What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Would 49ers limit/bench starters if AZ loses (1 Viewer)

whhwalker

Footballguy
49ers are scheduled for Monday Night. Cardinals play @SEA Sunday 4pm. 49ers clinch with a win OR Cards loss. When/if Cards lose, the 49ers could possibly fight for the 5th spot, but not much else to play for last 2 weeks.

If you have Kaep, Gore, Vernon (possibly Boldin/Crabtree) are you considering alternative? 49er homers any local rumblings about sitting starters with Cards loss?

 

whhwalker

Footballguy
Not just benching but also limiting snaps for starters. 49ers are in unique situation of knowing 24 hours in advance of their game if it has any meaning. There is precedence for a team to partially play starters in meaningless games. Therefore, it may impact strategy from a fantasy perspective. Hence the question, in preparation of setting a Championship week lineup what are Sharks thinking in relation to the impact of a Cards loss in a 4pm game as it likely limits options for alternatives to a 49er MNF starter?

 
G

General Tso

Guest
I've got Kendall Hunter as a possible RB2 this week (had no depth and lost Tate) and I've been tinkering with the idea of playing him. If San Fran has nothing to play for I could definitely see them limiting Gore and giving Hunter some extended pt. I'd be interested to see what the scenarios are for San Fran. Any links?

thanks.

 
G

General Tso

Guest
Here's a link to some playoff scenarios... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1891523-2014-nfl-playoffs-breaking-down-scenarios-for-every-team/page/5

If Seattle beats Arizona then the 49ers are locked into the 5th or 6th seed. The really is nothing to play for at that point. It's an away game in both scenarios and there shouldn't be much difference in the competition level. I could definitely see them limiting Gore's carries with Hunter getting a lot of action in the second half.

Problem is, we won't know for sure if Seattle wins until Sunday night. It seems like a lock they'll beat Arizona so I just might take the gamble anyways.

 

zftcg

Footballguy
Here's a link to some playoff scenarios... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1891523-2014-nfl-playoffs-breaking-down-scenarios-for-every-team/page/5

If Seattle beats Arizona then the 49ers are locked into the 5th or 6th seed. The really is nothing to play for at that point. It's an away game in both scenarios and there shouldn't be much difference in the competition level. I could definitely see them limiting Gore's carries with Hunter getting a lot of action in the second half.
Red hot Eagles team vs. flawed NFC North winner? I don't think so.

Alternatively: Eagles collapse and Dallas grabs the 4 seed, with a Rodgers-led GB team at No. 3. No difference there?

 
G

General Tso

Guest
Here's a link to some playoff scenarios... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1891523-2014-nfl-playoffs-breaking-down-scenarios-for-every-team/page/5

If Seattle beats Arizona then the 49ers are locked into the 5th or 6th seed. The really is nothing to play for at that point. It's an away game in both scenarios and there shouldn't be much difference in the competition level. I could definitely see them limiting Gore's carries with Hunter getting a lot of action in the second half.
Red hot Eagles team vs. flawed NFC North winner? I don't think so.

Alternatively: Eagles collapse and Dallas grabs the 4 seed, with a Rodgers-led GB team at No. 3. No difference there?
Eh, six in one half dozen in the other. In my opinion there's not much difference between Philly, Chicago, Dallas, and Green Bay. And at this point you don't even know what you'd be fighting for. It would seem more important to make sure you get Gore's ankle right going into the playoffs.
 

zftcg

Footballguy
Everyone always frets over this, but outside of the '09 Colts, is there any precedent for a team resting their starters before Week 17?

 

thecatch

Footballguy
Here's a link to some playoff scenarios... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1891523-2014-nfl-playoffs-breaking-down-scenarios-for-every-team/page/5

If Seattle beats Arizona then the 49ers are locked into the 5th or 6th seed. The really is nothing to play for at that point. It's an away game in both scenarios and there shouldn't be much difference in the competition level. I could definitely see them limiting Gore's carries with Hunter getting a lot of action in the second half.

Problem is, we won't know for sure if Seattle wins until Sunday night. It seems like a lock they'll beat Arizona so I just might take the gamble anyways.
They'd rather go Carolina/New Orleans than Seattle in round 2.

