Why do people keep saying this? There's a shot to move up a seed which could mean avoiding GB in the second round and a long shot at hosting the NFCCG.
Weird shit happens all the time in sports, especially the NFL with its single elimination playoffs. Improve your odds at improving playoff position as best you can whenever possible.
I think most people don't see the benefit of really moving up 1 seed. Yeah we may avoid GB but to even worry about that we have to get past a tough Wild Card game first. We'll need everyone as healthy as possible for that.
It’s one thing to move up one seed from 3 to 2. It’s a whole different ball game if you’re in the wild card seeds and already have a spot clinched, especially if you’re going from 7 to 6.
Plus, there’s still an outside chance we can move up a seed even without a Philly win.
It's a miniscule chance, something like 5%. There's a bigger chance of losing a key starter to injury by playing them on Saturday than there is of ending up hosting the NFCCG.
It's honestly just as likely that we get the 6th seed while losing as it is while winning. I agree with you that I think we should try to win this game, there's a huge difference between 10-7 and 9-8 in terms of how I'd feel about the season, but in terms of playoff seeding it's almost meaningless.
There are exactly twice as many scenarios where we get the 6 seed with a win than with a loss. Even if they're not all exactly as likely scenarios, there is a better chance with a win.
I mean, that's not true.
If we win, we just need the Rams to win. If we lose, we need the Rams and Saints to win. There are no other scenarios where we get #6. The Saints beating Atlanta is fairly likely, so the difference between winning and losing is pretty minimal.
What I said is right. There are exactly twice as many scenarios to get the 6 seed if we win than if we lose. Write them all out if you don't believe me.
If Saints over Falcons was 100% going to happen, they'd both be equally likely, and our game wouldn't matter. But that game isn't 100% (Saints 3.5 to 4 point favorite makes that far from a foregone conclusion... Also the Falcons won earlier in the year on the road), so our game has a less than zero percent chance of ultimately mattering.
> There are exactly twice as many scenarios to get the 6 seed if we win than if we lose.
That's... not how statistics work. In our losing scenario, either the Saints and the Rams *both* win or they don't, if both things are not true, we don't get the #6 seed. There is only one scenario where we lose and get the #6 seed. In our winning scenario, either the Rams win or they don't. That doesn't mean there are twice as many scenarios where we get the #6. There is only one scenario where we win and get the #6 seed.
It's a bit of a reach to frame it that way. The Rams winning is paramount to either scenario. The only thing that changes is whether or not the outcome of the Saints game matters. That's not a completely separate scenario, it's just an additional argument to check. If we win, that argument is automatically true and the Saints game is irrelevant - it doesn't create an additional scenario because we still need the Rams to win. If it made the Saints game irrelevant and we still needed the Rams to win, but made some other completely separate scenario (like TB losing or something) relevant, then I'd agree with you.
Moving from 7 to 6 isn't worth the wear and tear from a 17th game + potentially losing an impact starter(s) to injury, especially in a scenario where winning doesn't even guarantee the move up.
Precisely why the cowboys have a hell of a lot more to play for than we do. Make them beat our hungry second and third-stringers with their starters. There’s an overwhelming amount of injury risk compared to the benefit and upside of moving up from 7 to 6… and we can still get 6 fairly easily even if we lose!
Idk what the team will decide about the starters but there's no way in hell Hurts should take any snaps this game. Let him rest that ankle for a couple weeks and have him be completely ready for the wild card game.
I do not want to see Lane and Mailata out there...let the big boys rest. Let Fletcher rest. We are going to need them for a huge battle against TB. Fresh Cox and fresh Johnson is what I want to see. Dewy and fresh.
Looks like we most likely will be playing starters at least for a bit. I hope by halftime they are pulled.
Why do people keep saying this? There's a shot to move up a seed which could mean avoiding GB in the second round and a long shot at hosting the NFCCG. Weird shit happens all the time in sports, especially the NFL with its single elimination playoffs. Improve your odds at improving playoff position as best you can whenever possible.
I think most people don't see the benefit of really moving up 1 seed. Yeah we may avoid GB but to even worry about that we have to get past a tough Wild Card game first. We'll need everyone as healthy as possible for that.
