.

The issue with the Colts resting their starters is that had they not lost the game to the Jets, the Jets would have missed the playoffs.

You mean a team that made it to the Conference Finals? Let's not pretend they were a completely undeserving joke shop of a team that was obliterated in their first playoff game. The Jets might have pulled off a W with the Colts starters in-it was pretty close when Manning went out.

Yeah, the 9-7 New York Jets, the ones who more than likely would have been 8-8 and on the outside of the playoffs looking in had the League's MVP not been pulled from the game. The Colts tried twice against the Titans, twice against the Jaguars, twice against the Texans, and once against the Broncos, all of those teams finished 8-8 or 9-7 and missed the playoffs thanks in part to the fact that they were unlucky enough to play the Colts when the Colts tried to win football games. Why should the Jets have benefitted from the fact that the Colts were good enough for their last two games to be completely meaningless and that they were just lucky enough to play them in one of those?

All of the above teams had plenty of opportunities in the 16 game season to get that critical 9th or 10th win. Rather than sitting around screaming "Woe is Us", Beat somebody. If you take your destiny out of your hands, you can't complain about the results.

EDIT-More importantly, Tennessee and Houston played, but lost to the Jets last season. I believe they have officially cast aside any right to the "Woe is Us" claim.

Exactly, one game doesn't make a season. If your 8-8 or 9-7, you should consider yourself lucky to make the playoffs at all. Can you honestly say that any of those teams were true Super Bowl contenders. I don't think so, I bet most would have lost in the first round. Those teams screwed up plenty of other chances, to get the last spot.

I personally don't think there is much of a solution. I'm all for scheduling division games in Weeks 15-17, but I don't think it will have an effect on an 14-0 team. I would think most professional athletes would strive for a perfect season (and maybe rest starters once the game has been won). But most just want a championship. I don't think there is a true solution, without getting ridiculous.

[Saintsfan]

I am not so sure that putting division games at the end of the schedule would make a whole lot of difference. Sure it might mean tie breaks aren't set till later in the season, but it also means that it could be obvious that the tie breaker won't be needed.

[B-Rich]

After the Colts committed suicide with their perfect season last year....

Ummm, much like the vaunted Patriots "perfect season" of 2007, there was no "suicide" involved-- the attempt at the "perfect season" was/would've been "killed" by the Saints in Super Bowl XLIV.

(from a Saints homer)

[infrared41]

Well, this isn't tanking, it's just a matter of not being terribly concerned with the outcome of a game with no postseason ramifications. I'm sure they wouldn't mind winning with the second string.

What's the worst thing that happens if a 14-0 team sleepwalks through a game? You go do something else with your afternoon?

With the Eagles (and I assume most other teams not located in Jacksonville) it is so tough to get an individual-game ticket that there are many in the stands every game who are either there for the first time, spent a ton to get that ticket, may not get a chance to go back for a long time, etc. I think that they deserve to see a competitive game. Like I said in my post that contained my proposal, there's no way to guarantee a meaningful game, but you can reduce the risk of a meaningless one.

Apologies if this has already been brought up...

The only way to solve this is for the league to step in and create a rule. The rule would state that once you have secured your highest possible playoff position your top players must play at least 65% of the plays for the remaining games. Top players would be determined by the percentage of plays they were involved in throughout the season. Short of that, there is always going to be a way to get around playing your best players in meaningless games. We know that rule won't happen so again, there really is no solution.

[BBTV]

Well, this isn't tanking, it's just a matter of not being terribly concerned with the outcome of a game with no postseason ramifications. I'm sure they wouldn't mind winning with the second string.

What's the worst thing that happens if a 14-0 team sleepwalks through a game? You go do something else with your afternoon?

With the Eagles (and I assume most other teams not located in Jacksonville) it is so tough to get an individual-game ticket that there are many in the stands every game who are either there for the first time, spent a ton to get that ticket, may not get a chance to go back for a long time, etc. I think that they deserve to see a competitive game. Like I said in my post that contained my proposal, there's no way to guarantee a meaningful game, but you can reduce the risk of a meaningless one.

Apologies if this has already been brought up...

The only way to solve this is for the league to step in and create a rule. The rule would state that once you have secured your highest possible playoff position your top players must play at least 65% of the plays for the remaining games. Top players would be determined by the percentage of plays they were involved in throughout the season. Short of that, there is always going to be a way to get around playing your best players in meaningless games. We know that rule won't happen so again, there really is no solution.

That rule would be dumb and unenforceable. You can't tell if a player tweaked something and has to sit out, you can't tell if a guy was benched for disiplinary reasons, etc. You cannot dictate to a coach who he can plan and how much they need to play.

"Short of that, there is always going to be a way to get around playing your best players in meaningless games. "

Right... that's what I've been saying all along. That's why you have to at least attempt to reduce the number of meaningless games. You won't eliminate them, and that's a shame for those people, but oh well. You owe it to them to at least try though. Manipulating the schedule is the only way.

[infrared41]

Well, this isn't tanking, it's just a matter of not being terribly concerned with the outcome of a game with no postseason ramifications. I'm sure they wouldn't mind winning with the second string.

What's the worst thing that happens if a 14-0 team sleepwalks through a game? You go do something else with your afternoon?

With the Eagles (and I assume most other teams not located in Jacksonville) it is so tough to get an individual-game ticket that there are many in the stands every game who are either there for the first time, spent a ton to get that ticket, may not get a chance to go back for a long time, etc. I think that they deserve to see a competitive game. Like I said in my post that contained my proposal, there's no way to guarantee a meaningful game, but you can reduce the risk of a meaningless one.

Apologies if this has already been brought up...

The only way to solve this is for the league to step in and create a rule. The rule would state that once you have secured your highest possible playoff position your top players must play at least 65% of the plays for the remaining games. Top players would be determined by the percentage of plays they were involved in throughout the season. Short of that, there is always going to be a way to get around playing your best players in meaningless games. We know that rule won't happen so again, there really is no solution.

That rule would be dumb and unenforceable. You can't tell if a player tweaked something and has to sit out, you can't tell if a guy was benched for disiplinary reasons, etc. You cannot dictate to a coach who he can plan and how much they need to play.

"Short of that, there is always going to be a way to get around playing your best players in meaningless games. "

Right... that's what I've been saying all along. That's why you have to at least attempt to reduce the number of meaningless games. You won't eliminate them, and that's a shame for those people, but oh well. You owe it to them to at least try though. Manipulating the schedule is the only way.

It is pretty dumb isn't it? Oh well. I'm sticking to my original position; there is no solution. Continue chasing your tails.

[pcgd]

What do you tell the team's that have a starting QB injured in a meaningless game for that team?? No matter what someone's going to be pissed off. Sure I'd be upset if my team got out of a playoff spot because of a team taking a few weeks off, but I'd be more upset if my 14-1 team's QB got injured in a meaningless game against a 7-8 team trying to back into the playoffs...

[BBTV]

IR, You keep saying that there's no solution, but do you deny that an adjustment to scheduling would help at least a little?

[infrared41]

IR, You keep saying that there's no solution, but do you deny that an adjustment to scheduling would help at least a little?

Maybe but each "help a little" solution seems to create a different set of problems. As my "65% rule" surely attests, I have no idea how to fix this.