Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

NFL must keep top teams honest in late season

Wolf

Wolf

100% Texan
In the first game of today's NFL doubleheader, half of the Super Bowl pairing will shake out in what figures to be a terrific regular-season rematch as the powerful Indianapolis Colts take on those upstart Houston Texans.

Gary Kubiak's team, remember, almost beat Indy twice, but Mr. Unreliable Kris Brown missed a 42-yard field goal as time expired in a 20-17 loss, and Houston blew a 13-point halftime lead in the second meeting ...

Oh, wait.

Matt Schaub and three teammates are playing in next Sunday's Pro Bowl, and the rest of the Houston team, well, they're already working on their backswings.

Peyton Manning and friends are facing the New York Jets, not the Texans. The Jets arrived at this point in part because the Jets played and beat a largely disinterested Colts team in Game 15.

And that's a glaring problem the NFL needs to correct.

Of course, the Texans have their own mistakes to correct like Brown, that running game, etc.
Click to expand...

this is crazy.
The league cannot fine teams for resting their starters for the upcoming playoffs, but it can and should load incentives onto these regular-season finales to make it hard for playoff-bound teams to not try their hardest and play their best to win these games.

Cash bonuses won't work. Neither would trips to Disneyland. Roger Goodell probably can't offer inducements like a chance to become full-time host of "Tonight Show" on NBC.

The only reasonable solution is draft picks. Big-time, change-the-franchise draft picks.

If a team goes 16-0, award it the first pick of the next draft. You know, the one before the Lions and Rams every year. Had the Colts won, they might be prepared to pick Ndamukong Suh this April.

If a team goes 15-1, award it a supplemental pick at the end of the first round. That equates to the first pick of the second round. Last year that was safety Louis Delmas, who only started all but one game for the Lions, made 94 tackles and returned one of his two interceptions 101 yards for a touchdown. In other words, an impact player.

Even if a team goes 14-2, give it an extra pick at the end of the second round. Last year that pick produced Shonn Greene. You might notice him in today's Jets-Colts game. You know, the one the Texans should be playing in instead.
Click to expand...
http://www.statesman.com/sports/pro...-honest-in-late-192725.html?cxtype=rss_sports
 
Thats freaking crazy. Yeah, lets make the best teams better. The NFL cant do anything. And they dont have to. If the Texans were to make the playoffs, the had ample opportunity to do so. They just choked.
 
I think this is a bad idea. It seriously promotes the notion of "haves" and "have-nots", and seems to undercut the whole idea of drafting #1 overall in the first place (because your team needs the most help).


I can't remember who suggested it, but I think the best answer I've heard so far is to make the last 3 games of the season be divisional games. This would help to keep each division uncertain for as long as possible, and help to make it less likely that the teams will be willing to pull starters against their rivals.
 
TheCD said:
I can't remember who suggested it, but I think the best answer I've heard so far is to make the last 3 games of the season be divisional games. This would help to keep each division uncertain for as long as possible, and help to make it less likely that the teams will be willing to pull starters against their rivals.
Click to expand...


man I like that idea
 
I think the fine thing could work well if done effectively. Do us Texans fans really want to play 3 divisional games in a row if we're fighting for playoffs again? We know how that 4 game divisional stretch worked for us this past year.
 
TheCD said:
I think this is a bad idea. It seriously promotes the notion of "haves" and "have-nots", and seems to undercut the whole idea of drafting #1 overall in the first place (because your team needs the most help).


I can't remember who suggested it, but I think the best answer I've heard so far is to make the last 3 games of the season be divisional games. This would help to keep each division uncertain for as long as possible, and help to make it less likely that the teams will be willing to pull starters against their rivals.
Click to expand...

That's actually a really good idea!
 
well I am more into the " we have (or need) to win within the division" before we can win in the playoffs.
 
TheCD said:
I can't remember who suggested it, but I think the best answer I've heard so far is to make the last 3 games of the season be divisional games. This would help to keep each division uncertain for as long as possible, and help to make it less likely that the teams will be willing to pull starters against their rivals.
Click to expand...

Ooooooh, that is fantastic idea. And it would be relatively easy to implement, I would think.

I like that the writer was sticking up for us and all, but, at the end of the day, we have some things we need to fix on our end. Being mad at any other team because the Texans aren't in the playoffs is pointless.
 
