To rest the starters week 17 we need....

[JonRud]

To me the whole 'losing momentum' argument is soft, while injury or potential to injury are real.

Think about it - in 2005, 2013 and 2014 the Seahawks had a playoff bye and made it to the Super Bowl. In 2005 they rested a lot of players and lost in GB in Week 17. Yes, they came out a little flat vs. the Redskins in the first playoff game but Alexander was hurt early in that game.

To me this is a veteran team now with a ton of playoff experience the last 3 years. I personally do not believe that 'being on a roll' outweighs the health factor. We have seen enough devastating injuries lately with Lynch, Graham and Rawls and now Chancellor and Okung are banged up. To me health is a primary issue to win a Super Bowl - just look at last year when the defense was so decimated with injury in the 4th qtr. of the Super Bowl.

Again - this probably doesn't matter because I think the Hawks will need to beat the Cards in Week 17 to get the #5 seed. Even Pete 'We don't care who we play' will want to play in Washington/Philly instead of GB. But you can't tell me that we're not going to beat the Redskins if we are able to rest some guys in Week 17.

 

[JonRud]

The good news is that even if the Vikings beat the Giants this week they play the Packers at 10AM in week 17 so we will know before our game if the 5 seed is locked up or not.

Remember - the NFL moves games in Week 17 so that teams don't know the outcome of the other games that matter to them. Right now there are 13 games scheduled for 10am and 3 games scheduled for 1pm. This will change a lot after the Week 16 games. There will be 1 game moved to Sunday Night (they can pick ANY game), and several games moved to 1pm. I believe in our case the Min/GB game will definitely move to either 1pm or Sun. night so the Hawks will not know the outcome and have to play.

Also if GB wins this week they will want that game as the same time the Cards play so the #2 seed is still up in the air. and in this case the Cards will have to play all out to clinch a bye.

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

I don't expect them to rest guys. But if we do have it in hand, then I could see a sort of '3rd preseason game' kind of rotation happening. Enough to keep the rhythm of the week prep and game flow. But begin to rotate guys in later on. Keep injured guys on sideline. Although I think he'll keep the pedal down till the final whistle.

Given that Lynch may try to play in order to get a little rust off before the postseason in Arizona -- I doubt we'd put him out there without the benefit of our starting offense.

Then again, it's a division game. Sometimes you want to put it in your opponents' mind that you're here to play. We owe them one. And it's worth noting that Carroll doesn't typically lay up at the end of seasons. He's very attuned to the ebb and flow of how the season evolves. He's very much a process guy and clearly sees the regular season in it's entirety as the preparation to hit peak performance at the end of the season. He has traditionally been very aggressive at the end of seasons. So it is reasonable to assume there are legitimate reasons to keep the hammer down and don't let up at all that go way beyond mere injury risk.

 

[DavidSeven]

Recent history of 5-seeds that decided to rest/not rest their starters in Week 17:

2013: Locked into the AFC's fifth playoff seed before kickoff, it seemed the Chiefs (11-5) had nothing at stake against the desperate San Diego Chargers. But did Kansas City possibly lose a touch of focus, or maybe some momentum?

Result: A week later, the well-rested Chiefs surrender the biggest playoff lead of all time to the Colts (28 points). Lose in 1st round.

2007: Old school New York Giants coach Tom Coughlin had nothing to gain at the end of the regular season in 2007 but opted to play his starters against the undefeated New England Patriots. Coughlin's team lost a 38-35 battle that day but seemed to gain empowering confidence against a New England squad that overwhelmed so many foes on its way to the NFL's only 16-0 regular season.

Result: The Giants, 10-6 that year, stunned the 18-0 Patriots in Super Bowl XLII five weeks later. They ride a wave of confidence through the playoffs and solidify the modern "get hot at the right time" theory of NFL success.

 

[Largent80]

It's pretty clear to not rest starters. it's ok to disagree and be incorrect however.

 

[Polaris]

It's pretty clear to not rest starters. it's ok to disagree and be incorrect however.

To dive in, I think if everything is clinched, we treat it like the third preseason game and take extra care with injured and 'dinged up' players, i.e. have the number ones start for the first half and maybe into the third quarter minus those that really need a week to heal, and then use backups for the rest of the game.

I think that's the most reasonable compromise.

 

[onanygivensunday]

The good news is that even if the Vikings beat the Giants this week they play the Packers at 10AM in week 17 so we will know before our game if the 5 seed is locked up or not.

If Minny beats GB then personally I would be ok with the 6th seed. Go play Minnesota in their dome would be the result vs FedEx Field.......

Minnesota play outdoors this year at the University of Minnesota.

They'll be back in their new dome next year.

