How many times have the #3 & #4 seed met in championship?

[tombonneau]

I'm at work or I'd look it up myself, but going back the last 10 years, how many times have the 3/4 met in the championship.

Because really when it comes to this weekend and "Do the Pats try for #3 or not?" it all boils down to the likelihood of that seeding mattering in a home championship game. My guess is it has happened 2-3 times in the last 10 years, so about 10% of championship games?

 

[RobertWeathers]

I'm at work or I'd look it up myself, but going back the last 10 years, how many times have the 3/4 met in the championship.

Because really when it comes to this weekend and "Do the Pats try for #3 or not?" it all boils down to the likelihood of that seeding mattering in a home championship game. My guess is it has happened 2-3 times in the last 10 years, so about 10% of championship games?

Conference championship or SB?

 

[PatsFanInMaine]

Pats/Colts 2006 AFC Championship.

 

[Tunescribe]

Conference championship or SB?

I think he's mulling chances of the Pats hosting the AFCC. I'd like to know when/if that's happened as well (first two seeds getting eliminated early).

 

[pats1]

---3 division winners, 3 wild cards---
2000-01: Giants (1) vs. Vikings (2); Raiders (2) vs. Ravens (4)
2001-02: Rams (1) vs. Eagles (3); Steelers (1) vs. Patriots (2)

---4 division winners, 2 wild cards---
2002-03: Eagles (1) vs. Bucs (2); Raiders (1) vs. Titans (2)
2003-04: Eagles (1) vs. Panthers (3); Patriots (1) vs. Colts (3)
2004-05: Eagles (1) vs. Falcons (2); Steelers (1) vs. Patriots (2)
2005-06: Seahawks (1) vs. Panthers (5); Broncos (2) vs. Steelers (6)
2006-07: Bears (1) vs. Saints (2); Colts (3) vs. Patriots (4)
2007-08: Packers (2) vs. Giants (5); Patriots (1) vs. Chargers (3)
2008-09: Cardinals (4) vs. Eagles (6); Steelers (2) vs. Ravens (6)

 

[dhamz]

I'm at work or I'd look it up myself, but going back the last 10 years, how many times have the 3/4 met in the championship.

Because really when it comes to this weekend and "Do the Pats try for #3 or not?" it all boils down to the likelihood of that seeding mattering in a home championship game. My guess is it has happened 2-3 times in the last 10 years, so about 10% of championship games?

In 2006 the difference between 3 and 4 meant the Lombardi Trophy.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I think he's mulling chances of the Pats hosting the AFCC. I'd like to know when/if that's happened as well (first two seeds getting eliminated early).

Of course. Too many X-Mas cookies..

Looks like history says go for the 3 seed. Especially after 2006

 

[Sicilian]

---3 division winners, 3 wild cards---
2000-01: Giants (1) vs. Vikings (2); Raiders (2) vs. Ravens (4)
2001-02: Rams (1) vs. Eagles (3); Steelers (1) vs. Patriots (2)

---4 division winners, 2 wild cards---
2002-03: Eagles (1) vs. Bucs (2); Raiders (1) vs. Titans (2)
2003-04: Eagles (1) vs. Panthers (3); Patriots (1) vs. Colts (3)
2004-05: Eagles (1) vs. Falcons (2); Steelers (1) vs. Patriots (2)
2005-06: Seahawks (1) vs. Panthers (5); Broncos (2) vs. Steelers (6)
2006-07: Bears (1) vs. Saints (2); Colts (3) vs. Patriots (4)
2007-08: Packers (2) vs. Giants (5); Patriots (1) vs. Chargers (3)
2008-09: Cardinals (4) vs. Eagles (6); Steelers (2) vs. Ravens (6)

In short terms, as many 4 seeds have hosted the conference championship as have 3 seeds. One.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

How many SBs involved 2 #1 seeds?.......Easy answer is ZERO so Indy and N.O. is actually a longshot to meet in Miami,not sure about 3 and 4 though

 

[tombonneau]

In 2006 the difference between 3 and 4 meant the Lombardi Trophy.

And it looks like that was the only time in the last 10 years. So realistically only a 5% chance of it happening. Ironic that that was the only year it happened.

Wonder if BB's memory is fresh enough that he won't chance it happening again. (Not that they took a dive in Week 17 that year.)

 

[supafly]

Of course. Too many X-Mas cookies..

Looks like history says go for the 3 seed. Especially after 2006

Probably still very debatable, especially considering Cincy would get the 3 if we rested starters, as they'd still have something to play for.

If we ended up with the 4, and Cincy had the 3, it's not like going to Cincy would be half as bad as going to Indy was in 2006.

I guess it just depends on who they would rather play, etc--vs whether or not we want to continue with the recent momentum or rest.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I guess it just depends on who they would rather play, etc--vs whether or not we want to continue with the recent momentum or rest.

I wasn't clear with my earlier post. I look at it only from the AFCCG view. If you are #3 and you win the Div game vs the #2 seed and #4 knocks off #1, you are home for the AFCCC. Thats all I'm saying.

 

[tombonneau]

Probably still very debatable, especially considering Cincy would get the 3 if we rested starters, as they'd still have something to play for.

If we ended up with the 4, and Cincy had the 3, it's not like going to Cincy would be half as bad as going to Indy was in 2006.

I guess it just depends on who they would rather play, etc--vs whether or not we want to continue with the recent momentum or rest.

I don't know, I think that 2006 game might linger enough in BB's mind that he goes for the #3. Certainly he'll have a defense if anyone questions his logic.

I tweeted the stat to Reiss, hopefully he catches it and perhaps it becomes a nice subplot. Would love for someone to directly ask BB about it.

 

[supafly]

I wasn't clear with my earlier post. I look at it only from the AFCCG view. If you are #3 and you win the Div game vs the #2 seed and #4 knocks off #1, you are home for the AFCCC. Thats all I'm saying.

And that's a great point too, It'd be great to come back from SD to realize we're actually hosting the AFCCG.

I expect Belichick to weigh out the various scenarios etc, and certainly trust him to make the best descision of course.

 

[Poker]

Only once as you see. But also once in that time span, the #4 seed hosted the confrence championship as well (Cardinals 2008). Admittedly this latter scenario is only half as likely to happen, as it requires one extra game to go in your favor if you're the #4 seed, as you need the 6 seed to win twice while you win twice. If you're the #3 seed, assuming you beat #6 and #2, you just need the winner of #4/#5 to beat #1 to host the conference championship.

All things taken into account, I think Belichick goes for the victory Sunday in TX. It's best for momentum; the teams needs the reps and work; it preserves the best shot at the #3 seed, which the above analysis shows is twice as likely as #4 to host the AFCC game; and I don't think Belichick sees a huge difference between going to SD and going to Indy in the Divisional round.

 

[RobertWeathers]

it requires one extra game to go in your favor if you're the #4 seed, as you need the 6 seed to win twice while you win twice. If you're the #3 seed, assuming you beat #6 and #2, you just need the winner of #4/#5 to beat #1 to host the conference championship. .

Yep- you nailed it. Unless there is a matchup you want to avoid, you go for the higher seed (while monitoring the health of the players and managing the risk.)

All things taken into account, I think Belichick goes for the victory Sunday in TX. It's best for momentum; the teams needs the reps and work; it preserves the best shot at the #3 seed, which the above analysis shows is twice as likely as #4 to host the AFCC game; and I don't think Belichick sees a huge difference between going to SD and going to Indy in the Divisional round.

If you recall, they flew out early for SD in 06. I think it was on a Wednesday afternoon.