AFC Playoffs into December

[amarshal2]

I said that but I was wrong to be so dismissive in this case.

I'm talking about your most recent post where you said you prefer Pitt KC to Mia @Oak. What probability would you give for each matchup to get that outcome?

I'm with whoever said home field trumps all. Maneuvering for favorable matchups in the playoffs always feels like a fool's game for me. Win two home games and represent your conference in the Super Bowl seems like it should always be the goal.

Rank each of these games:
@Oak (no Carr)
Oak (no Carr)
Mia
Pitt
KC

As one of these:
Pats healthy favorite
Pats slight favorite
Pick em
Opponent slightly favorite
Opponent healthy favorite

 

[dcmissle]

FYI for people who think Miami would rest starters.

"We have an opportunity to play after Week 17, but our main focus is this week," Gase said. "We’re going to stick to our plan that we’ve had this entire season of not looking past the opponent that we’ve had ahead."

The Dolphins have several banged-up players down the stretch, including left tackle Branden Albert (hand), cornerback Byron Maxwell (ankle) and linebacker Kiko Alonso (thumb, hamstring), who could use a couple of weeks to rest. However, Gase said the Patriots can "embarrass you" if a team looks past them, and that Miami must bring its "A game" this week.

http://www.espn.com/blog/miami-dolphins/post/_/id/24072/dolphins-not-expected-to-rest-starters-vs-patriots

Gase did not have to say that. He could have gotten away -- until kickoff -- with "We'll do what's in the best interests of the team."

You say it when you mean it. When you're trying to erase 16+ years of rot (the third longest playoff win drought in the NFL). When you are trying to establish a winning, competitive culture.

I believe they will bring their A game approach for as long as the game remains competitive. Which probably means the entire game given the Pats history of playing in Miami under BB/Brady.

The rest of this week, we'll just go through the 5 stages here in response to this, in fact, being their approach.

 

[Stitch01]

I know I was responding to ralphwiggum and we posted at the same time.

Markets will probably say the later is slightly preferable but its going to be close enough I'd just take my chances with two home games. Pats would have been something like -2 to -3 at Oakland -6/-7 vs KC and Pitt before the Carr injury. Carr being worth about four or five points doesn't seem crazy to me.

The bigger picture thing is the Pats can't guarantee that seeding outcome by losing Sunday. They can lose and have the Raiders and Chiefs win and still possibly have to play Pitt and then either KC or at Oak. Avoiding Pitt is more valuable than avoiding KC and the 2 seed makes a date with Pitt more likely. Plus dumb stuff happens. One example, if Brady suffers a minor injury in round 2 or something I'd rather be at home for the AFCCG against a stronger opponent rather than away.

So my vote is just get homefield and take your chances. But I see your point.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

I'm talking about your most recent post where you said you prefer Pitt KC to Mia @Oak. What probability would you give for each matchup to get that outcome?



Rank each of these games:
@Oak (no Carr)
Oak (no Carr)
Mia
Pitt
KC

As one of these:
Pats healthy favorite
Pats slight favorite
Pick em
Opponent slightly favorite
Opponent healthy favorite

I will take the two home games.

 

[Stitch01]

Gase did not have to say that. He could have gotten away -- until kickoff -- with "We'll do what's in the best interests of the team."

You say it when you mean it. When you're trying to erase 16+ years of rot (the third longest playoff win drought in the NFL). When you are trying to establish a winning, competitive culture.

I believe they will bring their A game approach for as long as the game remains competitive. Which probably means the entire game given the Pats history of playing in Miami under BB/Brady.

The rest of this week, we'll just go through the 5 stages here in response to this, in fact, being their approach.

Who are you referring to with this post? The Dolphins fan posting in here laid out their likely approach, most people agreed. The Pats are favorites against Miami's starters. We have posters making logical cases that the two seed would be ideal. I don't think there's gonna be a lot of grief and denial about Miami's approach to the game nor do I see a lot of groupthink straw men that need beating.

 

[amarshal2]

I know I was responding to ralphwiggum and we posted at the same time.

