Resting Starters: It doesn't have to happen...

So a familiar tale played out last Sunday - the Colts, with nothing to play for, pulled influential starters Peyton Manning and Reggie Wayne, amongst others, partway through the third quarter with only a slender 15-10 lead to defend. Cue an uncertain debut - to say the least - from back-up quarterback Curtis Painter and the Jets leave Indianapolis 29-15 winners, and quite possibly on their way to the play-offs. The effect on the Colts' starters is unknown - will it rest them or rust them - but what is for certain is that the Jets have been handed a win they couldn't possibly have hoped for any other week of the season.

Is it fair? There's a lot of fans of other AFC play-off contenders would say not, but is it fair to force the Colts to potentially see Manning injured in a game they simply have nothing to gain from? (Then again, there's plenty of Colts fans would say they already had everything to gain - the perfect season, no less.)

It happens every year, to somebody, somewhere. Is there anything that can be done about it? As I've written on my blog...

Can such a system be fair? Sure. You still decide the divisional winners and wildcard spots on the basis of all 16 regular season games, but the seeding of those teams is decided on the last four games alone - the form teams go into the play-offs seeded and everyone has a reason to keep on playing, right to the end. Not only that, but you can run the schedule so that teams are guaranteed a fair spread of opponents in those final four weeks - one team ranked top in their division, one team ranked second, one team ranked third, and one ranked fourth, comprising one divisional game, two conference games and one non-conference game (the same proportion of conference and non-conference games encountered throughout the regular season). Make those two games at home and two on the road and it's pretty much a perfect microcosm of the season. Too good to be true? I don't think so. Full story at mattkeefe.com