Bengals don't need Momentum, aka 2005 Patriots, 1988 49ers, etc.

[Bengals Mike]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

I will say it again for you or anyone..

Name me a team that was locked in a seeded position, used their starters and beat a team that was gunning for the playoffs. It is not hard to understand but hard to find.

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

I will say it again for you or anyone..

Name me a team that was locked in a seeded position, used their starters and beat a team that was gunning for the playoffs. It is not hard to understand but hard to find.

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

I will say it again for you or anyone..

Name me a team that was locked in a seeded position, used their starters and beat a team that was gunning for the playoffs. It is not hard to understand but hard to find.

Once AGAIN

2007 - 15-0 Patriots vs 10-5 Giants
BEFORE - Patriots 1st in AFC, can't gain with a win, can't fall with a loss
BEFORE - Giants 5th in NFC, can't gain with a win, can't fall with a loss

BOTH teams play starters for 60 MINUTES - Patriots win 38-35

AFTER - Patriots win, Patriots finish 1st in AFC, they didnt gain with the win
AFTER - Giants lost, Giants finish 5th in NFC, they didnt fall with the loss

Both teams remained HEALTHY in a game neither team had anything to gain for their playoff position, go ahead and use the Patriots needed to go 16-0 more than they needed a Super Bowl to justify the Patriots, but what justification did the Giants have to do that?? they lost a game they didnt even have to play and yet they played hard enough where after that game before the playoffs they were considered a playoff sleeper for how well they played despite the loss

2010 - 11-4 Bears vs 9-6 Packers
BEFORE - Bears in 2nd in NFC, can't gain with a win, can't fall with a loss
BEFORE - Packers 6th in NFC, need win to make playoffs, miss playoffs with a loss

BOTH teams play starters for 60 MINUTES - Packers win 10-3

AFTER - Bears lost, Bears finish 2nd in NFC, they didnt fall with the loss
AFTER - Packers won, Packers clinched 6th in NFC, they made the playoffs with the win

I remember this game like you remember the Patriots tanking to Miami in 2005, why? because I had a $100 point spread on 3 games that day and I had the Packers to cover -13.5 points of course expecting the Bears to be benching it out and instead the Bears DID go all out in this game, if they didnt then I would have won $500 from this game and the Packers would have won by mass destruction against a team wasn't playing its starters but the Bears DID, so DON'T tell me that the Bears weren't trying because I did watch this game and I know what they DID do, they showed up and tried to win this game when they really didn't need it, of course the Bears didn't win, but they played hard enough in this game where it didnt detract them from winning their next game either

Why would you think the Bears weren't trying when they gave up the MOST sacks in the NFL that year with 56 and the Packers were 2nd in the NFL with 47 sacks, of course that would be perfect reasoning for a team to rest their starters in a game they didnt need and yet Jay Cutler played the ENTIRE game getting sacked 6 times and to top it all off in the end, BOTH teams ended that game healthy


Now it's your turn, there's only been one game in recent years where a team played their starters when they didnt have to and lost a significant player to an injury in that game the week before the playoffs in a game they didnt need - and I dont need you to tell me that it was New England in Houston in 2009 when Wes Welker tore his acl in the 1st quarter in Houston, however as bad as it was to lose a player like Welker, his absence wasn't why they lost the following week at home to Baltimore as Wes Welker did not play Defense for the Patriots who would let Ray Rice run for an 83 yard touchdown on the 1st play of the game and set the tone for a 24-0 Ravens lead after 1 quarter

Now that I've more than explained the scenarios to back my claim, your turn - Name games where a team lost a significant player in this situation in the final week of the season that literally hurt their team in the playoffs?