Markets will probably say the later is slightly preferable but its going to be close enough I'd just take my chances with two home games. Pats would have been something like -2 to -3 at Oakland -6/-7 vs KC and Pitt before the Carr injury. Carr being worth about four or five points doesn't seem crazy to me.

The bigger picture thing is the Pats can't guarantee that seeding outcome by losing Sunday. They can lose and have the Raiders and Chiefs win and still possibly have to play Pitt and then either KC or at Oak. Avoiding Pitt is more valuable than avoiding KC and the 2 seed makes a date with Pitt more likely. Plus dumb stuff happens. One example, if Brady suffers a minor injury in round 2 or something I'd rather be at home for the AFCCG against a stronger opponent rather than away.

So my vote is just get homefield and take your chances.

Fair enough. Good point on Pitt being slightly tougher than KC and getting the 2 seed virtually guarantees a matchup with Pitt (c'mon Miami!).

But you left out week 17 injuries. I'm not advocating for throwing the game but certainly an avoidable injury to a key player is more valuable to their SB chances than the difference between Pitt and KC.

we have posters making logical cases that the two seed would be ideal.

Just to be clear, the 1 seed is ideal. I'm saying that resting starters against Miami is the proper strategy.

 

[amarshal2]

I will take the two home games.

Compelling analysis. Thanks for contributing.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

Compelling analysis. Thanks for contributing.

Thanks.

 

[dcmissle]

Who are you referring to with this post? The Dolphins fan posting in here laid out their likely approach, most people agreed. The Pats are favorites against Miami's starters. We have posters making logical cases that the two seed would be ideal. I don't think there's gonna be a lot of grief and denial about Miami's approach to the game nor do I see a lot of groupthink straw men that need beating.

Red October posted the Gase quote. Loshjott responded, "Of course he was going to say that. And I believe it ..."

I am saying there is no "of course" about it -- unless you are trying to send an unmistakeable signal to your team and beyond. In other situations -- when a coach is not trying to change a culture of rot, when the team is well down a good, established path -- you may be better off with ambiguity. I wouldn't be surprised if BB went with "best interests of the team".

All this was against the backdrop of sentiment, that started spilling here last night, that the only "logical" course is for the Dolphins to rest their key guys (which, not coincidentally, would make things much easier for us).

Edit -- and I'm not saying amarshal is wrong; I disagree with him on this, but he could well be right about the Pats needing to sit out key players.

The humorous element is that this approach probably makes more sense for the Pats than the Dolphins.

 

[amarshal2]

Red October posted the Gase quote. Loshjott responded, "Of course he was going to say that. And I believe it ..."

I am saying there is no "of course" about it -- unless you are trying to send an unmistakeable signal to your team and beyond. In other situations -- when a coach is not trying to change a culture of rot, when the team is well down a good, established path -- you may be better off with ambiguity. I wouldn't be surprised if BB went with "best interests of the team".

All this was against the backdrop of sentiment, that started spilling here last night, that the only "logical" course is for the Dolphins to rest their key guys (which, not coincidentally, would make things much easier for us).

Edit -- and I'm not saying amarshal is wrong; I disagree with him on this, but he could well be right about the Pats needing to sit out key players.

The humorous element is that this approach probably makes more sense for the Pats than the Dolphins.

I didn't say anything about the Dolphins. I don't care what the Dolphins do, really. It's slightly better for us if they win but only in the unlikely event that SD pulls off an upset over KC.

I just don't want Bill to do what I fear he's going to do which is play most of his key guys for most of the game. Going full bore to 100% ensure home field advantage is worth nothing* and comes with great risk.

*this year is very unusual with the other potential 1 seed being so weak.

 

[Stitch01]

I agree with Loshjott its coachspeak. I completely buy Gase not wanting his team to take the week off. I don't think it says much about whether they rest anyone who is banged up or if they run a vanilla game plan.

Belichick says he doesn't even understand what resting starters means. Hightower and Slater still sat last week.

