(Non-Patriots) Divisional Round Discussion and Game Thread

[Conigliaro's Potential]

Might as well go ahead and start a new thread for this weekend's games...538's Elo-based methodology (which I know isn't ideal but can serve as a starting point for discussion) suggests the favorites' win probability are as follows:

--New England: 85%
--Kansas City: 64%
--Atlanta: 62%
--Dallas: 57%

I find it hard to believe the Texans would actually defeat the Patriots 1 out of 6 games - that percentage is surely too low. I also think the Falcons' percentage should be higher, given how ugly Seattle has been playing and how ripe for the picking their secondary is sans Thomas. Not sure what to make of the other two games...is Rodgers really enough on his own to make the game against Dallas effectively a pick 'em? And does Andy Reid have an Andy Reid in-game coaching clinic left in him for this season?

 

[Super Nomario]

Might as well go ahead and start a new thread for this weekend's games...538's Elo-based methodology (which I know isn't ideal but can serve as a starting point for discussion) suggests the favorites' win probability are as follows:

--New England: 85%
--Kansas City: 64%
--Atlanta: 62%
--Dallas: 57%

I find it hard to believe the Texans would actually defeat the Patriots 1 out of 6 games - that percentage is surely too low. I also think the Falcons' percentage should be higher, given how ugly Seattle has been playing and how ripe for the picking their secondary is sans Thomas. Not sure what to make of the other two games...is Rodgers really enough on his own to make the game against Dallas effectively a pick 'em? And does Andy Reid have an Andy Reid in-game coaching clinic left in him for this season?

This doesn't strike me as low. 85% is like a 13.5 - 2.5 season, which is about what the Patriots' record was against a pretty weak schedule. Houston is an averageish team, so eyeballing it, that seems right. Great teams lose to mediocre teams sometimes, probably about 15% of the time.

 

[TFisNEXT]

Vegas line has the KC/PIT game as the closest:

ATL -4.5
NE -16
KC -2
DAL -4

 

[Ed Hillel]

This doesn't strike me as low. 85% is like a 13.5 - 2.5 season, which is about what the Patriots' record was against a pretty weak schedule. Houston is an averageish team, so eyeballing it, that seems right. Great teams lose to mediocre teams sometimes, probably about 15% of the time.

This rough formula assumes a neutral field, it would seem. Add in Pats home field, and I think we're closer to 95%.

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

Just saw that Football Outsiders' DVOA-based predictions are now up as well:

--New England: 89.5%
--Atlanta: 69.4%
--Dallas: 66.9%
--Kansas City: 55.8%

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds

 

[ThePrideofShiner]

CJ Prosise will be back at practice this week and could play. That would be dynamic, as he gives Seattle a lot of options out of the backfield.

 

[Rudy's Curve]

Pinnacle, which is the best representation of the betting market, currently has the Pats just under 91% (~14.5-1.5 if you played it 16 times) by merging the +858 you'd get betting the Texans ML and -1150 you have to lay on the Pats. There's still a lot of time for the market to mature though.

 

[Super Nomario]

This rough formula assumes a neutral field, it would seem. Add in Pats home field, and I think we're closer to 95%.

The Texans aren't good, but they're not the Browns. There are not many 95% NFL games.

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

By the by, here's a list of every playoff game in which one team was favored by 10 or more points. 59 such games have been completed, and 12 of them were won by the underdog:

--1968 (SB): NYJ def. BAL (-18)
--2001 (SB): NE def. STL (-14)
--1996: JAX def. DEN (-12.5)
--2007 (SB): NYG def. NE (-12.5)
--1969 (SB): KC def. MIN (-12.0)
--1998: ATL def. MIN (-11)
--2007: SD def. IND (-11)
--1997 (SB): DEN def. GB (-11)
--1987: MIN def. SF (-11)
--2010: SEA def. NO (-10)
--2001: NE def. PIT (-10)
--2008: ARI def. CAR (-10)

Interesting that nearly half of these were Super Bowls - highlighted in bold - although I'd probably throw out NYJ-BAL and KC-MIN as historical outliers for numerous reasons. (Only in the 2010 "Beast Mode" game did a home team - Seattle - start as a double-digit underdog, FWIW.)

 

[johnmd20]

I forgot that the Pats were 10 point dogs to the Steelers. That was some run by that team in the playoffs, win a game on the road where you're a 10 point dog and then win the super bowl against the greatest show on turf as a 14 point dog.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Jordy Nelson has at least two fractured ribs

 

[Hendu for Kutch]

Interesting that nearly half of these were Super Bowls

I think that's simply because the heavy betting action ("amateur hour") for the Super Bowl typically will pile in on a heavy favorite, so the line tends to get exaggerated in those cases. Doubly so following an era of blowout Super Bowls. Or so I've heard in the past.

