A question about NFL coaching ethics

[GimmeTheBall!]

From the 50,000-watts pipeline of Plain Truth and H.L.H. products, Air Cowboys America in Farmers Branch where our children grow up to know cosmetology and oil field hydraulics.
Next up: Ken's Bowling Korner, followed by junior high roller derby (already in progress).

​

What do Wade and Jerra owe the fans?​

Simply put, there comes a time when playing to win and playing to not getting injured intersect.​

That barren, remote place in ethics that blurs the line between an entity that wants to win vs. an entity that is willing to lose in the name of long-range good. ​

Would Wade admit to tanking a game?
Would Jerra?
Would fans understand or be incensed by a front office that would not go all out to win even though a stadium ticket is an implied agreement that you play to win?
If Wade pulls out his starters and loses, is he -- at least one one particular day -- tanking? If he keeps them in and subjects them to injury, is he being reckless with the future of the team?
Wade, of course, cannot win.
Whatever he does, he'll be criticized.​

But the question: Is it ethical to not go all out to win?
Would the NFL pretend this doesn't happen?
Oh, Shoeless Joe Jackson, if we may channel you, please speak.​

In lieu of that, maybe someone in the Zone can answer that question.
But hurry up because "The Ghost and Mr. Chicken" will be on TV soon.​

 

[Cochese]

From the 50,000-watts pipeline of Plain Truth and H.L.H. products, Air Cowboys America in Farmers Branch where our children grow up to know cosmetology and oil field hydraulics.
Next up: Ken's Bowling Korner, followed by junior high roller derby (already in progress).

​

What do Wade and Jerra owe the fans?
​

Simply put, there comes a time when playing to win and playing to not getting injured intersect.​

That barren, remote place in ethics that blurs the line between an entity that wants to win vs. an entity that is willing to lose in the name of long-range good. ​

Would Wade admit to tanking a game?
Would Jerra?
Would fans understand or be incensed by a front office that would not go all out to win even though a stadium ticket is an implied agreement that you play to win?
If Wade pulls out his starters and loses, is he -- at least one one particular day -- tanking? If he keeps them in and subjects them to injury, is he being reckless with the future of the team?
Wade, of course, cannot win.
Whatever he does, he'll be criticized.​

But the question: Is it ethical to not go all out to win?
Would the NFL pretend this doesn't happen?
Oh, Shoeless Joe Jackson, if we may channel you, please speak.​

In lieu of that, maybe someone in the Zone can answer that queston.
But hurry up because "The Ghost and Mr. Chicken" will be on TV soon.​

I think that winning is about the big picture. This game does not matter. Resting key players with injuries can only set this team up to win what really matters.

 

[THUMPER]

Playing to not get hurt is like playing not to lose (Parcells), you usually get hurt and lose.

Do what got you here and don't go making changes to "protect" yourself. The best protection as a player is to go out and give it everything you have. Guys get hurt a lot less often when they are going full speed than when they are trying to avoid contact. Anyone who has played the game knows this.

There is always a chance that you can get hurt but those chances go up when you aren't playing the way you should.

On the other point: The NFL considers itself a business with a product to market so how can it then decide that it is in the best interest of the business to degrade the quality of the product and still charge full price for it? If a team decides not to play most of its key starters then the fans are getting ripped off. If they can't play due to injury, that is different, but for the team to decide that THEY have nothing to play for then they are ripping off the fans who paid good money to see them give their all.

Will any of those players who are being rested give back an equal portion of their game check? Heck no! They will receive full pay for partial service. That isn't how it works in the real world and the NFL needs to decide once and for all if it is a business or a game. Either way though, they are required by the ethics of both systems to play their best at all times.

It is both unethical and unwise to rest guys that could play. The media drives this stupid notion that you rest guys for the playoffs and sacrifice the final game if it doesn't "mean anything" to your seeding, when in fact it is better to go all out, win every game you can and be on a hot streak going into the playoffs.

Teams that have rested significant numbers of players over the past several years have done poorly in the playoffs while teams that have played hard have done better.