 

[jsinger121]

I agree with Loshjott its coachspeak. I completely buy Gase not wanting his team to take the week off. I don't think it says much about whether they rest anyone who is banged up or if they run a vanilla game plan.

Belichick says he doesn't even understand what resting starters means. Hightower and Slater still sat last week.

It was the Jets and they could have still beaten them with two hands tied behind their back.

 

[Stitch01]

I didn't say anything about the Dolphins. I don't care what the Dolphins do, really. It's slightly better for us if they win but only in the unlikely event that SD pulls off an upset over KC.

I just don't want Bill to do what I fear he's going to do which is play most of his key guys for most of the game. Going full bore to 100% ensure home field advantage is worth nothing* and comes with great risk.

*this year is very unusual with the other potential 1 seed being so weak.

The game reps still have value, particularly on offense where they're trying to find their way without Gronk and integrate Lewis and Floyd. Youve convinced me that sitting Bennett and Hightower and Slater has merit though.

 

[Stitch01]

It was the Jets and they could have still beaten them with two hands tied behind their back.

Right. He looked at the situation and rested two banged up starters.

 

[amarshal2]

The game reps still have value, particularly on offense where they're trying to find their way without Gronk and integrate Lewis and Floyd. Youve convinced me that sitting Bennett and Hightower and Slater has merit though.

We're pretty close at this point.

Guys I'd try and sit:
Brady (inactive)
Hightower (inactive)
Butler (inactive)
Bennet (inactive)
Edelman (inactive)
Solder (inactive)
Slater (inactive)

Limited snaps:
Brown
Cannon
Flowers
McCourty
Ebner
Blount (lotta miles)
White (pretty key at this point)

Full bore (still need reps): Lewis, Rowe, the line backers, Cy Jones, etc.

Edit: fit better here since Stich convinced me of differentiating 3 vs 4

Best outcome to worst:
1. Pats 1, KC 2 (probably play winner of Pitt/KC)
2. Pats 2, KC 6 (probably play winner of Pitt/KC, could conceivably play neither and travel to Oak)
3. Pats 1, KC 5 (probably play both Pitt and KC, KC first)
4. Pats 2, KC 5 (probably play both Pitt and KC, Pitt first)

Notes:
-1, 2 >>>>> 3, 4
-3 vs 4 and 1 vs 2 not worth risk of starters getting hurt week 17
-1 is possible with a win or loss vs Miami
-2 is only possible with a lost vs Miami
-Order of likelihood: 1, 3, 4, 2

 

[edmunddantes]

I agree with Loshjott its coachspeak. I completely buy Gase not wanting his team to take the week off. I don't think it says much about whether they rest anyone who is banged up or if they run a vanilla game plan.

Belichick says he doesn't even understand what resting starters means. Hightower and Slater still sat last week.

My guess is Bill is gong with the "starters are the guys that start the game and no one is guaranteed to start". Everyone earns it. Coach speak. So to him Hightower wasnt a starter he rested. He's a player that couldn't give him exactly what he wanted for that game so he didn't start and therefore not a starter. Though we all know the question is "why did you rest a guy that's normally a starter". Bill just isn't giving into the implied question.

Now it's mostly Bill doing his semantics thing. But who cares.

 

[JokersWildJIMED]

It really doesn't matter what happens in the Pats game as it all comes down to the Raider /Bronco game. If Raiders win the Pats probably get stuck with both KC and Pitt regardless of whether the Pats are the number one or two.

 

[Stitch01]

He's talked about the subject of sitting starters before at length. Basically a combination of 1) you can't sit all your starters, the math doesn't work 2) everyone playing has a meaningful role, so how do you say "well we don't care as much if you get hurt" 3) its football and injuries happen, you can't predict the who and when. Also we can piece together that both BB and Brady value live game reps.

But yeah, I think its basically a semantics thing answer based on past behavior, what the nfl films doc showed, etc.

 

[Gunfighter 09]

I am still a bit shellshocked from the events of this weekend. But every extra second that you line up Brady opposite Suh, Wake etc. for the purpose of avoiding a trip to Oakland to face Mighty Matt McGloin is a really, really stupid failure in risk management and respecting the big picture.

