Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Interesting development in Chicago this pre-season.  Nagy is bucking the trend to play starters in these meaningless pre-season games.

 

"We're just at the spot right now where we're lucky to be where we're at," Nagy said, per NBC Sports Chicago. "I love the growth as a team and as a family. I feel strong that when we go into Week 1 that those 25-30 plays [that his starters won't be playing in pre-season] aren't going to sway [the Green Bay game] one way or the other. It's really not. If we win that game against Green Bay, trust me, it wasn't because we didn't play those 25. If we lose it, same thing, I promise you that."

 

This is likely to catch on further next year and beyond.

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/bears-coach-matt-nagy-sitting-starters-in-preseason-wont-change-week-1-result/

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

Aren’t the Chargers doing a mini-version of this already? I can see it catching on more and more, but it appears our Bills need some.....something.....practice, games, coaching....something....

Edited by Augie
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

Rams did the same thing. This is a copycat league. I guess you have to balance rust vs having players injured. I don't think it's a bad idea to do this in many situations fwiw. Gives young guys a lot more time on the field and vets already know what's up.

Edited by ndirish1978
Posted

This will definitely catch on.  Sal C. mentioned today that he thinks it could impact the next CBA.  I don't disagree with him.

 

It could become a problem for the league if most or all of the teams refuse to play starters in the pre-season. 

 

Might finally make some progress in terms of reducing or eliminating the games.

 

 

Posted

I feel sorry for anyone trying to break into that roster.  Granted, the coaches willl see more rookie action/free agent , but it sends the wrong message to the rookies that, no matter what, the open spots are pretty much taken.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted

Hope it impacts the CBA, putting more time into actual coaching in the offseason but to me the "impact the CBA" point, which Sal "Max and Syracuse U" Carpaccio didn't offer anything on, will be an agreement to go to an 18 game season (league would gladly go to 18 games) and hopefully no preseason (which I think the players would agree to), saving STHs from being annually robbed by the owners for preseason games like the one forth coming Thursday. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Marv's Neighbor said:

I feel sorry for anyone trying to break into that roster.  Granted, the coaches willl see more rookie action/free agent , but it sends the wrong message to the rookies that, no matter what, the open spots are pretty much taken.

Nice contrarian view point. 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, YoloinOhio said:

Rex did that one year and they didn’t look ready week 1. But that could have just been him.

 

Yeah... they didn’t look ready in week 16 either. 

Edited by transient
Posted

I am all for experimentation. I for one think that "Live rounds" for starters in the form of pre-season is necessary. Adding up how much time starters play in pre-season is about less than 5 quarters of football spread out over 3 weeks. That seems like the right amount of time to get the vets ready for a season. However if training camp and practice is enough and the results show it then why not just end pre-season or have pre-season be for backups only? Sure it would make pre-season that much more worthless but if it means less injures then that's worth the cost. 

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Fadingpain said:

Interesting development in Chicago this pre-season.  Nagy is bucking the trend to play starters in these meaningless pre-season games.

 

"We're just at the spot right now where we're lucky to be where we're at," Nagy said, per NBC Sports Chicago. "I love the growth as a team and as a family. I feel strong that when we go into Week 1 that those 25-30 plays [that his starters won't be playing in pre-season] aren't going to sway [the Green Bay game] one way or the other. It's really not. If we win that game against Green Bay, trust me, it wasn't because we didn't play those 25. If we lose it, same thing, I promise you that."

 

This is likely to catch on further next year and beyond.

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/bears-coach-matt-nagy-sitting-starters-in-preseason-wont-change-week-1-result/

 

Let's hope they eliminate the preseason and add two regular season games. Just scrimmage a couple teams in training camp and we are golden.

 

And don't want to hear about too many games in a season, Canadian teams play a 18 game season.

 

 

8 hours ago, Augie said:

Aren’t the Chargers doing a mini-version of this already? I can see it catching on more and more, but it appears our Bills need some.....something.....practice, games, coaching....something....

 

Coaching is fine, offensive talent is not.

 

 

 

7 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

Rex did that one year and they didn’t look ready week 1. But that could have just been him.

 

it was him

 

 

Edited by Buffalo Barbarian
Posted

Of course, there is no real way to measure whether this is a good or bad idea. The only way it would really catch on is if all the teams that did it won their first 2-3 games out of the box, then the next year every team in the league would do it--which would mean that half the teams that did it were not any better off.

 

Posted

The season ticket holders have to be thrilled about this. Forced to pay full price for two “games” featuring future insurance salesmen and grocery store clerks. 

Posted
10 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

He wants to save up as much bad football as possible for the regular season.  Why waste all that crappiness on meaningless games?

 

 

....can we rent their OL for game four??...........

  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...