I recall reading somewhere that the Patriots would never have been 14 point underdogs to the Rams outside of a Super Bowl. In fact, they were only 8.5 point underdogs earlier in the year. That game was in Foxboro, but the Patriots were a 5-4 team that nobody thought much of that that point either, so the real spread had no business being that large.

 

[BigSoxFan]

Jordy Nelson has at least two fractured ribs

Cowboys are going to steamroll the Pack this week.

 

[Seels]

I'd actually take the Packers over any of the NFC teams if Nelson were healthy. With him out? eh.

Seems really hard to see any of the road teams winning this week unless Pittsburgh plays at their 95% percentile.

 

[EricFeczko]

I'd actually take the Packers over any of the NFC teams if Nelson were healthy. With him out? eh.

Seems really hard to see any of the road teams winning this week unless Pittsburgh plays at their 95% percentile.

I don't know, I have a hard time projecting either NFC game due to the complete lack of defenses (or in Seattle's case, deep skepticism surrounding their unit combined with a ridiculous offense playing at home). I think both games will be shootouts.

 

[jsinger121]

 

[Bosoxen]

Cowboys are going to steamroll the Pack this week.

The line opened at Dallas -4 and it's now at -4.5. I don't know whether it's because bettors agree with you or if this is due to the Nelson injury (or both) but that does appear to be the perception.

Personally, I'm cautiously optimistic but I am awfully nervous. It's one thing to beat a stout defense like NY's but to hang 38 on them is scary. That means the Cowboys are about to run headlong into a buzz saw.

 

[Marciano490]

The line opened at Dallas -4 and it's now at -4.5. I don't know whether it's because bettors agree with you or if this is due to the Nelson injury (or both) but that does appear to be the perception.

Personally, I'm cautiously optimistic but I am awfully nervous. It's one thing to beat a stout defense like NY's but to hang 38 on them is scary. That means the Cowboys are about to run headlong into a buzz saw.

I'm so in love with the over at 52, I'm asking its friends what size ring it wears and whether it wants cushion cut or oval.

 

[SMU_Sox]

The line opened at Dallas -4 and it's now at -4.5. I don't know whether it's because bettors agree with you or if this is due to the Nelson injury (or both) but that does appear to be the perception.

Personally, I'm cautiously optimistic but I am awfully nervous. It's one thing to beat a stout defense like NY's but to hang 38 on them is scary. That means the Cowboys are about to run headlong into a buzz saw.

Yeah but unlike the Giants the Cowboys will be able to move the ball on GB. GB also is hurting more on the offense with Nelson likely out and Montgomery banged up. The Packers had one good half on offense and the Giants had no answer. Yes, it could be close but I think DAL has a comfortable edge over GB especially with Nelson out.

 

[SMU_Sox]

I'm so in love with the over at 52, I'm asking its friends what size ring it wears and whether it wants cushion cut or oval.

Marriage is a trap man. Date that 52. Flirt with that 52. But once you commit it's only a matter of time before you're inevitably disappointed. Plus in a year you and that 52 have nothing to talk about.

In all seriousness I think that 52 is high. After watching GB in the 2nd half you'd think it is safe but I wouldn't be surprised by a tighter game with fewer possessions and a lower score. Not to piss on your money parade.

 

[Marciano490]

Marriage is a trap man. Date that 52. Flirt with that 52. But once you commit it's only a matter of time before you're inevitably disappointed. Plus in a year you and that 52 have nothing to talk about.

In all seriousness I think that 52 is high. After watching GB in the 2nd half you'd think it is safe but I wouldn't be surprised by a tighter game with fewer possessions and a lower score. Not to piss on your money parade.

My money parade has been marching out of town. Piss away. I think Dallas is good for 30-35 at home against GB's defense. You don't think GB can get the rest of the way?

 

[Bosoxen]

My money parade has been marching out of town. Piss away. I think Dallas is good for 30-35 at home against GB's defense. You don't think GB can get the rest of the way?

I do. I'm thinking Dallas wins a 41-38 barn burner and they go way over the 52.

Basically, I think this is going to resemble the Pittsburgh game and they get half of the 52 in the 4th quarter alone.

