2017 NFL Playoffs

[sheajets]

Patriots will absolutely cruise to a Super Bowl Championship using this whole Brady/Kraft/Belichick turmoil as extra motivation. They absolutely love it when everybody tried to sink their teeth in and bury them. Everybody is just playing into their hands at this point.

They will win the Super Bowl and get their usual assortment of calls and miracles and breaks.

Feel good for Jacksonville and that Jags/Pitt game will be an absolute slugfest. Marrone I think may be on the cusp of becoming one of the next big coaches.

[Rupert Patrick]

I've been trying to figure out this Atlanta Philadelphia game, that the top-seeded Eagles are home underdogs to a number six seed, something we've never seen before. Reading this week's Peter King column, I am inclined to agree that Philly should go with their ground game against the Falcons, play ball control and keep the ball away from Ryan; in short, the same strategy that Bill Parcells did against the Bills in Super Bowl XXV. People seem to overlook the Eagles fourth-ranked defense, who were fourth in the league in turnovers, while Atlanta was 27th in turnovers. My gut says the Eagles should pull this out, but it will be close. 26-20 Eagles.

Vikings-Saints could be a high scoring shootout, except for the Vikings top-ranked defense, second in fewest yards passing and rushing. The Vikings run game is seventh in the league in yards, but rushes at slightly below the league average at 3.9 yards a run while NO rushes for 4.7 a pop. The Saints defense was 10th in points allowed, and right in the middle in yards allowed both rushing and passing. I think this will be the best game this weekend, with Pittsburgh-Jacksonville a close second. I wouldn't mind seeing the Saints winning, but I think the Vikings will win 30-23.

New England vs. Tennessee is the easiest game to pick this weekend. The Titans are a scrappy team, and I know the Patriots are not going to underestimate them, but it's going to be all New England. Make it 31-10.

Finally Pittsburgh vs. Jacksonville. My playoff prediction system picks an upset in this game and so do I. Pittsburgh isn't as bad as the team who lost to Jacksonville 30-9 early in the season, but they aren't really as good as their record indicates. They won eight games by six points or less, against teams like Cleveland (twice), Cincinnati and Indianapolis that they should have beaten decisively. At their best, they came within a controversial (although correct) call of beating New England. Jacksonville may be on the verge of building the next great defense in the NFL, I think. We'll know for sure in a couple years but I think in 2-3 years they are going to need a nickname. Even right now they are quire formidable, and their offense is good but not great. I think Pittsburgh will turn to it's running game and try to keep the ball away from the Jacksonville defensive secondary; if they do that, they might be able to win. However, I have a feeling the Jags will burn Roethlisberger at least once or twice and make him pay. I'll take Jacksonville, 21-13.

[Reaser]

Patriots and Steelers, which was my preseason AFC CG pick, think win pretty easily. Everyone else in the AFC playoffs is there by default, no one else is good and definitely aren't great. Typical of the quality of the league the last decade or so. Average or above average is good enough to be a "playoff team". If anyone but NE or PIT comes out of the AFC or wins the SB it'd be an extremely weak SB winner.

I picked the Bills last week because their defense is basically as good as Jacksonville's (stats don't say it but watching the games does, to me) and the difference was a 4th and goal TD pass. Otherwise it was an even game, with the Bills, with McCoy somewhat slowed down and the main reason Buffalo lost was Taylor playing conservative. Receivers were open for 10 yard gains/first downs left and right -against Jacksonville's 'legendary' secondary- and he wouldn't pull the trigger. Not to mention downfield he had receivers running open (open, for NFL standards) and he either didn't throw it or he missed the throw. Halfway decent passer would have hit at least half of those -at worst- and Buffalo wins without much trouble.

Jaguars defense is good, but not significantly better than and possibly even equal with teams like the Bills and Chargers (who only missed the playoffs because they were messing around at kicker to start the season). Offense isn't good. Bortles isn't good. Fournette has been trending down the last month of the season (the so-called rookie wall?) and was merely solid but not spectacular before that anyway. Only way they beat Pittsburgh is if Brown isn't good to go, Bell gets injured or Roethlisberger gives the game away like their first game.

