Thoughts On Cutting Keenan Allen?

[Lefty2SLO]

You're absolutely correct that they may have lost anyway, but at least we would have had our full compliment and been able put our best foot forward. This isn't about 'I told you so', it's about expecting team leadership to make sound decisions and maximize our chances to win games.

Put it to you this way; did the eagles or chiefs schedule full contact practice games during their bye week (obviously no)? Apparently they valued health over continuity. The value of the bye is that you get to get your walking wounded healthy, which is much more valuable than 'continuity', particularly when the team you'll eventually play did NOT get the opportunity to rest their guys.

Like I said earlier - I hope team leadership is smarter next year . . . . .

And for the record; If the Denver game had had ANY real meaning, ie; in or out of the playoffs, home field advantage, higher seeding, better playoff matchups, etc. etc. I would have no issues with the starters playing, even if some got injured. What really chaps my hide is the exposure of our best players to injury for nothing. It was stupid - and I have a very low tolerance for stupid.

How would you have felt if JH had gotten hurt in the Denver game? Was it smart to play our already injured superstar?

[Bolt4Knob]

You're absolutely correct that they may have lost anyway, but at least we would have had our full compliment and been able put our best foot forward. This isn't about 'I told you so', it's about expecting team leadership to make sound decisions and maximize our chances to win games.

Put it to you this way; did the eagles or chiefs schedule full contact practice games during their bye week (obviously no)? Apparently they valued health over continuity. The value of the bye is that you get to get your walking wounded healthy, which is much more valuable than 'continuity', particularly when the team you'll eventually play did NOT get the opportunity to rest their guys.

Like I said earlier - I hope team leadership is smarter next year . . . . .

Most fans would have understood resting the plays to prepare for the Jags - even if they played poorly against the Jags

and another thing -- anybody that understands NFL scheduling knew the Jags would play on Saturday - - or had a high probability. So the Chargers had to fly back to CA and on a short week fly to Jacksonville
Its not why they lost - but Staley should have been fired

If you cannot make the decision to rest your players that game - how can I trust you to make tougher decisions or coach your team. So far, a lot of talk...

[Maniaque 6]

I think Staley wanted to start the playoff with a 5 games winning streak.

[richpjr]

I think Staley wanted to start the playoff with a 5 games winning streak.

He all but said this. I would not have played any key or dinged players myself but Belichick regularly played Brady and his others in the same situation. Sirriani had Hurts playing late in the season even after admitting he was in a lot of pain. It backfired badly but Staley is getting more criticism about it than other coaches do.

[ChargersPowderBlue]

And for the record; If the Denver game had had ANY real meaning, ie; in or out of the playoffs, home field advantage, higher seeding, better playoff matchups, etc. etc. I would have no issues with the starters playing, even if some got injured. What really chaps my hide is the exposure of our best players to injury for nothing. It was stupid - and I have a very low tolerance for stupid.

The commentators during the broadcast of the game explained why Staley couldn't just rest his starters. A few people on this forum has too. But the people who bitch and complain about it disregard/ignore that.

[Boltjolt]

Most fans would have understood resting the plays to prepare for the Jags - even if they played poorly against the Jags

and another thing -- anybody that understands NFL scheduling knew the Jags would play on Saturday - - or had a high probability. So the Chargers had to fly back to CA and on a short week fly to Jacksonville
Its not why they lost - but Staley should have been fired

If you cannot make the decision to rest your players that game - how can I trust you to make tougher decisions or coach your team. So far, a lot of talk...

They would be complaining about that as well lol.

[Lefty2SLO]

The commentators during the broadcast of the game explained why Staley couldn't just rest his starters. A few people on this forum has too. But the people who bitch and complain about it disregard/ignore that.

You're referring to the limited number of WR's active for the Denver game - I assume? And other positions? Who the f*** do you think makes the decisions as to who will be active on game day?? The argument that he HAD to play player xxxxx because he had no-one else available is completely disingenuous, as Staley put himself in that position with his personnel decisions.

