Who do we bench/start?

[Cyrus12]

With the season over who should and who should start? Do we have any young guys who were riding the pine all year? Why not see what they can do for a proper evaluation?

 

[Appyhawk]

Lets beat the Bears and the Rams then see what happens.

 

[Jville]

It's a short week ....... next game on Thursday.

Focus this week should be on eliminating critical self inflicted mistakes.

 

[nanomoz]

I'm on board. Haynes?

 

[Shane Falco]

It's a short week ....... next game on Thursday.

Focus this week should be on eliminating critical self inflicted mistakes.

No doubt. Penalties and turnovers, the story of that game.

 

[Cyrus12]

More McIntosh..I say start him.

 

[Shane Falco]

More McIntosh..I say start him.

He has looked pretty good in limited action.

 

[flv2]

The Week 17 game against the Bears will have ZERO impact on who wins the division this year. The Seahawks will reach the playoffs with 2 Rams losses. Obviously the 2nd Rams loss would be to the Seahawks. It would make sense to risk as few starters as possible on Thursday.

 

[getnasty]

The Week 17 game against the Bears will have ZERO impact on who wins the division this year. The Seahawks will reach the playoffs with 2 Rams losses. Obviously the 2nd Rams loss would be to the Seahawks. It would make sense to risk as few starters as possible on Thursday.

The Seahawks have to win out and the Rams have to lose out for Seattle to get in.

 

[bigskydoc]

The Seahawks have to win out and the Rams have to lose out for Seattle to get in.

Nope.

flv2 is correct. We do not have to win out. The Rams have to lose out, and we would own the tie breaker of best win percentage in division games.

If Rams beat Cards and we beat Rams, Rams have the tie breaker based on strength of victory.

The Chicago game has no effect on whether we make the playoffs, only who we play.

 

[getnasty]

Nope.

flv2 is correct. We do not have to win out. The Rams have to lose out, and we would own the tie breaker of best win percentage in division games.

If Rams beat Cards and we beat Rams, Rams have the tie breaker based on strength of victory.

The Chicago game has no effect on whether we make the playoffs, only who we play.

Good it. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Should have played Howell this week. Play him on Thursday.

 

[DarkVictory23]

We aren't out of the playoffs. We play like we are planning to win the game against Chicago.

The Week 17 game against the Bears will have ZERO impact on who wins the division this year. The Seahawks will reach the playoffs with 2 Rams losses. Obviously the 2nd Rams loss would be to the Seahawks. It would make sense to risk as few starters as possible on Thursday.

Seahawks losing to Chicago does in fact matter. Technically, we can still win the division even if Arizona loses against LA next week, it's just the SOV tiebreaker no longer favors us (if we beat Minn, we'd have basically secured the SOV tiebreaker and the Chicago game wouldn't have mattered, but now it does).

 

[bigskydoc]

Rams beat the Bills and Vikings while the Hawks biggest wins were against the Dolphins and the Broncos. How do you see SOV favoring the Hawks?

 

[sutz]

You play to win the game.

Backups have had a full season and last off season to prove themselves. If they're not on the field, they probably haven't earned the chance. Can't think of many who need game time work beyond maybe MacIntosh.

 

[flv2]

We aren't out of the playoffs. We play like we are planning to win the game against Chicago.


Seahawks losing to Chicago does in fact matter. Technically, we can still win the division even if Arizona loses against LA next week, it's just the SOV tiebreaker no longer favors us (if we beat Minn, we'd have basically secured the SOV tiebreaker and the Chicago game wouldn't have mattered, but now it does).

Could you please post a combination of results that would demonstrate this. At this point I can't create any combination of results on the ESPN playoff machine where a Rams victory over the Cardinals ends with a Seahawks division title. Thanks.

Later edit: You are correct. However it would require at least 10 of the 11 following results: 2 Bills losses, 2 Broncos victories, 2 Dolphins victories, 2 49ers losses, a Packers victory over the Saints, a Packers victory over the Vikings, and a Bears victory over the Packers. Possible but extremely unlikely.

 

[DarkVictory23]

Possible but extremely unlikely.

Yeah, it pretty much requires a bunch of stuff to go our way... and basically every possible game this week went against us. So, yeah, we need to beat Chicago and very much would like Arizona to beat LA, please and thank you.

 

[bigskydoc]

Could you please post a combination of results that would demonstrate this. At this point I can't create any combination of results on the ESPN playoff machine where a Rams victory over the Cardinals ends with a Seahawks division title. Thanks.

Later edit: You are correct. However it would require at least 10 of the 11 following results: 2 Bills losses, 2 Broncos victories, 2 Dolphins victories, 2 49ers losses, a Packers victory over the Saints, a Packers victory over the Vikings, and a Bears victory over the Packers. Possible but extremely unlikely.

It was the Bills needing to lose to both the Jets and the Patriots plus the Bears needing to beat the Packers that made me overlook this possibility.

I could see the Dolphins beating Browns and Jets, and Broncos beating Bengals. Unlikely Broncos beat KC.

 

[flv2]

It was the Bills needing to lose to both the Jets and the Patriots plus the Bears needing to beat the Packers that made me overlook this possibility.

I could see the Dolphins beating Browns and Jets, and Broncos beating Bengals. Unlikely Broncos beat KC.

Even if all games were 50-50 coin flips the chances of winning 10 or all 11 coin flips would be 0.6%. I'm not saying throw the game against the Bears, but it would make sense to protect key personnel.

 

[Wsumatt1982]

Don't rest anybody who isn't hurt