Goodell: Compet comm. to look at resting starters (1 Viewer)

[Shaolin Hangman]

I believe this is being looked at wrong. Teams shouldn't be compensated with draft picks for playing their starters, they should be penalized draft picks for not playing their starters. Then should a player go down to injury and miss the playoffs, that team would be awarded draft picks as predetermined by the league for the value of specific players. All players in the league on teams with a chance at being in the playoffs in week 15 and beyond would carry a compensation pick value.

This is Bad Idea Jeans.

Why is that? If starters are played and there are no injuries, no compensation picks are awarded. Should a star player tear his ACL a compensation pick is awarded. I'm not saying they would get a 1st or 2nd rd pick here, but should Manning go down a 4th rd pick would be in order, and a lesser pick for a lesser player. Perhaps no pick other than a 4th, 5th, or 6th would ever be awarded, but a team could lose a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th for not playing their starters.

I don't want the league micromanaging how teams handle their personnel and their lineups. That's stupid, and the bolded part is precisely why.

 

[Truman]

My fix for it.At the end of the third round, all the playoff teams will pick in the last slots. Draft order can be based on the record of those playoff teams for their last five regular season games only for that round. Along with that goes the other tiebreaker formats ( points, division wins, etc, etc) Add a 8th round of the draft, for all non playoff teams only, have a single round draft, based on the last five regular season game record. Every non playoff team gets to pick twice. Players are not allowed to receive signing bonuses in this round. The best record for playoff teams and for non playoff teams will each get one more practice squad slot for that upcoming season. ( The union gets two more jobs) Roster spots are valuable. You can't trade 8th round picks and if you trade your third rounder, the team that trades for it also inherits any benefit from it. This will- Protect first day picks- Give the union 2 more jobs to satisfy them- Help weaker non playoff teams but not so much that its unfair- Encourage stronger playoff teams to count the tradeoffs ( whats four slots up in the back half of the third round worth hypothetically?)- Give players not normally drafted one last opportunity for exposure- Give teams something to play for, but not so much that it's detrimental to balanceGG

Good fix, but the draft order should apply to every round, then we'll see some competitive games.

 

[craxie]

PFT has this one nailed, the only way to affect their behavior is to make their behavior impact the playoffs

ie SUBJECTIVITY

you never see colleges resting players because they know they will get punished in the polls

1. make the last wildcard slot filled by a committee so even teams that have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs (like the Browns and the Panthers) have an incentive to play hard

2. have playoff seeding determined by committee like the ncaa basketball tournament

Rigorous formulas and tie-breakers for determining the playoffs and seeding are great to eliminate bias, but the downside is that it lets people game the system and take games off

Is allowing bias and seeding controversies worth getting all teams to always play hard? I don't know, but if that's your goal, that's the only way to do it.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Don't give the MVP to guys who are "resting" multiple games, it makes it a joke. This isn't the only thing you can do because it's not going to make a team not rest players but it's just a mindset one of many things that should be done.

 

[pizzatyme]

It would probably never happen, but I think a good way to have teams play every game is to give them 1 point in the playoffs for every win. Then when the playoffs come, whatever the point differential is between the two teams playing, that is your starting score.

Colts 16-0 versus 14-2 now means 2 points for every playoff game!!!

 

[RandyDB]

Find a way to tie players and coaches salaries to the number of wins and you will see competitive games all season. Contracts might be based on an 8 win season. everyone would have an opportunity to double their earnings with a 16 win season. this could even be part of a new revenue sharing system by the owners.

 

[Sam Quentin]

I think going back to 3 divisions per conference will help -- less will be decided. That and find ways to bring more parity back into the mix.

 

[domvin]

At some point, teams need to be rewarded for clinching early, not penalized. You can't award playoff teams that are already playoff teams extra picks.

Bottom line, is that the Texans, Steelers, and a slew of other teams need to win more in the regular season.

The Texans lost horrifically to Indy, both times they played this year.

The Steelers had what, a 5 game slide losing to the Browns and Raiders? Sorry, you missed your chance too.

Look at the Pats finishing 11-5 last year? Sometimes life aint fair.

I don't like teams sitting players either, but messing with a teams future(draft picks) is the lifeblood of teams.

I can see a luxury tax/fine possibly, but taking away draft picks or awarding draft picks could be too detrimental......

 

[fatness]

It would probably never happen, but I think a good way to have teams play every game is to give them 1 point in the playoffs for every win. Then when the playoffs come, whatever the point differential is between the two teams playing, that is your starting score.Colts 16-0 versus 14-2 now means 2 points for every playoff game!!!

good god

 

[fatness]

I can see it now. A team pulls a starting RB for a series and suddenly the game is stopped, the officials look at who's in the huddle, stop play and order the RB back in.