Which I keep hearing on TV about that game that the Jaguars ran all over Pittsburgh and Ben kept getting sacked/hit/hurried and Jacksonville forced turnovers. That's not really what I remember (though I'll probably watch the game again this week since no other football to watch). I remember Jacksonville not doing anything on offense. The Steelers moving the ball but settling for FG's once they got to the redzone. And Pittsburgh outplaying Jacksonville before taking the lead until inexplicably the 2nd half gameplan became to throw it nearly every play, go away from Bell and Ben forcing it to Brown even more than he usually does. That was what led to most of the interceptions and the two "pick-sixes" were the difference. Which both came on tipped balls falling right into the Jags hands. It wasn't JAX running all over the Steelers or a million sacks/hurries forcing bad throws or even keeping the Steelers from moving the ball. The Jaguars offense consisted of the game for all intents and purposes being over after the 5th int and Fournette breaking a 90 something yard TD run to give them some offensive stats that had no baring on the outcome of a game that was already decided at that point. One "game over" long TD run. That's practically it.

So Jacksonville didn't dominate offensively and really didn't do anything special on defense other than a good play by Ramsey, the rest were deflections that fell right into their hands (of course tipping the ball is making plays but the ball going right to them was fortunate) and the last couple were thrown up for grabs free interceptions in the final 5 or so minutes. Roethlisberger played poor mixed with an unfortunate tipped pass. I'd be pretty surprised if that repeated itself. Not that Roethlisberger can't throw a couple ints, or that Ramsey can't make a great play, but five with two pick-sixes? Extremely doubtful and if it doesn't happen like that then the Steelers are the clearly better team. I don't think it'll even be that close. Maybe not a blowout -though possible- but a comfortable win.

Patriots over Titans is an easy pick.

The NFC games are the interesting ones, in my opinion. Though i still think Patriots/Steelers winner wins the SB.

I'm picking the Falcons and Saints. Falcons D is underrated and Eagles offense is worse without Wentz, obviously.

Saints-Vikings should be the best game, of the 8 playoff teams left I would want the Vikings to win the SB but if there's an upset this week this would be the game for it.

[7DnBrnc53]

I think the Steelers will win 28-10, but the Pats will struggle. They aren't as good as people think. This is a 9-7 or 8-8 team posing as a 13-3 team. These guys are overrated almost every year.

That being said, they should beat the Titans. I think Pittsburgh will pull off the "upset" the next week, though.

[Rupert Patrick]

I think the Steelers will win 28-10, but the Pats will struggle. They aren't as good as people think. This is a 9-7 or 8-8 team posing as a 13-3 team. These guys are overrated almost every year.

That being said, they should beat the Titans. I think Pittsburgh will pull off the "upset" the next week, though.

If they're overrated almost every year, how have they won five Super Bowls in 15 years (including two Super Bowl wins, a Super Bowl loss and three losses in the AFC Championship game over the past six seasons), and this is with a constantly changing cast of characters except for the QB and Head Coach. If you look at the 60's Packers, 70's Steelers, 80's 49ers, 90's Cowboys, and all the other top dynasties, you can reel off a list of HOFers who played with each of them, but with the Pats, other than Brady, I can't name too many. There's Vinatieri, who was there from 2001-05, and Junior Seau was there for a couple years chasing a ring, same with Randy Moss. After that, you have Ty Law, who was there from 2001-04 who is a candidate this year, and then you have active guys like Welker and Gronkowski who are way too early to even be talking about Canton. From 2001-16 the Pats have had ten different players lead the team in rushing during the season, and eight different receivers lead the team in catches. There was no true defensive anchor, no Joe Greene or Ray Nitschke or Ronnie Lott. How Belichick does it every year is one of the most amazing things I have ever seen in coaching. The Patriots are a lot of things. Overrated is certainly not one of them.

[7DnBrnc53]

I think the Steelers will win 28-10, but the Pats will struggle. They aren't as good as people think. This is a 9-7 or 8-8 team posing as a 13-3 team. These guys are overrated almost every year.

That being said, they should beat the Titans. I think Pittsburgh will pull off the "upset" the next week, though.