I don't see how Brady, Butler, Bennett and whoever else you really value plays any meaningful minutes in Miami if the Patriots top priority is winning the SuperBowl.

 

[Stitch01]

Well their top priority is winning the Super Bowl and some of those guys are going to play meaningful minutes (Brady for starters) so I don't know where that leaves you.

 

[jsinger121]

I am still a bit shellshocked from the events of this weekend. But every extra second that you line up Brady opposite Suh, Wake etc. for the purpose of avoiding a trip to Oakland to face Mighty Matt McGloin is a really, really stupid failure in risk management and respecting the big picture.

I don't see how Brady, Butler, Bennett and whoever else you really value plays any meaningful minutes in Miami if the Patriots top priority is winning the SuperBowl.

Except the Raiders haven't even won a bye yet let alone the AFC west. There is no guarantee they even win in Denver in next week with a backup QB. Even with Denver already missing the playoffs I think they play for pride against a hated Raider team. The Chiefs should win in San Diego against a bad Charger team. Pats still hope for a tomato can scenario of the Texans, Raiders and Dolphins as the 4, 5 and 6 seeds.

 

[wilked]

Oakland is 3.5 point dog vs Denver, equates to 35% chance of winning. They will not be favorite vs Pit/KC even at home. Chances they make AFC Championship game as #1 seed are like 1 in 8 at best, even assuming the Pats lose vs Mia

Bill should rest the key folks

 

[Toe Nash]

Except the Raiders haven't even won a bye yet let alone the AFC west. There is no guarantee they even win in Denver in next week with a backup QB. Even with Denver already missing the playoffs I think they play for pride against a hated Raider team. The Chiefs should win in San Diego against a bad Charger team. Pats still hope for a tomato can scenario of the Texans, Raiders and Dolphins as the 4, 5 and 6 seeds.

Not sure what you're saying here -- if Oakland loses the division the Patriots would get the #1 seed win or lose. They can hope for that scenario regardless of what they do.

I agree that BB should treat it like a preseason game. Obviously you can't just rest every starter but I would have Brady only play a quarter and deactivate anyone who's fighting an injury. Getting reps for backups against a team that's most likely going all-out has some value too.

 

[RedOctober3829]

The Pats shouldnt treat the game like the preseason as long as there is something to play for. If either team gets a big lead like last week, they'll pull as many guys out as they can because the result is in hand. But, if they don't you'll see a pretty regular workload for the starters. After last year's disaster down in Miami and the ensuing result of it, how can anyone advocate for doing anything other than playing this like any other game? I can see Bill playing it safe with at risk players like Hightower and Slater but it doesn't make sense to me to not take this game seriously and doing all they can to win and get HFA.

 

[dcmissle]

The Pats shouldnt treat the game like the preseason as long as there is something to play for. If either team gets a big lead like last week, they'll pull as many guys out as they can because the result is in hand. But, if they don't you'll see a pretty regular workload for the starters. After last year's disaster down in Miami and the ensuing result of it, how can anyone advocate for doing anything other than playing this like any other game? I can see Bill playing it safe with at risk players like Hightower and Slater but it doesn't make sense to me to not take this game seriously and doing all they can to win and get HFA.

One can argue, reasonably, that facing a McGloin led team in Oakland this year (if it comes to that) is worlds removed from going to a house of horrors for the AFC championship game last year, with an o-line held together by spit and baling wire facing Denver's defense.

I'm mainly with you, but I think the other side of this argument is very potent.

(Until this discussion popped up, I had blocked out the Pats dropping games to the Jets and Dolphins down the stretch last year. Some things are too painful. The only consolation is that we were quite flawed -- especially when you combine those two losses with the give-away at Denver and the abomination of a home loss vs Philadelphia the very next week. Deserving often has little to do with anything, but the Pats were not worthy of a title last year).