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Bengals Mike

Once AGAIN

2007 - 15-0 Patriots vs 10-5 Giants
BEFORE - Patriots 1st in AFC, can't gain with a win, can't fall with a loss
BEFORE - Giants 5th in NFC, can't gain with a win, can't fall with a loss

BOTH teams play starters for 60 MINUTES - Patriots win 38-35

AFTER - Patriots win, Patriots finish 1st in AFC, they didnt gain with the win
AFTER - Giants lost, Giants finish 5th in NFC, they didnt fall with the loss

Both teams remained HEALTHY in a game neither team had anything to gain for their playoff position, go ahead and use the Patriots needed to go 16-0 more than they needed a Super Bowl to justify the Patriots, but what justification did the Giants have to do that?? they lost a game they didnt even have to play and yet they played hard enough where after that game before the playoffs they were considered a playoff sleeper for how well they played despite the loss

2010 - 11-4 Bears vs 9-6 Packers
BEFORE - Bears in 2nd in NFC, can't gain with a win, can't fall with a loss
BEFORE - Packers 6th in NFC, need win to make playoffs, miss playoffs with a loss

BOTH teams play starters for 60 MINUTES - Packers win 10-3

AFTER - Bears lost, Bears finish 2nd in NFC, they didnt fall with the loss
AFTER - Packers won, Packers clinched 6th in NFC, they made the playoffs with the win

I remember this game like you remember the Patriots tanking to Miami in 2005, why? because I had a $100 point spread on 3 games that day and I had the Packers to cover -13.5 points of course expecting the Bears to be benching it out and instead the Bears DID go all out in this game, if they didnt then I would have won $500 from this game and the Packers would have won by mass destruction against a team wasn't playing its starters but the Bears DID, so DON'T tell me that the Bears weren't trying because I did watch this game and I know what they DID do, they showed up and tried to win this game when they really didn't need it, of course the Bears didn't win, but they played hard enough in this game where it didnt detract them from winning their next game either

Why would you think the Bears weren't trying when they gave up the MOST sacks in the NFL that year with 56 and the Packers were 2nd in the NFL with 47 sacks, of course that would be perfect reasoning for a team to rest their starters in a game they didnt need and yet Jay Cutler played the ENTIRE game getting sacked 6 times and to top it all off in the end, BOTH teams ended that game healthy


Now it's your turn, there's only been one game in recent years where a team played their starters when they didnt have to and lost a significant player to an injury in that game the week before the playoffs in a game they didnt need - and I dont need you to tell me that it was New England in Houston in 2009 when Wes Welker tore his acl in the 1st quarter in Houston, however as bad as it was to lose a player like Welker, his absence wasn't why they lost the following week at home to Baltimore as Wes Welker did not play Defense for the Patriots who would let Ray Rice run for an 83 yard touchdown on the 1st play of the game and set the tone for a 24-0 Ravens lead after 1 quarter

Now that I've more than explained the scenarios to back my claim, your turn - Name games where a team lost a significant player in this situation in the final week of the season that literally hurt their team in the playoffs?

OMG, I tried to make it as simple as possible. But you still don't understand.

The games you mention are not examples of a seeded team that had nothing to gain, but played their starters and defeated a team gunning for the playoffs.

The 2007 Pats vs Giants -- Here, while the Pats played their starters they had nothing to gain [other then making history] they did NOT knock out the Giants out of the playoffs.

The 2010 Bears vs Packers -- Similarly, the Bears had nothing to gain, they played their starters but they did NOT knock out the Packers out of the playoffs.

The Jan 3, 2010 Patriots vs Texans -- The Patriots lost the game, thus they did NOT knock out the Texans.

Ok, anyone please provide me a game where a team was stuck in a seeded slot and they played their starters anyway and knocked out a team that was gunning for the playoffs.

I know this happened once. Normally, teams who are stuck in a seeded slot do not have their starters play the whole game and knock out a team gunning for the playoffs.

Good luck, it just doesn't happen,....normally.

[Bengals Mike]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

OMG, I tried to make it as simple as possible. But you still don't understand.

The games you mention are not examples of a seeded team that had nothing to gain, but played their starters and defeated a team gunning for the playoffs.

The 2007 Pats vs Giants -- Here, while the Pats played their starters they had nothing to gain [other then making history] they did NOT knock out the Giants out of the playoffs.

The 2010 Bears vs Packers -- Similarly, the Bears had nothing to gain, they played their starters but they did NOT knock out the Packers out of the playoffs.

The Jan 3, 2010 Patriots vs Texans -- The Patriots lost the game, thus they did NOT knock out the Texans.

Ok, anyone please provide me a game where a team was stuck in a seeded slot and they played their starters anyway and knocked out a team that was gunning for the playoffs.

I know this happened once. Normally, teams who are stuck in a seeded slot do not have their starters play the whole game and knock out a team gunning for the playoffs.

