Sugashane Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 2 hours ago, El ramster said: Appreciate the YuGiOh reference. lol As long as the players don't get rusty on the time off. There has been a few times I have seen the team look flat after a layoff. With Lafleur as one of my top HC candidates for the Bears, I want to see a long playoff run. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammymvpknight Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 The Rams could lose to the 49ers. I’m sure they’d prefer to lose without their starters than with their starters. That’s something that could affect momentum. The only real risk is losing home field advantage against the #3 seed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsoxsuck05 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 I'd prefer that some other team disposes of a potentially unfavorable playoff matchup. Would the Giants have won the 2011 Super Bowl had the Saints beaten the 49ers? There's no guarantee that you'll "have" to face that team if you want to win the SB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
808 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 18 minutes ago, MidSouthRam said: No. It's because the Rams/McVay are not stupid. The goal is to get to and win the Super Bowl and it's in the teams best interest to get as healthy as possible entering the playoffs. They be foolish to risk very important players in a meaningless game when there really isn't much difference in the #3 and #4 seeds. I could see if they had the #1 or #2 seed locked up. But not the #3 or #4 seed. Just my personal opinion; apparently I'm wrong for it. 17 minutes ago, El ramster said: The dude said scared?? More tuddies. Yup, I said scared. Like your squad in the 4th quarter. Donald couldn't get home here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Ramster Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 That's cool.. The fact that you searched up those images and took 3 mins off your day It's a win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
808 Posted December 28, 2017 Share Posted December 28, 2017 Just now, El ramster said: That's cool.. The fact that you searched up those images and took 3 mins off your day It's a win. And I'm on the clock, so it's a win-win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandyMossIsBoss Posted December 28, 2017 Author Share Posted December 28, 2017 3 hours ago, FourThreeMafia said: I mean, I love everything McVay has done, but "new age coaching"? Haha....come on. This isnt some mastermind decision at all and has been done many times in the past. They are locked in as division winners and guaranteed the 3rd or 4th seed, but cant get a bye. Either way, they are going to get a home game against a good team, and if they win, go on the road vs one of two teams that have beaten them already this season. There are alot of things to praise McVay for. This decision isnt one of them. Its a no brainer. What are some examples? edit- Seems the Ravens did it in 2012. They were 10-5 with the division clinched and rested their starters against the Bengals even though had they won, and the Patriots lost, they would have gotten the 3 seed instead of the 4 seed. They really had no choice when you look at, as they could either play to win against the Bengals, get the 3 seed, and then have to play the Bengals (6 seed locked in) again next week, which is not ideal having just shown your hand. Even then they didn't quite control their own destiny, as they needed a Pats loss. Is there an example of a team resting starters who could have improved their seeding with a win alone in week 17, like the Rams are doing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul-mac Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 I have a feeling the 3rd seed in the NFC might actually end up being really valuable, because I actually expect both of the bye week teams to lose on divisional weekend, so whoever is the 3rd seed ends up hosting the NFC championship. The Eagles look vulnerable with Foles and I don't think Minnesota is going anywhere with Keenum. Really the NFC playoffs for me is about the Saints, Rams and Panthers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apparition Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 Being a #4 seed instead of a #3 in a strong conference can work against you. Just ask the 2006 Patriots. They were behind the Chargers (14-2), Ravens (13-3) and Colts (12-4) that year (the last by virtue of a head-to-head loss). They won their WC game against the Jets with ease, but then they miraculously (thanks, Marlon McCree!) beat the Chargers who were clearly the best team in the league) and had to go to Indy for the AFCCG, which they likely would've won had it been played in Foxboro. Then again the Rams are facing the buzzsaw that is Jimmy G.O.A.T.'s 49ers this week so it might not matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NVRamsFan Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 Nothing to do with seeding and everything to do with keeping key players healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Ramster Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 15 minutes ago, NVRamsFan said: Nothing to do with seeding and everything to do with keeping key players healthy. Que the Rams road record and record setting season. 8-1.. By scoring 27 points against the Titans on Sunday, the Rams set a franchise record for the most points scored on the road with 262. The previous best was 250, which was set by the Rams in 2001. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hudson3010 Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 If they really need to get healthy ok. If not it’s a bad decision. I’d rather play the falcons/seahawks than panthers/saints and also play at home the nfc champ if the #4 seed gets there. You cannot look ahead the division round, have to worry about getting there first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 If there is this much fear in playing the Vikings, how are they going to manage the championship game if both teams make it. It's kind of weak to try and avoid playing a specific team. The Rams can do what they think is best strategically but it does come off as being a bit insecure. However, I can understand the strategy of resting starters for the purpose of giving them time off before the WC round. In the end, there is little difference between the 3rd and 4th seed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrry32 Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 Why wouldn't we rest starters? We have nothing to gain this week. Giving our best players a week off might allow them to get healthier and avoid that much more fatigue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 5 hours ago, FourThreeMafia said: I mean, I love everything McVay has done, but "new age coaching"? Haha....come on. This isnt some mastermind decision at all and has been done many times in the past. They are locked in as division winners and guaranteed the 3rd or 4th seed, but cant get a bye. Either way, they are going to get a home game against a good team, and if they win, go on the road vs one of two teams that have beaten them already this season. There are alot of things to praise McVay for. This decision isnt one of them. Its a no brainer. Same. Not buying the 4D chess approach at all. It's a long, long season. Guys need rest. Might as well treat week 17 like a bye for the starters before the playoffs start which is a home game anyway. I don't think McVay cares about who the Rams will face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.