2019 Playoff Seeding and Home Field Advantage Watch

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,899
Hingham, MA
Am I correct that if the Steelers and Titans finish with the same record, the Steelers make the playoffs? Both at 9-7 and at 10-6.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,899
Hingham, MA
I was wrong. If Pittsburgh wins today and loses next week, and the Titans lose today and win next week, the Titans make it at 9-7.
 

Hendu for Kutch

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2006
6,938
Nashua, NH
Right now if today's scores carry and the favored teams all win next week, your #6 seed is...the Raiders?!? At least, according to the Playoff Machine.

Baltimore and Texas might be resting starters, but they are hosting the Steelers and Titans, respectively. So I could still see either one winning, potentially.

Indy is eliminated, but they are playing @ Jacksonville, and the Jaguars reek of tire fire. So I expect Indy to win.

If Oakland can go to Denver and beat a team with nothing to play for (no sure thing at all), that leaves all 4 teams tied at 8-8 with Oakland getting that last spot.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
34,442
suddenly the Raiders seem like they have a pretty good shot, no? two of the three teams they need to help them are tire fires or facing tire fires.

meanwhile the top of the NFC is so scrambled right now
 

HriniakPosterChild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 6, 2006
14,841
500 feet above Lake Sammammish
The same issue of the Times has a column suggesting that the Seahawks bring back Marshawn Lynch, despite the fact that he’s 99 years old and hasn’t been on the field since he suffered a season ending injury for the Raiders last year.

Why not get Shawn Alexander back, if you’re stuck in fantasyland?
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
The same issue of the Times has a column suggesting that the Seahawks bring back Marshawn Lynch, despite the fact that he’s 99 years old and hasn’t been on the field since he suffered a season ending injury for the Raiders last year.

Why not get Shawn Alexander back, if you’re stuck in fantasyland?
If you are going to go get someone, at least get someone with some talent... Curt Warner is probably available.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
8,551
KPWT
I was ten feet away from Marshawn last week, I don’t believe he is in playing shape. But if any guy was going to come off the couch and play great it would be him. He looks better than CJ Anderson did last year.

All of a sudden the Raiders ten game parlay looks much more doable. It makes the choke/ref job against the Jags that much more painful. All they would need is a Titans loss if they hadn’t blown that one / gotten screwed.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
21,004
St. Louis, MO
I was ten feet away from Marshawn last week, I don’t believe he is in playing shape. But if any guy was going to come off the couch and play great it would be him. He looks better than CJ Anderson did last year.

All of a sudden the Raiders ten game parlay looks much more doable. It makes the choke/ref job against the Jags that much more painful. All they would need is a Titans loss if they hadn’t blown that one / gotten screwed.
Luckily Houston has seeding to play for however unlikely it is that the Chiefs lose. Hopefully the Ravens go starters for a full half. I think the biggest hurdle will actually be beating Denver.

If we pull off the inside straight would we be the first playoff team in history with a -100 point differential?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,626
Right now if today's scores carry and the favored teams all win next week, your #6 seed is...the Raiders?!? At least, according to the Playoff Machine.

Baltimore and Texas might be resting starters, but they are hosting the Steelers and Titans, respectively. So I could still see either one winning, potentially.
Why do we think the Texans would rest starters when they have a chance at the #3 seed? It may not seem like much, but it gives you slightly better chance at hosting.
 