 

[amarshal2]

The Pats shouldnt treat the game like the preseason as long as there is something to play for. If either team gets a big lead like last week, they'll pull as many guys out as they can because the result is in hand. But, if they don't you'll see a pretty regular workload for the starters. After last year's disaster down in Miami and the ensuing result of it, how can anyone advocate for doing anything other than playing this like any other game? I can see Bill playing it safe with at risk players like Hightower and Slater but it doesn't make sense to me to not take this game seriously and doing all they can to win and get HFA.

Lots of posters have given specific reasons why that you didn't address. For instance, I pointed out that "what they have to play for" is that their odds of making the super bowl almost certainly go down if they win against Miami.

What does last years disaster down in Miami have to do with anything?

All you keep saying is "remember last year" but just because you made a strategic decision once and another team won the lottery doesn't mean you made the wrong call. There's another side to that coin. "Remember Welker?" Not only that but the calculus has changed! 2015 Denver is not 2016 Carr-less Raiders.

 

[RedOctober3829]

I understand what you've been saying regarding the odds. I just prioritize home field for this team over avoiding certain teams. I honestly don't care who comes into Foxboro because the Patriots should beat any of these teams at home.

 

[Ralphwiggum]

I agree and several other posters have made the same point, but amarshall has figured out the odds and the Pats should be resting everyone on Sunday in Miami.

 

[Phil Plantier]

I think people in the preseason camp are overestimating the effect of the Carr injury. The raiders are still a very good team without him, with a strong running game. McGloin is not Cassell. I think the raiders will win this weekend, and look impressive doing so. They are still a team that scares me. Patriots should play all out.

 

[NortheasternPJ]

I think people in the preseason camp are overestimating the effect of the Carr injury. The raiders are still a very good team without him, with a strong running game. McGloin is not Cassell. I think the raiders will win this weekend, and look impressive doing so. They are still a team that scares me. Patriots should play all out.

Are you implying he's better or worse than Cassell? It's not clear.

 

[AB in DC]

Simplifying, here are the four scenarios (in order of likelihood) and what it would mean for NE and Mia seeding


1. Oak loses, KC wins - Game is meaningless for both teams. Good outcome either way (Pitt@KC very likely round two while NE hosts Oak/Hou/Mia)
2. Oak wins, KC wins - Miami locked into 6 seed. NE win likely sets up KC@NE round two then either PIT@NE or Oak@NE. Miami win means Pit@NE very likely round two followed by either KC@NE or NE@Oak round three)
3. Oak loses, KC loses - NE locked into 1 seed. Miami winning and getting 5 seed is best outcome (KC@Pit round one)
4. Oak wins, KC loses - NE win likely sets up KC@NE round two, then either Pit@NE or Oak@NE. Miami win sets up KC@Pit round one, later rounds unclear.

So a Miami win is only in New England's favor in scenario 3 and possibly scenario 4. In scenario 2 and 4, a Miami win probably means Pitt@NE in round two which seems like the worst case scenario. (Assuming Pittsburgh is a bigger threat than KC, I'd rather Pittsburgh have to face two teams before coming to NE). If anyone thinks this is offset by a possible NE@Oak conference championship, remember these scenarios assume that Oakland not only beats Denver on the road this week but also wins round two against probably KC. Which means Oakland would be a better team than we might think.

 

[Phil Plantier]

Are you implying he's better or worse than Cassell? It's not clear.

Sorry, I was implying that he is better than Cassell is now. Although maybe it's just the devil you don't know, since he's only attempted 55 passes in three years. So let me amend to "he could be much better than Cassell".

My fear is that the Patriots do treat Sunday as a preseason game, then McGloin puts in a competent performance against Denver. Once that happens, all of these wishful odds calculations go out the window.

 

[H78]

Here's my nightmare scenario: Pats rest starters, lose to Miami, end up having to travel to Oakland after Oakland's D carries them through a home playoff victory, then lose at Oakland because Oakland's D does just enough, yet again, to win a 17-16 type of game at home.

Why does this scenario, in particular, scare me so much? We'd be traveling to Oakland essentially because we lost to Buffalo (at home) when Brady was out due to Sheriff Goodell's DFG suspension, and that idiotic punishment would come full-circle with a loss at Oakland.

