correct me if I'm wrong...

[Metal Panda]

...but something Alex Marvez wrote in his day-after article struck me as incorrect.

He stated that the Patriots might rest their players as they are locked into the #4 seed as of right now. How is that possible? If New England was to win out and Cincinnati was to lose, both teams would be 11-5, and the teams didn't meet head to head and since they're from different divisions, you go by conference record, which in that scenario, New England would win 8-4 to 7-5. Is there something I'm missing, or was Alex wrong?

I hate to think New England would rest their starters in week 17, since I am really looking forward to our last hour of football being memorable. Plus it would be nice if Miami met New England and ruined their chances at a #3 seed, on the road.

 

[RunningBackGuru]

I think you may be right. Both teams would be 11-5 and the Pats would be 6-0 (Div Rec.) and Cinci would be 5-1 (Div Rec.). I may be wrong with you, but I do believe you are right.

 

[Metal Panda]

I think you may be right. Both teams would be 11-5 and the Pats would be 6-0 (Div Rec.) and Cinci would be 5-1 (Div Rec.). I may be wrong with you, but I do believe you are right.

Division record would not apply in this circumstance as they're from different divisions and they use (if I'm not mistaken) the same tiebreaker as the wild card tiebreaker (if both teams are from different divisions).

 

[Aqua and Orange]

I hope we seriously f up the pats playoffs with a win against them.

 

[Riftur]

yeah but the pats won their division. They are in the playoffs.

 

[Metal Panda]

yeah but the pats won their division. They are in the playoffs.

We're not talking about that, we're talking about seeding. That could be the difference between playing the Jags or Steelers (although the Jags will likely be the higher seed and I almost think getting them would be the better matchup).

 

[HysterikiLL]

Wouldn't it be decided by common teams rather than division records?

 

[Metal Panda]

Wouldn't it be decided by common teams rather than division records?

No. Common games does take precedence over conference games if both teams are in the same division, but conference games takes precedence over common games if both teams are from different divisions and divisional games aren't a factor.

http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakers

 

[Metal Panda]

Welp, Alex just emailed me back and admitted he made a mistake, so it looks like the Patsies WON'T be resting their starters. So we can look forward to an emotional, kickass game.

 

[steveincolorado]

The Pats can still move up to the #3 seed. If KC beats Cincinnati and we lose to the Pats, then NE is the #3.

BTW, if KC beats Cincinnati, then KC comes to Miami in 2006. KC looses and SD beats Denver, then SD comes to Miami. All of the other opponets for 2006 are set.

 

[Metal Panda]

Yep...see the thread I started in the NFL general commentary :)

We get, in addition to the Bills, Jets, and Patriots both at home and on the road, Jacksonville, Tennessee, Green Bay, Minnesota, and whomever finishes in second in the AFC West (which you mentioned) at home, and Houston, Indianapolis, Chicago, Detroit, and Pittsburgh on the road.

 

[steveincolorado]

Yep...see the thread I started in the NFL general commentary :)

We get, in addition to the Bills, Jets, and Patriots both at home and on the road, Jacksonville, Tennessee, Green Bay, Minnesota, and whomever finishes in second in the AFC West (which you mentioned) at home, and Houston, Indianapolis, Chicago, Detroit, and Pittsburgh on the road.

Who would you rather see come to Miami, KC or SD? Their both going to be tough games, but with Dick Vermeil maybe leaving, and SD just getting better, I'll take my chance with KC. Plus I know a lot more KC fans than SD fans.

 

[Metal Panda]

Who would you rather see come to Miami, KC or SD? Their both going to be tough games, but with Dick Vermeil maybe leaving, and SD just getting better, I'll take my chance with KC. Plus I know a lot more KC fans than SD fans.

It's hard to say with predictability from one year to the next being so difficult in today's NFL.

We have owned the Chargers, and haven't lost to them in years...Kansas City has been steamrolling us lately. I'd say San Diego, tentatively.

Hopefully we'll be so good next year that it won't matter.

 

[steveincolorado]

It's hard to say with predictability from one year to the next being so difficult in today's NFL.

We have owned the Chargers, and haven't lost to them in years...Kansas City has been steamrolling us lately. I'd say San Diego, tentatively.

Hopefully we'll be so good next year that it won't matter.

I see your logic, but then again we went for about 10 years beating the Chiefs. Even though we only played 5 times in those 10 years and all in Miami, all things must come to an end. They put up 40+ on us in 2002. I think SD is a better team than KC (I did see them play yesterday and I know the result), but I would take SD beating KC more than the other way around. It's just a matter of time before SD gets one on us.