Good luck, it just doesn't happen,....normally.

Fair enough, but my defense was that teams have played their starters in games they did not need to win, my point with the Patriots and Giants game was both teams were in the same scenario regarding the playoffs, neither of them could gain or lose their positioning in that game and they both went all out for the win, yes the Patriots had the perfect record to go for but it didnt affect the playoff positioning at all where they went for it and a team like the Colts didnt go for it in 2009 because of their playoff positioning and a team like the Giants had no incentive at all to play like they did that game but they did anyway and that's my thing with the Bengals this week, you can play games that dont affect playoff positioning in the final week and stay healthy

and in this instance I'm saying the Bengals will win this week based on the fact that I think the Ravens will do even less on the field to secure an even better path in the playoffs by losing, not by the Bengals exerting themselves for 60 minutes like a playoff game but just by simply outplaying the Ravens backups by matchups with starters for 2-3 quarters to at least stabilize the offense going into the playoffs as Dalton hasn't had a turnover free game in 4 weeks and the Offensive line hasnt given up less than 5 sacks in a game in the last 3 weeks

That's why I'm all for the starters to play this week and again, not for 60 minutes but at least 2-3 quarters

[TheCincinnatiKid]

I think we're in with momentum regardless of this weekend's game. We'll have won 6 of 8 at worst going into the playoffs, and we'll be one of the hottest teams in the league.

Unfortunately the Pats would also be on fire if we get them. Houston is a better momentum matchup, they've had the #1 seed on lockdown for the whole season basically, so to lose that and drop to 3rd, losing their bye and playing a red-hot Bengals team while they've been off key for a bit, would go in our favour. Not saying we'd then definitely win, but more of a chance there than New England imo. I think we have a tough matchup regardless. the AFC isn't particularly strong this year, but the division winners are'nt bad.

[Bengals Mike]

Originally Posted by TheCincinnatiKid

I think we're in with momentum regardless of this weekend's game. We'll have won 6 of 8 at worst going into the playoffs, and we'll be one of the hottest teams in the league.

Unfortunately the Pats would also be on fire if we get them. Houston is a better momentum matchup, they've had the #1 seed on lockdown for the whole season basically, so to lose that and drop to 3rd, losing their bye and playing a red-hot Bengals team while they've been off key for a bit, would go in our favour. Not saying we'd then definitely win, but more of a chance there than New England imo. I think we have a tough matchup regardless. the AFC isn't particularly strong this year, but the division winners are'nt bad.

Well there's nothing wrong with going 6-2 to end the year but we've seen what happened when this team has benched it out the week before and it didnt bode well the next week in the playoffs either which is why im all for the playing time this week, I dont think it has to be a 60 minute game but just outplay the Ravens bench to correct the offense and id be happy with that, I see where my wanting the win has been misleading this week but I think we can get it just by exploiting the matchups, not by exerting ourselves for 60 minutes like its the playoffs

As for the Patriots, I wouldnt go as far as calling them on fire, they look like they peaked in the Texans game, almost completely fell apart in the 49ers game and look like they were still picking up pieces in the Jaguars game, I dont know if they'll do that to ths Dolphins this week - that's not to say they're soft, they're still a postseason team that will put up a tough game but they havent been world beaters lately either but nobody wants to play the Bengals right now which is why I see the Ravens doing even less this week to get the Colts then probably Houston path instead of the Bengals then Denver path, I've heard all the 'but they can still get 3rd talk' and that only does them good if they're in an afc title game against a 4/5 seed which nobody can oversee and plan that far ahead, but an inexperienced Colts team that cant stop the run is a sure thing to have with a loss

[kevin]

Originally Posted by EyeOfTheTiger

Too bad! Take your ball and go home. Stop being selfish and put the good of the team over your ow interests. You are blessed to have the money to see this team live. Some of us Bengals fans (like me) have NEVER been to a Bengals game. Quit taking what you have for granted. Spoiled!

In another thread you said...F the season ticket holders.....You say you have never been to a Bengals game...but you say F the season ticket holders....For those who don't like Mike Brown, I will say I'm glad you aren't the owner.

Beat Baltimore !! Go Bengals !!!

