Aaron Rodgers has been placed on injured reserve by the Green Bay Packers and will not play Saturday against the Vikings

[Simpleton]

Okay I knew about that part. I thought the outrage was because we needed minny to lose.

If I understood correctly, we need Detroit to lose as well as one of the NFC South teams losing their last 2 games right?

Yes, Minnesota is irrelevant.

 

[NoDak]

If I were the Giants I'd want Eli shelved. There is no reason to play him.

The only thing to benefit from that would be an all out tank for draft positioning. It's not like they have a good young QB behind him to get experience. But they may have some young guys at other positions they want to evaluate going forward, and they'd get a better understanding of what they have if they're playing with a competent QB. And if Eli gets injured playing out the string? Oh well. It's not like he'll be back there next year, anyway.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

The only thing to benefit from that would be an all out tank for draft positioning. It's not like they have a good young QB behind him to get experience. But they may have some young guys at other positions they want to evaluate going forward, and they'd get a better understanding of what they have if they're playing with a competent QB. And if Eli gets injured playing out the string? Oh well. It's not like he'll be back there next year, anyway.

Davis Webb was a third round draft pick. I'd say that there is plenty of good reason to play him before any of the Packers QBs would be worth playing not named Rodgers.

It is interesting though. So Rodgers is good enough to play and take off of IR. He sustains no new injury and than you're just allowed to put him on IR for the same injury he was on IR for before? Is it just me or does that sort of seem like a violation of the NFL rules with regards to the IR designation. You can't just place any player on IR that you want. They actually have to sustain an injury.

 

[Genghis Khan]

First is NFC record. But if we both win out we'd have the same. So next up is common opponent. After that it's margin of victory or some shit.

I saw this on Reddit so I can't vouch for its accuracy but it seems right. I'm just copy/pasting:


It would actually be best for ATL to lose both of those games. The only way (barring ties) that SEA, DAL, or DET make the playoffs is to go 10-6. If ATL loses both games, ATL will be 9-7, so the tiebreakers don't matter.

For SEA & DAL, it doesn't really matter which team does it. Both have the conference record tiebreaker over NO & CAR, and since ATL would be 9-7, that's irrelevant, too. However, if DET is also at 10-6, then DET would actually win the tiebreaker over SEA/DAL on common games (NO/CAR would drop out on conference record). So SEA/DAL needs DET to lose a game as well.

For DET, it would be much better for ATL to lose out, because DET has head-to-head losses to all three NFC South teams. If DET is stuck in a 2-way tie with any of them, DET is out. However, if DAL or SEA also finish 10-6, then that allows DET to bypass the head-to-head loss (because head-to-head only matters in a 3-way if one team lost to the others or one team beat all the others, and neither DAL nor SEA played DET, CAR, or NO). So if NO or CAR is the team that loses, out, DET requires the winner of the DAL/SEA game to win week 17, too. But if ATL loses out, DET clinches the berth no matter what DAL/SEA do because DET would have a better record than ATL and would have common games on DAL/SEA.

 

[GShock]

Per the rule, if we was put on IR without sustaining an injury that will keep him out 6 weeks, he has to be waived.

Multiple teams have complained.

League not expected to enforce rule.

Shocker.

 

[NoDak]

Per the rule, if we was put on IR without sustaining an injury that will keep him out 6 weeks, he has to be waived.

Multiple teams have complained.

League not expected to enforce rule.

Shocker.

I know it would never happen, but how awesome would it be if the league actually enforced this rule and forced them to waive him and the Cleveland Browns swooped in with the top waiver priority and claimed him?

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Per the rule, if we was put on IR without sustaining an injury that will keep him out 6 weeks, he has to be waived.

Multiple teams have complained.

League not expected to enforce rule.

Shocker.

Yeah I think it's horse shit. It's an abuse of the waiver system. But yeah the league will never punish a darling like the Packers or Aaron Rodgers.

 

[1bigfan13]

Per the rule, if we was put on IR without sustaining an injury that will keep him out 6 weeks, he has to be waived.

Multiple teams have complained.

League not expected to enforce rule.

Shocker.

I heard that story this morning. My guess is if push came to shove, the Packers would fabricate some injury to justify the IR move. Shutdown fro precautionary reasons due to tightness in the shoulder or some nonsense like that.

 

[1bigfan13]

Yeah I think it's horse shit. It's an abuse of the waiver system. But yeah the league will never punish a darling like the Packers or Aaron Rodgers.

Of course they wouldn't. But you better believe they'd be wielding the hammer if it were the Cowboys. Just like the salary cap punishment they gave us for overspending during that uncapped year. I still don't see how a rule was technically broken since there was no cap in place. But whatever. Hail Goodell!

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Of course they wouldn't. But you better believe they'd be wielding the hammer if it were the Cowboys. Just like the salary cap punishment they gave us for overspending during that uncapped year. I still don't see how a rule was technically broken since there was no cap in place. But whatever. Hail Goodell!

They violated no rule. The NFL basically said "we don't care" it's for the sake of competitive balance.