 

[Conigliaro's Potential]

Refereeing assignments for this weekend games have been made:


http://www.footballzebras.com/2017/01/09/steratore-morelli-cheffers-corrente-are-divisional-playoff-referees/

 

[Greg29fan]

Dallas wins by having an offensive performance like they did against Pittsburgh or Washington on Thanksgiving.

Rodgers is going to get his against their suspect pass defense, but make him have a lot of attempts to get yards and try to keep him off the field as much as possible.

 

[BigSoxFan]

The Packers won't be able to get off the field against Dallas. Rodgers will get his but I'm going with 34-24 Cowboys in a game that is effectively over by the 3rd quarter.

 

[tims4wins]

The Packers won't be able to get off the field against Dallas. Rodgers will get his but I'm going with 34-24 Cowboys in a game that is effectively over by the 3rd quarter.

This would be my concern about the 52 - if Dallas has really long possessions it might end up the type of game where the score ends up lower even though the offenses play well.

 

[Marciano490]

This would be my concern about the 52 - if Dallas has really long possessions it might end up the type of game where the score ends up lower even though the offenses play well.

Long possessions usually result from series of 3-4 yard running plays and quick outs, right? How many runs in a row will GB be able to ever go without Zeke pumping out a 50 yarder?

 

[TFisNEXT]

Dallas wins by having an offensive performance like they did against Pittsburgh or Washington on Thanksgiving.

Rodgers is going to get his against their suspect pass defense, but make him have a lot of attempts to get yards and try to keep him off the field as much as possible.

The Cowboys were one of the better teams at not allowing pass plays of 20+ yards (only 6 teams allowed fewer). So while their pass defense is suspect, they make you earn it. Not totally dissimilar to the some of the Patriots defenses over the years that statistically didn't look great, but would make you march the field which often resulted in the opposing offense shooting themselves in the foot with a penalty or something to end the drive.

I suspect they'll play similar against Rodgers. Make him drive the field on shorter passes and hopefully their lack of a running game ends up being their downfall...by having a sack or penalty end a few of their drives.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

By the by, here's a list of every playoff game in which one team was favored by 10 or more points. 59 such games have been completed, and 12 of them were won by the underdog:

--1968 (SB): NYJ def. BAL (-18)
--2001 (SB): NE def. STL (-14)
--1996: JAX def. DEN (-12.5)
--2007 (SB): NYG def. NE (-12.5)
--1969 (SB): KC def. MIN (-12.0)
--1998: ATL def. MIN (-11)
--2007: SD def. IND (-11)
--1997 (SB): DEN def. GB (-11)
--1987: MIN def. SF (-11)
--2010: SEA def. NO (-10)
--2001: NE def. PIT (-10)
--2008: ARI def. CAR (-10)

Interesting that nearly half of these were Super Bowls - highlighted in bold - although I'd probably throw out NYJ-BAL and KC-MIN as historical outliers for numerous reasons. (Only in the 2010 "Beast Mode" game did a home team - Seattle - start as a double-digit underdog, FWIW.)

That 1997 DEN-GB line is just crazy. I get that GB were defending champs and DEN had a history of getting blown out in Super Bowls. But DEN was a 12-4 team with a +185 point differential (higher than GB) that year. They were arguably the better team during the regular season and Vegas gave them 11 points?

 

[Bosoxen]

That 1997 DEN-GB line is just crazy. I get that GB were defending champs and DEN had a history of getting blown out in Super Bowls. But DEN was a 12-4 team with a +185 point differential (higher than GB) that year. They were arguably the better team during the regular season and Vegas gave them 11 points?

Two words: Brett Favre.

Denver just wasn't a sexy team and they didn't even win their division. But that running game was a fucking steamroller.

 

[Captaincoop]

The Texans aren't good, but they're not the Browns. There are not many 95% NFL games.

I feel like the "Texans suck" narrative is a runaway train right now. It's a bit crazy. They are not a historically bad team, and the Pats are not a historically good team. I think the Pats win this game at home, but it doesn't feel to me like the biggest gimme playoff game of the Patriots post-2001 run.

Houston has a decent coaching staff and some real playmakers on defense. That alone gives them a puncher's chance.

 

[Super Nomario]

That 1997 DEN-GB line is just crazy. I get that GB were defending champs and DEN had a history of getting blown out in Super Bowls. But DEN was a 12-4 team with a +185 point differential (higher than GB) that year. They were arguably the better team during the regular season and Vegas gave them 11 points?

The NFC had won 13 straight Super Bowls leading into that year, most of them by blowout. So the Packers were favored, and 11 was just kind of a typical SB margin as seen at the time. A quick eyeball shows 7 one-score Super Bowls in the first 30; there have been 11 in the last 20. Something like that, anyway.