This thread is brimming with bad ideas, kind of like a stopped-up toilet.

Who a team plays is up to that team, and that's it.

 

[Doug B]

ONe thing to stop and think about -- why is this actionable NOW? Haven't early-clinching teams been resting starters forever? Ain't broke, don't fix.

 

[jackdubl]

Yeah, as much as what the Colts did pains me, you can't stop teams from doing it and any plan on compensation or what-not doesn't really seem feasible to me. The best we can hope for is an injury report-style system for resting starters. Just like in the preseason("starters will play for a half") but make it mandatory like the injury report.

 

[Addai's Adidas]

If Peyton got hurt how many picks is he worth? None picks. He's a once a generation player.

How about Wes Welker? It's a ridiculous idea.

 

[Wilbur Wood]

Having read all the ideas, here's a simple way for the NFL to regulate this.

#1 A firm mandate by the NFL (which would have to be voted in by the owners) is that the "spirit and intent" is that all 16 games are to be played competitively with "Winning" as the prime objective regardless if playoff positions have alredy been clinched. Again, this is just a "mission statement"but again the NFL is still somewhat of an "old boys club" and I think this simple change will have an impact.

#2 The NFL Commishioner is mandated to invoke significant fines to NFL teams that fail to comply with #1. The Commish (with input from the NFL office) will total discretion to invoke these fines based upon a judgement call. The initial fine will be $1 million ( a real amount that an NFL owner will not want to pay). This year I can only think that Colts in Week 16 & 17, Saints in Week 17 and Cards in Week 17 would have failed #1 (I'm not sure what exactly BB was trying to do vs Texans but I guess his mainline starters played enough. Cincy certainly started Palmer & Ocho until they were down 24+ points in the 2nd half). In practice, this hammer would come down only when elite skill position players (QB, WR, RB and maybe select key defensive personnel).

Anyway, I don't think that it would require much more than the above. A change in the "mission statement", coupled with a BIG HAMMER for non-compliance. I think that it is best to leave the standard for invoking #2 "open-ended" (its like Pornography, you know it when you see it).

 

[Topes]

Having read all the ideas, here's a simple way for the NFL to regulate this.

#1 A firm mandate by the NFL (which would have to be voted in by the owners) is that the "spirit and intent" is that all 16 games are to be played competitively with "Winning" as the prime objective regardless if playoff positions have alredy been clinched. Again, this is just a "mission statement"but again the NFL is still somewhat of an "old boys club" and I think this simple change will have an impact.

#2 The NFL Commishioner is mandated to invoke significant fines to NFL teams that fail to comply with #1. The Commish (with input from the NFL office) will total discretion to invoke these fines based upon a judgement call. The initial fine will be $1 million ( a real amount that an NFL owner will not want to pay). This year I can only think that Colts in Week 16 & 17, Saints in Week 17 and Cards in Week 17 would have failed #1 (I'm not sure what exactly BB was trying to do vs Texans but I guess his mainline starters played enough. Cincy certainly started Palmer & Ocho until they were down 24+ points in the 2nd half). In practice, this hammer would come down only when elite skill position players (QB, WR, RB and maybe select key defensive personnel).

Anyway, I don't think that it would require much more than the above. A change in the "mission statement", coupled with a BIG HAMMER for non-compliance. I think that it is best to leave the standard for invoking #2 "open-ended" (its like Pornography, you know it when you see it).

Might work, if it was possible.Commissioner represents ownership.

Owners would never approve of this.

Sentiment from within the NFL against teams mailing it in is not strong.

 

[Addai's Adidas]

Having read all the ideas, here's a simple way for the NFL to regulate this.

#1 A firm mandate by the NFL (which would have to be voted in by the owners) is that the "spirit and intent" is that all 16 games are to be played competitively with "Winning" as the prime objective regardless if playoff positions have alredy been clinched. Again, this is just a "mission statement"but again the NFL is still somewhat of an "old boys club" and I think this simple change will have an impact.

#2 The NFL Commishioner is mandated to invoke significant fines to NFL teams that fail to comply with #1. The Commish (with input from the NFL office) will total discretion to invoke these fines based upon a judgement call. The initial fine will be $1 million ( a real amount that an NFL owner will not want to pay). This year I can only think that Colts in Week 16 & 17, Saints in Week 17 and Cards in Week 17 would have failed #1 (I'm not sure what exactly BB was trying to do vs Texans but I guess his mainline starters played enough. Cincy certainly started Palmer & Ocho until they were down 24+ points in the 2nd half). In practice, this hammer would come down only when elite skill position players (QB, WR, RB and maybe select key defensive personnel).