[Bengals Mike]

Originally Posted by Bengals Mike

First of all your 2007 Colts example doesnt help you at all - they were one and done with resting AND a bye

and since you asked:

2004 - Steelers 14-1 @ Bills 9-6 - http://www.pro-football-reference.co...0501020buf.htm
Steelers had Division and Home field wrapped up and Tommy Maddox started at QB for Steelers, every other starter started for Steelers and won 29-24 against the Bills who needed the win for the Wildcard and the Steelers were healthy after that game

2006 - Patriots 11-4 @ Titans 8-7 - http://www.pro-football-reference.co...0612310oti.htm
Patriots had Division wrapped up and weren't going to get a bye week with Ravens about to play a bad Bills team later that day similar to Broncos/Patriots situation this week (I'm sure you'll disregard this as the Patriots still had the chance in 2006 but you're the one thinking they'll tank the Dolphins game to drop behind the Ravens this week so I'm awaiting your doublestandard on this) Titans needed game for wildcard but Patriots won 40-23 anyway and were healthy after that game

2007 - Patriots 15-0 @ Giants 10-5 - http://www.pro-football-reference.co...0712290nyg.htm
Patriots had Division and Home Field wrapped up and of course went for 16-0, Giants were locked into 5th seed and both teams played every regular starter and of course Patriots won 38-35 but for a game the Giants and really even the Patriots didn't 'need' they went all out and remained healthy anyway

2010 - Bears 11-4 @ Packers 9-6 - http://www.pro-football-reference.co...1101020gnb.htm
The Bears had the Division and a Bye week wrapped up and couldnt get home field and the Packers absolutely needed this game to make the playoffs and the Bears went all out and played everyone anyway and the Packers won 10-3 in a slugfest similar to the Bengals/Steelers on the weekend, both teams finished the game as healthy as they were before the game


and in the original post I named more instances of teams with winning streaks entering the playoffs REGARDLESS of need that would go on to play Wildcard Weekend WITHOUT rest and won at least 2 games than you have trying to claim teams pampering themselves to avoid injury - this team is one and done if they try this again and Marvin knows this

I can now add another game to this list under the same scenario after today

2012 - 12-3 Texans @ 10-5 Colts
With the Texans needing a win to secure the top seed in the AFC, the Colts were locked into the 5th seed unable to gain or lose anything out of this game, yes Chuck Pagano returned but the game had no bearing on their playoff status and were essentially playing for fun, but that didnt stop the Colts from the 28-16 win dropping the Texans from home field to wildcard weekend and once again, the Colts remained healthy after the game

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Bengals Mike

I can now add another game to this list under the same scenario after today

2012 - 12-3 Texans @ 10-5 Colts
With the Texans needing a win to secure the top seed in the AFC, the Colts were locked into the 5th seed unable to gain or lose anything out of this game, yes Chuck Pagano returned but the game had no bearing on their playoff status and were essentially playing for fun, but that didnt stop the Colts from the 28-16 win dropping the Texans from home field to wildcard weekend and once again, the Colts remained healthy after the game

You have to be kidding right????

This game will be one of the lead games of highlights during the week, heck during the year with the emotional return of the Colts coach.

C'mon man!!!!

This one is similar to the Pats going for 16-0.

[Bengals Mike]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

You have to be kidding right????

This game will be one of the lead games of highlights during the week, heck during the year with the emotional return of the Colts coach.

C'mon man!!!!

This one is similar to the Pats going for 16-0.

wow anything to protect your selective criteria that just happens to expand by the game

I've maintained my criteria of my point - a team that didnt need the win to improve or worsen their own playoff situation that played everyone against a team that was in the same situation or absolutely needed to win the game for their own personal gain and stayed healthy in the end

If you want to add fanfare to a game to detract from it then go ahead but I've stayed true to my point the whole time

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Bengals Mike

wow anything to protect your selective criteria that just happens to expand by the game

I've maintained my criteria of my point - a team that didnt need the win to improve or worsen their own playoff situation that played everyone against a team that was in the same situation or absolutely needed to win the game for their own personal gain and stayed healthy in the end

If you want to add fanfare to a game to detract from it then go ahead but I've stayed true to my point the whole time

Dude, it is COMMON SENSE to understand that a team will want to make history to go 16-0. Similarly, the Colts were playing an emotional game for their coach for their fans.

