NFL Division Playoff Round Thread

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

I remember someone predicting that they were going to hold them to under 20 points in a Super Bowl....

(I think the number he said was 17)

How did that one end...?

Brady was dumb enough to say something back. Lesson learned. If the Ravens want to taunt the Pats at this point, I wish them well going to NE.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Opening line for the AFC Championship game appears to be New England (-9), O/U 51.5

I realize Vegas is about betting not who wins, but do people really believe that after what happened in Denver?

[britrock88]

You guys were hilarious during the SEA/ATL game. Thanks for that.

[MrBug708]

[molson]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Whenever I read all this constant bitching about the Patriots, it sound like some guy complaining the his Ferrari is "making a weird noise" or isn't accelerating just quite as fast as it used.

For me the Pats reached the "gravy" stage after the '01 season. I really just wanted one super bowl after living and dying with them for 15 years prior to that. 12 years of gravy since then. Sweet, delicious, gravy. Beyond anything I could have ever hoped for as a fan of a team. I just always expect them to win and they almost always do. If you would have told me in '00 they would have had this kind of success, I would have said, "who gives a fuck, just give me one and I'm good." And I'm still good.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I realize Vegas is about betting not who wins, but do people really believe that after what happened in Denver?

What happens in Denver stays in Denver. Are we to expect Brady to throw INTs like Manning did? Are we to expect the Pats secondary to look like a virtual laughingstock the way Denver's did? Brady is a much better cold weather QB. Since the Pats got beat at home by the Cards, the Ravens can win there, but I see why people are still backing the Pats.

[stevew]

I think the Gronk injury is enough to keep the Pats from winning the Super Bowl. I wouldn't be surprised if they go TE early in the draft because Hernandez looks to be a guy that will miss time every year, and you need two really good TE to run the system that they do.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Pretty good post-game line from Asante Samuel

“It’s Matt ‘Black Ice.’ ‘Black Ice,’ because it’s that slick stuff you can’t see coming.”

[NorvTurnerOverdrive]

Originally Posted by stevew

I think the Gronk injury is enough to keep the Pats from winning the Super Bowl. I wouldn't be surprised if they go TE early in the draft because Hernandez looks to be a guy that will miss time every year, and you need two really good TE to run the system that they do.

they've got jake ballard on ir

[Danny]

Houston's been a mediocre at best team down the stretch. I think Baltimore gives NE a run for their money, especially without Gronk, but that fatigue and Brady will end up being too much for them.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Danny

Houston's been a mediocre at best team down the stretch. I think Baltimore gives NE a run for their money, especially without Gronk, but that fatigue and Brady will end up being too much for them.

I think Baltimore has to be worn out after the last game. Will be interesting to see if they run out of steam in the 2nd half.

[jeff061]

Unlike last year they've already played the majority of their games without Gronk, I'm not as concerned as others about his absence.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by molson

For me the Pats reached the "gravy" stage after the '01 season. I really just wanted one super bowl after living and dying with them for 15 years prior to that. 12 years of gravy since then. Sweet, delicious, gravy. Beyond anything I could have ever hoped for as a fan of a team. I just always expect them to win and they almost always do. If you would have told me in '00 they would have had this kind of success, I would have said, "who gives a fuck, just give me one and I'm good." And I'm still good.

That's where I am with the Bucs after '02 (minus the extra heaping gravy). My "fanaticism" was rested once I realized I didn't have to die without them winning a Super Bowl (which for over a decade seemed like a foregone conclusion, I might add).

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by jeff061

Unlike last year they've already played the majority of their games without Gronk, I'm not as concerned as others about his absence.

They have others that can block, and Vereen looks like he can replace him as a receiver.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I realize Vegas is about betting not who wins, but do people really believe that after what happened in Denver?

