NFL Week 17 Thread

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by rowech

Different team right now.

Same could be said of Denver although they get a lot of love while playing a rather piss poor schedule. IIRC, they have a 2-3 record against teams worth a damn, but you know, those three loses came early, etc.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by TroyF

They are the proverbial team nobody wants to play. ESPN has talked them up bigtime. Football Outsiders has them as their #1 team in the league. But here is my problem:

Road games:

Losses against Cardinals, Rams, 49ers, Lions, Dolphins. Wins against Bears (OT), Panthers (by 4) and Bills (in Toronto)

Beyond those numbers:

Russell Wilson:

Home - 64.6% completion, 9.17 yards per pass attempt, 17 TD, 2 INT
Road - 63.8%, 7.05 yards per pass attempt, 9 TD, 8 INT

This is a very good football team. Their defense and running game are terrific, which keeps the kid throwing the ball in great shape. He attempted 37 passes on 3rd or 4rth and 9 yards or more this year. (Luck attempted 77, RG3 41, you see who was asked to do more with those numbers)

The Hawks finished 2-2 when allowing 20 or more points. The wins both came at home (Ne by one and the Vikings by 10) The losses both came on the road. One was to Detroit (by 4). The other was a three point loss to the Dolphins, the only blot on their late season surge.

They will now get to play the #4 team in the league in points scored. They win that, they play would play 2 of these 3 on the road to go to the Super Bowl: Atlanta (#7 in points), SF (#11 in points) or GB (#5 in points) To top it off, two of those three teams are PISSED and will be playing far more than a playoff game against them.

If the Seahawks and Wilson do it, more power to them. They have had an amazing season and finishing it off with 3 road wins before throttling an AFC team in the Super Bowl would be something I'd be ok with. (unless off course they beat Denver in the title game)

I just don't believe the odds favor them. That's why they play the games. . .

I don't want to turn Seattle into something they are not - their receiving corps is pretty bad, they certainly could be made into a one dimensional offense. However, they have dramatically improved since the losses you listed.

Winning 3 on the road is certainly hard, but it has happened 4 times in the past seven years - Steelers, Giants, Packers, and Giants again. So 4/7 SB winners have actually been road WC teams.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by TroyF

My fear as well. So happy we get to avoid them until the AFC title game. Pats will be a very, very tough out.

If the Patriots and Denver meet, it's a different matchup than earlier in the season when Peyton clearly wasn't a 100% and dialed in with his new team.

The Denver defense is the type that gives Brady fits and the Pats defense would be good for at least a couple of game changing PIs, especially in Denver.

I could see this game playing out similar to the SF game - without the crazy comeback.

[Noop]

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I don't want to turn Seattle into something they are not - their receiving corps is pretty bad, they certainly could be made into a one dimensional offense. However, they have dramatically improved since the losses you listed.

Winning 3 on the road is certainly hard, but it has happened 4 times in the past seven years - Steelers, Giants, Packers, and Giants again. So 4/7 SB winners have actually been road WC teams.

How many had a rookie QB?

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I don't want to turn Seattle into something they are not - their receiving corps is pretty bad, they certainly could be made into a one dimensional offense. However, they have dramatically improved since the losses you listed.

Winning 3 on the road is certainly hard, but it has happened 4 times in the past seven years - Steelers, Giants, Packers, and Giants again. So 4/7 SB winners have actually been road WC teams.

Pittsburgh was 11-5 on the year and had a 6-2 road record.
NY Giants were 7-1 on the road.
NY Giants last year were 5-3 on the road

The 2010 Packers went 3-5 on the road. That comes with an asterisk. They lost two of those games without Aaron Rodgers at the helm. One was a loss at Detroit where they scored 3 points and lost 7-3. The other was a loss at the 14-2 Patriots by 4 points. Their road schedule that year was brutal. It included tilts away at Philly (10 wins), Chicago (11 wins), NY Jets (11 wins), Atlanta Falcons (13 wins) and New England Patriots (14 wins)

Conversely, this years Seahawks team played two teams with a winning record on the road this year and still went 3-5. They split those games, winning against the Bears who had already started their slide and losing to the Niners in a very close game they could have won.