Ryan said:
I think the fine thing could work well if done effectively. Do us Texans fans really want to play 3 divisional games in a row if we're fighting for playoffs again? We know how that 4 game divisional stretch worked for us this past year.
Click to expand...

Well, but, that's the thing. It would FORCE us to get our act together. If we have ANY chance of being a dominant playoff team we all want, we have to become a major player in our division first.
 
I love the idea of moving the divisional games to the last few weeks as well. Many of those games would then become de facto playoff games for their respective division championships. It also kind of gives the hot teams at the end of the season a better chance b/c you can make up ground easier by beating teams ahead of you in the division. Even with out the issues of teams sitting starters late in the season b/c they have clinched, it is a great idea. I can't see the negative in this? Anyone?
 
Ryan said:
I think the fine thing could work well if done effectively. Do us Texans fans really want to play 3 divisional games in a row if we're fighting for playoffs again? We know how that 4 game divisional stretch worked for us this past year.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, Kubiak's Kids seem to play better football in December than any other month. All other things being equal, I like our chances with this change.

and isn't your divisional record one of the tie-breakers to determine home field advantage? Yeah, this is a better idea than passing out extra picks to help the rich get richer.

I wonder if the schedule gurus could make it work?
 
Here is a simple solution. If you mail in games like the Colts did, you lose your first and second round pick in the up coming draft. All teams need picks, no matter how good they are. Losing a first and second rounder would be devastating.
 
awtysst said:
Here is a simple solution. If you mail in games like the Colts did, you lose your first and second round pick in the up coming draft. All teams need picks, no matter how good they are. Losing a first and second rounder would be devastating.
Click to expand...

The Rules committee, basically owners and coaches, will never agree to that.
 
Cowboys had to play washington and Philly the last two weeks and quite honestly ,for the most part, stats can be thrown out the window when it is rivalry games
 
Man if the texans are like 13-2

and like playing like Pittsburg in the snow on wk 17 WTF would we play and risk AJ or Matty Getting hurt ??????
 
Ryan said:
I think the fine thing could work well if done effectively. Do us Texans fans really want to play 3 divisional games in a row if we're fighting for playoffs again? We know how that 4 game divisional stretch worked for us this past year.
Click to expand...


@colts-L
bye
vs Tenn-L
vs colts-L
@ jags-L


It still haunts me LOL
 
The thing about giving away the number 1 pick is that nobody really wants it. Unless they change the rookie pay structure the first pick is too big of a risk, especially for a team that just went 16-0. The writers idea was not very well thought out IMO.

It is something that I would like to see addressed though. I like the idea of playing the divisional games in December. As far as fines or taking away draft picks, then you get into having to decide whether the team blew it on purpose or just had a meltdown. If Peyton Manning sits out with a cramp in week 17, who is going to be the one who decides if he was faking or not?
 
I despise all Kindergarten style rules for this league. The NFL has always been a league of toughness, strength and power. If you have won your games, you have the power to do what you want to do as you approach the playoffs. One of the advantages of being a dominant team is that you can play at home and you can go into the Super Bowl tournament any way you choose. If your team doesn't like it they should win more games before the last games of the season. This reminds me that another reason the NFL regular season is vastly superior to the other Pro Sports leagues' 'regular seasons' is that ALL the NFL games are important early in the year.
 
i like the idea of playing division games at the end of the year. That would be exciting watching divison rivals going all out for making the playoffs or a division title.

You could also fine a team say $250,000 for resting their players and that would stop all of the laying down that goes on at the end of the season.
 
File under "tough ****."

You make your own breaks. It makes it tough for mediocre teams and fantasy football players, but life goes on.

It ain't broke. Good teams should get the time off and bad teams should get the draft picks.
 
Vinny said:
I despise all Kindergarten style rules for this league. The NFL has always been a league of toughness, strength and power. If you have won your games, you have the power to do what you want to do as you approach the playoffs. One of the advantages of being a dominant team is that you can play at home and you can go into the Super Bowl tournament any way you choose. If your team doesn't like it they should win more games before the last games of the season. This reminds me that another reason the NFL regular season is vastly superior to the other Pro Sports leagues' 'regular seasons' is that ALL the NFL games are important early in the year.
Click to expand...

I agree with the toughness thing, but wouldnt you think that there might be a bit more 'excitement' as to who wins the divisions if teams ended up playing 3 inter-games?
 
