Quote:
Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy
Why? Because they couldnt help kick the snot out of garbage teams that try to pass for football franchises in the NFL? Why shouldnt the team that's down 35-0 pull their starters in favor of getting the backups some work? If (star player from some team) is still in the game down by 35 in the fourth, what's the point of keeping him in the game?
I hate the argument that the leading team should take their foot of the gas for sportsmanship. If, at a certain point BOTH teams remove starters to prevent injury, fine. That would make more sense to me, but the losing teams always drag out the clock and try to put points on the board. Nothing makes me laugh harder then when Trent Green/Mark Bulger or some other QB on an 0-5 - 0-8 team runs the no huddle offense in the fourth quarter down by 100. Stupid.
|
Its a smart move to save your teams top players from potential injury, and developing your backup QB, who gets to play against starters on the other team.
If it happens to the Pats and they lose a key player to injury when they allready had the game won, I will laugh. Simple as that. I would laugh even more if they end up losing the superbowl because of it. Things can turn sour fast if Brady gets hurt.