 

bicycle_seat_sniffer

Smells like chicken
Everyone always frets over this, but outside of the '09 Colts, is there any precedent for a team resting their starters before Week 17?
The Denver Broncos did it the season before they won B2B superbowls, got absolutely smashed by Natrone Means and Jacksonville in their first playoff game.

Of course Denver had HFA locked up early

 

Not Sleeping

Footballguy
Here's a link to some playoff scenarios... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1891523-2014-nfl-playoffs-breaking-down-scenarios-for-every-team/page/5

If Seattle beats Arizona then the 49ers are locked into the 5th or 6th seed. The really is nothing to play for at that point. It's an away game in both scenarios and there shouldn't be much difference in the competition level. I could definitely see them limiting Gore's carries with Hunter getting a lot of action in the second half.

Problem is, we won't know for sure if Seattle wins until Sunday night. It seems like a lock they'll beat Arizona so I just might take the gamble anyways.
They'd rather go Carolina/New Orleans than Seattle in round 2.
This exactly. There is a lot of value in the #5 seed vs. #6. First, it defers the trip to Seattle. Second, there is an unlikely but not impossible scenario where the #6 Panthers knock off Seattle and then SF gets to host the NFC Championship game at home. No way they don't play to win the next 2 games.

 

Scoresman

Footballguy
the only guy who may get rest if any is Gore. He's been a little gimpy the last few weeks and may need a rest.

 

MattFancy

Footballguy
Here's a link to some playoff scenarios... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1891523-2014-nfl-playoffs-breaking-down-scenarios-for-every-team/page/5

If Seattle beats Arizona then the 49ers are locked into the 5th or 6th seed. The really is nothing to play for at that point. It's an away game in both scenarios and there shouldn't be much difference in the competition level. I could definitely see them limiting Gore's carries with Hunter getting a lot of action in the second half.

Problem is, we won't know for sure if Seattle wins until Sunday night. It seems like a lock they'll beat Arizona so I just might take the gamble anyways.
They'd rather go Carolina/New Orleans than Seattle in round 2.
This exactly. There is a lot of value in the #5 seed vs. #6. First, it defers the trip to Seattle. Second, there is an unlikely but not impossible scenario where the #6 Panthers knock off Seattle and then SF gets to host the NFC Championship game at home. No way they don't play to win the next 2 games.
Doesn't necssarily defer the trip to Seattle. Seattle would play the lowest team remaining. So say SF plays Philly and Carolina plays Chicago. If Chicago beats Carolina and SF beats Philly, SF would travel to Seattle. Only way SF wouldn't play Seattle is if the 6th seed beats the 3rd seed.

 

Shutout

Footballguy
Here's a link to some playoff scenarios... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1891523-2014-nfl-playoffs-breaking-down-scenarios-for-every-team/page/5

If Seattle beats Arizona then the 49ers are locked into the 5th or 6th seed. The really is nothing to play for at that point. It's an away game in both scenarios and there shouldn't be much difference in the competition level. I could definitely see them limiting Gore's carries with Hunter getting a lot of action in the second half.

Problem is, we won't know for sure if Seattle wins until Sunday night. It seems like a lock they'll beat Arizona so I just might take the gamble anyways.
They'd rather go Carolina/New Orleans than Seattle in round 2.
This exactly. There is a lot of value in the #5 seed vs. #6. First, it defers the trip to Seattle. Second, there is an unlikely but not impossible scenario where the #6 Panthers knock off Seattle and then SF gets to host the NFC Championship game at home. No way they don't play to win the next 2 games.
I'd say this is the scenario that is most likely in teams' minds. Forget "do I have to play Dallas or GB or Chicagor or Philly.", etc. Its all about delaying a trip to Seattle at this point.

The most likely issue I see is if the Falcons lay down like dogs and the Niners go into halftime up 24-3 or something. Then I think they probably rest Gore and just muddle their way through the rest of the game with Vernon, Gore, Boldin, Crabtree all suffering.