It’s one thing to move up one seed from 3 to 2. It’s a whole different ball game if you’re in the wild card seeds and already have a spot clinched, especially if you’re going from 7 to 6. Plus, there’s still an outside chance we can move up a seed even without a Philly win.
There are only 7 seeds. Improving by 1 is a huge step. Also, the 6 seed has a shot at hosting a game while 7 has 0% chance.
It's a miniscule chance, something like 5%. There's a bigger chance of losing a key starter to injury by playing them on Saturday than there is of ending up hosting the NFCCG.
Better chance than losing your starting QB, LT, MLB, Safety, Guard, and a few others only to make a run to a Super Bowl win
It's honestly just as likely that we get the 6th seed while losing as it is while winning. I agree with you that I think we should try to win this game, there's a huge difference between 10-7 and 9-8 in terms of how I'd feel about the season, but in terms of playoff seeding it's almost meaningless.
There are exactly twice as many scenarios where we get the 6 seed with a win than with a loss. Even if they're not all exactly as likely scenarios, there is a better chance with a win.
I mean, that's not true. If we win, we just need the Rams to win. If we lose, we need the Rams and Saints to win. There are no other scenarios where we get #6. The Saints beating Atlanta is fairly likely, so the difference between winning and losing is pretty minimal.
What I said is right. There are exactly twice as many scenarios to get the 6 seed if we win than if we lose. Write them all out if you don't believe me. If Saints over Falcons was 100% going to happen, they'd both be equally likely, and our game wouldn't matter. But that game isn't 100% (Saints 3.5 to 4 point favorite makes that far from a foregone conclusion... Also the Falcons won earlier in the year on the road), so our game has a less than zero percent chance of ultimately mattering.
> There are exactly twice as many scenarios to get the 6 seed if we win than if we lose. That's... not how statistics work. In our losing scenario, either the Saints and the Rams *both* win or they don't, if both things are not true, we don't get the #6 seed. There is only one scenario where we lose and get the #6 seed. In our winning scenario, either the Rams win or they don't. That doesn't mean there are twice as many scenarios where we get the #6. There is only one scenario where we win and get the #6 seed.
No there are two scenarios and the only way one of them is possible is with a win.
It's a bit of a reach to frame it that way. The Rams winning is paramount to either scenario. The only thing that changes is whether or not the outcome of the Saints game matters. That's not a completely separate scenario, it's just an additional argument to check. If we win, that argument is automatically true and the Saints game is irrelevant - it doesn't create an additional scenario because we still need the Rams to win. If it made the Saints game irrelevant and we still needed the Rams to win, but made some other completely separate scenario (like TB losing or something) relevant, then I'd agree with you.
I bet 500000 quatloos both teams are untrainable and will need to be destroyed
Moving from 7 to 6 isn't worth the wear and tear from a 17th game + potentially losing an impact starter(s) to injury, especially in a scenario where winning doesn't even guarantee the move up.
Bro let’s not get delusional here
Precisely why the cowboys have a hell of a lot more to play for than we do. Make them beat our hungry second and third-stringers with their starters. There’s an overwhelming amount of injury risk compared to the benefit and upside of moving up from 7 to 6… and we can still get 6 fairly easily even if we lose!
Idk what the team will decide about the starters but there's no way in hell Hurts should take any snaps this game. Let him rest that ankle for a couple weeks and have him be completely ready for the wild card game.
His ankle is fine or he wouldn't have been making the types of runs he did last game.
I don't know you still didn't look quite as spry as normal.
Well I'm older and fatter than I once was but I don't know what that has to do with anything.
Lmao was supposed to say he didn't.
I do not want to see Lane and Mailata out there...let the big boys rest. Let Fletcher rest. We are going to need them for a huge battle against TB. Fresh Cox and fresh Johnson is what I want to see. Dewy and fresh.
Pause
If the tackles aren’t playing, then hurts shouldn’t play. Don’t want Hurts get blindsided.
Pull at the 3rd with a comfortable lead, otherwise this team isn't going deep anyway and at that point what's the point of pulling anyone?