So while we're all dreaming of Goodell handing Brady the Lombardi Trophy, image if he actually gets the last laugh in Oakland - against the very team where Brady's legacy (arguably) started in the first place.

A bit melodramatic, I know, but that's the nightmare scenario. Then, we watch as Seattle or Green Bay crushes Oakland in SB51.

Fuck that. Win in Miami.

 

[mwonow]

The "fear factor" thing has to work the other way too, right? Teams coming into Foxborough have to know that Pats home losses are very, very rare...

 

[pdaj]

As a Miami fan, I'm hoping that Miami beats NE, KC loses to SD, and Oak gets beat by Denver. That would make the Dolphins the #5 seed and Oakland the #1 seed. So the road to getting thrashed by NE in the AFC Championship would travel through Houston (very beatable) and Oakland (more beatable without Carr).

The chances of all this happening? Um, less than 5%? But, hey, it's been that kind of season for Dolphins' fans.

More likely, however, is that Miami loses on Sunday, the Chiefs win, and Oakland wins/loses a close game (isn't likely to matter).

Miami's LB/S situation is in dire straights right now. NE should be able to work the ground game well, isolate White/Lewis on LB, take advantage of Miami's D-line aggressiveness (screens), and run all their typical underneath stuff in the passing game. Additionally, with Thomas and Rambo at S, I'd expect Hogan to get loose for at least one long TD strike.

NE just needs to do 2 things:

1) Let Brady throw more than a couple passes in the 1st half.

2) Stop the MIA running game.

Long, sustained drives that lead to TDs are really Miami's only shot.

This post ended up being longer than I initially anticipated. I guess I could have simply written, "Stop worrying NE fans; you'll have the #1 seed."

 

[H78]

If Oak loses to Denver Pats are the #1 seed regardless of what happens in Miami this week.

 

[PayrodsFirstClutchHit]

The "fear factor" thing has to work the other way too, right? Teams coming into Foxborough have to know that Pats home losses are very, very rare...

This is the key point. I think we all believe the Pats are capable of winning on the road in the playoffs. However, it is much more difficult for the other AFC playoff teams to travel to NE and be successful. Which of the potential playoff opponents has any degree of success playing at NE?

Secure the HFA throughout and make opposing teams play in a (somewhat) hostile environment.

 

[pdaj]

If Oak loses to Denver Pats are the #1 seed regardless of what happens in Miami this week.

Good point; thanks for pointing that out. So my dream road for Miami is now at about 3% likelihood, haha.

 

[Al Zarilla]

If Oak loses to Denver Pats are the #1 seed regardless of what happens in Miami this week.

Unfortunately, the Pats play before the Raiders, with probably no overlap, so they have to assume Oakland will win and play to win themselves or possibly lose the 1 seed.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

double

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

If Oak loses to Denver Pats are the #1 seed regardless of what happens in Miami this week.

Too bad for the Pats that they have to play before the Oakland game

 

[H78]

Yeah, but I don't think Oakland in Denver is remotely close to a sure thing regardless.

The Denver D is going to play with a huge chip on their shoulder knowing they're defending SB champions and they won't be in the playoffs. Also, Siemian has a lot to play for (his job, mainly). I don't see McGloin doing anything against the Denver pass defense.

I think with Carr out, Denver probably beats Oakland on Sunday. I think the Pats should let Brady and the starters play a half, maybe into the third to see if they can build a lead, and if the game is overly physical or they start to sputter, just get Jimmy in there and pull Brady, Edelman, Bennett, and minimize Blount's touches.

 

[Toe Nash]

I think the last few posters are confusing this thread with the "Patriots Fear Factor" thread where it's OK to post irrational things you're afraid of.

It's very unlikely McGloin, having less meaningful experience in the last 3 years than Jacoby Brissett, can be even close to Carr-level. The Raiders may still be good if he doesn't suck, but it would be in the way the Patriots were good when Brady was hurt. The Raiders defense is built to close games out with their pass rushers but doesn't do other things particularly well -- this is not a unit that is going to carry a mediocre offense.

