What an awful matchup. Texans vs Patriots in Brady's house. I hate Oswelier, very sick of hearing this guy's name all the time. and he SUCKS. These AFC teams are just awful.
Any given Sunday. Tom Brady's alarm clock might stop working, Bill Belichick could be detained for killing a hooker right before the game. There are plenty of favorable scenarios like that.
entertained the world champion Saints in Seattle during WC weekend and beat them..NO ONE gave the awful Seahawks team a chance..
Fair enough, but people thought the Saints had a good home record. Take a look at NE's in comparison. They'd have a better chance playing the game on one leg in Texas than they do in NE.
entertained the world champion Saints in Seattle during WC weekend and beat them..NO ONE gave the awful Seahawks team a chance..
Fair enough, but people thought the Saints had a good home record. Take a look at NE's in comparison. They'd have a better chance playing the game on one leg in Texas than they do in NE.
I don't believe the Texans belong on the same field as the Pats. Just pointing out that nothing is an absolute lock. Osweiller is dreadful, but their D is rather good, despite no Watt..Miller could be a big help on O..
I would love the Texans to win and eventually have the Chiefs win the SB..A great FY to the Eagles would be nirvana
finish 7-9 on the season shouldn't be in the playoffs to begin with, let alone hosting a playoff game. They shouldn't even be given a shot to win a playoff game in the first place.
finish 7-9 on the season shouldn't be in the playoffs to begin with, let alone hosting a playoff game. They shouldn't even be given a shot to win a playoff game in the first place.
Agreed, but that has been debated to death on here..
Yeah but so many mediocre-bad teams make it to the second round of the playoffs because the mediocre beat the bad (or bad beat bad, like Houston defeating Raiders without Carr, first start Cook) and we get, Patriots vs Texans in the divisional round. Either that, or the AFC is very weak.
Pats have another cake walk to the championship game, playing the Texans. That said - I had no idea the Texans had the #1 rated defense in the league (AFC) --- there problem is and has always been NO QB! They would be better off playing Savage if he is cleared. Texans D could limit Pats to 17 points and still lose 17-3
Pats have another cake walk to the championship game, playing the Texans. That said - I had no idea the Texans had the #1 rated defense in the league (AFC) --- there problem is and has always been NO QB! They would be better off playing Savage if he is cleared. Texans D could limit Pats to 17 points and still lose 17-3
17 points? They're only going to score 17 points? Oh, ok...
Yeah but so many mediocre-bad teams make it to the second round of the playoffs because the mediocre beat the bad (or bad beat bad, like Houston defeating Raiders without Carr, first start Cook) and we get, Patriots vs Texans in the divisional round. Either that, or the AFC is very weak.
What's the alternative? Have fewer playoff teams?
I'm not sure I'd say the AFC is "very weak" per se; it's just top-heavy, and Carr's injury crushed the Raiders' chances. Still, the Patriots, Chiefs and Steelers are all legitimate Super Bowl contenders and the Raiders (with Carr) probably would have been as well. Is that really all that different than the NFC?
Pats have another cake walk to the championship game, playing the Texans. That said - I had no idea the Texans had the #1 rated defense in the league (AFC) --- there problem is and has always been NO QB! They would be better off playing Savage if he is cleared. Texans D could limit Pats to 17 points and still lose 17-3
17 points? They're only going to score 17 points? Oh, ok...
And Clowney's the type of player who could wreck a game. There's a chance they can be competitive but ultimately I don't see a historical upset. Bill Belichick teams don't look ahead or lack intensity, it just doesn't happen with this guy.
Yeah but so many mediocre-bad teams make it to the second round of the playoffs because the mediocre beat the bad (or bad beat bad, like Houston defeating Raiders without Carr, first start Cook) and we get, Patriots vs Texans in the divisional round. Either that, or the AFC is very weak.
What's the alternative? Have fewer playoff teams?
I'm not sure I'd say the AFC is "very weak" per se; it's just top-heavy, and Carr's injury crushed the Raiders' chances. Still, the Patriots, Chiefs and Steelers are all legitimate Super Bowl contenders and the Raiders (with Carr) probably would have been as well. Is that really all that different than the NFC?