Why is it you think playing division games at the end of the year makes a difference? If the Colts are 14-0 and have the division and seedings wrapped up, they're going to pull the starters no matter who is on the schedule. It doesn't change or solve anything.
 
Did the Jaguars pull their starters against the Texans in 2007? It was
the final game of the year, and a DIVISION GAME.

It makes no difference.
 
Why do people insist there's a problem when there's not? Games are only important till you have your seed locked up, and that's the way it should be.
 
I hate engaging in this discussion because of the role the Texans played in it this year. It's hard to stay objective when your team is the one at the mercy of such things.

1.) The Texans are not in the playoffs because they screwed up royally. They lost November - all of it. That's completely on them, and ultimately the reason they missed the playoffs.

2.) The Jets-Colts and Jets-Bengals game highlight a problem in the game that probably has no real solution. Situations like that detract from the integrity of the game. When the Giants went for it a couple years ago against the Pats, they had nothing to play for. They used that game to gain valuable experience that helped them win the SB against that same Pats team later. Whoever won that game, you knew it was genuine and honest. The Colts-Jets and the Bengals-Jets? Not so much.

I've never liked this situation in years past and it never gets much talk here because our team is never involved. In FFL circles, it gets discussed every year, for other reasons, but one concern is always voiced - it cheapens the game.

I'm definitely against the proposed solutions so far.
 
b0ng said:
Why do people insist there's a problem when there's not? Games are only important till you have your seed locked up, and that's the way it should be.
Click to expand...

Right. I think if you've gone through the gauntlet, have your seed locked up you've earned the right to do as you feel the last 2-3 games.

I think if some people were honest about their clear bias against this because it affected whether or not the Texans backdoored into the playoffs vs the Jets.

Let's say next year the Texans make the playoffs as a wildcard late in the season. The top 4 seeds are wrapped up prior to the final game and either matchup the following week looks good. What incentive do you have for playing Matt Schaub, AJ, Slaton(or productive rookie RB), Mario Williams, and Brian Cushing or Demeco Ryans? What if one of those guys get hurt in a meaningless game? Does that change your outlook any?
 
Last edited:
rmartin65 said:
Thats freaking crazy. Yeah, lets make the best teams better. The NFL cant do anything. And they dont have to. If the Texans were to make the playoffs, the had ample opportunity to do so. They just choked.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but in the AFC West, you pretty much clinch the division at 9-7... They could go 9-0, then coast the rest of the year.

Turn Sarcasm on:
What we need is a BCS style system, that way every game is important, and teams can't take any games off
Click to expand...

Turn Sarcasm off:
 
Mr. White said:
It ain't broke. Good teams should get the time off and bad teams should get the draft picks.
Click to expand...

Even still, it's proved to not work, and maybe even be detrimental for a team to "take a week off"

I agree, let it be.
 
sportfan73 said:
I can't believe there's talk of 18-game seasons, this year better of shut those people up.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but can't agree with you on this. The 18-game season - which WILL happen - is because season ticket holders are tired of paying full price for pre-season games. It's one of the biggest rip-offs there is, and the backlash is getting louder. Roger Goddell knows this.


Overall, this is a great thread. I'm seeing all sides in this debate.
 
I haven't seen any better solution to the perceived or imagined problem of teams mailing it in during the last few weeks of the regular season. If the Colts go 14-0 and want to rest their star players, who says they shouldn't? They are the ones who earned it and they are the ones who get to decide on what course of action they should take. Just because we got the short end of the stick on the whole situation doesn't mean we should throw out our common sense and challenge the system.

Also, as to those that suggest playing three divisional games for the last three weeks of the season; I don't think the NFL would want to attempt to do that. Considering all the events that happen within football stadiums or cities in general, trying to plan ahead for those games would seem like a huge headache to me for the scheduling committee that really isn't even necessary. And what happens if we did have that schedule, and the Colts are 13-0 with home-field locked up throughout the playoffs and three divisional games lined up to end the season. We as fans lose more than the teams. To be honest, professional players don't get nearly as jazzed up for some perceived rivalry games as us fans do, it's just the nature of the beast. So, instead of getting one of the best games of the season in week 15, we get a watered down Colts squad cruising to the playoffs, ambivalent about whether they win or lose.