Hendu for Kutch

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2006
6,938
Nashua, NH
Why do we think the Texans would rest starters when they have a chance at the #3 seed? It may not seem like much, but it gives you slightly better chance at hosting.
KC plays at 1:00, so HOU will know if they have anything to play for by the time their game starts. So very likely the game means nothing to them and they'll be locked into the #4 seed.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,466
I think for the first time, I'm convinced that the top 3 teams in the AFC are better than the top 3 teams in the NFC. I'd take Baltimore, NE, and KC over SF, NO, and either GB or Seattle. And in fact, I might go so far as to say that the top 5 in the AFC are better than the top 5 in the NFC, when I didn't think that was remotely possible earlier in the year.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
I think for the first time, I'm convinced that the top 3 teams in the AFC are better than the top 3 teams in the NFC. I'd take Baltimore, NE, and KC over SF, NO, and either GB or Seattle. And in fact, I might go so far as to say that the top 5 in the AFC are better than the top 5 in the NFC, when I didn't think that was remotely possible earlier in the year.
I think you are sleeping on Payton/Brees. That's a matchup I wouldn't want in the playoffs. Especially with 2 weeks of planning. FWIW, the Pats would have to be #5 of those 6/7 teams for me if I were seeding them. I'm not saying I think they can't win - but the Pats combo of offensive weapons/performance aren't screaming playoff juggernaut to me... nothing new to anyone watching the team this year though.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,466
I think you are sleeping on Payton/Brees. That's a matchup I wouldn't want in the playoffs. Especially with 2 weeks of planning. FWIW, the Pats would have to be #5 of those 6/7 teams for me if I were seeding them. I'm not saying I think they can't win - but the Pats combo of offensive weapons/performance aren't screaming playoff juggernaut to me... nothing new to anyone watching the team this year though.

Yeah, those top NFC teams are really good, no doubt. And right now ANY matchup with the top NFC teams would scare me. But I still think the top AFC teams are better.
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
2,385
Yeah, those top NFC teams are really good, no doubt. And right now ANY matchup with the top NFC teams would scare me. But I still think the top AFC teams are better.
Here's my fear factor list (least to most). Tonight's game and next week Seattle / SF match-ups might move those 4 teams around as I think Seattle is toast.

Philadelphia
Tennessee
Seattle
Buffalo
Minnesota
Green Bay
Houston
New Orleans
San Francisco
Kansas City
Baltimore
 

Old Fart Tree

the maven of meat
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2001
14,377
Boulder, CO
I think KC is too high and NO/GB too low, but otherwise mostly agree. There are a lot of really good teams this year, it seems.
 

mostman

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2003
19,243
Buffalo should really scare people more.

Also the gap between the Ravens and the team below them is large. Going off that list above, I’d rather see KC or Jimmy and Friends and start them at 7 points than have to face the Ravens.
 

Seels

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
5,055
NH
I think you are sleeping on Payton/Brees. That's a matchup I wouldn't want in the playoffs. Especially with 2 weeks of planning. FWIW, the Pats would have to be #5 of those 6/7 teams for me if I were seeding them. I'm not saying I think they can't win - but the Pats combo of offensive weapons/performance aren't screaming playoff juggernaut to me... nothing new to anyone watching the team this year though.
Na. I think they're a team that can do some damage in the playoffs but matchup really poorly with the Pats. Pats should be 6-7 point favorites over them -- way too reliant on Thomas and trickery with Hill.

On a neutral field Pats would be favored over everyone except Baltimore.

I agree about the NFC. Saints are one dimensional, Packers are just not as good as their record is, same as Seattle. Minnesota -- I don't think anyone knows how to evaluate them.

Not that I don't think the NFC can easily win the Super Bowl, but aside from San Fran all those teams are super flawed.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,296
Na. I think they're a team that can do some damage in the playoffs but matchup really poorly with the Pats. Pats should be 6-7 point favorites over them -- way too reliant on Thomas and trickery with Hill.

On a neutral field Pats would be favored over everyone except Baltimore.


I agree about the NFC. Saints are one dimensional, Packers are just not as good as their record is, same as Seattle. Minnesota -- I don't think anyone knows how to evaluate them.

