Who do we want to lose on Thursday Night football (Oakland @ Kansas City)?

[meatface]

Uh Oakland obviously

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

HAHA! So that's what @TB_Helmet meant!

That commercial is still funny after all these years.

 

[gitgronked82]

definitely chiefs


and i've been meaning to ask.. what is the tie-breaker that oak has over us?

 

[Gwedd]

That commercial is still funny after all these years.

Not to go too far O/T, but this one also makes me laugh.

 

[NewFeep]

Da Bears.........

 

[nabwong]

Chefs. You can always count on Andy Reid and Alex smith to screw up in the playoffs.

 

[Gumby]

definitely chiefs


and i've been meaning to ask.. what is the tie-breaker that oak has over us?

Strength of Victory: 0.467 versus 0.358

Tiebreaker basis could change to overall/AFC record with a loss by either or even to record vs common opponents if both lose, but one team loses to a team the other didn't play, but for now the strength of the afcw gives them a leg up.

 

[n1997y]

We are tied at 10-2 with Oakland, but Oakland currently owns the tiebreaker. So obviously, we want Oakland to lose, right?

Only thing is.... Kansas City is only a game behind us, and has a significantly easier remainung schedule than the Raiders. If victorious, will the Chiefs win the #1 Seed? Do we risk playing the AFC title game at Arrowhead?

Your thoughts?

Simple. KC's allegedly easier schedule won't make one whit of difference if the Pats win out. Oakland owing the tiebreaker will.

Assume the Pats win out. Rooting against KC is rooting against HFA for New England.

Duh. We want OAK to lose.

 

[JPPT1974]

Pats had a harder schedule than KC. It depends on the strength of schedule. Pats will win out1

 

[luuked]

Both Raiders and Chiefs still need to play Denver and the Chargers. Doesn't matter if at home or away I don't understand why anyone would just assume that any of the two will win out. Division games are tough. Especially against capable opponents and both Denver and the Chargers have a good shot at winning those games.

 

[TBR]

While a tie would be nice, it's unlikely. Root for KC to win.

 

[1960Pats]

Would a tie benefit us

Not with either team. Any loss we have would put us behind the Raiders and also lose the tie-breaker advantage we have over the Chefs.

 

[1960Pats]

definitely chiefs


and i've been meaning to ask.. what is the tie-breaker that oak has over us?

I think it works this way: If both teams were to win out, the Raiders would win based on their 4-0 record in common games. Our loss with Jacoby as QB would be the difference in our 3-1 record.

 

[zoostation]

Oak-town

 

[goheels22002]

Oakland has had enough fun this year and should now return to doubt and despair in their grim and insecure black hole.

 

[1960Pats]

I think it works this way: If both teams were to win out, the Raiders would win based on their 4-0 record in common games. Our loss with Jacoby as QB would be the difference in our 3-1 record.

I don't think it's going to happen though. The Raiders have 3 AFCW road games and a home game with Indy left.

 

[1960Pats]

Oakland has had enough fun this year and should now return to doubt and despair in their grim and insecure black hole.

There isn't enough of this sentiment in this thread. Too many youngsters who don't remember 1976 I suppose.

 

[BTTA]

Whatever combination of W-L for both teams that has one of them with the #2 seed, the other one as a WC, and Denver left out of the playoffs. Just make it happen. I don't want to have to figure out how.

 

[sambam94]

I think it works this way: If both teams were to win out, the Raiders would win based on their 4-0 record in common games. Our loss with Jacoby as QB would be the difference in our 3-1 record.

so goodell would cost the Pats the #1 seed...great

 

[dannydyn]

so goodell would cost the Pats the #1 seed...great

I could have told you that back in Week 1