To sum it all up, the system of teams mailing it in isn't the reason why we're not in the playoffs. The Texans had all the opportunities in the world to pull out a couple more games, but they couldn't make the plays and it hurt us in the long run. It's easy to blame others for us not making it to the post-season, but sometimes, we've got to put down the Kool-Aid and realize what really happened.
 
Ryan said:
I think the fine thing could work well if done effectively. Do us Texans fans really want to play 3 divisional games in a row if we're fighting for playoffs again? We know how that 4 game divisional stretch worked for us this past year.
Click to expand...

I think it could work in our favor because we seem to always play better down the stretch.
 
TheCD said:
I think this is a bad idea. It seriously promotes the notion of "haves" and "have-nots", and seems to undercut the whole idea of drafting #1 overall in the first place (because your team needs the most help).


I can't remember who suggested it, but I think the best answer I've heard so far is to make the last 3 games of the season be divisional games. This would help to keep each division uncertain for as long as possible, and help to make it less likely that the teams will be willing to pull starters against their rivals.
Click to expand...

It was me.:

http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68299&page=4

B) Here is my solution and please tell me what yall think. If the NFL wants to improve the competiveness for the last remaining weeks of a season, why not make the last 3-4 weeks of the season all be division games league wide? Each division has 4 teams in it so the games would be spread out equally. Most teams playoff hopes are based on division wins so the elimination process could go well into the 16th game of the season. Perhaps homefield advantage wouldn't be wrapped up so soon by a team that is 12-0.

Case in point is our Texans. We played 3 division games in a row in November. Now say you take in to account all wins we've had so far and all losses except for those 3 division games in November, we would be 8-4 heading into December with perhaps one more out of divison game before
Click to expand...
heading into the last 3 divison games. Meanwhile Indy is 12-0 heading into December. The divison doesn't look so up for grabs anymore does it? A whole plethera of changes can happen. Of course in this scenario and the results we know of, we then go 8-7 and are fighting for our playoff lives but I think if you got 4 teams having to play division games in the last 3-4 weeks of the season, the results are way different.
Click to expand...

And then, in week 15, when I looked at the teams after 12 games with no last three division games, the divisions looked like this:

AFC EAST
New England 8-4
NYJ 7-5
Miami 5-7
Buffalo 4-8

That division could still be up for grabs, no Tom Brady resting there

AFC NORTH
Cincy 7-5
Pitt 7-5
Bmore 7-5
Browns 3-9

That division would still be up for grabs, even Cleveland could make a push

AFC SOUTH
Indy 12-0
Houston 8-4
Jville 6-6
Tenn 5-6
Indy wouldn't be able to sit their starters just yet. Someone said Indy would be handing Tenn a way into the playoffs. They better not, division is still close at this point. Houston would have to play real well to keep Jville and Tenn from getting 2nd in the division.

AFC WEST
SD 10-2
Den 8-5
Oak 4-8
KC 2-11
Pretty much the same as AFC SOUTH

**** I'd like to add that Houston would be tied with New England for 2nd best record in AFC, and up a half game on Denver at this point just because I LOVE THE TEXANS!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Here's what the NFC looks like:

NFC East
Philly 9-4
Dall 8-4
NYG 6-6
Wash 3-9

That would still be up for grabs in that division between 3 teams. Nobody's resting

NFC NORTH
Minn 9-3
GB 8-4
Chi 5-7
Det 2-10

Division STILL up for grabs between 3 teams

NFC SOUTH

NO 12-0
ATL 8-4
Car 7-5
Tampa 3-9
Pretty much like AFC South

NFC WEST
AZ 9-3
SF 6-7
Seattle 5-7
STL. 1-11
Division up for grabs going into division week between 3 teams. Nobodies resting

So as you can see it could change the season around in the last month of the season. It doesn't totally eliminate the possibility of someone being able to rest starters but for most divisions you can see that noone can really afford to do that. Plus even if someone wins the division the possibility of them having to play for home field advantage late in the season is highly likely.
Click to expand...


I then took it to Moving The Chains on Sirius NFL Radio and these were their answers:

Submitted my ideas to the Opening Drive on Sirius NFL Radio on the air. They basically said that of all the ideas that have been submitted, this one had the best legs to stand on. They pretty much said what I have said all along. It wouldn't eliminate the possibility of someone being able to rest their starters but it would reduce the number of games that are played that way. They did agree that it possibly would've worked for this season because of San Diego and Indy battling for homefield.