[Rrobo9]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

Patriots opted for healthy and to avoid the Steelers. Maybe just to avoid the Steelers

In the season of 2005, Bill Belichick opted for seed 4 instead of seed 3. Seed 4 would have gotten them the Steelers, seed 3 got them Jacksonville. We all knew the Bengals turned it to be seed 3 and faced the Steelers. The Bengals also did not want seed 3 and played their worst game of the season getting blown out by the Kansas City Chiefs.

The Pats played Miami in New England on Jan 2, 2006 on the last game of the season. The Pats were heavy favorites with a lot of streaks on the line. This game was NOT the same where the Bengals are now. We are locked in as the 6th seed. In 2005, the Pats could have been seed 3 or 4. The Pats rested their starters and did not give a damn about momentum.

Look, everyone knows that Belichick is a genius. No one questions whether he is a great coach. He let his starters rest their last game, heck in all honesty that game against Miami was a dive. He let his 2nd-3rd stringers against Miami's first stringers. He let Doug Flutie do a drop kick!!!!!!

Alll this talk about momentum is foolish. The Pats wanted no part of the Steelers and preferred Jacksonville to come into New England to play in the cold. In the end, Bill was right, Jacksonville had to play in New England on a COLD SATURDAY NIGHT!!!!
Pittsburgh went on to win the Superbowl.

BTW, Miami is a rival to Pats.

Enter 2012, it is a long shot and ironically, the Pats would have to lose to Miami again but if they did and we "lose" to the Ravens. We get the Ravens instead of the Patriots.


Many would argue about momentum but I remember the 1988 49ers losing on purpose their last game of the year against their rivals the Rams to keep the Giants out of the playoffs via the wildcard. The 49ers were locked in the second seed and that last game against the Rams was in in Frisco that night. The 1988 Superbowl Champion 49ers got crushed by the Rams in Frisco, 38-16.

Yeah, momentum

For all those who want to put their heads into the sand and don't want to remember the 88 49ers, recently the Saints of 2009 loss their last THREE games of the season after into the playoffs with no momentum and came out Superbowl Champions. Let me repeat that for the hard of hearing, the Saints loss their last THREE games.


Now back to the 2005 Patriots who took a dive to avoid the 3rd seed. The reference is from New England sources.

Originally Posted by BengalYankee
Please read these and get back to me.

http://patspulpit.blogspot.com/2006/...-28-recap.html

"I don't think it looked that convincing. I think, when it came down to it, Belichick wanted the No. 4 seed, and with Kansas City beating Cincinnati, and beating them well and easily all day, Belichick sent in the "dive." No chance a running back stumbles through a hole and sends the game to overtime. A nice little throwaway that no one could conceivable catch, and there's your fourth seed. "





How is it that the Patriots can send in their 2nd and 3rd stringers against Maimi's 1st stringers, yet we can't do the same?
See the link below.

http://nwe.scout.com/2/484340.html


http://patspulpit.blogspot.com/2006/...en-thread.html

How about them Bengals, played some starters, rested other etc.. and pulled out a win..two wins over league opponents.. 7 wins of last 8 games.. got to love Marvin

[Bengals Mike]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

Dude, it is COMMON SENSE to understand that a team will want to make history to go 16-0. Similarly, the Colts were playing an emotional game for their coach for their fans.

right, just like the Colts did in 2009 at 14-0 when they benched it out in the middle of a 3rd quarter lead with the Jets?

that game alone refutes how much 16-0 means when a team can make a decision like that in that scenario

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Bengals Mike

right, just like the Colts did in 2009 at 14-0 when they benched it out in the middle of a 3rd quarter lead with the Jets?

that game alone refutes how much 16-0 means when a team can make a decision like that

Colts did not want to achieve history, so they pulled their starters and did exactly what I first stated.

They were locked in a seed and did not knock out a team gunning for the playoffs.

[Bengals Mike]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

Colts did not want to achieve history, so they pulled their starters and did exactly what I first stated.

They were locked in a seed and did not knock out a team gunning for the playoffs.

and yet the Patriots and Giants both did what I've been proving all along - you can play your starters in a game that has no bearing on playoff seedings and remain healthy after playing such a game

[Bengals Mike]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

Colts did not want to achieve history, so they pulled their starters and did exactly what I first stated.