Apperently Vegas thinks half of the country will go on New England with 9 points. Line doesn't really seem that far off to me. (Wouldn't touch it either way but that is usually the sign of a solid line)

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

and the trash talk has begun: Ravens player says the Pats offense is the equivalent of a cheap shot :P

Brendon Ayanbadejo

✔

@brendon310

New England does some suspect stuff on offense. Can't really respect it. Comparable to a cheap shot b4 a fight

(edit: Too bad he's a LB not a DB, I remember the last person to rip the pats before an AFC Championship game.. The Pats singled him out so much that if I remember correctly he was out of the league the next year)

They wouldn't be able to in either case since he only plays STs. Maybe he was talking about a game of Madden?

[spleen1015]

I have thought a lot about this since the Broncos game ended on Saturday.

Even though Manning had a great comeback year, one for the ages, I think there is something still not quite right about him. I'm starting to believe that he's really not the Manning of old and he won't be able to get it all back. I didn't get to see a lot of their games this year, so I don't know how he looked in the regular season, but I think what I watched Saturday confirms it.

I was pissed that the Broncos had the ball with more than 30 seconds to end the 1st half and the game and they did try to move down the field. I don't think Manning threw a pass down the field all day. I don't remember seeing a pass for more then 20 yards or more.

I don't think Manning can throw the deep ball like he used to. You guys probably already figured this out, but I've been a super Manning fanboy in denial, I guess.

It makes me sad.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I have thought a lot about this since the Broncos game ended on Saturday.

Even though Manning had a great comeback year, one for the ages, I think there is something still not quite right about him. I'm starting to believe that he's really not the Manning of old and he won't be able to get it all back. I didn't get to see a lot of their games this year, so I don't know how he looked in the regular season, but I think what I watched Saturday confirms it.

I was pissed that the Broncos had the ball with more than 30 seconds to end the 1st half and the game and they did try to move down the field. I don't think Manning threw a pass down the field all day. I don't remember seeing a pass for more then 20 yards or more.

I don't think Manning can throw the deep ball like he used to. You guys probably already figured this out, but I've been a super Manning fanboy in denial, I guess.

It makes me sad.

Apparently "only 2 of [Manning's] 43 attempts went more than 15 yards downfield."

[Buccaneer]

I can't recall many other 36 year old qbs doing what he did this season. But I didn't have the broncos in the playoffs let alone a first seed because I thought he would wear out in the season. I guess the wall hit in the playoffs. I hope he does well again next season for he is so much fun to watch.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by britrock88

You guys were hilarious during the SEA/ATL game. Thanks for that.

It was like election night 2000 in here. The game was over and called both ways about a dozen times.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Apparently "only 2 of [Manning's] 43 attempts went more than 15 yards downfield."

That's apparently consistent with the entire season, according to the stat split on espn.com

583 attempts
Behind the line 58/78
1-10 yds 219/285
11-20 yds 75/130
21-30 yds 17/40
31-40 yds 7/19
41+ yds 0/1

Then again .... back to 2009 MVP
31-40 yds 6/24
41+ yds 1/3

2008 MVP
31-40 yds 7/26
41+ yds 0/2

[Carman Bulldog]

2012 Regular Season Wins Against Teams Over .500

Houston - 4
New England -3
Cincinnati - 3
Indianapolis - 3
Baltimore - 3
Denver - 2

Seattle - 5
San Francisco - 4
Green Bay - 4
Minnesota - 4
Atlanta - 3
Washington - 3

One of these things just doesn't belong here, one of these things just isn't the same...

Can anyone remind me again why Vegas installed Denver as Super Bowl favorites heading into the playoffs?

Good news though, as next year Denver has the easiest strength of schedule in terms of both opponents winning percentage (.430) and point differential (-784). The next best schedule in terms of winning percentage is .457 while only one other team faces a schedule with an opponent that has a point differential worse than -488.

So we can all look forward to Peyton Manning having another "MVP" regular season followed by Denver heading into the playoffs as favorites, only to lose again.

[Buccaneer]

I can't recall many other 36 year old qbs doing what he did this season. But I didn't have the broncos in the playoffs let alone a first seed because I thought he would wear out in the season. I guess the wall hit in the playoffs. I hope he does well again next season for he is so much fun to watch.

