Today, the Kansas City Chiefs saw that winning or losing had no result on their playoff position so they decided to not play their star players. This is commonly done in many sports before playoffs. I am not a fan of it for a few reasons.
1. I don't think it's effective. Every time I see the star players come back they need more time to adjust. If the team happens to have a bye they are going up to 3 weeks without playing. At least in football the playoffs seem to follow the momentum of the teams. Low seeds on a hot streak frequently bump off better teams. I'm sure there are examples of it but I really don't remember a team that has went on to win the Super Bowl after resting their starters.
2. I don't think it's fair to the fans. If someone pays 120$ to see their team play they should see that team playing to the best of their abilities. They don't want to see a third string quarterback fumbling snaps.
3. Gambling. It's a business and odds are given with the assumption both people will be trying. It's almost like throwing the game. I don't do it, but my coworkers are always gambling with each other. One of the guys had a hundred dollar bet with a coworker at 5 to 1 odds that the Steelers would get in the playoffs. With how the games fell today, all he needs is KC to win. I would feel bad for him if he loses out on 500$ because of players sitting on the bench instead of playing the game.
The only advantage I really see is that football is very physical. Every play is one that you can become injured. However, I see that as a risk you take when you decide to play ball for a living.
What are your thoughts on resting players?