What is the benefit to benching starters for the preseason?

[SmokinwithWilly]

58 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Which is how they ended up with a too old backup and a #3 who isn't a solid #4. It literally already blew up in their faces this preseason and they are already getting the unfavorable outcome due to the blowback that created for the guys they are trying to evaluate with a waste of space at QB, even by the 90 man roster standards, for 3 preseason games.

I think people get what your saying while also saying it is a terrible approach that deserves the criticism it's getting. If they were expecting a pass I think that already went out the window so that 1st home game could be a surprise for them from the home crowd.

What it screams to me is they're ok with failure. How can anyone say they're trying to improve the team when the most important position on the field has zero competition.

Or that could just be the plan. If BY gets hurt, put in Plummer and it's a straight shot to number 1. 

[strato]

Well. what they should be very afraid of is Young getting booed off the field because the fans are not buying it at the price they want to sell it for. 

Someone was telling me basically that I had no say, it doesn’t matter what I think because it is not my call to make.

That call can be taken out of the team’s hands with enough fan displeasure. It is the only way fans can influence something. Coach, QB, whatever. You get the stadium booing enough and they would be forced to respond. 

I am not advocating that, I am pointing that they are aware and working to forestall that until such time as Young may be able to win some people over.  Cause they are losing people from their corner, right and left.

[Waldo]

9 minutes ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

What it screams to me is they're ok with failure. How can anyone say they're trying to improve the team when the most important position on the field has zero competition.

Or that could just be the plan. If BY gets hurt, put in Plummer and it's a straight shot to number 1. 

Them being OK with failures makes me hope they are gone next year. It's unforgivable. Pederson won a SB, got caught tanking and was out of the league for 2 years (?). I'm not sure he gets another shot without that SB win on his resume, something no one has here.

[csx]

The benefit is giving extended looks to the players who will make up your depth while preventing injuries to your starters.

The cons are that your starters are not in a top stage of readiness for early games.

Given that we are a thin roster, rebuilding, and not contending I don't think the con is as bad as most are making it out to be. 

[Waldo]

2 minutes ago, strato said:

Well. what they should be very afraid of is Young getting booed off the field because the fans are not buying it at the price they want to sell it for. 

Someone was telling me basically that I had no say, it doesn’t matter what I think because it is not my call to make.

That call can be taken out of the team’s hands with enough fan displeasure. It is the only way fans can influence something. Coach, QB, whatever. You get the stadium booing enough and they would be forced to respond. 

I am not advocating that, I am pointing that they are aware and working to forestall that until such time as Young may be able to win some people over.  Cause they are losing people from their corner, right and left.

Seems it is on a crash course for that now. Could you imagine the team trotting Clausen back out for a year 2 vs brining in Cam? Yikes

[RumHam]

On 8/17/2024 at 6:28 PM, L-TownCat said:

Only rational explanation is that they’re putting off showing how bad they are as long as they possibly can.

still need to fill seats

[strato]

7 minutes ago, csx said:

The benefit is giving extended looks to the players who will make up your depth while preventing injuries to your starters.

The cons are that your starters are not in a top stage of readiness for early games.

Given that we are a thin roster, rebuilding, and not contending I don't think the con is as bad as most are making it out to be. 

People don’t generally like change, to start with. They try to act as though things did not change until they are hit in the face with the reality that things did in fact change (and) they have to change too. 

This all about a rethinking because poo for sure changed with the preseason. 

Edited August 19 by strato

[Khyber53]

Remember back in the days when both Fox and Rivera had the mantra that you tried to win preseason games also, because you needed to teach a team that winning is the most important thing.

Now it seems that we're only teaching how to keep your job and play not to get hurt. 

We've been missing something for a few years now. Backbone.

[WUnderhill]

On 8/17/2024 at 6:15 PM, hepcat said:

On what planet does the worst team in the NFL the previous season and over the last 5 years think it’s a good idea to bench starters for all preseason games?

The best teams in the NFL are playing their starters for at least a few drives. But the Panthers are on their 3rd coaching staff in the last 3 years, talking up a “great practice” against the Jets on Thursday as reason to bench starters for preseason games.

I thought the Panthers employed NFL professionals who understood practice reps are not the same as game reps but maybe I am wrong. The Panthers were a dumpster fire in preseason last season so maybe they’re trying to avoid tanking ticket sales worse than they already are or they are intentionally tanking, but who knows. 