 

[tims4wins]

I feel like the "Texans suck" narrative is a runaway train right now. It's a bit crazy. They are not a historically bad team, and the Pats are not a historically good team. I think the Pats win this game at home, but it doesn't feel to me like the biggest gimme playoff game of the Patriots post-2001 run.

Houston has a decent coaching staff and some real playmakers on defense. That alone gives them a puncher's chance.

Well by DVOA they are one of the worst playoff teams ever. They also went 2-5 on the road (not counting Mexico) and were outscored by 70 points in those games.

 

[Captaincoop]

Well by DVOA they are one of the worst playoff teams ever. They also went 2-5 on the road (not counting Mexico) and were outscored by 70 points in those games.

There have been plenty of teams that have limped into the playoffs due to key injuries and have been way worse than their DVOA, though. Oakland this year is a great example.

And a massive chunk of those 70 points came in a single game in September. Meanwhile, we're a month removed from Houston going into Lambeau and playing Green Bay really tough.

I'm in no way arguing that the Pats shouldn't be favored or that Houston is some world-beating team. It's just jarring to see such unanimous cockiness among our normally pretty jittery fanbase.

 

[loshjott]

Don't we have a separate thread for Texans-Patriots?

 

[DJnVa]

I'm in no way arguing that the Pats shouldn't be favored or that Houston is some world-beating team. It's just jarring to see such unanimous cockiness among our normally pretty jittery fanbase.

I mean, I get this, but when a team is the 4th biggest favorite by point spread in postseason history it's gonna happen.

 

[Bosoxen]

Don't we have a separate thread for Texans-Patriots?

I consider us lucky that we're almost through the entire first page without a reference to "the event which shall not be named". This is nothing.

 

[Curt S Loew]

I consider us lucky that we're almost through the entire first page without a reference to "the event which shall not be named". This is nothing.

Till now.

 

[uk_sox_fan]

By the by, here's a list of every playoff game in which one team was favored by 10 or more points. 59 such games have been completed, and 12 of them were won by the underdog:

--1968 (SB): NYJ def. BAL (-18)
--2001 (SB): NE def. STL (-14)
--1996: JAX def. DEN (-12.5)
--2007 (SB): NYG def. NE (-12.5)
--1969 (SB): KC def. MIN (-12.0)
--1998: ATL def. MIN (-11)
--2007: SD def. IND (-11)
--1997 (SB): DEN def. GB (-11)
--1987: MIN def. SF (-11)
--2010: SEA def. NO (-10)
--2001: NE def. PIT (-10)
--2008: ARI def. CAR (-10)

Interesting that nearly half of these were Super Bowls - highlighted in bold - although I'd probably throw out NYJ-BAL and KC-MIN as historical outliers for numerous reasons. (Only in the 2010 "Beast Mode" game did a home team - Seattle - start as a double-digit underdog, FWIW.)

In a separate list of all Superbowl-era playoff games with spreads of 14 points or more the favourite won 9 of 11 (82%) but ATS were just 5-5-1. Looks like the bookies know what they're doing even in the blowouts.

SB XXIX: SF-19 v SD --- 49-26 SF (Fav covered by 4)
SB III: Bal-18 v NYJ --- 7-16 NY (upset - underdog covered by 27)
'98 NFC DR: Min-16.5 v Ari --- 41-21 Min (Fav covered by 3.5)
'16 AFC DR: NE-15.5 v Hou
'94 NFC DR: SF-15.5 v Chi --- 44-15 SF (Fav covered by 13.5)
'78 NFC DR: Dal-15 v Atl --- 27-20 Dal (underdog covered by 8)
SB I: GB-14 v KC --- 35-10 GB (Fav covered by 11)
'91 NFC CG: Was-14 v Det --- 41-10 Was (Fav covered by 7)
SB XXXI: GB-14 v NE --- 35-21 GB (push)
'99 NFC CG: StL-14 v TB --- 11-6 StL (underdog covered by 9)
SB XXXVI: StL-14 v NE --- 17-20 NE (upset - underdog covered by 17)
'07 AFC CG: NE-14 v SD --- 21-12 NE (underdog covered by 5)

edit: added link: http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/213218684/nfl-playoff-history-longest-odds-patriots

note - the favourite did win all 9 games and covered 7 of the 9 that were 13 or 13.5 pt spreads

 

[koufax32]

So KC looks like fun Sunday.

 

[Greg29fan]

No big surprise but Jordy Nelson is officially out for Sunday

 

[BigSoxFan]

No big surprise but Jordy Nelson is officially out for Sunday

Cowboys will roll. This is an easy one to call.