[whomario]

just checked and Tom Brady splits look eerily similar, so my uneducated guess is that long passes are less common than we might think.

Pass Thrown Behind Line of Scrimmage	64	86	480	74.4	5.58	23	2	1	0	90.3	0	0	0.0	0	0
Pass Thrown 1-10 yds	222	303	2,193	73.3	7.24	83	16	2	0	108.2	0	0	0.0	0	0
Pass Thrown 11-20 yds	48	106	904	45.3	8.53	59	4	1	0	84.0	0	0	0.0	0	0
Pass Thrown 21-30 yds	15	44	443	34.1	10.07	63	5	1	0	100.9	0	0	0.0	0	0
Pass Thrown 31-40 yds	6	13	256	46.2	19.69	56	3	0	0	132.2	0	0	0.0	0	0
Pass Thrown 41+ yds	0	6	0	0.0	0.00	0	0	0	0	39.6	0	0	0.0	0	0

[whomario]

Aaron Rodgers :

BY PASS PLAY CMP ATT YDS CMP% AVG LNG TD INT SACK RAT ATT YDS AVG LNG TD Pass Thrown Behind Line of Scrimmage 68 85 375 80.0 4.41 19 0 0 0 85.1 0 0 0.0 0 0 Pass Thrown 1-10 yds 172 240 1,562 71.7 6.51 40 11 3 0 99.0 0 0 0.0 0 0 Pass Thrown 11-20 yds 57 101 1,042 56.4 10.32 72 11 3 0 116.0 0 0 0.0 0 0 Pass Thrown 21-30 yds 14 35 414 40.0 11.83 61 7 1 0 112.4 0 0 0.0 0 0 Pass Thrown 31-40 yds 4 7 143 57.1 20.43 41 3 0 0 141.4 0 0 0.0 0 0 Pass Thrown 41+ yds 1 6 52 16.7 8.67 52 0 1 0 23.6 0 0 0.0 0 0

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by whomario

just checked and Tom Brady splits look eerily similar, so my uneducated guess is that long passes are less common than we might think.

I have not looked, but my gut instinct is that you should look for QBs like Russel Wilson or RG III to see if they had more long throws down field. My impression from watching a ton of football this season is those teams (and other teams with a more mobile quarterback) depended upon the safetys not over-committing in case the QB started running 30 yards down field and it led to more down field attempts from those QBs.

Watching Brady for years, it does not surprise me at all that he is not a real long ball threat. Other than a few years with Moss here, he has almost exclusively passed shorter to WR over the middle or TE. I know Brandon Lloyd was supposed to be a down field threat, but he never really turned into that from what I saw.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

2012 Regular Season Wins Against Teams Over .500

Houston - 4
New England -3
Cincinnati - 3
Indianapolis - 3
Baltimore - 3
Denver - 2

---

One of these things just doesn't belong here, one of these things just isn't the same...

I'm not trying to argue whether they should/shouldn't have been the favorite to make the Super Bowl. But is it really a great argument to stress one particular number like this, when a one unit change would result in your "outlier" being equivalent with the rest of the competition?

Of course I'm assuming you weren't trying to argue that Houston should have been the favorite on account of their four wins that meet your criteria.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I have not looked, but my gut instinct is that you should look for QBs like Russel Wilson or RG III to see if they had more long throws down field.

RG III
31-40 yds ... 0/4
41+ yds ... 4/13

Wilson
31-40 yds ... 6/17 (3 TD, 2 INT)
41+ yds ... 3/12 (1 TD, 3 INT)

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Logan

I'm not trying to argue whether they should/shouldn't have been the favorite to make the Super Bowl. But is it really a great argument to stress one particular number like this, when a one unit change would result in your "outlier" being equivalent with the rest of the competition?

Of course I'm assuming you weren't trying to argue that Houston should have been the favorite on account of their four wins that meet your criteria.