Anyway, I don't think that it would require much more than the above. A change in the "mission statement", coupled with a BIG HAMMER for non-compliance. I think that it is best to leave the standard for invoking #2 "open-ended" (its like Pornography, you know it when you see it).

So how badly do you punish teams who are "trying" out guys late in the season to see what they have in a guy when you could have been playing your "best guys"?Also, how would you punish the Lions?

 

[fatness]

"We're 1-10 and going nowhere this year. Let's start playing some of our backups to see what we've got."

"The league will fine us for that."

 

[MikeApf]

"We're 1-10 and going nowhere this year. Let's start playing some of our backups to see what we've got.""The league will fine us for that."

Plus, why can't I change who the "starter" is from game to game? There is no rule that says your official starting QB game 1 has to be your official starting QB game 16. Other QB starts, gets dinged on the first play, Peyton spells him for a few series...by then first guy is taped up and ready to go.

 

[Wilbur Wood]

Having read all the ideas, here's a simple way for the NFL to regulate this.

#1 A firm mandate by the NFL (which would have to be voted in by the owners) is that the "spirit and intent" is that all 16 games are to be played competitively with "Winning" as the prime objective regardless if playoff positions have alredy been clinched. Again, this is just a "mission statement"but again the NFL is still somewhat of an "old boys club" and I think this simple change will have an impact.

#2 The NFL Commishioner is mandated to invoke significant fines to NFL teams that fail to comply with #1. The Commish (with input from the NFL office) will total discretion to invoke these fines based upon a judgement call. The initial fine will be $1 million ( a real amount that an NFL owner will not want to pay). This year I can only think that Colts in Week 16 & 17, Saints in Week 17 and Cards in Week 17 would have failed #1 (I'm not sure what exactly BB was trying to do vs Texans but I guess his mainline starters played enough. Cincy certainly started Palmer & Ocho until they were down 24+ points in the 2nd half). In practice, this hammer would come down only when elite skill position players (QB, WR, RB and maybe select key defensive personnel).

Anyway, I don't think that it would require much more than the above. A change in the "mission statement", coupled with a BIG HAMMER for non-compliance. I think that it is best to leave the standard for invoking #2 "open-ended" (its like Pornography, you know it when you see it).

So how badly do you punish teams who are "trying" out guys late in the season to see what they have in a guy when you could have been playing your "best guys"?Also, how would you punish the Lions?

Again, no one gives a hoot about the scrub teams who are playing musical chairs at QB. That is why if the NFL wants to change this all they have to do is the above. Leave it in Goodell's discretion, don't touch the Lions, Rams as those teams that suck anyway and are simply trying to find their way. I would expect this to only be enforced against teams that have already clinched playoff slots as that is the only time that this issue creates an uproar. Another poster said that the NFL will never want to do this may be correct. But Goodell works for the NFL and works for the owners and has stated that he wants to evaluate this issue. Hence, I propose a way to do it that would work and not create havoc with other aspects of the game (draft picks, point handicaps, a selection committee a la the NCAA tournament, etc). Obviously, this would only be done if the NFL wants to address the issue. That is a self evident statemetn.

 

[Addai's Adidas]

Having read all the ideas, here's a simple way for the NFL to regulate this.

#1 A firm mandate by the NFL (which would have to be voted in by the owners) is that the "spirit and intent" is that all 16 games are to be played competitively with "Winning" as the prime objective regardless if playoff positions have alredy been clinched. Again, this is just a "mission statement"but again the NFL is still somewhat of an "old boys club" and I think this simple change will have an impact.

#2 The NFL Commishioner is mandated to invoke significant fines to NFL teams that fail to comply with #1. The Commish (with input from the NFL office) will total discretion to invoke these fines based upon a judgement call. The initial fine will be $1 million ( a real amount that an NFL owner will not want to pay). This year I can only think that Colts in Week 16 & 17, Saints in Week 17 and Cards in Week 17 would have failed #1 (I'm not sure what exactly BB was trying to do vs Texans but I guess his mainline starters played enough. Cincy certainly started Palmer & Ocho until they were down 24+ points in the 2nd half). In practice, this hammer would come down only when elite skill position players (QB, WR, RB and maybe select key defensive personnel).

Anyway, I don't think that it would require much more than the above. A change in the "mission statement", coupled with a BIG HAMMER for non-compliance. I think that it is best to leave the standard for invoking #2 "open-ended" (its like Pornography, you know it when you see it).

So how badly do you punish teams who are "trying" out guys late in the season to see what they have in a guy when you could have been playing your "best guys"?Also, how would you punish the Lions?