 

Spin

Footballguy
Here's a link to some playoff scenarios... http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1891523-2014-nfl-playoffs-breaking-down-scenarios-for-every-team/page/5

If Seattle beats Arizona then the 49ers are locked into the 5th or 6th seed. The really is nothing to play for at that point. It's an away game in both scenarios and there shouldn't be much difference in the competition level. I could definitely see them limiting Gore's carries with Hunter getting a lot of action in the second half.

Problem is, we won't know for sure if Seattle wins until Sunday night. It seems like a lock they'll beat Arizona so I just might take the gamble anyways.
They'd rather go Carolina/New Orleans than Seattle in round 2.
This exactly. There is a lot of value in the #5 seed vs. #6. First, it defers the trip to Seattle. Second, there is an unlikely but not impossible scenario where the #6 Panthers knock off Seattle and then SF gets to host the NFC Championship game at home. No way they don't play to win the next 2 games.
Doesn't necssarily defer the trip to Seattle. Seattle would play the lowest team remaining. So say SF plays Philly and Carolina plays Chicago. If Chicago beats Carolina and SF beats Philly, SF would travel to Seattle. Only way SF wouldn't play Seattle is if the 6th seed beats the 3rd seed.
Right, 6th seed would guarantee them a trip to Seattle if they win. 5th seed gives them a chance to be able to avoid Seattle, and a shot (very little) at hosting the NFC Championship game. I think it's likely that SF and NO/Car both win as the 5/6th seeds.

 

zftcg

Footballguy
I'd say the risk is slightly raised. If the Niners get out to a big lead, or if one of their starters gets dinged up, they could sit (as happened with Romo in Week 16 two years ago). The question is whether that risk is enough to sit them. I'd argue that in the vast majority of cases, it's not.

I feel like this is one of those topics people like to obsess over just because they can. The worry is a little more acute here than the people who were posting two months ago, "What if the Broncos wrap up HFA by Week 14?" But it's basically the same idea.

 

MattFancy

Footballguy
Gore is the one I would be worried. They've been limiting him the last few weeks anyway. If they have nothing to play for, I could see Hunter/James getting more of the workload and let Gore rest his ankle.

 

first round bust

Footballguy
Am I missing something?

SF is 10-4 and AZ is 9-5.

If AZ loses to Seattle in week 16 they will be 9-6.

If SF loses to Atl in week 16 they will be 10-5.

If they both lose in week 16, SF plays at AZ in week 17 and if AZ wins, both teams would be 10-6 and AZ would get the tiebreaker.

Therefore, SF has something to play for against Atl this week, right?

 

thecatch

Footballguy
Am I missing something?

SF is 10-4 and AZ is 9-5.

If AZ loses to Seattle in week 16 they will be 9-6.

If SF loses to Atl in week 16 they will be 10-5.

If they both lose in week 16, SF plays at AZ in week 17 and if AZ wins, both teams would be 10-6 and AZ would get the tiebreaker.

Therefore, SF has something to play for against Atl this week, right?
Arizona would lose the tiebreaker regardless because of their 3 division losses.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tango

Footballguy
Am I missing something?

SF is 10-4 and AZ is 9-5.

If AZ loses to Seattle in week 16 they will be 9-6.

If SF loses to Atl in week 16 they will be 10-5.

If they both lose in week 16, SF plays at AZ in week 17 and if AZ wins, both teams would be 10-6 and AZ would get the tiebreaker.

Therefore, SF has something to play for against Atl this week, right?
SF clinches a playoff spot with an Arizona loss this week. This thread is discussing the implications of that fact; including whether they'd go all-out in the particular scenario you describe.

 

ghostguy123

Footballguy
I would think it only affects Gore. Sucks for me cause I need him in my title game.

Either way, no matter what happens in the seattle game, I am sure San Fran is playing to win on monday night.

However, that doesn't mean Gore will get a full load. As someone said, yes they want to win and get the 5 seed, but it would be more important to have Gore healthy for the long run, and not worry so much about the round 1 opponent.

I suppose there is a chance the other guys could sit some, but I would be far less worried about that.

