AFC playoff standings

[luuked]

Baltimore could give them a little trouble too.

I just don't see L. Jackson being able to score enough on KC. But yeah might be another long shot. Sure.

 

[1960Pats]

I don't know if the Colts will beat Houston but I'm calling now that Philly beats them.

Unfortunately, if Philly loses their next two games (at Dallas and at the Rams) the Texans game will be meaningless to them.

Edit: I see that this has already been discussed. Never mind.

 

[Mack Herron]

The NFL roulette wheel.

 

[jradMITEX]

Baltimore does have the number 1 scoring and yardage defense, the Chiefs D has been better at home but is still suspect, sure the Ravens will need some bounces for sure but by no means is this a gimme.

 

[QB12]

Not sure if this has any relevance for a potential matchup really.

Oh, so that a potential opposing QB has never beat a Brady-Belichick team has NO relevance? smh

 

[mcmurtry86]

Oh, so that a potential opposing QB has never beat a Brady-Belichick team has NO relevance? smh

I don't see the relevance, other than cherry picking, to exclude the one game he won (and played great in) against the Cassel-led Pats in 2008.

The 2008 D got lit up by Rivers in that game which should prove that he is capable of beating a Belichick D (and he was one of only 2 QB's to put up 300+ yards passing against the Pats that year).

Obviously, he has struggled against New England in most of the other games, but he's not incapable of playing well against Belichick teams and the inclusion of Brady is irrelevant since he's not lining up opposite Rivers.

 

[BobDigital]

My current predictions.

#1 Pats (they win out)
#2 KC
#3 Hou
#4 Pitt
#5 SD
#6 Ravens

As far as the NFC I could do predictions but in the end it will be either the Rams or Saints.

 

[luuked]

Oh, so that a potential opposing QB has never beat a Brady-Belichick team has NO relevance? smh

I see no particular relevance in the past especially since every year teams change and evolve. If some historical trivia makes you feel better than good.

 

[QB12]

I see no particular relevance in the past especially since every year teams change and evolve. If some historical trivia makes you feel better than good.

Illogical now personal?

 

[luuked]

Illogical now personal?

Nothing about this is illogical it is just one of those pointless historical stats that don't mean anything for a potential playoff matchup in 2018.

Like I said if you feel better by holding onto results of completely different teams playing each other in the past then good for you. But this is not any more absurd than the people ****ting their pants because the Ravens beat us at some point more than 6 years ago.

Hell as teams evolve I would not even think the results from the first 8 weeks of the regular season this year have much bearing on what will happen in the playoffs and those are significantly more relevant than what happened in the years before.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Hell as teams evolve I would not even think the results from the first 8 weeks of the regular season this year have much bearing on what will happen in the playoffs and those are significantly more relevant than what happened in the years before.

Hell, look at 2007 Week 17 and SB42.

 

[1960Pats]

Upon further review...
I have KC and Tenn winning out
NE, Hou, Pitt, LC and Denver losing 1 more
Balt and Miami losing 2 more
Indy losing 3 more

That leaves...
1 - KC (14-2)
2 - NE (12-4)
3 - Hou (12-4)
4 - Pitt (10-5-1)
5 - LAC (12-4)
6 - Ten (10-6)
Bal, Ind, Den at 9-7
Mia at 8-8

This will set up rematches with Ten at Hou and LAC at Pitt (because of the ridiculous division setup and in spite of the Chargers better record and win over Pitt, this game will be a home game for Pitt). Houston and Pitt will go on to win.

That leaves Pitt at KC and Hou at NE, with both home teams winning, resulting in a NE at KC title game in the AFC.

Some games may end up being meaningless and change things...
Hou vs Phi, LAC at Den and Ind at Tenn for instance.

 

[goheels22002]

Baltimore could give them a little trouble too.

I think Baltimore is going to beat the Chiefs.

 

[supafly]

Hell, look at 2007 Week 17 and SB42.

True, but if anyone walked away from the week 17 matchup feeling super confident, they were kidding themselves. The Giants played very well and were leading that game in the third quarter. As a matter of fact, the Pats were down 28-16 at one point and had to score 15 points in the final quarter.

 

[supafly]

I think Baltimore is going to beat the Chiefs.

If the Ravens actually pull that off, we’ll know that they’re capable of winning a big game. In the meantime, they really haven’t beaten anyone worthy aside from Pittsburgh.

 

[maust]

If the Ravens actually pull that off, we’ll know that they’re capable of winning a big game. In the meantime, they really haven’t beaten anyone worthy aside from Pittsburgh.

And of late there may be some doubt about just how 'worthy' Pittsburgh is

 

[TB_Helmet]

I see no particular relevance in the past especially since every year teams change and evolve. If some historical trivia makes you feel better than good.

Agreed...that’s just how sports works.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

True, but if anyone walked away from the week 17 matchup feeling super confident, they were kidding themselves. The Giants played very well and were leading that game in the third quarter. As a matter of fact, the Pats were down 28-16 at one point and had to score 15 points in the final quarter.

that's my take on it too Sup. Obviously some of this is 20/20 hindsight but that game was the expose of some weaknesses not fully seen before (some injury caused). And that was a struggle end to end to get the W.

I see why some say this year has nothing to do with the last. There isn't an utter lack of logic in that belief. But same QB and same coach with a totally dominating AFCE record except in Miami (with different QBs and coaches in that span) over a pretty significant sample? I just don't see how that doesn't have a bit of prognostication value (if I'm putting money on the game there is no way I'd dismiss out of hand the abnormal loss rate in Miami).

 

[QuantumMechanic]

True, but if anyone walked away from the week 17 matchup feeling super confident, they were kidding themselves. The Giants played very well and were leading that game in the third quarter. As a matter of fact, the Pats were down 28-16 at one point and had to score 15 points in the final quarter.

Right, but in Week 17 NE had no problems scoring points. Rather different in SB42.

 

[supafly]

Right, but in Week 17 NE had no problems scoring points. Rather different in SB42.

I guess, QM, but they were bottled up pretty well when they were held to 16 halfway through the third quarter, so I think there were some hints of things to come, that’s all.

At any rate your point is quite valid. I just don’t love the example of that particular game.