Cannot see DEN beating OAK in the Hole next week. Losing is a big FU to the Chiefs and the Pats.
It's at Denver.Cannot see DEN beating OAK in the Hole next week. Losing is a big FU to the Chiefs and the Pats.
I do not understand "Miami ought to be resting its starters!"I would hope they learned their lesson from last year and just go to Miami and take care of business. That game plan last year was inexcusable. I wouldn't worry about hiding plays based on a theoretical matchup. Sew up homefield and worry about possible opponents later.
Because during the first half Saturday he was 5 for 14 for 57 yards, threw a brutal interception, against an awful Buffalo defense, and because he played the Jets the week before?Why does Moore need a fuckton of work? 34 pts last two weeks plus he handled the end of the game against Arizona. He and their offense are fine. They should rest Ajayi and protect their WRs and DL IMO. I don't think it is wishcasting at all.
That being said, they are 9-1 in their last 10 and may just want to keep every bit of momentum going, so playing it straight is also a totally viable strategy.
I could see it going either way.
Oakland has something to play for (seeding, new QB) next week and Denver has nothing to play for. Have you seen the Broncos games the past 2 weeks? I'd be shocked if they beat Oakland. That first home playoff game will be more difficult, but it will be at home and against a team not coming off of a bye.If NE / OAK lose and KC wins can they get top seed?
Edit to add - that is not a possibility
So for the pats to travel, they need to lose Sunday and Oakland beat Denver and beat its first playoff opponent. Put it together and you are probably below 25% even if you assume Pats lose.
Personally I would rest many, play Brady first half, and roll out the vanilla game plan. This year is not last year, and even in that 25% of going to Oakland I am just not worried (vs worried about an injury Sunday)
So if the Pats were in Miami's shoes, you'd want the starters out there in the hopes they could move up one spot on the condition that the Chargers (who just lost to Cleveland) beat KC? I suspect you'd be criticizing him if he did that.I do not understand "Miami ought to be resting its starters!"
Can anyone guarantee Tannehill will be ready week 1 of the playoffs? ( He is just out of a cast and walking with a limp.) If not, Moore still needs a fuckton of work. And if he needs that, he needs it with starters, not to mention linemen who will keep him on one piece.
Oh, and maybe this coaching staff wants to keep them playing hard, not to mention seeding. That's what some of the Dolphins fans here think.
Wishcasting central.
I would absolutely play balls out.So if the Pats were in Miami's shoes, you'd want the starters out there in the hopes they could move up one spot on the condition that the Chargers (who just lost to Cleveland) beat KC? I suspect you'd be criticizing him if he did that.
I think this is key. In the first place, it's one thing to be a staff that has lots of success and can dial the intensity up or down each week, but for a new regime tasting success for the first time I imagine there would be a desire not to tinker.It has been a generation plus since the Dolphins have accomplished any damn thing.
It opened DEN -3.5, which I think is about right. I think Denver will have too much pride to roll over at Mile High.Let's play predict that line:
OAK (McGloin-led) @ Denver
I would put it at Oak -1, and believe it to be close to a pickem. To those that have already marked it a win for Oakland, where do you see the line opening at
Disagree. With their volatile personalities they may quit.It opened DEN -3.5, which I think is about right. I think Denver will have too much pride to roll over at Mile High.
I think the point is, they really can't. Or it's highly unlikely. KC could get a bye with a win. I don't see them losing to San Diego.I would absolutely play balls out.
It has been a generation plus since the Dolphins have accomplished any damn thing. There is nothing to "preserve"; they are in no sense favorites. They can improve seeding and, yes, this QB needs work with starters.
Jay Ajayi tweaked his shoulder after carrying it over 30 times against Buffalo. I would argue strongly that the risk of Ajayi getting hurt and missing the first round of the playoffs greatly outweighs the possibility of Miami getting the 5 seed.I think this is key. In the first place, it's one thing to be a staff that has lots of success and can dial the intensity up or down each week, but for a new regime tasting success for the first time I imagine there would be a desire not to tinker.
In the second place, the confidence and momentum gained from beating the Patriots in the season's final home game would outweigh any injury concerns.
That's the coaching staff. Whether the players can get to the same intensity level is debatable. I haven't looked at the statistics in a long time, but there used to be a clear difference in winning percentage between teams fighting to get into the playoffs versus those fighting for seeding.
This....100 timesI would hope they learned their lesson from last year and just go to Miami and take care of business. That game plan last year was inexcusable. I wouldn't worry about hiding plays based on a theoretical matchup. Sew up homefield and worry about possible opponents later.
They rested DH and MS in part because the field conditions were poor and it made sense to not risk further injury.Yeah its stuff like that, how safe the Dolphins play with banged up guys. Pats rested Slater and Hightower yesterday, I'd guess the Dolphins likely do the equivalent with banged up guys who could probably go but are susceptible to aggravating injuries. But who knows.
Also doubt the Dolphins want to show everything they have since they probably have to beat NE again in the playoffs at some point.
Aren't the field conditions going to be terrible in Miami, too? I understand they're hosting a bowl game this week.They rested DH and MS in part because the field conditions were poor and it made sense to not risk further injury.
As in 2 days before. Yes, the grass will be not ideal.Aren't the field conditions going to be terrible in Miami, too? I understand they're hosting a bowl game this week.
Not if Pitt and KC both won, which they didThought I saw a graphic saying NE/MIA was flexed to 4:00.
I just posted my thoughts about this in the Miami thread. I agree with this wholeheartedly. It's uncharted territory for the Dolphins and along with all the reasons you cited, I don't think they can afford to dial it down at this point. Unlike New England, they have question marks galore about what kind of team they really are and a lot of work to do on both sides of the ball. That #5 seed should be more than enough incentive to keep the pedal to the metal and (hopefully) work out some of the kinks that reared their head the past few weeks v. subpar competition.I would absolutely play balls out.