 

[loshjott]

View attachment 14032

So KC looks like fun Sunday.

Ice storm warning from tonight through Monday morning, with highest chance overnight Sat night through Sun morning.

It could keep fans from getting to the game and diminish the usual huge Arrrowhead advantage.

 

[RetractableRoof]

Interesting article on Dak and the support system that has been around him this year leading into this weekend.

http://www.espn.com/blog/dallas-cowboys/post/_/id/4757649/dak-prescott-credits-his-rise-to-the-cowboys-village

 

[NortheasternPJ]

Ice storm warning from tonight through Monday morning, with highest chance overnight Sat night through Sun morning.

It could keep fans from getting to the game and diminish the usual huge Arrrowhead advantage.

It's going to be a disaster. Tickets are down to $25 on Stub Hub. You can sit in the 100's for $79!

 

[Hoodie Sleeves]

There have been plenty of teams that have limped into the playoffs due to key injuries and have been way worse than their DVOA, though. Oakland this year is a great example.

And a massive chunk of those 70 points came in a single game in September. Meanwhile, we're a month removed from Houston going into Lambeau and playing Green Bay really tough.

I'm in no way arguing that the Pats shouldn't be favored or that Houston is some world-beating team. It's just jarring to see such unanimous cockiness among our normally pretty jittery fanbase.

They didn't limp into the playoffs though, they've been bad all year.

They had a negative point differential for the season. They won small against bad teams, and then got blown out by good teams. They have all the hallmarks (and stats) of just being a bad team.

They beat a bad CIN team by 2 points.
They beat a bad JAX team by 3 points the first time, and 1 point the second time.
They beat a bad Indy team by 3 and 5 points.

The only impressive game Houston played all year was beating KC in week 2.

They're not just one of the worst teams in the playoffs, they're one of the worst teams in football. No, they're not Cleveland bad, but they're SF, JAX bad. It is significantly more likely that this game is a blowout than a close game, and HOU winning would be a historical upset.

 

[dcmissle]

Yes an historical upset; the lines are what they are, for good reason.

But here's the hitch: it's one game win or go home, with a limited number of possessions and a high correlation of turnover differential to outcome, and by the way we're playing a good defense. If DVOA is your god, a better defense than the Pats'. That makes this unique among the major sports, and considering the stakes, somewhat scary. And it would be scarier still if the Pats weren't so professional and focused in their approach.

I would prefer an opening round opponent with a potent offense and crappy defense, but we get what we get.

Considering the stakes and expectations, this arguably is the most uncomfortable game, a game you're happy to survive and move on from. Put differently, if Pitts comes in next weekend and wins, it would be no surprise, or at most a very mild one. KC -- a bit more surprising to me, but not earth shaking. Disappointing in both cases, to be sure. But losing this one would be viewed, fairly or not, as a massive choke job.

 

[snowmanny]

It's going to be a disaster. Tickets are down to $25 on Stub Hub. You can sit in the 100's for $79!

What a mess. I hope there aren't power outages and such. I'd hate for them to have to delay the game until Monday.

 

[Captaincoop]

They didn't limp into the playoffs though, they've been bad all year.

They had a negative point differential for the season. They won small against bad teams, and then got blown out by good teams. They have all the hallmarks (and stats) of just being a bad team.

They beat a bad CIN team by 2 points.
They beat a bad JAX team by 3 points the first time, and 1 point the second time.
They beat a bad Indy team by 3 and 5 points.

The only impressive game Houston played all year was beating KC in week 2.

They're not just one of the worst teams in the playoffs, they're one of the worst teams in football. No, they're not Cleveland bad, but they're SF, JAX bad. It is significantly more likely that this game is a blowout than a close game, and HOU winning would be a historical upset.

You're misreading me. I'm not saying this team limped into the playoffs. I'm saying that season-long DVOA is not a good way to measure how good a team is in January. For example, Oakland looks way better than Houston based on DVOA, but was a far worse team last week because they lost Carr and replaced him with one of the least ready QBs ever to start a playoff game. Same thing with Arizona a couple of years ago when Ryan Lindley started a playoff game - I don't care what their DVOA was for the season, that team was worse than this Houston team with Ryan Lindley starting at QB.

I hope everyone in the general public is right and I'm wrong. But the track record when the public is 90% in agreement on a game is not good. I expect a tough game tomorrow.

 

[Red Right Ankle]

What a mess. I hope there aren't power outages and such. I'd hate for them to have to delay the game until Monday.