Lead
On Sunday the Las Vegas Raiders will give playing time to the full active roster in a regular-season finale with the Kansas City Chiefs — a game that, if lost, will hand the Raiders the first overall pick in the 2026 NFL draft. Coach Pete Carroll said he plans to rotate everyone, including both backup quarterbacks Aidan O’Connell and Kenny Pickett. Several regular starters will not play because of injuries, most notably Geno Smith, Maxx Crosby and Brock Bowers. The matchup has revived public debate about draft incentives and the NFL’s current worst-team-first draft order.
Key Takeaways
- If the Raiders lose to the Chiefs on Sunday, they will receive the No. 1 overall selection in the 2026 NFL draft.
- Coach Pete Carroll announced that every active roster player will see snaps, including backups Aidan O’Connell and Kenny Pickett.
- Starting quarterback Geno Smith, defensive end Maxx Crosby and tight end Brock Bowers are listed out with injuries; Crosby reportedly wanted to play through a knee issue.
- The Raiders’ decision underscores how the current draft rule — awarding the highest pick to the worst record — creates incentives to lose late in the season.
- Proposed alternatives include rewarding non-playoff teams with the longest late-season winning streaks, which would change Week 18 dynamics and discourage tanking.
Background
Under the NFL’s longstanding draft order, the team with the worst regular-season record receives the first overall pick. That structure was designed to promote competitive balance by giving struggling franchises access to top collegiate talent. But critics say the rule creates a perverse incentive: teams with terrible records can materially benefit from losing late-season games, particularly when playoff elimination is already certain.
In recent seasons, coaches and front offices have publicly denied any intent to tank while still handing significant playing time to inexperienced backups when a high draft pick is reachable. Those practices produce the optics — and sometimes the effect — of strategic losing. League observers have proposed various alternatives to make late-season matchups more meaningful and to reward teams that keep competing after playoff hopes end.
Main Event
Raiders coach Pete Carroll told reporters the club intends to rotate the active roster on Sunday and give multiple backups a chance to play meaningful snaps. He specifically named backup quarterbacks Aidan O’Connell and Kenny Pickett as planned participants. Carroll framed the move as a development opportunity: coaches want to see how second-string players perform in live action.
Several of the team’s regular contributors will not be available. The club listed Geno Smith, Maxx Crosby and Brock Bowers out with injuries; Maxx Crosby has reportedly expressed a desire to play through a knee problem but was held out by the team’s medical and coaching staff. The absence of those veterans further reduces the Raiders’ on-field chances while opening reps for younger players.
From a standings perspective, a Raiders loss in this finale would leave them with the worst record in the league and the consequential No. 1 pick in the 2026 draft. That clear line between a single-game result and draft positioning has drawn attention from fans, commentators and league policymakers because it makes a measurable asset contingent on losing.
Analysis & Implications
The Raiders’ plan highlights a tension at the heart of the draft-order system: parity versus perverse incentives. Awarding the top pick to the worst team helps weaker franchises rebuild by granting access to premier prospects, but it also creates situations where late-season roster decisions look indistinguishable from intentional efforts to lose. That ambiguity harms perceptions of competitive integrity.
Changing draft incentives would alter how teams approach Week 18 and final-season games. One alternative — awarding higher picks to non-playoff teams that finish the season on the longest winning streaks — would reward sustained competitiveness after playoff elimination. Such a rule would make late-season wins valuable even for teams out of contention, shifting incentives away from losing.
There are counterarguments. Some teams rebuilding via top picks argue that a guaranteed high selection is the fastest path back to contention, and tinkering with the order could prolong weakness for small-market or poorly run franchises. Any rule change would need leaguewide buy-in and likely a collective-bargaining discussion with the players’ association.
Comparison & Data
| Current Rule | Proposed Streak Rule |
|---|---|
| Highest pick to team with worst record | Highest pick to non-playoff teams with longest end-of-season winning streaks |
| Incentive: risk-reward for losing late | Incentive: reward competitive finish after elimination |
The table contrasts the present worst-record-first method with a winning-streak alternative. Under the streak idea, a team like the Saints — on a four-game winning streak — would benefit more than a team that lost late even if that losing team had a worse overall record. That example helps explain why attention turned to the Week 18 Saints-Falcons matchup: the Saints have a four-game streak and the Falcons a three-game streak, making their result valuable under the proposed system.
Reactions & Quotes
Coach Carroll framed the rotation as both a chance for evaluation and a recognition of the team’s reality this season. He emphasized development while acknowledging plans don’t always unfold perfectly.
“Everybody’s gonna play and I’m hoping it works out well. It doesn’t always, good plans don’t always come through, but we’ve got plans for these guys to get in there and get their playing time.”
Pete Carroll
Carroll also spoke to the unexpectedness of the season’s arc and the players’ responses to it, underlining that the staff expects the roster to keep competing.
“I never even dreamed it would be like this. These guys will continue to work and they’ll stay with it.”
Pete Carroll
Team medical and coaching decisions drew notice after reports that Maxx Crosby pushed to play despite a knee issue. The organization decided to protect the player’s long-term health by holding him out, a move that removed one of the club’s most competitive on-field forces from the finale.
Maxx Crosby has made clear he wants to play through his knee injury, but the Raiders declined to clear him for the game.
Team reports / sources
Unconfirmed
- Whether the Raiders’ decision was coordinated with front-office draft strategy beyond standard player evaluation is not independently confirmed.
- The extent of Maxx Crosby’s requests to play was reported but not released as a full, contemporaneous statement by Crosby or the team medical staff.
- No official NFL proposal to adopt a streak-based draft-order system has been published; suggestions remain conceptual and unvetted by the league.
Bottom Line
The Raiders’ plan to play everyone in a finale that can hand them the No. 1 pick in 2026 crystallizes a broader policy debate about draft incentives. Under the current worst-record-first system, a single game can materially alter a franchise’s rebuilding trajectory, which creates understandable scrutiny of late-season roster decisions.
Policymakers and stakeholders face a trade-off: preserve a simple parity tool that helps weak teams rebuild quickly, or redesign incentives to reward late-season competitiveness and reduce the appearance of tanking. The Saints-Falcons example and other Week 18 permutations illustrate how alternate rules might reframe the value of winning down the stretch. Expect renewed discussion within the league if more high-profile finales carry clear draft consequences.