 

[253hawk]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JessaMcIntyre/status/678997527035707392[/tweet]

 

[sc85sis]

Pete won't rest the starters--at least not the way other teams do. He may rotate more and pull some guys earlier if we have a lead, but it's not in his DNA to just sit guys when there's a game to be played.

 

[byau]

Not sure it's in Coach's mentality and strategy to rest the starters as others do

Maybe a better question is at what point do you stop playing for the regular season and start planning for the postseason? And enlist playing philosophy for that whatever it may be whether resting starters or playing them half a game or what not

I would almost say after clinching we could enlist this to make sure everyone is healthy for playing through the playoffs on the road and without a bye

Don't forget, the Seahawks have played more games than any other team the last two seasons, so whatever they need to do to be ready to play on the road in the playoffs, I think they start doing now. If that means resting starters, so be it. If that means approaching practices differently now, so be it

The #5 seed is likely to play the Redskins at home. The #6 seed is likely to play the Packers at home. The Redskins are hotter, and they have a crap field. Almost seems like it'd be worth it to just start prepping for the playoffs now

In the second round, should we make it, I'm guessing the Vikings (the other wildcard team) is likely to lose so we'd end up playing Carolina anyway in the second round

I say start practicing and prepping for the playoffs now

 

[seahawks08]

No resting, play to win, only if anybody is banged up they get to rest. If you played all this while with the risk to injury, you take that risk. You can't save players for later and put a different mindset into them come playoffs. We didn't earn HFA, so we earn everything else.

 

[BadgerVid]

In order to rest players, the Seahawks would need...a new head coach.

No way Pete does it...very week is a championship opportunity.

 

[hawknation2015]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JessaMcIntyre/status/678997527035707392[/tweet]

:snack:

 

[Rob12]

I don't believe in resting the players, they prepare and get ready every week, breaking that cycle can bite you in the ass just as much as a injury. Teams come out flat and out of sync, against a team like the Panthers. Steelers and Cards or Packers getting behind in the playoffs can be a death blow. Lots of offense in this years dance.

I think PC is with you, judging from history. Aside from a blowout in Arizona, the starters will play. There's no need to rest the starters if it's not needed.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Go 1-0 thru Feb 7th. There is no resting players.

 

[NINEster]

I'm curious about week 17 schemes.

Sure you might want to play normally, but with a potential 3rd meeting at hand, it could change things.

In all honesty, it would be more of an issue for the Cardinals than the Seahawks because the Cards already won. If the Cards pull the sweep putting in a lot of effort, a 3rd match in the playoffs could be to the Hawks benefit.

No guarantees of course, as the '86 Giants beat the Redskins 3 times that season and a late 2000s Colts team did the same to the Jaguars.

But it's not something you like to play with.

2008 Giants were #1 seed in the NFC and probably the best team that year but got knocked out in the first round at home by the Eagles.

Division games are always a bit of a risk.

 

[Hawks46]

Hawks to win next week and the Vikes to lose right? This would lock up 5th seed? If yes to both it would be huge for this to happen as we could use the rest.

Almost. To lock up the #5 seed (I'll leave the resting issue alone), Green Bay also has to win. We need Green Bay to win in order to lock Green Bay into the NFC North title (along with a Minny loss). Combined with a Seattle win, it clinches the #6 seed and only the #6 seed for Minny, and the #5 seed and only the #5 seed for Seattle.

It's really not that big of a deal this year. Either Minny loses and becomes the 6th seed, or GB loses and we become the 6th seed.

If we're the 5th seed, we'd play the winner of the NFCE.

If we're the 6th seed, then we play Minnesota, in Minnesota.

Honestly, is one really more desirable than the other ? Matter of fact, there's less travel involved with Minnesota. And Minnesota is a looooong way away from FedEx field, which I want to stay far away from.

 

[Seymour]

It's really not that big of a deal this year. Either Minny loses and becomes the 6th seed, or GB loses and we become the 6th seed.

If we're the 5th seed, we'd play the winner of the NFCE.

If we're the 6th seed, then we play Minnesota, in Minnesota.

Honestly, is one really more desirable than the other ? Matter of fact, there's less travel involved with Minnesota. And Minnesota is a looooong way away from FedEx field, which I want to stay far away from.

Quite possibly yes. If this turns into a cold weather snow game (playing outdoors this year), then it becomes Peterson vs ??? Michael or Lynch. I'd much rather take my chances at cow pie field over the chance things could get ugly in Minnesota weather wise. Yes we shut down Peterson this year, but I do not expect that to be the case 10x out of 10.

 

[hawkfan68]

The Seahawks are resting a number of players currently - Marshawn Lynch, Jordan Hill, Anthony McCoy, maybe Russell Okung now.