Re: 2006 NFL Play-Off Scenarios...Are the Patriots playing for anythin
 

[ QUOTE ]
No, Bruschi's hurt. Belichick says his hamstring tightened up which probably means they already gave Tedy his last rites.

[/ QUOTE ]

this looks like a gigantic loss for the Pats. single most important player on the D; he was a giant reason why the defense went from sucking to being very good.

this makes me sad [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: 2006 NFL Play-Off Scenarios...Are the Patriots playing for anythin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I were a Patriots fan, I'd want no part of the Colts until absolutely necessary. They own Pittsburgh and would get them at home. Pitt-Denver is far superior to Jax-Indy IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, Pitt-Denver is far superior to Jax Indy. However, I'm assuming that any path to the SB involves the Colts.

So, I think Pitt-Denver-Indy is a worse path than Jax-Indy-Denver/Cincy/Pitt. Obviously, being #3 means you might not have to face the Colts (unlikely) and a better chance of hosting a championship game (unlikely)

I said this in an another thread, but this is the deepest AFC field I remember in a long time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indy losing their first game and enabling the Pats to not only avoid the Colts, but get home field in the AFC Championship game is such a huge advantage, that it only needs to happen IMO a small % of the time to prefer that route. Say it's Indy vs. Cinci in round 2. The Colts would be....what?....11 point favorites? That's like 20% range chance of the Bengals winning. That's HUGE from the Patriots standpoint IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

one huge factor which people don't realize/are discounting pretty heavily:

If the Pats are the #4 seed (and play Jax), that means a red-hot Pittsburgh team plays at Cinci. If Pittsburgh wins, then Pittsburgh goes to Indy for round 2 - not the Pats.

so, the #4 seed doesn't nec. mean Jax/Indy. it could very well be Jax/Denver.

Re: 2006 NFL Play-Off Scenarios...Are the Patriots playing for anythin
 

[ QUOTE ]
I said this in an another thread, but this is the deepest AFC field I remember in a long time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I firmly believe that every single team in the AFC playoff picture would have the number 1 seed in the NFC, if they played in that conference all year.

Re: 2006 NFL Play-Off Scenarios...Are the Patriots playing for anythin
 

I think Pats are overrated, and are gleaning a lot of hype from playing a weak AFC East, and general Patriot-love fervor. Without Bruschi, they could be in trouble. Still, they are the Pats in the playoffs.

Chiefs and Chargers both deserve at least #2 or #3 seeds in the NFC.

Re: 2006 NFL Play-Off Scenarios...Are the Patriots playing for anythin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I said this in an another thread, but this is the deepest AFC field I remember in a long time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I firmly believe that every single team in the AFC playoff picture would have the number 1 seed in the NFC, if they played in that conference all year.

[/ QUOTE ]

not if you transplant them with Philly(or any other NFC east team) and leave Seattle untouched

Re: 2006 NFL Play-Off Scenarios...Are the Patriots playing for anythin
 

[ QUOTE ]
If I were a Patriots fan, I'd want no part of the Colts until absolutely necessary. They own Pittsburgh and would get them at home. Pitt-Denver is far superior to Jax-Indy IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, not to mention from a revenue point of view (although with the massive popularity of this team I doubt the front office is pushing it). Bellichick will do his best to win out convincingly with minimal risk vs. Miami, knowing home field is great and staying hot is important.

NT

Re: 2006 NFL Play-Off Scenarios...Are the Patriots playing for anythin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, Bruschi's hurt. Belichick says his hamstring tightened up which probably means they already gave Tedy his last rites.

[/ QUOTE ]

this looks like a gigantic loss for the Pats. single most important player on the D; he was a giant reason why the defense went from sucking to being very good.

this makes me sad [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a certain all-pro end may have had more to do with it (they came back to full strength around the same time). I'd rather be without Bruschi than Seymour.

NT

Re: 2006 NFL Play-Off Scenarios...Are the Patriots playing for anythin
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I said this in an another thread, but this is the deepest AFC field I remember in a long time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I firmly believe that every single team in the AFC playoff picture would have the number 1 seed in the NFC, if they played in that conference all year.

[/ QUOTE ]

not if you transplant them with Philly(or any other NFC east team) and leave Seattle untouched

[/ QUOTE ]

If you're suggesting the Giants/Redskins would have a better record than the Patriots, I'm pretty sure you're wrong. The only division the Pats would have a problem against is the NFC West and only because I think Seattle's offense might give them some trouble. Who else though in the NFC would be able to exploit the Patriots secondary? The Giants? Yeah, because Eli has proven himself as a solid QB this year.

The Patriots lost 5 games this year. 3 of them came against teams with high-powered offenses who can throw the ball down the field. (Colts, Chargers, Broncos) The other two games were, in my opinion, flukes. And when I say fluke, I mean the Patriots did not play to their ability, and lost the game, rather than they were out...talented (yes, i said outtalented). The only team in the NFC who really matches up well against the Pats are the Seahawks. If the Patriots play the Panthers/Giants/Redskins/Bears 10 times each, I think you'd find they'd win 60-65% of those games.

Re: 2006 NFL Play-Off Scenarios...Are the Patriots playing for anythin
 

He's saying if you put the Patriots in the same division with the Giants, Eagles, and Redskins, (Dallas has an impossibly hard schedule) the Patriots don't get the #1 seed in the NFC.

The Seahawks only lost 2 games all year. If you replace the Eagles with a team from the AFC, maybe the Seahawks lose 3 games.

After beating Seattle @home, you still have to go 13-3 against the Giants twice, the Redskins twice, the Eagles (when they were good) once, Kansas City, Denver, @Carolina, @San Diego.

Only the Colts/Broncos would be good bets for home-field there.

Plus, the Seahawks have been relatively healthy all year. If the Patriots struggle with injuries in the NFC East like they did this year, they're going to have a hard time just getting in. As tough as the AFC is, the AFC East is terrible, and the Patriots didn't win their division, they were defaulted it.

Re: 2006 NFL Play-Off Scenarios...Are the Patriots playing for anythin
 

[ QUOTE ]
He's saying if you put the Patriots in the same division with the Giants, Eagles, and Redskins, (Dallas has an impossibly hard schedule) the Patriots don't get the #1 seed in the NFC.

The Seahawks only lost 2 games all year. If you replace the Eagles with a team from the AFC, maybe the Seahawks lose 3 games.

After beating Seattle @home, you still have to go 13-3 against the Giants twice, the Redskins twice, the Eagles (when they were good) once, Kansas City, Denver, @Carolina, @San Diego.

Only the Colts/Broncos would be good bets for home-field there.

Plus, the Seahawks have been relatively healthy all year. If the Patriots struggle with injuries in the NFC East like they did this year, they're going to have a hard time just getting in. As tough as the AFC is, the AFC East is terrible, and the Patriots didn't win their division, they were defaulted it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for clearing that up. Makes tons of sense and I agree.