Just to add to this point. Yes, Denver had two wins against >.500 teams, and all three of their losses came to those teams as well.

New England was 3-3 (losses to SF, Seattle, and Baltimore). They also lost to Arizona. Does the extra victory make up for the loss to a not quite horrendous yet at the time Arizona squad? Not sure.

Baltimore was 3-4 against teams over .500 (losses to Denver, Houston, Washington, and Cincy) and additional losses to a Charlie Batch-led Pittsburgh team and an early loss to Philly. Is that better to do than fail to win a 3rd game against a 9-7 or better team?

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

Can anyone remind me again why Vegas installed Denver as Super Bowl favorites heading into the playoffs?

Because Denver became one of the two hottest teams in the league while beating up on the lesser teams in the league. Those three early loses against playoff teams? Those don't count since they came early in the season and Manning was still getting to know his teammates despite putting up at least 21 points in each game.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by Logan

Just to add to this point. Yes, Denver had two wins against >.500 teams, and all three of their losses came to those teams as well.

New England was 3-3 (losses to SF, Seattle, and Baltimore). They also lost to Arizona. Does the extra victory make up for the loss to a not quite horrendous yet at the time Arizona squad? Not sure.

Baltimore was 3-4 against teams over .500 (losses to Denver, Houston, Washington, and Cincy) and additional losses to a Charlie Batch-led Pittsburgh team and an early loss to Philly. Is that better to do than fail to win a 3rd game against a 9-7 or better team?

I'm not sure 3-4 is any better than 2-3, but heading into the weekend, Denver were 10 point favorites over Baltimore. The Broncos were also Super Bowl favorites at 11/4 and the favorites to win the AFC at 11/10 while Baltimore was 18/1 and 9/1 respectively.

Denver also lost to the three toughest teams on their schedule while the two wins came against the two weakest teams. And in those three losses, their point differential was a -28 and they were actually down by 20 points in all three of those games before late rallies made the score more respectable. While you use New England for comparison, they were -11 in their four losses (and -9 in the three losses to teams over .500).

I'm just saying it's surprising that Denver was such heavy favorites in the AFC and the Super Bowl heading into the weekend, considering their body of work. Granted, they were on an 11 game win streak, but that was against a schedule with a winning percentage of .376.

The fact is, that we're likely to be here again next year as the Broncos have by far the easiest schedule and another 13-3 or 14-2 season (or better) is not out of the question, once again debating Peyton Manning's legacy after another great regular season fails to result in another Super Bowl.

[kcchief19]

Speaking of things that aren't the same:

Tom Brady, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco and Colin Kaepernick.

How can you look at that list and not install the Patriots as a dead lock to win the Super Bowl? Granted, when they have been a lock seems to be when they have lost, but I'm not sure those other three guys are Eli.

[B & B]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

Tom Brady, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco and Colin Kaepernick.

.

Because this is not the way you approach the game. Kaepernick didnt beat Rodgers. SF beat GB.


Trent Dilfer has a ring.

[albionmoonlight]

Elite coaching is more important than elite QB play. Belichick went 11-5 with Matt Cassell. Drew Brees went 7-9 w/o Sean Payton. Jim Harbaugh took the same team that Mike Singletary had and has them as favorites to go to the Super Bowl.

Looked at that way, I think that we have a really good final four. Belichick, Smith, and the Harbaughs.

[Carman Bulldog]

Point Differential Against Over .500 +Other Losses

So I thought I would go a bit more in depth regarding point differential in games against team's over .500 and any additional losses. To read the following, the first bolded number is the point differential in games against teams over .500 and any additional losses. I then list the record versus teams over .500, the point differential in those games as well as any additional losses and the point differential in those games.

