Waaaah, waaah, waaah. Everybody is whining about the colts losing the perfect season. And every idiot with a keyboard (yes, me included) is going to make some silly argument about how they should, or shouldn't do that. But what I really hate about the crappy sports writing going on right now, is that that most of these jar heads have no idea how to conduct analysis.
Take this guy for example:
without boring you with the details, he tries to argue that the colts shouldn't have rested their starters and lost to the jets. But in support of this, he only offers two other data points, the two times that teams have finished the regular season undefeated. One worked, one didn't, and together they add absolutely nothing to his argument whatsoever.
And then he tries to argue that they might be helping inferior teams like the jets make the playfuls, while more 'deserving' teams get shut out. Well duuuuh!! That's even more incentive for teams that have clinched everything they can to rest their starters. I'm sure the colts would much rather see the jets in the playoffs than the defending champion steelers. In fact, there is a strategic incentive for all the top seeds to act in collusion to get the weaker borderline teams in.
But whatever, I'd just wish if someone was going to make a historical argument, that they would look at a more meaningful data set. Take every team in the last 40 years that has clinched and rested starters and chart their playoff success. Now that would be meaningful and interesting.
But that would take more time than I have, and I don't even have a deadline to write by. So I'm not gonna hold my breath for anyone else to do it. but it would be nice if someone did.