dennehy
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Dec 29, 2015
- Posts:
- 11,162
- Liked Posts:
- 12,008
- Location:
- Jewels to get a case of Squirt
it was fair though because really the Redskins also looked like they were trying to lose.
am i the only who doesn’t care or see anything wrong here? they would be stupid to not do what they did in that situation.
I think the difference here is that there is a major difference between announcing on the Monday prior to the game that you're resting your starters, as opposed to making a QB change to a clearly inferior player when it's a one possession game.How is it different than playoff teams protecting starters and losing their last game because of it? Teams have gotten into the playoffs by that sort of dubious win in the past.
Its match-fixing, which is explicitly against NFL rules and is legally dubious to say the least. It is against the rules for a team to intentionally lose a game. There are ways around this, like the Steelers sitting Rudolph to rest Roethlisberger of the near-decade of the Colts not playing their starters week sixteen or seventeen during the Manning years, but the Eagles took it a step further. The coaches actively interfered with the outcome of the game by intentionally losing as the game was going on.
So you'd rather have your favorite NFL team lose, then see another team win?Exactly!
Let's not act like the Bears wouldn't play at least half assed if Green Bay needed a win from the Bears to make the playoffs.
The fact you are going to these types of disingenuous lengths to excuse this exposes that you ultimately agree that the Eagles behavior was at best unsporting and unethical.
So you'd rather have your favorite NFL team lose, then see another team win?
I watched the whole game- what a crapfest of poor play on both sides. Hurts wasn't playing lights out anyway and when they put Sudfeld in there I just thought the Eagles wanted to see if he was worth keeping next year by playing him with live bullets flying. So what- they are 4-12 for a lot of reasons. Crap players and crap coaches all doing not enough to win all season. If the Giants wanted in then maybe they should have won 1 more game instead of crying about the Eagles motivations. I only wish it would have been the Cowboys that got boned so I could see Jerrah melt down.
Losing does not lead to winning in the NFL.
Ahh. Thank you for clarifying.No. What I'm saying is that a lot of meatballs on this forum would applaud the Bears for doing the same if it kept GB out of the playoffs. Some of these idiots care more about GB losing than the results of any Bears game.
They aren't moving on from Wentz, he has $59mil in dead money next year.Exactly!
Outside of 2 rushing TDs, Hurts wasn't doing anything out there. The Eagles are moving on from Wentz. They wanted to see if they need to draft or sign a backup QB in place of Sudfeld in 2021.
I see no problem.
So you'd rather have your favorite NFL team lose, then see another team win?
and like Peterson said...rewarding Sudfeld for 4 years of being a good citizen, as they planned to pre-game.I realize it was pretty bad, but is it any worse than a team that is heading into the playoffs and want to rest the starters. The Steelers did just that this weekend, only thing different is they did not even start the game with the starting QB. Philly pulled the QB of the Future in the 3rd Quarter....
Some call it unethical, but reality is they were reducing the risk that Hurts would get hurt in a meaningless game, and getting the best draft position possible. I call it smart.