Again, no one gives a hoot about the scrub teams who are playing musical chairs at QB. That is why if the NFL wants to change this all they have to do is the above. Leave it in Goodell's discretion, don't touch the Lions, Rams as those teams that suck anyway and are simply trying to find their way. I would expect this to only be enforced against teams that have already clinched playoff slots as that is the only time that this issue creates an uproar. Another poster said that the NFL will never want to do this may be correct. But Goodell works for the NFL and works for the owners and has stated that he wants to evaluate this issue. Hence, I propose a way to do it that would work and not create havoc with other aspects of the game (draft picks, point handicaps, a selection committee a la the NCAA tournament, etc). Obviously, this would only be done if the NFL wants to address the issue. That is a self evident statemetn.

What about teams trowing games at the end to get the #1 pick?

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Having read all the ideas, here's a simple way for the NFL to regulate this.

#1 A firm mandate by the NFL (which would have to be voted in by the owners) is that the "spirit and intent" is that all 16 games are to be played competitively with "Winning" as the prime objective regardless if playoff positions have alredy been clinched. Again, this is just a "mission statement"but again the NFL is still somewhat of an "old boys club" and I think this simple change will have an impact.

#2 The NFL Commishioner is mandated to invoke significant fines to NFL teams that fail to comply with #1. The Commish (with input from the NFL office) will total discretion to invoke these fines based upon a judgement call. The initial fine will be $1 million ( a real amount that an NFL owner will not want to pay). This year I can only think that Colts in Week 16 & 17, Saints in Week 17 and Cards in Week 17 would have failed #1 (I'm not sure what exactly BB was trying to do vs Texans but I guess his mainline starters played enough. Cincy certainly started Palmer & Ocho until they were down 24+ points in the 2nd half). In practice, this hammer would come down only when elite skill position players (QB, WR, RB and maybe select key defensive personnel).

Anyway, I don't think that it would require much more than the above. A change in the "mission statement", coupled with a BIG HAMMER for non-compliance. I think that it is best to leave the standard for invoking #2 "open-ended" (its like Pornography, you know it when you see it).

So how badly do you punish teams who are "trying" out guys late in the season to see what they have in a guy when you could have been playing your "best guys"?Also, how would you punish the Lions?

Again, no one gives a hoot about the scrub teams who are playing musical chairs at QB. That is why if the NFL wants to change this all they have to do is the above. Leave it in Goodell's discretion, don't touch the Lions, Rams as those teams that suck anyway and are simply trying to find their way. I would expect this to only be enforced against teams that have already clinched playoff slots as that is the only time that this issue creates an uproar. Another poster said that the NFL will never want to do this may be correct. But Goodell works for the NFL and works for the owners and has stated that he wants to evaluate this issue. Hence, I propose a way to do it that would work and not create havoc with other aspects of the game (draft picks, point handicaps, a selection committee a la the NCAA tournament, etc). Obviously, this would only be done if the NFL wants to address the issue. That is a self evident statemetn.

What about teams trowing games at the end to get the #1 pick?

Nobody wants to pay the #1 pick anymore (unless there is a Peyton Manning out there) It's a lot cheaper to move down and still get great value.

 

[pizzatyme]

It would probably never happen, but I think a good way to have teams play every game is to give them 1 point in the playoffs for every win. Then when the playoffs come, whatever the point differential is between the two teams playing, that is your starting score.Colts 16-0 versus 14-2 now means 2 points for every playoff game!!!

good god

Excellent well thought out response!

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Best answer I've heard:

Weeks 16 and 17 are divisional games only. Much more (likely) at stake.

Not 100% guaranteed but it should help - but again, if a team is 14-0 and the rest of the division is 8-8, it still wont' matter.

You can try and fix it but there's no way to completely avoid this situation, and they shouldn't. Good teams that blast through the competition in Weeks 1-14 deserve to rest players if that's in their best interests.

 

[Addai's Adidas]

Best answer I've heard:Weeks 16 and 17 are divisional games only. Much more (likely) at stake.Not 100% guaranteed but it should help - but again, if a team is 14-0 and the rest of the division is 8-8, it still wont' matter.You can try and fix it but there's no way to completely avoid this situation, and they shouldn't. Good teams that blast through the competition in Weeks 1-14 deserve to rest players if that's in their best interests.

That's how we do it in my FF league. The last three games are division games. It gets crazy. I wouldn't mind seeing the first and last three games of the season being divisional games.

 

[Go Pack]

This has probably already been mentioned, but I think one major improvment would be to allow wold card teams to host in the 1st round if they have a better record than division winners. Basically just seed the 6 teams that get in for each conference by record. That would not change teams like the Saints & Colts resting starters, but would make a lot of the 2, 3 & 4 seeds work a lot harder the last couple weeks. Teams like the Cardinals of last year would have had something to play for despite having wrapped up a poor division early. Allowing 8-8 teams to host teams with 2, 3 or 4 more wins is pretty crazy.