Sure there is a chance that McGloin is somehow lights-out and going to Oakland turns out to be a nightmare, but it's far from a likely scenario given what we know right now, and that chance is outweighed by the benefit of not getting people injured and perhaps having a path that doesn't go through both KC and Pittsburgh.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

The Denver D is going to play with a huge chip on their shoulder knowing they're defending SB champions and they won't be in the playoffs.

Or, they will mail it in because their season is over. Short of someone spending the week at practice and witnessing the rally cry, I find this supposition to be at best far reached. I can buy (to an extent) the argument that it's divisional rival game, so they'll play hard, but I've seen this point made a couple times and I think it's pretty silly.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

Simplifying, here are the four scenarios (in order of likelihood) and what it would mean for NE and Mia seeding


1. Oak loses, KC wins - Game is meaningless for both teams. Good outcome either way (Pitt@KC very likely round two while NE hosts Oak/Hou/Mia)
2. Oak wins, KC wins - Miami locked into 6 seed. NE win likely sets up KC@NE round two then either PIT@NE or Oak@NE. Miami win means Pit@NE very likely round two followed by either KC@NE or NE@Oak round three)
3. Oak loses, KC loses - NE locked into 1 seed. Miami winning and getting 5 seed is best outcome (KC@Pit round one)
4. Oak wins, KC loses - NE win likely sets up KC@NE round two, then either Pit@NE or Oak@NE. Miami win sets up KC@Pit round one, later rounds unclear.

So a Miami win is only in New England's favor in scenario 3 and possibly scenario 4. In scenario 2 and 4, a Miami win probably means Pitt@NE in round two which seems like the worst case scenario. (Assuming Pittsburgh is a bigger threat than KC, I'd rather Pittsburgh have to face two teams before coming to NE). If anyone thinks this is offset by a possible NE@Oak conference championship, remember these scenarios assume that Oakland not only beats Denver on the road this week but also wins round two against probably KC. Which means Oakland would be a better team than we might think.

Isn't the best (however unlikely) Oakland, Kansas City and NE losing?

NE
OAK
with
KC @ PITT
MIA @ HOU
and
NE playing either Miami or Houston
Oakland playing either KC or Pittsburgh

 

[jsinger121]

Isn't the best (however unlikely) Oakland, Kansas City and NE losing?

NE
OAK
with
KC @ PITT
MIA @ HOU
and
NE playing either Miami or Houston
Oakland playing either KC or Pittsburgh

Best is New England winning, KC winning Oakland losing.

Miami @Pitt
Oak @ Hou

Gives NE likely Houston in the divisional if they can win via defense and it puts Pittsburgh into Arrowhead where I'd favor the Chiefs.

 

[SirPsychoSquints]

Isn't the best (however unlikely) Oakland, Kansas City and NE losing?

NE
OAK
with
KC @ PITT
MIA @ HOU
and
NE playing either Miami or Houston
Oakland playing either KC or Pittsburgh

NE could play HOU/MIA/KC and Oakland could play PIT/HOU/MIA in that scenario.

 

[amarshal2]

Best is New England winning, KC winning Oakland losing.

Miami @Pitt
Oak @ Hou

Gives NE likely Houston in the divisional if they can win via defense and it puts Pittsburgh into Arrowhead where I'd favor the Chiefs.

Note: If NE loses the results are the same. The best scenario just requires Oak losing and KC winning.

Arguably the best scenario is NE/KC/Oak losing. That puts KC at Pitt in divisional (wear out both teams early). If Pitt wins they play in Oakland and Pats play MIAvHOU. If KC wins Pats would have KC first and would host winner of Mia/Oak in an AFCCG.

Any scenario where the Pats play any one of MIA/HOU/OAK things have gone very well.

 

[DeadlySplitter]

What a fucking draw we got.

 

[wilked]

What a fucking draw we got.

It really is unbelievable

I have no idea what the opening line will be, OAK @ HOU. OAK slight favorite?