AFC Playoff Watch: The Quest for the #1 seed

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
21,518
Here
The PHI odds seem, well, odd. If they played nine times, Philly would win only three? I'm not at all sure that I agree.
Until the QB situation is cleared up, the odds seem ok to me. Nate Sudfeld ain’t gettin’ it done in Chicago.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
17,385
I can’t see Indy winning 3 straight road games but it wouldn’t be the craziest thing.
it's been awhile since a low seed made a serious run (I guess Baltimore 2012.... but I'm talking about a WC seed going all the way here). this would be the year for that for sure as any of the WC teams are capable
 

SirPsychoSquints

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
4,092
Charleston, SC
it's been awhile since a low seed made a serious run (I guess Baltimore 2012.... but I'm talking about a WC seed going all the way here). this would be the year for that for sure as any of the WC teams are capable
Options:
  1. #5 SF lose the NFCCG in 2013
  2. #4 BAL win the SB in 2012
  3. #4 NYG win SB in 2011...ugh
  4. #6 GB win SB in 2010
  5. #6 NYGJ lose AFCCG in 2010...ugh
Edit: New Jersey team confusion corrected per comments below

Edit2: And Baltimore
 
Last edited:

TFisNEXT

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
10,803
Didn't BAL win the superbowl in 2012 too? Listed as them losing on option 2.
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
Options:
  1. #5 SF lose the NFCCG in 2013
  2. #4 BAL lose the SB in 2012
  3. #4 NYG win SB in 2011...ugh
  4. #6 GB win SB in 2010
  5. #6 NYGJ lose AFCCG in 2010...ugh
Edit: New Jersey team confusion corrected per comments below
Also the Ravens won in 2012... ugh.

As for crazy low seeded scenarios, for me nothing tops the 2008 NFCCG, where the #6 seeded 9-6-1 Eagles visited the #4 seeded 9-7 Cardinals. Much as I like the occasional upset, it was odd to watch two 9-win teams vying for a trip to the Super Bowl.
 

SirPsychoSquints

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
4,092
Charleston, SC
Didn't BAL win the superbowl in 2012 too? Listed as them losing on option 2.
Also the Ravens won in 2012... ugh.

As for crazy low seeded scenarios, for me nothing tops the 2008 NFCCG, where the #6 seeded 9-6-1 Eagles visited the #4 seeded 9-7 Cardinals. Much as I like the occasional upset, it was odd to watch two 9-win teams vying for a trip to the Super Bowl.
Corrected, thanks!
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
11,916
Mansfield MA
That 2013 offense not very good at all with Gronk dead, and Denver was a juggernaut on both sides of the ball. It would have probably been considered a top 5 team ever had Manning et al not choked and gotten stopped by an all-time D in the Superbowl. New England overperformed in 2013. Kenbrell Thompkins, Aaron Dobson, Josh Boyce, Austin Collie, and Matthew Slater were playing WR, for Chrissakes.

I wouldn’t call the Pats the favorites in the AFC this year (KC is), but they have a hell of a lot better chance than that 2013 squad imo, especially in a potential SB. Seattle would have destroyed New England in 2013.
You're misremembering that Denver squad defensively. Von Miller got hurt and missed half the season and that was pre-Talib (he was on the Pats) so that was a below-average unit (finished 22nd in points, 19th in yards). The exceptional Denver D was only really a two-year phenomenon: 2015 and 2016.

You're not wrong about the Pats but they were healthier at the end of the year than at the beginning. Amendola and Vereen both got hurt Week 1 (and Gronk was already hurt) so they were running out Bolden, Dobson / Thompkins, and Hoomanwanui for a few weeks. Gronk got hurt again later but 'Dola and Vereen were back so the O was a lot better late in the season. They averaged 19 points per game the first five weeks but over 30 points a game from Week 6 on.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
5,661
Springfield, VA
The PHI odds seem, well, odd. If they played nine times, Philly would win only three? I'm not at all sure that I agree.
I would. The Eagles' point differential is only +19 (367-348), and that's with two games against the QB-less Redskins. Only three of their wins were by more than a TD (those two plus one against the Giants). Yes, they had the one great win against the Rams, but they were swept by Dallas and got slaughtered by the Saints

The Bears are +138 (421-283) with six wins by more than a TD, and their four losses were by 1, 3 (OT), 7, and 3 (OT).

I would expect the Bears to beat the Eagles at home about 8 times out of 10. no doubt.
 

dynomite

Member
SoSH Member
You're misremembering that Denver squad defensively. Von Miller got hurt and missed half the season and that was pre-Talib (he was on the Pats) so that was a below-average unit (finished 22nd in points, 19th in yards). The exceptional Denver D was only really a two-year phenomenon: 2015 and 2016.

You're not wrong about the Pats but they were healthier at the end of the year than at the beginning. Amendola and Vereen both got hurt Week 1 (and Gronk was already hurt) so they were running out Bolden, Dobson / Thompkins, and Hoomanwanui for a few weeks. Gronk got hurt again later but 'Dola and Vereen were back so the O was a lot better late in the season. They averaged 19 points per game the first five weeks but over 30 points a game from Week 6 on.
Yes I was going to say the same. Plus Blount and Ridley combined for more than 1,500 yards and 14 TDs.

It’s an almost eerily similar situation, actually: we’re the #2 seed because of a gut wrenching late season loss in Miami, while the #1 seed is an historic offensive juggernaut AFC West team that we beat in Foxboro by a FG in a dramatic regular season game on Sunday Night Football.

Hopefully things end differently this year...