1992: If Buffalo doesn't comeback vs. Houston, who wins AFC?

[CSKreager]

Let's say the Bills don't make history in that AFC Wild Card Game against the Oilers.

If Buffalo doesn't do the Reich thing, then who ends up facing Dallas in SB 27 at Pasadena?

It would have been Houston-Pittsburgh (Because that was a 4-5 game) against Miami.


On a separate note, if Buffalo had beat Houston in the week 17 regular season game, that could have really changed the AFC Playoffs:

Buffalo and Pittsburgh are 1-2, Houston would have played the AFC Wild Card game in Miami instead.

[Rupert Patrick]

Let's say the Bills don't make history in that AFC Wild Card Game against the Oilers.

If Buffalo doesn't do the Reich thing, then who ends up facing Dallas in SB 27 at Pasadena?

It would have been Houston-Pittsburgh (Because that was a 4-5 game) against Miami.

I think Houston would have beat Pittsburgh and then Miami, but would have lost to Dallas in the Super Bowl.

[ChrisBabcock]

I think Houston would have beat Pittsburgh and then Miami, but would have lost to Dallas in the Super Bowl.

^^^ I agree with this.

In that alternate scenario with the Bills winning in week 17 and grabbing the top seed, I say Houston easily wins in Miami in the Wild Card round, which sends them to Rich Stadium the following week for a showdown against the Bills. So we just might have seen the Greatest Comeback anyway just one week later! Reich would have started this game since Kelly wasn't back until the AFCCG.

[74_75_78_79_]

Even though both wins over them could have gone the other way, if Steelers weren't better than Houston in '92 they at least matched up well with them. Now next year, Buddy onboard, a much different story of course as evident in that convincing sweep. Back to '92 I do think Steelers, despite not really being ready yet for prime time, they take Houston in a divisional three-match with Neil or Bubby over center. And being that Miami was nothing too special themselves, Steelers take them at home the following week. Their 'reward'? Being utterly embarrassed two weeks later! So maybe for the best. To me, Oilers were the only AFC playoff team that year that would have avoided embarrassment against Big D, but it wouldn't have been a nail-biter either. Dallas wins convincing enough.

[7DnBrnc53]

Even though both wins over them could have gone the other way, if Steelers weren't better than Houston in '92 they at least matched up well with them. Now next year, Buddy onboard, a much different story of course as evident in that convincing sweep. Back to '92 I do think Steelers, despite not really being ready yet for prime time, they take Houston in a divisional three-match with Neil or Bubby over center. And being that Miami was nothing too special themselves, Steelers take them at home the following week. Their 'reward'? Being utterly embarrassed two weeks later! So maybe for the best. To me, Oilers were the only AFC playoff team that year that would have avoided embarrassment against Big D, but it wouldn't have been a nail-biter either. Dallas wins convincing enough.

I don't see the Steelers beating Houston three times that year, but if they did, they probably do beat Miami in an AFC Title Game at home. The Dolphins had a golden opportunity against Buffalo, and only run the ball 11 times against an average defense en route to a 29-10 loss.

[Rupert Patrick]

The gap between the AFC and NFC was in my opinion at it's widest in 1992, so great in fact that I think that five of the six NFC playoff teams that year (Dallas, SF, Minnesota, New Orleans and Philadelphia) would have defeated whichever team won the AFC had they gotten to the Super Bowl.

[CSKreager]

The gap between the AFC and NFC was in my opinion at it's widest in 1992, so great in fact that I think that five of the six NFC playoff teams that year (Dallas, SF, Minnesota, New Orleans and Philadelphia) would have defeated whichever team won the AFC had they gotten to the Super Bowl.

I think the gap was widest in 1989. A 9-6-1 team got a first-round bye!

[Rupert Patrick]

The gap between the AFC and NFC was in my opinion at it's widest in 1992, so great in fact that I think that five of the six NFC playoff teams that year (Dallas, SF, Minnesota, New Orleans and Philadelphia) would have defeated whichever team won the AFC had they gotten to the Super Bowl.

I think the gap was widest in 1989. A 9-6-1 team got a first-round bye!

I misspoke in that I meant the gap between AFC and NFC playoff teams. But even if you look at 1989, there is San Francisco and then there is the rest of the league. There were eight teams who won ten or more games in 1989, seven of them were in the NFC. Oddly, there were only two NFC teams (Detroit and New Orleans) who finished between 9-6-1 and 6-9-1. By contrast, there were ten AFC teams who won less than ten games but also failed to lose ten games. If you think about the normal curve and teams being, in general, normally distributed with regard to wins, in both cases in 1989, they are both weirdly skewed in opposite directions. Virtually all the AFC teams were right around .500, while only a couple NFC teams were.

Looking at won-loss records, there is a gap, but if you look at point differential, which I think is a better indicator than won loss record, there isn't much of a difference. San Fran was +189, Denver was +136. The 12-4 Giants were +96 while the 9-7 Bills were +92. The 11-5 Eagles were +68 and 11-5 Rams were +82, while the 9-6-1 Browns were +80. Even the 10-6 Redskins and Packers, neither of which made the playoffs, were +78 and +6 respsectively.

Among the 1989 AFC playoff teams, I think Pittsburgh and Houston would not have had a chance against any of the NFC teams in the Super Bowl. According to my Postseason Prediction System, Denver I think would have been about a three point favorite over any of the NFC teams except for San Francisco of course, and Cleveland would have been a 2-3 point underdog against the other NFC teams except for San Francisco. Buffalo I would have rated a 1-2 point favorite over any of the NFC teams except the 49ers.

My system seen the 1989 49ers as one of the 3-4 most dominant teams of the Super Bowl era, relative to the other teams they have to face in their particular season. It predicted the 49ers a 69 percent chance of winning the NFC title and a 51 percent probability of winning the Super Bowl. I have only seen a couple other teams (1987 49ers, 1996 Packers, 1999 and 2001 Rams, 2007 and 2016 Patriots) reach that threshold of 50 percent chance of winning the Super Bowl.

[BD Sullivan]

The 1989 Browns did finish 9-6-1, yet they very easily could have been 13-3:

They lost two road games (Miami and Indy) in OT and their tie came in a flat performance at home against old coach Marty Schottenheimer. Four days later, they played the Lions in Detroit and lost 13-10 to the 2-9 Lions.

[CSKreager]

Even though both wins over them could have gone the other way, if Steelers weren't better than Houston in '92 they at least matched up well with them. Now next year, Buddy onboard, a much different story of course as evident in that convincing sweep. Back to '92 I do think Steelers, despite not really being ready yet for prime time, they take Houston in a divisional three-match with Neil or Bubby over center. And being that Miami was nothing too special themselves, Steelers take them at home the following week. Their 'reward'? Being utterly embarrassed two weeks later! So maybe for the best.

I doubt it- Pittsburgh wouldn’t have had 9 turnovers.