Not that I don't think the NFC can easily win the Super Bowl, but aside from San Fran all those teams are super flawed.
The Patriots would not be favored over KC right now on a neutral field and unlikely they would even be favored at home. The Pats were -3 in Foxboro and lost to a banged up Mahomes. The Chiefs defense has been lights out over the past month and now Mahomes appears to be healthy again. It is mind boggling to me that the Ravens are such overwhelming favorites in the AFC when they already lost to KC and the Chiefs are being penalized for having so many injuries earlier in the year. I'm not complaining though as I just bought some Chiefs to win Super Bowl at +750 last week......I don't care if they win I already won by getting the best team at that price. I'm guessing by the start of the playoffs that is cut in half.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
32,012
The Patriots would not be favored over KC right now on a neutral field and unlikely they would even be favored at home. The Pats were -3 in Foxboro and lost to a banged up Mahomes. The Chiefs defense has been lights out over the past month and now Mahomes appears to be healthy again. It is mind boggling to me that the Ravens are such overwhelming favorites in the AFC when they already lost to KC and the Chiefs are being penalized for having so many injuries earlier in the year. I'm not complaining though as I just bought some Chiefs to win Super Bowl at +750 last week......I don't care if they win I already won by getting the best team at that price. I'm guessing by the start of the playoffs that is cut in half.
Not saying you didn't make a good bet but the Ravens defense is completely different than week 3. Like literally completely different - of the 19 guys who got snaps Sunday against the Browns, 6 guys literally weren't on the roster in Week 3 and 1 guy wasn't active because of injury; 2 guys are playing different positions; and 3 guys who played a grand total of 44 snaps versus KC played a total of 125 snaps versus CLE.

Put another way, players who played on a total of 269 snaps versus KC are either out with injuries, not playing defense anymore, or no longer with the team, and 129 additional snaps were played by players who no longer play that position. And in virtually every case, BAL upgraded those snaps.

Just FYI.
 

Helmet Head

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
4,843
Central Mass
Maybe they should have won more games earlier
And the fact that their point differential is -105. Not really going to feel bad for Oakland potentially not making the playoffs because the Ravens are resting players. All they had to do is beat the Jets or Jags and failed to do so. All that said, I would like Oakland to make the playoffs.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,296
Not saying you didn't make a good bet but the Ravens defense is completely different than week 3. Like literally completely different - of the 19 guys who got snaps Sunday against the Browns, 6 guys literally weren't on the roster in Week 3 and 1 guy wasn't active because of injury; 2 guys are playing different positions; and 3 guys who played a grand total of 44 snaps versus KC played a total of 125 snaps versus CLE.

Put another way, players who played on a total of 269 snaps versus KC are either out with injuries, not playing defense anymore, or no longer with the team, and 129 additional snaps were played by players who no longer play that position. And in virtually every case, BAL upgraded those snaps.

Just FYI.
My primary concern in a rematch isn’t the players on the field but Andy Reid’s notoriously boneheaded clock management in key situations.
 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
22,229
A Scud Away from Hell
Also, would much rather have the Steelers or the Raiders. The revived Titans & Tannehill are the one team you do not want to face out of the three.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,995
deep inside Guido territory
I’m thinking this for next week.
If Seattle is 5 seed
Saturday
4:30 Buffalo at Houston ESPN/ABC
8:15 Seattle at Philadelphia/Dallas FOX

Sunday
1:00 TBA at New England CBS
4:40 Minnesota at New Orleans NBC

If Seattle is 3 seed
Saturday
4:30 Buffalo at Houston ESPN/ABC
8:15 Minnesota at Seattle NBC

Sunday
1:00 TBA at New England 1:00 CBS
4:40 San Francisco at Philly/Dallas FOX
 
Last edited:

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,995
deep inside Guido territory
Another scenario. I just saw that cbs has had Sunday at 1 2 years in a row.

Seattle as 5 seed
Saturday
4:30 Buffalo at Houston ESPN/ABC
8:15 TBA at New England CBS

Sunday
1:00 Minnesota at NO FOX
4:40 Seattle at Philly/Dallas NBC

Seattle as 3 seed
Saturday
4:30 Minnesota at Seattle ESPN/ABC
8:15 San Francisco at Dallas/Philly FOX

Sunday
1:00 Buffalo at Houston NBC
4:40 TBA at New England CBS
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,251
HOU has given up, TN just ran 10 straight plays that ended with a Henry TD where no one tried to tackle him.
Safe to pencil TN into the 6th seed. One of the better 6th seeds in recent memory. Tannehill turned that team around.