We have played well and won a first round bye as well as home field throughout the playoffs. That means our guys don't have to travel at all until the SB and they have an extra week off before they play their first playoff game. They should be plenty rested and healed up by then and in good shape to play but they have an obligation to the fans to play their best players and to play their best to win this weekend.

Losing is NEVER a good thing, not EVER!

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

The ONLY thing that matters is


"one for the other thumb"

Fans can(will have to) get over the Skins game.

 

[aikemirv]

I kind of feel sorry for the Vikings. We gave them our best and beat them. Now, we are going against another team that could very well get a loss if we played our full strength and we are not going to give full "effort".

It is really not about our "right" to do it because we have earned that right, but I do think the integrity of the game is marred a bit by what could happen to Cleveland and Minnesota because of it.

 

[Woods]

I kind of feel sorry for the Vikings. We gave them our best and beat them. Now, we are going against another team that could very well get a loss if we played our full strength and we are not going to give full "effort".

It is really not about our "right" to do it because we have earned that right, but I do think the integrity of the game is marred a bit by what could happen to Cleveland and Minnesota because of it.

I understand where you're coming from, but frankly said, Minn should have taken care of business last weekend.

 

[aikemirv]

I understand where you're coming from, but frankly said, Minn should have taken care of business last weekend.

Absolutely, but the Vikings and Cleveland have to play 16 competitive game and the Titans and Commanders only have to play 15.

 

[Eddie]

After the Skins beat our backups, ES is going to be overflowing with Super Bowl dreams.

 

[joseephuss]

Will any of those players who are being rested give back an equal portion of their game check? Heck no! They will receive full pay for partial service. That isn't how it works in the real world and the NFL needs to decide once and for all if it is a business or a game. Either way though, they are required by the ethics of both systems to play their best at all times.

It isn't? I have seen people give half efforts the day before their vacation starts or a holiday begins. If Dallas wins the Superbowl, there will be many fans going to work in the real world that won't be putting in a 100% effort. The real world is not about 100% effort at all times. In the real world also, a company may choose to send an employee with a minor cold home so they can get better for an upcoming critical meeting, presentation or whatever. Small sacrifices for the sake of the bigger picture.

I don't know what part ethics has to play in this final weekend of the regular season. The goal is to win the Superbowl. In order to do that a team may need to evaluate it's strategy at this time. If some guys need to be rested, then so be it.

 

[joseephuss]

Absolutely, but the Vikings and Cleveland have to play 16 competitive game and the Titans and Commanders only have to play 15.

Isn't that a little backwards? The Titans have to play to win while the results of the Browns game does not matter.

 

[Doomsday101]

Wade will do what he feels is in his teams best interest. Winning or losing this meaningless game is not how Wade will be judged what this team does in the post season will go a long way. Starter will see some action except for those who are nursing injuries how much they play is strickly up to Wade. He knows his team better than any fan or media want to be.

 

[LeonDixson]

The smartest thing to do is to have the team in the best position possible to win in the playoffs and the SB. If that means sitting every player with any kind of minor injury then so be it. This game means nothing except a franchise record for the most wins in a season. The SB means everything.

I don't buy the "integrity of the game" argument for the fans' sake. A team doesn't owe the fans a chance to see all the starters for a full game if the game is meaningless.

As far as the question about tanking the game, that's not what's happening. I'm sure they would love to win this game and will be trying their best to win with the players they put out there. They just aren't going to risk everything for this game with HFA already wrapped up and the playoffs just around the corner.

I would guess the cheats will play their starters until they know they have the game wrapped up, but that's a little different. They are playing for a historical undefeated season.

 

[Doomsday101]

The smartest thing to do is to have the team in the best position possible to win in the playoffs and the SB. If that means sitting every player with any kind of minor injury then so be it. This game means nothing except a franchise record for the most wins in a season. The SB means everything.

I don't buy the "integrity of the game" argument for the fans' sake. A team doesn't owe the fans a chance to see all the starters for a full game if the game is meaningless.

As far as the question about tanking the game, that's not what's happening. I'm sure they would love to win this game and will be trying their best to win with the players they put out there. They just aren't going to risk everything for this game with HFA already wrapped up and the playoffs just around the corner.

I would guess the cheats will play their starters until they know they have the game wrapped up, but that's a little different. They are playing for a historical undefeated season.

