Coach Nick Sirianni’s shocking decision to rest Saquon Barkley, despite him being just a step away from a major bonus, has sparked heated debate within the Eagles – Was this a sacrifice of personal “fairness” to prioritize the playoffs, or a risky move that leaves fans questioning its importance?
In the final week of the 2025 NFL regular season, Philadelphia Eagles head coach Nick Sirianni made a decision that ignited fierce discussion among fans, analysts, and players alike. He chose to rest star running back Saquon Barkley, along with quarterback Jalen Hurts, wide receiver A.J.
Brown, and several other key starters, in a meaningless game against the Washington Commanders.
The Eagles had already clinched the NFC East title and a playoff spot, but Barkley sat just 87 yards shy of reaching 1,500 combined rushing and receiving yards—a threshold that would trigger a $250,000 bonus in his contract.
This move echoed a similar choice Sirianni made the previous year, when he rested Barkley in the 2024 season finale, preventing him from chasing Eric Dickerson’s single-season rushing record despite being only 101 yards away.
That decision drew criticism at the time, but the Eagles went on to win the Super Bowl, vindicating the focus on health over individual milestones. In 2025, however, the stakes felt different.
Barkley had experienced a regression from his historic 2024 campaign, where he rushed for over 2,000 yards and helped lead Philadelphia to a championship. This season, he finished with 1,140 rushing yards and 273 receiving yards, totaling 1,413 scrimmage yards—solid but far from his previous dominance.
Sirianni’s rationale was straightforward: prioritize player health and freshness for the playoffs. “One thing I could guarantee was giving them rest,” he said after the game.
“I couldn’t guarantee anything else.” The coach emphasized that avoiding injuries to core players like Barkley and Hurts was paramount, especially with the postseason looming. Veterans such as defensive end Brandon Graham supported the call, noting the team’s wealth of big-game experience and proven ability to win on the road.
Former Eagle Jason Kelce, now an analyst, also defended Sirianni on his podcast, arguing that rest could prove crucial in a grueling playoff run.
Yet the decision backfired in unexpected ways. The Eagles’ backups struggled, falling 24-17 to a Commanders team starting third-string quarterback Josh Johnson. Meanwhile, the Detroit Lions defeated the Chicago Bears, meaning a Philadelphia win would have secured the No. 2 seed in the NFC playoffs.
Instead, the loss dropped the Eagles to the No. 3 seed, forcing them to host the formidable San Francisco 49ers in the wild-card round rather than a potentially easier matchup against the Green Bay Packers.
Fans erupted on social media and talk radio, questioning whether the “homemade bye week” was worth sacrificing higher seeding and home-field advantage deeper into the playoffs.
The controversy deepened around Barkley’s missed bonus. Entering Week 18 with 1,413 scrimmage yards, the All-Pro running back needed only a modest performance to hit the incentive—a sum that, while not life-changing for a player on a lucrative extension, represents meaningful compensation tied directly to on-field production.
Critics argued that Sirianni sacrificed “fairness” to one of the team’s cornerstone players, especially after Barkley had been instrumental in the Eagles’ success despite a down year statistically.
Some pointed out that the organization has adjusted incentives in the past, such as for defensive end Josh Sweat, raising hopes that Barkley’s contract could be tweaked internally to reward his contributions.
Barkley himself has remained publicly supportive of Sirianni, whom he once admitted to disliking from afar during his Giants days but now praises as one of the league’s best coaches.
The running back has emphasized team goals over personal achievements, aligning with the culture Sirianni has built in Philadelphia—one that has produced consistent playoff appearances, multiple NFC titles, and a Super Bowl victory in recent years.
At its core, the debate boils down to philosophy: Is it better to chase every possible edge in the regular season, including individual incentives and optimal seeding, or to preserve the roster’s health for the brutal postseason grind? History offers mixed lessons.
Teams that rest starters often enter the playoffs refreshed but sometimes rusty or disadvantaged by tougher paths. Conversely, playing through Week 18 risks devastating injuries that derail Super Bowl aspirations altogether.
Sirianni, known for tough decisions that polarize opinion—”half the people are going to agree with it, half the people aren’t,” as he put it—stands by his choice. He consulted with team brass, staff, and players before finalizing the plan, convinced it positioned the Eagles best for a deep run.
With a roster loaded with talent and experience, including a dominant offensive line and a defense that ranked among the league’s best, Philadelphia remains a legitimate contender regardless of seed.
As the Eagles prepare to face the 49ers at Lincoln Financial Field, the true judgment of Sirianni’s call will come in the results. A strong playoff performance could silence doubters and reaffirm that team success trumps individual rewards.
But an early exit might fuel lingering questions about whether risking a bit more in Week 18—for Barkley’s bonus, for better seeding—could have altered the postseason landscape.
In the high-stakes world of the NFL, where margins are razor-thin, decisions like this define legacies. Sirianni has bet on health and collective priorities over immediate gratification. Now, with the playoffs underway, the Eagles must prove him right.