The only thing they said that could potential be wrong is how the networks go about scheduling the games because of ratings in the middle of the season. Saying that the majority of division games are set in the middle of the season so that interest can be drawn for those games. My counter to that was, nobody is saying when to schedule the first division games and that there are 32 teams in which you can spread out first division games for each team in Sept Oct, and November. He then stated that it would then take away traditional games like Dallas vs. Washington as the first game of the season. My counter to that was you can still keep that game there, but you could also make a new tradition of Cowboys vs. Skins as the last game of the season.

His partner kept agreeing with me but Randy Cross kept trying to find a reason not too and I always had an answer why it should be this way. Randy Cross did say "Hey, it's the best idea I've heard of to this date".
Click to expand...
 
Honestly though, even if the games were divisional games, if a team is going into week 15 with a 14-0 record they are more than likely going to sit their starters no matter who they are playing.

It's an imagined problem with no real workable solution that wouldn't be abuseable.
 
b0ng said:
Honestly though, even if the games were divisional games, if a team is going into week 15 with a 14-0 record they are more than likely going to sit their starters no matter who they are playing.

It's an imagined problem with no real workable solution that wouldn't be abuseable.
Click to expand...

Not if Indy wants home field with San Diego being 12-2 at that point possibly. Also, a game that really proves my point, Chicago had nothing to play for but they put it to Minnesota because they are a playoff team. Minn, was still hoping to get homefield advantage because New Orleans lost earlier in the day to Tampay Bay. Instead Chicago beats Minnesota and New Orleans still wins homefield.

HHHHmmmmmm.......I wonder what the turnout would've been if Minnesota played in Minnesota.
 
What's wrong with resting your starters if you've already gotten into the playoffs? Screw it, the league NEEDS to police officials who make f'ed up calls that GIVE games away.
 
Goldensilence said:
Right. I think if you've gone through the gauntlet, have your seed locked up you've earned the right to do as you feel the last 2-3 games.

I think if some people were honest about their clear bias against this because it affected whether or not the Texans backdoored into the playoffs vs the Jets.

Let's say next year the Texans make the playoffs as a wildcard late in the season. The top 4 seeds are wrapped up prior to the final game and either matchup the following week looks good. What incentive do you have for playing Matt Schaub, AJ, Slaton(or productive rookie RB), Mario Williams, and Brian Cushing or Demeco Ryans? What if one of those guys get hurt in a meaningless game? Does that change your outlook any?
Click to expand...

Would still love for some fans here to answer this scenario.
 
El Tejano said:
Not if Indy wants home field with San Diego being 12-2 at that point possibly. Also, a game that really proves my point, Chicago had nothing to play for but they put it to Minnesota because they are a playoff team. Minn, was still hoping to get homefield advantage because New Orleans lost earlier in the day to Tampay Bay. Instead Chicago beats Minnesota and New Orleans still wins homefield.

HHHHmmmmmm.......I wonder what the turnout would've been if Minnesota played in Minnesota.
Click to expand...

It doesn't freaking matter!!!!!!

As soon as a team has their playoff situation locked, it will NOT matter who is on the schedule.

If Minnesota wanted home field they should have won their game. It's that simple. Doesn't matter if Kansas City was on the schedule or Green Bay. They needed to win their game and they didn't.

As for Chicago getting up for it, yeah, teams play spoiler all the time. The Texans did it last year to the Bears. Knocked them out of the playoffs. It happens all the time and will continue to happen no matter how you set the schedule up.

What the hell?
 
El Tejano said:
Not if Indy wants home field with San Diego being 12-2 at that point possibly. Also, a game that really proves my point, Chicago had nothing to play for but they put it to Minnesota because they are a playoff team. Minn, was still hoping to get homefield advantage because New Orleans lost earlier in the day to Tampay Bay. Instead Chicago beats Minnesota and New Orleans still wins homefield.

HHHHmmmmmm.......I wonder what the turnout would've been if Minnesota played in Minnesota.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you've just bolstered the case that says it makes little if any difference. If Indy's 14-0, and San Diego's 12-2, then Indy's going to play their starters whether the game's against a AFC South opponent or anybody else in the league. The fact it's a divisional game has nothing to do with why they would be choosing to play their starters in that scenario.