They were locked in a seed and did not knock out a team gunning for the playoffs.

and yet the Patriots and Giants both did what I've been proving all along - you can play your starters in a game that has no bearing on playoff seedings after clinching your own and remain healthy after playing such a game

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Bengals Mike

and yet the Patriots and Giants both did what I've been proving all along - you can play your starters in a game that has no bearing on playoff seedings and remain healthy after playing such a game

You have proved nothing.

I asked to present a team that was stuck in a seeded slot and stopped a team gunning for the playoffs, by playing their starters in their last game.

You can't!!!!!

[Rrobo9]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

You have proved nothing.

I asked to present a team that was stuck in a seeded slot and stopped a team gunning for the playoffs, by playing their starters in their last game.

You can't!!!!!

I can called the Colts.. stuck in 5th but knocked off the Texans...

also the Bengals did play most of their starters today especially on Defense Baby...

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Rrobo9

I can called the Colts.. stuck in 5th but knocked off the Texans...

also the Bengals did play most of their starters today especially on Defense Baby...

Looks like you came in late and have no idea what was said earlier.

The Texans are not knocked out from the playoffs.

Plus, the starters have to play the whole game and knock off a team.

Find a game. I know of one , just one where starters played the whole game where they did not have to and knock off a team from getting into the playoffs.

[Who-Dey Girl]

You can look at the videos on the front page and see that this was not a meaningless game to the defense at least. They wanted a chance to redeem themselves after the first debacle. They looked at those reporters like they had two heads!

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Who-Dey Girl

You can look at the videos on the front page and see that this was not a meaningless game to the defense at least. They wanted a chance to redeem themselves after the first debacle. They looked at those reporters like they had two heads!

Most of the starters from both teams left early or did not play. In an important game starters from both teams would play the whole game.

The players who did play are professional and played their hearts out.

[Who-Dey Girl]

Agree with this but the D really did want this one bad I think. Just a pride thing.

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Who-Dey Girl

Agree with this but the D really did want this one bad I think. Just a pride thing.

Agree those that played, played their hearts out.

[Bengals Mike]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

You have proved nothing.

I asked to present a team that was stuck in a seeded slot and stopped a team gunning for the playoffs, by playing their starters in their last game.

You can't!!!!!

I did

Originally Posted by Bengals Mike

and yet the Patriots and Giants both did what I've been proving all along - you can play your starters in a game that has no bearing on playoff seedings after clinching your own and remain healthy after playing such a game

I dont care what point you want, I made my point from the beginning and it held up today - the Bengals won, have the momentum of entering the playoffs with a win streak for once and did it playing starters without significant injuries - yes Crocker got hurt but it wasn't fatal and he wasn't hurt so bad where that's gonna cause the whole team to collapse in the playoffs

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Bengals Mike

I did



I dont care what point you want, I made my point from the beginning and it held up today - the Bengals won, have the momentum of entering the playoffs with a win streak for once and did it playing starters without significant injuries - yes Crocker got hurt but it wasn't fatal and he wasn't hurt so bad where that's gonna cause the whole team to collapse in the playoffs

I know you don't care. You are completely lost. You have not pointed to a team that has started their regulars that had nothing to gain for and knock another team out of playoff contention.

As for as the Ravens game, who did not want the Bengals to win???

As for as momentum is concerned, I guess Atlanta is in trouble, coming into their game with Tampa, Atlanta was 13-2 and played at home and lost to a bad Tampa team that was shut out and destroyed the week before by over 40 points.


The Bengals won with their reserves over the opponents reserves. This did not happen in 2011, 2009 or 2005.


Watch the first two videos and get back to me.
http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321230004

[Rrobo9]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

Looks like you came in late and have no idea what was said earlier.

The Texans are not knocked out from the playoffs.

Plus, the starters have to play the whole game and knock off a team.

Find a game. I know of one , just one where starters played the whole game where they did not have to and knock off a team from getting into the playoffs.

i read your posts.. you have continued to talk about a game that means nothing for a playoff bound team and they play their starters for the whole game... well the Colts fit that.. whatever happened yesterday, they were going to be the 5th seed regardless and they won playing their starters....

but it is ok.. i can tell you have a hard time when you are wrong.... cheer up a New Year is here even for idiots..