Oh yeah, the QB's of those teams were Eli Manning (twice) Big Ben and Aaron Rodgers. Russell is playing some damned good football right now. He'll have to convince me he's at the level of the other three.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by TroyF

My fear as well. So happy we get to avoid them until the AFC title game. Pats will be a very, very tough out.

And as a Pats fan I hate that we'll have to play Denver in Denver. Nothing ever goes right there.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Matthean

Same could be said of Denver although they get a lot of love while playing a rather piss poor schedule. IIRC, they have a 2-3 record against teams worth a damn, but you know, those three loses came early, etc.

The start was bad, but 2 of the 3 early losses came on the road to the Falcons and Pats. The other was against a Texans team who was playing at their peak. That said, it's a valid concern. A lot of wins against bad football teams. I could look at the positive and note road victories at Cincy and Baltimore. I could look at the negative and look at the amount of teams beat with losing records.

The other positive thing? Denver was not out of any of those games. Even the Patriots game was getting interesting when McGahee put the ball on the ground. Pats scare the hell out of me. I believe Denver can win at home against any other AFC team.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

If the Patriots and Denver meet, it's a different matchup than earlier in the season when Peyton clearly wasn't a 100% and dialed in with his new team.

The Denver defense is the type that gives Brady fits and the Pats defense would be good for at least a couple of game changing PIs, especially in Denver.

We'll see - my takeaway from the Denver game was that 20-minute stretch where we were running the no-huddle to perfection and getting first down after first down with seeming ease until we got up 31-7 and tightened up. With Gronk back we can go into those heavy 2 TE sets and negate Dumervil and Miller's pass-rushing ability by running it down their throats (Miller's been much better at run D and setting edges this year, but Dumervil is still weak). It'll probably come down to turnovers anyway, but I'm not really worried about our offense vs. their D.

I will say that I would much rather have had to go through Houston than Denver.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

And as a Pats fan I hate that we'll have to play Denver in Denver. Nothing ever goes right there.

Forgetting the intentional safety game. Although that was 9 years ago.

[bhlloy]

Turns out that Jerry Brown was sober (well easily sober enough to drive a car -.056 BAC)

I think that makes it even more tragic and frustrating. Even if Brent didn't want to call a cab, all he had to do was let his buddy drive. Fuck.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

We'll see - my takeaway from the Denver game was that 20-minute stretch where we were running the no-huddle to perfection and getting first down after first down with seeming ease until we got up 31-7 and tightened up. With Gronk back we can go into those heavy 2 TE sets and negate Dumervil and Miller's pass-rushing ability by running it down their throats (Miller's been much better at run D and setting edges this year, but Dumervil is still weak). It'll probably come down to turnovers anyway, but I'm not really worried about our offense vs. their D.

I will say that I would much rather have had to go through Houston than Denver.

The speed the Pats were running the no huddle in that game is something you don't usually see outside of Oregon. I think it was the Jets who complained that it was too fast and that the Pats were making subs while the Broncos didn't get the time to sub.

I'm not sure if I buy into that, but the Broncos were simply not prepared for that speed of offense. I would expect Denver to be much better prepared for that in the event the two teams meet in the playoffs.

That first game was one which shows how a couple of plays can change a game around. Thomas simply drops the ball as Denver is driving for an early score. Manning fumbles the ball with Denver down 24-7 and the Pats score 7 with the short field and it was a blowout. That turns a 24-14 well played game to a 31-7 blowout at the time.

If this were MOST teams, I would be at all concerned about that first game. The Pats had drives of 12, 14, 16 and 16 plays in that game. Those drives covered 84, 80, 93 and 80 yards.

The Broncos gave up 9 other drives of 80 yards or more and 3 of those were in garbage time after games were decided. The Pats had 4 in the same game.

On one hand, a lot of things have to go right for you to have drives that go that long in 16 plays. No fumbles, tipped passes, sacks, penalties. . . etc.

On the other hand, this is the Patriots. This is Brady. Earlier in the season when some were questioning the Pats, I pointed out they never get blown out and they are going to be in every game because of their QB. Nothing has changed. They scare the hell out of me as a Broncos fan. Beyond scaring the hell out of me, gun to my head, I think the Patriots beat Denver right now. I just hope if Denver does lose that game, it's because of things the Patriots do (not Thomas fumbling the ball untouched to start the game for example)