Are they though? I just looked at the box scores for a few, and I could be wrong because I don’t worry myself so much with watching other teams, but it appears to be a completely false narrative that “all the best teams are playing their starters a few drives.” I started with the 49ers since they were just in the Super Bowl (we all know Mahomes has played so didn’t bother looking at the Chiefs), and it appears Purdy has played maybe a series over 2 games (2/6 on pass attempts), McCaffrey doesn’t appear to have played at all, and neither do any of their starting receivers (I don’t see any stat lines for Samuel or Pearsall but it’s possible they played and didn’t catch a pass). A brief check of other division winners/playoff teams from last year showed no Prescott, no Goff, no Mayfield, no Hurts, just 2 pass attempts from Love. At that point I just stopped looking because the narrative that all the other good teams are playing starters is clearly just false. Please don’t move the goalposts, I get there are other arguments for why people think we should get some reps for our starters, but can we at least stop acting like all good teams play their starters and we should follow their examples because it just isn’t true.

[KSpan]

16 hours ago, MHS831 said:

I don't know how many of you played football, but every week, your body is beaten up.  In college, Sundays and Mondays were training room days (ice buckets, treatments, etc) You did not start feeling better until about Wednesday.  Some ouches and bruises heal completely, but others are irritated each week and seem like they never heal until the end of the season.  They add up--even if you can dress, you still have soreness.  By the end of the season, (and we played 12 games, not 17 with three preseason games) you are holding the rails going down steps on your way to practice.  You groan when you drop something and have to pick it up.  This messes up your technique and makes you more vulnerable to injury. Maybe I was doing it wrong, but I understand the wear and tear and see no real benefit for extending the contact when you can take a look at the depth players. The huddle in college used to smell like Atomic Balm--we painfully laughed about it.  The tape lines and ice tub lines are longer.  And in the NFL, after 17 games it is possible to play 3 or 4 more.  I literally do not see how they do it. 

Preseason games are more dangerous.  You have guys with nothing to lose playing like it.  You have second or third team players blocking for you. No thanks. 

No one is suggesting that first-teamers play entire preseason games. However, there is little doubt that a team with a new coach, new schemes, and new players at key positions would likely benefit from getting a few drives under their belts during the preseason in true game situations. 

I get that a lot of the league is moving toward this model but when the best in the league do something, such as the Chiefs, 49ers, etc still playing some/all of their guys to varying degrees, it's fair to think that it adds value. Like everything in recent years though, the rubber will meet the road here in 2 weeks and time will tell how Canales' strategy works out this season. 

[SmokinwithWilly]

37 minutes ago, csx said:

The benefit is giving extended looks to the players who will make up your depth while preventing injuries to your starters.

The cons are that your starters are not in a top stage of readiness for early games.

Given that we are a thin roster, rebuilding, and not contending I don't think the con is as bad as most are making it out to be. 

BY needs to be playing. Forget draft status. Based on his play alone from last year, he should be competing for a starting spot and nothing should be guaranteed just because he was the number 1 pick. 

Based strictly off performance, we've got a late rounder/udfa starter, a dinosaur qb2, and some practice squad rejects as our hopeful starting QB. No team should ever feel comfortable going into the season with that, but we're good. 

[MHS831]

20 hours ago, Davidson Deac II said:

Either that or lower the prices a significant amount.  

Or bring in entertainment to appeal to a wider audience base--have some local bands, activities for kids (before the game) fireworks--make it fun and attractive for people who aren't football fans.  Might recruit a few fans.  I am not sure what they do now--so this could be a mute point.

Edited August 19 by MHS831

[WUnderhill]

31 minutes ago, KSpan said:

No one is suggesting that first-teamers play entire preseason games. However, there is little doubt that a team with a new coach, new schemes, and new players at key positions would likely benefit from getting a few drives under their belts during the preseason in true game situations. 

I get that a lot of the league is moving toward this model but when the best in the league do something, such as the Chiefs, 49ers, etc still playing some/all of their guys to varying degrees, it's fair to think that it adds value. Like everything in recent years though, the rubber will meet the road here in 2 weeks and time will tell how Canales' strategy works out this season. 

It’s funny how I just gave clear examples of actually most of the playoff teams last year not playing starters and this post immediately follows. To your first point, Justin Herbert hasn’t played a snap this preseason either with new coach, schemes, players, etc. Y’all really just need to stop acting like this is some Panthers-only, losing teams only, approach so we can have real conversations. And just lol imagining the posts we would have to endure here if Bryce Young had played this preseason to go 2/6 for 11 yards and a sack as Brock Purdy has.

[CRA]

1 hour ago, csx said:

The benefit is giving extended looks to the players who will make up your depth while preventing injuries to your starters.

The cons are that your starters are not in a top stage of readiness for early games.

Given that we are a thin roster, rebuilding, and not contending I don't think the con is as bad as most are making it out to be. 

con is pretty big IMO if you are looking big picture.   Can Canales make it work with Bryce.  That needs to be answered this year.  Delaying looks and reps, delays knowing that.   And we know Frank had to do tons of tinkering to try to find something that work. 

Canales is guaranteeing a slow start.  Delaying figuring out what does and doesn't work with a unicorn QB.  Worst case scenario is Bryce remains and unknown after this year.