I fail to see how the Minny/Chicago example has anything to do with your proposal.
 
The Texans got screwed by what the Colts and Bengals did for the Jets, but the simple reality is that the Texans were 1-5 within their division. As much as I'd like to cry foul, that fact alone stops me from claiming the Texans were robbed.

All they have to do is go 2-4 in their own division (instead of 1-5) and they make the playoffs.
 
ziggy29 said:
The Texans got screwed by what the Colts and Bengals did for the Jets, but the simple reality is that the Texans were 1-5 within their division. As much as I'd like to cry foul, that fact alone stops me from claiming the Texans were robbed.

All they have to do is go 2-4 in their own division (instead of 1-5) and they make the playoffs.
Click to expand...

All they had to do was win any one of the seven games they lost. Heck they could have had no different record than they did - beat the Jets and lose another game somewhere else even the Titans to be 0-6 in the division and they would have been in.
 
Agree with ziggy and cak here. The Texans made their own bed, and now they get to sleep in it all off season.
 
ChampionTexan said:
Yeah, but you've just bolstered the case that says it makes little if any difference. If Indy's 14-0, and San Diego's 12-2, then Indy's going to play their starters whether the game's against a AFC South opponent or anybody else in the league. The fact it's a divisional game has nothing to do with why they would be choosing to play their starters in that scenario.

I fail to see how the Minny/Chicago example has anything to do with your proposal.
Click to expand...

Because if you look at each teams record in their division, you got alot of divisions still up for grabs. Like I said, it doesn't eliminate the teams resting starters but it reduces those games. After 12 games Cincy, Pitt and Bmore were all 7-5, with four more games left and the division up for grabs, those last 3-4 games get really nasty.

You wouldn't have Cincy laying down for Jets, or even Indy resting for the Bills. Those last division games would matter alot more. None of this is was created to think of scenarios that the Texans could use to get in the playoffs. I agree, they didn't get in because they couldn't get a yard twice a FG 3 times and throwing halfback passes at the goalline. However you have to look at the records for each team in the division, and perhaps a team like the Texans or even Cleveland could make a late run because division games are so unpredictable.
 
Speedy said:
It doesn't freaking matter!!!!!!

As soon as a team has their playoff situation locked, it will NOT matter who is on the schedule.

If Minnesota wanted home field they should have won their game. It's that simple. Doesn't matter if Kansas City was on the schedule or Green Bay. They needed to win their game and they didn't.

As for Chicago getting up for it, yeah, teams play spoiler all the time. The Texans did it last year to the Bears. Knocked them out of the playoffs. It happens all the time and will continue to happen no matter how you set the schedule up.

What the hell?
Click to expand...

But those division games could be way more marketable than Houston vs. Chicago. Chicago playing Minnesota who also had to win in order to get in during that year would've been alot more of a hype machine and game.
 
pbat488 said:
I haven't seen any better solution to the perceived or imagined problem of teams mailing it in during the last few weeks of the regular season. If the Colts go 14-0 and want to rest their star players, who says they shouldn't? They are the ones who earned it and they are the ones who get to decide on what course of action they should take. Just because we got the short end of the stick on the whole situation doesn't mean we should throw out our common sense and challenge the system.
Click to expand...

It's been said earlier... we don't have to worry about it, but if the Texans ever get to the point where they can rest their starters the last two weeks of the seaon, you just picked up 2 more preseason games. That is if you are a season ticket holder. Those last two games are just as worhtless, and probably just as entertaining as the 4th preseason game of the year.

Luckily, we won't have to worry about that for a while.
 
El Tejano said:
But those division games could be way more marketable than Houston vs. Chicago. Chicago playing Minnesota who also had to win in order to get in during that year would've been alot more of a hype machine and game.
Click to expand...

OMG! None of that makes a difference. Denver needed to beat the team they were playing to get in. It just so happened to be Kansas City. It would have been no different had they played Chicago. They still needed to win a game against a team going nowhere to make the playoffs. They didn't. They stay home.

Chicago needed to beat a going nowhere Houston last year. They didn't. They stay home. No difference.

Each team needed a win in week 17 to make the post-season, no matter who the team was on the schedule. One team had a division rival, the other an inter-conference game. They both lost, they both stay home.

More marketable?? This is the freaking NFL! It's already a juggernaut of marketability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top