Even if you disregard the above what's wrong with putting in your 3rd string RB, 2nd and 3rd string TE's and bottom 2 WR + the backup QB and center and running the hell out of the ball? It didn't matter if we won - nothing was gained or lost. Run the ball, shorten the game, punt as often as necessary and get the hell out of Dodge!!!. It was basically a preseason game - and should have been executed like one. Staley had a golden opportunity handed to him for a 'mini bye' ahead of a short week, but somehow managed to turn a positive into a negative . . . . . with poorly reasoned decision making.

I bitch and complain about this because the course of action that would have allowed us to be as prepared as possible for the Jville game was clear and obvious, but instead Staley went in a different direction . . . . . and the rest is history.

:smh:

[Lefty2SLO]

I think Staley wanted to start the playoff with a 5 games winning streak.

Decision process would be valuing momentum over health and preparation, right? I understand the process, but disagree (vehemently) with the ultimate decision.

[chargeroo]

The argument about playing your stars or sitting them in these year-end games has been going on ever since I can remember. Some of the best coaches play them, and others of the best coaches sit them.
IMO, resting your best is a good idea but many people think that going into the playoffs on a winning streak is worth the risk.

[Lefty2SLO]

The argument about playing your stars or sitting them in these year-end games has been going on ever since I can remember. Some of the best coaches play them, and others of the best coaches sit them.
IMO, resting your best is a good idea but many people think that going into the playoffs on a winning streak is worth the risk.

Roo - there are many variables that go into this decision, ie;

Does the game in question have value (in winning)?
Short week vs more prep time for the critical game ahead
Are star players already nicked up (and need rest)?
Are star players injury prone (or not)?
Relative value of the star player(s) in question (QB's more important than LB's, etc)

I understand that this type of decision can't be a 'one size fits all' deal. The variables for each team and each situation will always be different.

IMO the variables for playing to win in Denver were decidedly negative; a short window for preparation for the Jville game, Herbert's existing injuries, MW and Lindley's propensity to get nicked, no advantage (other than momentum) for a win, etc. If I'm the Charger HC I don't play any of my critical or nicked up guys, run my backups out there as much as possible, get the game over as quickly as possible, and I and my staff don't spend 1 second of time prepping for the Denver game. All of our focus will be on breaking down Jville and figuring out how to beat THEM. I would have approached the Denver game just like a preseason game - run our vanilla stuff and get back home ASAP so we have the most time possible to prep for the important game to come.

The decision making for Denver is just beyond me . . . . . .

[dmac_bolt]

You're absolutely correct that they may have lost anyway, but at least we would have had our full compliment and been able put our best foot forward. This isn't about 'I told you so', it's about expecting team leadership to make sound decisions and maximize our chances to win games.

Put it to you this way; did the eagles or chiefs schedule full contact practice games during their bye week (obviously no)? Apparently they valued health over continuity. The value of the bye is that you get to get your walking wounded healthy, which is much more valuable than 'continuity', particularly when the team you'll eventually play did NOT get the opportunity to rest their guys.

Like I said earlier - I hope team leadership is smarter next year . . . . .

It’s like over a month late is what it is. I thought we hashed out this debate 5+ weeks ago or so? I missed Howe it got brought up again, i think.

I was one of the first to call for sitting key players here, before the game, and MW was at the top of my list to sit. Many here in TPB were opposed based on the competing “momentum theory” of playoff success. Its not a black and white “truth” - both methods have succeeded and both have failed I don’t remember if you posted to not play any starters prior to the game - were you posting this before the game?

[dmac_bolt]

The argument about playing your stars or sitting them in these year-end games has been going on ever since I can remember. Some of the best coaches play them, and others of the best coaches sit them.
IMO, resting your best is a good idea but many people think that going into the playoffs on a winning streak is worth the risk.

Exactly right.