I agree and I don't see Dungy being questioned yet he is holding out 11 and others will only see very limited action including Manning.

 

[5Stars]

As a fan, don't forget that the Cowboys have given us 15 solid games already. They have played their butts off to be where they are so one game played easy to get where they want to go does not bother me and it should not bother anyone else.

If anyone is not satisfied with what the Cowboys have accomplished so far and are going to be disappointed if some of the starters are pulled during the Commander game then perhaps the Patriots would be a better team to root for?

As long as whoever is out there on the field representing the Dallas Cowboys play as hard as they can to win the game, hey, that is good enough for me for one game...

Carry on...

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

As a fan, don't forget that the Cowboys have given us 15 solid games already. They have played their butts off to be where they are so one game played easy to get where they want to go does not bother me and it should not bother anyone else.

If anyone is not satisfied with what the Cowboys have accomplished so far and are going to be disappointed if some of the starters are pulled during the Commander game then perhaps the Patriots would be a better team to root for?

As long as whoever is out there on the field representing the Dallas Cowboys play as hard as they can to win the game, hey, that is good enough for me for one game...

Carry on...

Excellent post.

What a dilema we have for game 16

 

[peplaw06]

I didn't pay to see this game. It's a home game for the Skins. Most of them paid to see the Skins.

Our team owes no duty to their fans. To our fans, you may think they owe some contractual duty to you, but they don't. This is a business. Business is better for the Cowboys when they are successful, and part of that includes taking every step to ensure that you are successful when it matters... in the playoffs.

I know most of us live and die with the Cowboys, but in the end, they don't owe us anything. You don't have a contract with the team, they owe no duty to you.

And personally, I'll trade winning this week for being healthy in the playoffs and having a better shot of reaching the Super Bowl.

 

[5Stars]

I didn't pay to see this game. It's a home game for the Skins. Most of them paid to see the Skins.

Our team owes no duty to their fans. To our fans, you may think they owe some contractual duty to you, but they don't. This is a business. Business is better for the Cowboys when they are successful, and part of that includes taking every step to ensure that you are successful when it matters... in the playoffs.

I know most of us live and die with the Cowboys, but in the end, they don't owe us anything. You don't have a contract with the team, they owe no duty to you.

And personally, I'll trade winning this week for being healthy in the playoffs and having a better shot of reaching the Super Bowl.

I couldn't have said it better than this!!

 

[THUMPER]

I didn't pay to see this game. It's a home game for the Skins. Most of them paid to see the Skins.

Our team owes no duty to their fans. To our fans, you may think they owe some contractual duty to you, but they don't. This is a business. Business is better for the Cowboys when they are successful, and part of that includes taking every step to ensure that you are successful when it matters... in the playoffs.

I know most of us live and die with the Cowboys, but in the end, they don't owe us anything. You don't have a contract with the team, they owe no duty to you.

And personally, I'll trade winning this week for being healthy in the playoffs and having a better shot of reaching the Super Bowl.

And if we come out flat in our first playoff game...?

 

[peplaw06]

And if we come out flat in our first playoff game...?

It doesn't have anything to do with ethics or owing a duty to the fans.

That is a coaching decision and should be left up to the coach. There is no business relationship with fans that should influence it one way or the other.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

Our team owes no duty to their fans. To our fans, you may think they owe some contractual duty to you, but they don't.

This is astounding to hear anyone say that.
That is your onion and I respect it but I beg to differ.
The Cowboys, like any business, owes its utmost to its fans
Without the fans, they are nothing.
Aside from the astoundinessitism of your comment, do you think Jerra would ever utter that in public?
I think not, Mr. Pep.


and on to your second comment that caught my eye (I only have one; a fishing axcident.)

This
And personally, I'll trade winning this week for being healthy in the playoffs and having a better shot of reaching the Super Bowl.

Strategic wise, there is a lot in what you say.

The big question -- and I have not seen anyboody address this:

Does the NFL have any express written consent to mandate that its teams NOT give less than 100% to achieve quality control?
Right now it is turning a blind eye (there we go again, with the eye) and giving a wink to teams that tank games.
Is the NFL wrong to encourage this?