I'm Sick and Tired of the Colts Game

First, I do feel a little sorry for Indy Fans who shelled out $150 and basically watched a Preseason Game 4 type game.  I know I'd be pissed off if it were me.  But sometimes I pay $60 for pay-per-view boxing for a match that only goes 2 rounds.  Also I go to baseball games and the parent team has called up all the prospects because of injuries in the majors and now the Major League team is full of rookies and the AAA team is now full of AA prospects too.  I guess in a live environment you have to be willing to accept that risk.

But, on the other hand, the only reason anyone cares about the Colts is

1. because they did this at the sacrifice of their perfect season and
   
2. because it keeps the Jets in the running for a post season bid where 7 teams are all vying for 2 spots. 
   

Let's face facts:  If the earlier games ended differently and any one of the 3 teams that had to win actually won their game, the Jets would have been eliminated from the post season before their game started, and the Colts would have still rested their players and lost the game and their perfect season.  Then most of the complains in the NFL and media (aside from Colts fans re: the perfect season) would be non-existant.  So this is more about the perception that the Jets got a gift than anything else (and from those 6 other teams fighting for the playoffs)

If one of those 3 teams last week were playing the Lions or some other rebuilding franchise, would be all be moaning about how they have an easy win?  No.  Cause that is how the schedule works out, and sometimes you are in a weak division and play lots of weak teams and make the playoffs where better teams playing tougher schedules do not.  Not only are people mad about this spot because its the Jets who benefit, but also because it doesnt seem fair for a good team to lose to a lesser team simply to preserve their players.

The fact that the Jets NEEDED to win that game was irrelevant.  I agree with the other folks who said if these bubble teams got it done the other 14 or 15 weeks, they wouldn't have to hope for an easy match-up (either by schedule or personnel decision) the last game of the season.  The Jets didn't get it done, they had the Colts next on the schedule, and had to play them for the win.

The Jets went to Indy, played the Colts and won.  I agree with Rex that he can't choose which players are on the field for the Colts, so as far as he's concerned, the Jets did what they had to do to win.  This ISNT the preseason and the Jets were under no obligation to bench their starters too...  Plus, the Colts weren't able to build a huge lead after 40 minutes of game play - only 5 points, so it wasn't like the Jets were just hapless beneficiaries of circumstance.

Do you remember a few years back when the Patriots were on their perfect season run and they ran up scores on the opponents.  It was driving fans and the media nuts!  Let's assume that it was done to help break all the single season records.  Everyone (outside of NE) argued at the time that it wasn't in the spirit of the NFL to do that, and the Pats should put their backups in after a while.  That is literally the complete opposite argument people are making here with the Colts (with the key difference being that this time it cost the Colts the game.  I think that a team ultimately can decide who to play and when.

Lastly, I saw another interesting point that the Colts playing their backups isn't only benefiting the starters and the Jets.  Suppose that the Colts suffer an injury in the playoffs (Manning or another key position player).  Asking the backups - who are NFL players waiting for their big break, btw - to get in there and finish the playoffs is to be expected.  Perhaps you are doing the team a huge favor by seasoning some of your rookies and backups where you can so when you do need to call on them, they have some actual game experience against an opponents "A" team.  It's called DEPTH, but I realize most fans have no idea what that is.

Personally, I don't agree on completely resting starters because I think it ruins momentum and that the bye week doesn't always lead to a sharper team, sometimes it is disruptive.  I think reducing carries, and limiting game time is a good idea.  If the Jets had Home Field locked up I wouldn't be against splitting time with Clemens or Ainge, and also wouldn't be against playing Woodhead more or giving Wright and Clowney some more action.  Hunter and Turner too.  If we were 14-0, I would have waited for a bigger lead than 15-10 though!

Just some thoughts.