Take away two teams, and have 3 divisions again and go back to the way it was prior to the 2002 format. Ditch the Jets and the Browns or one of those irrelevant teams. You never saw teams make the playoffs at 7-9, and the fact they now get a home playoff game for a lousy record is absurd. 9-7 should be a "maybe" road wildcard playoff record, and shouldn't host a playoff game either when the opposing WC team is 12-4.
Then you also run the risk of leaving out 10-6 and maybe 11-5 teams out and shitty teams still can find their way to the playoffs only because they play in a weak division. Example: Carolina was 3-8-1 in 2014 when they went into week 14's game in December, and they still made it to the playoffs because they won 4 in a row.
It just made sense when a team who didnt win the division but had a decent record got to host the WC round (playing an extra game) to a team that had an inferior record to them. Not the other way around.
You answered your own question, Comrade.
Fair enough, but people thought the Saints had a good home record. Take a look at NE's in comparison. They'd have a better chance playing the game on one leg in Texas than they do in NE.
Saints were a different team on the road.
Quote:
entertained the world champion Saints in Seattle during WC weekend and beat them..NO ONE gave the awful Seahawks team a chance..
Fair enough, but people thought the Saints had a good home record. Take a look at NE's in comparison. They'd have a better chance playing the game on one leg in Texas than they do in NE.
I don't believe the Texans belong on the same field as the Pats. Just pointing out that nothing is an absolute lock. Osweiller is dreadful, but their D is rather good, despite no Watt..Miller could be a big help on O..
I would love the Texans to win and eventually have the Chiefs win the SB..A great FY to the Eagles would be nirvana
Agreed, but that has been debated to death on here..
But their defense could keep them in it.
But their defense could keep them in it.
I'm pretty sure most people on this page said the Same thing leading into the Packers game.
the only thing they might be able to do is hold the Patriots under 40 points and that should be considered a moral victory.
The other three games should all be good IMO, not this one.
17 points? They're only going to score 17 points? Oh, ok...
What's the alternative? Have fewer playoff teams?
I'm not sure I'd say the AFC is "very weak" per se; it's just top-heavy, and Carr's injury crushed the Raiders' chances. Still, the Patriots, Chiefs and Steelers are all legitimate Super Bowl contenders and the Raiders (with Carr) probably would have been as well. Is that really all that different than the NFC?
Quote:
Pats have another cake walk to the championship game, playing the Texans. That said - I had no idea the Texans had the #1 rated defense in the league (AFC) --- there problem is and has always been NO QB! They would be better off playing Savage if he is cleared. Texans D could limit Pats to 17 points and still lose 17-3
17 points? They're only going to score 17 points? Oh, ok...
I see what you did there :)
Quote:
Yeah but so many mediocre-bad teams make it to the second round of the playoffs because the mediocre beat the bad (or bad beat bad, like Houston defeating Raiders without Carr, first start Cook) and we get, Patriots vs Texans in the divisional round. Either that, or the AFC is very weak.
What's the alternative? Have fewer playoff teams?
I'm not sure I'd say the AFC is "very weak" per se; it's just top-heavy, and Carr's injury crushed the Raiders' chances. Still, the Patriots, Chiefs and Steelers are all legitimate Super Bowl contenders and the Raiders (with Carr) probably would have been as well. Is that really all that different than the NFC?
Take away two teams, and have 3 divisions again and go back to the way it was prior to the 2002 format. Ditch the Jets and the Browns or one of those irrelevant teams. You never saw teams make the playoffs at 7-9, and the fact they now get a home playoff game for a lousy record is absurd. 9-7 should be a "maybe" road wildcard playoff record, and shouldn't host a playoff game either when the opposing WC team is 12-4.
Then you also run the risk of leaving out 10-6 and maybe 11-5 teams out and shitty teams still can find their way to the playoffs only because they play in a weak division. Example: Carolina was 3-8-1 in 2014 when they went into week 14's game in December, and they still made it to the playoffs because they won 4 in a row.
It just made sense when a team who didnt win the division but had a decent record got to host the WC round (playing an extra game) to a team that had an inferior record to them. Not the other way around.
I was all over Seattle in that game. I knew they would win.
The Pats will win this game by at least 10 pts.