New England (+62) (vs. +.500 3-3, +64) (1 Loss, -2)
Denver (+3) (vs. +.500 2-3, +3) (0 Losses)
Baltimore (-9), (vs. +.500 3-4, -5) (2 Losses, -4)
Houston (-20), (vs. +.500 4-4, -20) (0 Losses)
Cincinnati (-30), (vs. +.500 3-2, -8) (4 Losses, -22)
Indianapolis (-80), (vs. +.500 3-3, -49) (2 Losses, -31)

Atlanta (+28), (vs. +.500 3-0, +47) (3 Losses, -19)
Seattle (+24), (vs. +.500 5-1, +41) (4 Losses, -17)
Green Bay (+4), (vs. +.500 4-5, +4) (0 Losses)
San Francisco* (E), (vs. +500 2-1, +3) (1 Loss, -3)
San Francisco~ (-19), vs. +500 2-2, -19) (0 Loss)
San Francisco (-19), (vs. +.500 4-3, -16) (1 Loss, -3)
Washington (-28), (vs. +.500 3-3, -2) (3 Losses, -26)
Minnesota (-33), (vs. +.500 4-5, -14) (1 Loss, -19)

* w/ Kaepernick as starter
~ w/ Smith as starter

Very interesting numbers, at least in my opinion. The top 4 teams in each conference were the one's playing this past weekend. The games that should have been close (Atlanta-Seattle, Denver-Baltimore and Green Bay- San Francisco ) were close, at least heading into the 4th quarter, while Houston never really competed with New England. Going back to the Wild Card round Texans vs. Bengals was relatively close while the others weren't, the only real outlier being the Seattle vs. Washington game, which is closer than their differentials would indicate, although you could arguably take into consideration the home vs. away differential and traveling west to east into that.

If you adjust for playoff performances heading into this weekend, San Francisco with Kaepernick is at a +14 while Atlanta is at +30 which would indicate a competitive game while New England would be poised to topple Baltimore.

Going back to last year, the Giants were a dismal -76 (1-3) although New England wasn't that impressive either at a -15. Even Green Bay only mustered a +33 despite going 15-1. That's not much better than their Super Bowl year, when they went 10-6 and were a +31.

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by B & B

Kaepernick didnt beat Rodgers. SF beat GB.

Are you saying this in the sense that Rodgers doesn't play defence and as such, Kaepernick did not directly beat him? Because that, I would agree with.

Or are you saying that Kaepernick didn't outplay Rodgers? I would say that Kaepernick definitely had the much better day and did more to help his team win.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

Speaking of things that aren't the same:

Tom Brady, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco and Colin Kaepernick.

How can you look at that list and not install the Patriots as a dead lock to win the Super Bowl? Granted, when they have been a lock seems to be when they have lost, but I'm not sure those other three guys are Eli.

SF beat NE while on the road. I still think SF's A game is better than anybody else's. I just don't know if you get it for 3 games in a row.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by Logan

Baltimore was 3-4 against teams over .500 (losses to Denver, Houston, Washington, and Cincy) and additional losses to a Charlie Batch-led Pittsburgh team and an early loss to Philly. Is that better to do than fail to win a 3rd game against a 9-7 or better team?

The loss to Cincinnati doesn't really count, that game was the most meaningless of all regular season games played this season.

[Crapshoot]

Bill Barnwell on the weekend's divisional games - Grantland

Important. This silliness about "choking" and Peyton was ridiculous back then, and its ridiculous now.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Bill Barnwell on the weekend's divisional games - Grantland

Important. This silliness about "choking" and Peyton was ridiculous back then, and its ridiculous now.

I already had my say on Facebook. How is Ryan lucky when he led his team to a 27-7 lead at the start of the 4th quarter? How is Manning unlucky when he was gifted 14 points to even be within reach at the end?

[Carman Bulldog]

I like Barnwell, but some important things to note from both that article and that have come up earlier in this thread...

The same is true for Manning, who took a fair amount of flak for not winning with a below-average defense and a running game that seemed to disappear in big playoff games in Indianapolis.

