Remember in 2009, the Pats already won the division, and Billechek was stupid enough to play his starters in week 17, and get Wes Welker injured before the playoffs in a meaningless game that didn't matter.Then come play off time, he was without his #1 key weapon in the wild card, before Baltimore put a beating on them.
Pulling the starters don't mean you're giving up. The Saints pulled their starters too. They could have easily beat the Panthers in the final week, but the playoffs was more important. We were 10-6 last year, 6 loses and we proved the playoffs is all that matters.
And before someone brings up the 2009 Colts, they could have easily lost a key starter by not benching their starters at the end of those last 2 games. 14-2 or 16-0 would not have changed the out come of that Super Bowl. They were totally out played in the big game, and I don't think 16-0 would have made a difference at all. Saints were huge under dogs in that game, and when you under estimate those guys, they play 3 times better than they normally do.
That's really what worries me. I've always pulled for under dogs outside the NFC, and I can't help but think back to 1997. We get in the Super Bowl, 14 points over Denver, there is just NO WAY IN HELL we're going to lose, and some how we lose. I've seen some huge under dogs over time come out and play way better than everyone expected. I'd hate to get to the Super Bowl, undefeated and everything get to our heads like the Patriots. I mean, you know New England was due and finally ready for a loss that year. I don't remember anyone in the world cheering for them when they were 16-0.