It has been a generation plus since the Dolphins have accomplished any damn thing. There is nothing to "preserve"; they are in no sense favorites. They can improve seeding and, yes, this QB needs work with starters.
This is almost always true, but I'm struggling with this this year.Home field trumps anything else.
I agree that that's a favorable scenario, but are the Pats not #1 either way if OAK loses?I think the only way that the above seeding could happen would be if MIA beats the Pats, Denver beats OAK and SD beats KC this weekend. Again, a long shot, but I think I'm rooting for this as it's more favorable than having to play both KC and PITT (which couldn't happen because one of the two would be knocked out in the first round).
Nah.Home field trumps anything else.
Argh, I should have stated OAK beats Denver (which is actually more likely). I fucked that up.I agree that that's a favorable scenario, but are the Pats not #1 either way if OAK loses?
Gotcha. That's definitely a good if not the ideal path to the AFCCG. After last year, I do subscribe at least somewhat to the "homefield above all" mindset but going into a Carr-less Oakland wouldn't be a bad scenario.Argh, I should have stated OAK beats Denver (which is actually more likely). I fucked that up.
EDIT: OK, post above now corrected.
I think this is where both teams are. Miami has plenty of bodies that can use a rest, but because most of their roster is inexperienced in terms of the playoffs, I don't think they can risk preparing and executing this week like it didn't matter.Of course he's going to say that. And I believe it. But if Pats go up by 14 or so in the second quarter, any smart coach will start dialing things down and resting some starters.
85 percent to win in Oakland translates to pats -10.5. I've heard sports bettor power rankings have the Pats about 8 above an average team. So given home field that translates to Oakland being about 5.5 points worse than an average team without Carr. No way, and the difference in win percentages you've assigned isn't valuing home field properly.Nah.
My pulled out of my ass odds of Pats beating each opponent:
KC: .6
Pitt: .6
Mia: .85
Hou: .95
Oak: .95
@Oak: .85
Pats Odds to make super bowl:
Pats 1, KC 5, KC wins WC, Pitt wins WC, Div: .36
Pats 2, KC 6...
...Pats play Miami, KC: .51 (home field)
...Pats play Pitt, Miami: .51 (home field)
...Pats play Pitt, @Oak (unlikely): .51
So not playing KC and Pitt > Pats securing #1
You need to assume Pats are worse than 60/40 in Oakland for you to be right. That's not reality.
Does Oak get a big home field boost? You're just applying a flat rate. If this were Den in particular, Seattle or KC I'd agree with you.85 percent to win in Oakland translates to pats -10.5. I've heard sports bettor power rankings have the Pats about 8 above an average team. So given home field that translates to Oakland being about 5.5 points worse than an average team without Carr. No way, and the difference in win percentages you've assigned isn't valuing home field properly.
I'm skeptical but fair enough60 percent translates to about Pats -3. That's too low at home, both for KC and for Pitt.
I'll run this with market lines once we have a better approximation for where the Raiders are without Carr, but you are generally too high on the chances of winning the non KC/Pitt games, too low on the chance of winning the KC/Pitt games, and not assigning enough weight to the difference between playing at Oakland and at Foxboro.
Are you saying that if you had to choose between only these two scenarios . . .85 percent to win in Oakland translates to pats -10.5. I've heard sports bettor power rankings have the Pats about 8 above an average team. So given home field that translates to Oakland being about 5.5 points worse than an average team without Carr. No way, and the difference in win percentages you've assigned isn't valuing home field properly.
60 percent translates to about Pats -3. That's too low at home, both for KC and for Pitt.
I'll run this with market lines once we have a better approximation for where the Raiders are without Carr, but you are generally too high on the chances of winning the non KC/Pitt games, too low on the chance of winning the KC/Pitt games, and not assigning enough weight to the difference between playing at Oakland and at Foxboro.
I think the only way you're right is if Pats have a lower odds @Oak without Carr as at home vs Pitt/KC. That doesn't pass the smell test. They should be more favored in former than latter.Even if its not a giant homefield boost, the swing of being home vs away should swing the win percentages more and the Pats historical home record says they need to at least get the flat rate.
It is going to be closer than I thought, I was underweighting the fact they can only go to Oakland w/o Carr when I handwaved away the original argument.
My insinct is that KC and Pitt aren't as worrisome as the chance of playing Pitt last year was, but certainly evidence out there to argue against that
I think I still do, yesAre you saying that if you had to choose between only these two scenarios . . .
1. MIA/HOU @ NE, and then NE @ OAK (minus Carr)
2. KC @ NE, and then PITT @ NE
. . . you'd prefer the latter? Hmmmmm...I don't think I agree.
3 of those road losses were in Denver. The 4th was that disaster against the Colts when everyone on defense left the game at halftime.Pats are 15-3 at home in the playoffs with Brady and Belichick versus 2-4 on the road.
Of course time and score is going to dictate how you handle the roster. But, neither coach is going to do what BB did in Wk 17 '14 if there are playoff implications on the line. Both sides should want to get out to a big lead and then assess their options for resting people after that.BB said he didn't even understand the question about resting starters, yet he's sat Gronk before in finales, played backups I'm the second half, sat Hightower and Slater last week, etc. it's coach speak. Maybe resting starters is a bad term, but if someone is borderline with an injury I doubt Miami is running them out there and I doubt Ajayi is getting carries in a 21-10 game in the second half or whatever.
So you have both Miami and @Oak as harder than Pitt & KC????I think I still do, yes