As much flak as the defences always get on Manning's teams, this is the 6th time that Manning has had a defence ranked in the top 8 in points against (7, 2, 1, 7, 8, 4) and failed to win a Super Bowl all six years. For comparison, Brady's team has been ranked in the top 8 a total of eight times (6, 1, 2, 2, 4, 8, 5, 8) and won 3 Super Bowls those years. Marino had 4 top-8 D's in his career (including his first two seasons), Montana had 10 in his primary years as starter (9 in 10 years in San Fran, 1 in 2 years in Kansas City).

Let's also take into account how team's are built and that there is only so much money to spread around, and thus, only so much talent to spread around. The Colts chose to invest in their skill position offensive players such as Harrison, Wayne, James and Clark. It seemed to be a successful formula in the regular season but the defence always gets blamed for the losses. Would Manning have been as successful with his leading receiver being Reche Caldwell or David Givens and his top running back being Laurence Maroney? I don't know, but that's the tradeoff.

If the Broncos get the sort of defensive/special teams miracle they seemed to get last year in overtime games with Tim Tebow, the Broncos almost surely win, which means that Manning had a good game.

I guess two return TD's in regulation time isn't sufficient.

Flacco and Wilson were the better quarterbacks on the day because they played better, not because they won or lost.

This seems to contradict a lot of what he is saying. Manning is a better quarterback than Flacco and thus expected to play better than Flacco. It's not acceptable to just be "good" or "above average." The problem with Manning isn't necessarily his overall performance in the playoffs as his career numbers are relatively respectable. The problem is the drop off in play from regular season to post-season, particularly for someone discussed as the greatest of all-time at his position. Furthermore, it's the fact that he's gone one and done eight times in his career, posting a 58% completion percentage in those games, down from a career percentage in the regular season of 65%

In part, Manning is a victim of his own regular season dominance because his play definitely declines in the playoffs and he's measured against his regular season performance. While that is probably true of a lot of quarterbacks if you compare the numbers, I would speculate that Manning's play drops off more than others, although I may be wrong.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

Would Manning have been as successful with his leading receiver being Reche Caldwell or David Givens and his top running back being Laurence Maroney?

Manning got his one ring BECAUSE Reche Caldwell was one of Brady's top receivers...

[Danny]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

Would Manning have been as successful with his leading receiver being Reche Caldwell or David Givens and his top running back being Laurence Maroney? I don't know, but that's the tradeoff.

Maybe if Belicheck was his coach. Peyton really has never had a great or even very good coach. And yes I think Dungy is mediocre. Ultimately I consider myself lucky to be a part of watching the entirety of both Brady's and Manning's career, two of the all time greats. While I am a bigger Manning fan, I do think I have to take Brady in January if forced to choose. I still would choose Peyton over Eli though.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Danny

I still would choose Peyton over Eli though.

I just don't get it.

Eli is 8-3 with many road wins in the playoffs. Peyton is 9-11 with many choke jobs.

Say all you want about the players around them, but twice at the very least Eli hasn't cost them games and made plenty of big plays on his own.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I just don't get it.

Eli is 8-3 with many road wins in the playoffs. Peyton is 9-11 with many choke jobs.

Say all you want about the players around them, but twice at the very least Eli hasn't cost them games and made plenty of big plays on his own.

I'm sure its at least part bias. I like Peyton, but I want to punch Eli in the face whenever I see him.

[Danny]

I do give Eli props for his superbowl performances though, he has been great.

[Danny]

And at least no one is arguing to take Big Ben over Peyton. He's the QB I like the least, him I want to punch in the nuts.

[Danny]

I also wonder how much personality plays into this. I think Peyton's personality probably hurts him in playoff situations where someone like Eli who is cold as ice is helped.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by Danny

And at least no one is arguing to take Big Ben over Peyton. He's the QB I like the least, him I want to punch in the nuts.

Wait until he wins his third Super Bowl

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Danny

I'm sure its at least part bias. I like Peyton, but I want to punch Eli in the face whenever I see him.

and my love for Eli obviously clouds my opinion, but someone show me any numbers indicating Peyton is the obvious choice over Eli.