Positives and negatives from Eagles' controversial decision to rest starters

6 days ago 2

The Philadelphia Eagles needed to beat the battered and bruised Washington Commanders to have any shot at rising from the third seed in the NFC Playoffs to the second. They'd also need help. They required the Detroit Lions to walk into Soldier Field and beat the Chicago Bears.

Philadelphia got what it wanted. Detroit did them a solid. The rest was up to the Birds. There isn't anyone in the Delaware Valley who doesn't know what transpired.

The Eagles failed to handle their own business. Attention now turns to the most talked-about decision since LeBron James informed us that he was taking his talents to South Beach.

No one will revoke your fan badge if you needed coffee to endure the regular-season finale. That was certainly tough to watch. The Eagles didn't make it easy on themselves. At times, they didn't even make it enjoyable.

The NFC's playoff picture is complete and the decision to rest the starters is water under the bridge now. Why is it then that we can't stop talking about this?

The negatives stemming from Nick Sirianni's decision

There was plenty of scoreboard watching. With one eye on another slugfest disguised as an NFC East game, Eagles fans kept the other on the Bears and Lions.

In the aftermath of the loss, Nick Sirianni's thinking has become a talking point. It's not easy for everyone to understand.

We know why he rested the starters. More on that in a moment. Still, if the Eagles lose at home to a sixth seed, there will be outrage. Worse yet, if they travel to Chicago and lose there, Sirianni and the Eagles will be hammered all offseason for letting the second seed slip away.

But this isn't just about Sunday. It never should have come to this. The conversation arguably began on Black Friday, when the Eagles suffered an embarrassing home loss to Chicago. That handed the Bears the head-to-head tiebreaker. Without that result, maybe none of this matters.

Maybe Philadelphia's fate isn't tied to Detroit if the Eagles handle their business at home against the Bears. Then again, even with a win, they may have still needed a Week 18 victory to stay ahead.

And who's to say that, if the roles were reversed and the second seed truly hung in the balance, the Eagles wouldn’t have rested their starters anyway?

Philadelphia could have ultimately lost the second seed if it had lost in Week 18. We’ll never know how it would have played out. What we do know is this.

The world hasn't ended. The Eagles will host a playoff game next weekend, and they'll have a week of rest. There are reasons to be excited about that.

The positives of Nick Sirianni's decision

Nick Sirianni knew this outcome was possible, and he still decided that the best course of action was to rest his starters. If he hasn't taught us anything else, we are sure that he knows his team. He spoke with media members and doubled down on his decision to rest key starters.

Coach Sirianni may struggle with X's and O's. He doesn't struggle with those types of decisions. Postgame, he doubled down on his controversial decision.

"No [I don't regret the decision]. Again, you go through your process, you make what you think is the best decision for the football team, and that’s what we did."

The NFC's playoff picture is set. Philadelphia would have played the Green Bay Packers had they earned the second seed. They didn't so that they will face the San Francisco 49ers on Sunday at 4:30 p.m. EST.

Truth be told, they should be good enough to beat either team. If they falter, trust us on this. It won't be because they didn't play the starters in Week 18. It will be because they still haven't fixed the issues we complained about all season.

This article originally appeared on Eagles Wire: Positives and negatives from Eagles resting starters in Week 18 loss

Read Entire Article