 

Steed

Footballguy
Isn't this the last game in candlestick? Think they job the fans on a day they commemorate hallowed ground? I doubt it

 

ghostguy123

Footballguy
Yeah, after looking more, San Fran DEFINITELY would prefer the 5 seed.

If carolina or the Saints are the 6 seed, they will not only probably win and then go to seattle round 2, they can beat seattle, which as was mentioned, would give the 49ers home field in the NFC championship game if they get there.

 

ROCKET

Footballguy
I don't see a coach like Harbaugh letting up for one second in week 16. That's not the kind of message you want to send to your team going into the playoffs. With the exception of a blowout there will be no resting of players. He would rest guys in week 2 if that happened too. This is complete bs. Start everyone and relax.

 

ghostguy123

Footballguy
I don't see a coach like Harbaugh letting up for one second in week 16. That's not the kind of message you want to send to your team going into the playoffs. With the exception of a blowout there will be no resting of players. He would rest guys in week 2 if that happened too. This is complete bs. Start everyone and relax.
I think you are PROBABLY right, but I definitely see potential to limit Gore.

 

Tango

Footballguy
I don't see a coach like Harbaugh letting up for one second in week 16. That's not the kind of message you want to send to your team going into the playoffs. With the exception of a blowout there will be no resting of players. He would rest guys in week 2 if that happened too. This is complete bs. Start everyone and relax.
I think you are PROBABLY right, but I definitely see potential to limit Gore.
...depending on the score, it also could easily have an effect on 4th quarter subs for the entire squad...particularly the quarterback.

 

Spin

Footballguy
I don't see a coach like Harbaugh letting up for one second in week 16. That's not the kind of message you want to send to your team going into the playoffs. With the exception of a blowout there will be no resting of players. He would rest guys in week 2 if that happened too. This is complete bs. Start everyone and relax.
I think you are PROBABLY right, but I definitely see potential to limit Gore.
They've been limiting Gore more this year then ever to keep him fresh for the playoffs. It will be business as usual.

 

ghostguy123

Footballguy
I don't see a coach like Harbaugh letting up for one second in week 16. That's not the kind of message you want to send to your team going into the playoffs. With the exception of a blowout there will be no resting of players. He would rest guys in week 2 if that happened too. This is complete bs. Start everyone and relax.
I think you are PROBABLY right, but I definitely see potential to limit Gore.
They've been limiting Gore more this year then ever to keep him fresh for the playoffs. It will be business as usual.
LIke I said, PROBABLY.

But I can see them sub for him earlier than usual. Say they are up like 21-7 at halftime. I can see Gore on the bench for the entire 2nd half unless it became a 1 score game.

The 49ers should feel pretty confident against the Falcons whether Gores plays all game or doesn't even suit up. Up with a 21-7 lead, and I can see him sitting for the rest of the game.

Maybe, maybe not, but the potential is there more so this game than any others up to this point.

 

bagger

Footballguy
Gore is the one I would be worried. They've been limiting him the last few weeks anyway. If they have nothing to play for, I could see Hunter/James getting more of the workload and let Gore rest his ankle.
given that its monday night i picked up hunter off waivers in case i need to insert hunter in the lineup if gore gets scratched but otherwise will roll with gore. even gore limited isnt that much different than a normal week.
 

first round bust

Footballguy
Am I missing something?

SF is 10-4 and AZ is 9-5.

If AZ loses to Seattle in week 16 they will be 9-6.

If SF loses to Atl in week 16 they will be 10-5.

If they both lose in week 16, SF plays at AZ in week 17 and if AZ wins, both teams would be 10-6 and AZ would get the tiebreaker.

Therefore, SF has something to play for against Atl this week, right?
Arizona would lose the tiebreaker regardless because of their 3 division losses.
oh ok thanks.

 

first round bust

Footballguy
I don't see a coach like Harbaugh letting up for one second in week 16. That's not the kind of message you want to send to your team going into the playoffs. With the exception of a blowout there will be no resting of players. He would rest guys in week 2 if that happened too. This is complete bs. Start everyone and relax.
I think you are PROBABLY right, but I definitely see potential to limit Gore.
Gore vs Atl is such a mismatch I think you have to play him regardless, there is a risk but the upside is too big.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top