If they're overrated almost every year, how have they won five Super Bowls in 15 years (including two Super Bowl wins, a Super Bowl loss and three losses in the AFC Championship game over the past six seasons), and this is with a constantly changing cast of characters except for the QB and Head Coach. If you look at the 60's Packers, 70's Steelers, 80's 49ers, 90's Cowboys, and all the other top dynasties, you can reel off a list of HOFers who played with each of them, but with the Pats, other than Brady, I can't name too many. There's Vinatieri, who was there from 2001-05, and Junior Seau was there for a couple years chasing a ring, same with Randy Moss. After that, you have Ty Law, who was there from 2001-04 who is a candidate this year, and then you have active guys like Welker and Gronkowski who are way too early to even be talking about Canton. From 2001-16 the Pats have had ten different players lead the team in rushing during the season, and eight different receivers lead the team in catches. There was no true defensive anchor, no Joe Greene or Ray Nitschke or Ronnie Lott. How Belichick does it every year is one of the most amazing things I have ever seen in coaching. The Patriots are a lot of things. Overrated is certainly not one of them.

It's a different sport, but in the 90's, there were critics that said that the Bulls won in a watered-down era. The same can be said for the Patriots the last 16 years. They have played in a weak division that whole time. The Bills, Dolphins, and Jets have combined for about 18 different coaches and 40+ different starting QB's, and they are way below .500 against teams that finished the season with a winning record.

You combine that with the preferential treatment that they get from the league (they covered up Spygate for example), and you see why they are so successful.

[rhickok1109]

I think the Steelers will win 28-10, but the Pats will struggle. They aren't as good as people think. This is a 9-7 or 8-8 team posing as a 13-3 team. These guys are overrated almost every year.

That being said, they should beat the Titans. I think Pittsburgh will pull off the "upset" the next week, though.

If they're overrated almost every year, how have they won five Super Bowls in 15 years (including two Super Bowl wins, a Super Bowl loss and three losses in the AFC Championship game over the past six seasons), and this is with a constantly changing cast of characters except for the QB and Head Coach. If you look at the 60's Packers, 70's Steelers, 80's 49ers, 90's Cowboys, and all the other top dynasties, you can reel off a list of HOFers who played with each of them, but with the Pats, other than Brady, I can't name too many. There's Vinatieri, who was there from 2001-05, and Junior Seau was there for a couple years chasing a ring, same with Randy Moss. After that, you have Ty Law, who was there from 2001-04 who is a candidate this year, and then you have active guys like Welker and Gronkowski who are way too early to even be talking about Canton. From 2001-16 the Pats have had ten different players lead the team in rushing during the season, and eight different receivers lead the team in catches. There was no true defensive anchor, no Joe Greene or Ray Nitschke or Ronnie Lott. How Belichick does it every year is one of the most amazing things I have ever seen in coaching. The Patriots are a lot of things. Overrated is certainly not one of them.

It's a different sport, but in the 90's, there were critics that said that the Bulls won in a watered-down era. The same can be said for the Patriots the last 16 years. They have played in a weak division that whole time. The Bills, Dolphins, and Jets have combined for about 18 different coaches and 40+ different starting QB's, and they are way below .500 against teams that finished the season with a winning record.

You combine that with the preferential treatment that they get from the league (they covered up Spygate for example), and you see why they are so successful.

Hmmm ... let's see ... they've gone 25-9 in the playoffs under Belichick. How many of those games were against teams with a losing record?

[Rupert Patrick]

It's a different sport, but in the 90's, there were critics that said that the Bulls won in a watered-down era. The same can be said for the Patriots the last 16 years. They have played in a weak division that whole time. The Bills, Dolphins, and Jets have combined for about 18 different coaches and 40+ different starting QB's, and they are way below .500 against teams that finished the season with a winning record.

You combine that with the preferential treatment that they get from the league (they covered up Spygate for example), and you see why they are so successful.

Hmmm ... let's see ... they've gone 25-9 in the playoffs under Belichick. How many of those games were against teams with a losing record?

The two times they lost in the Super Bowl, they lost in the final minute of the game.. They held off The Greatest Show on Turf, they came back from a 28-3 deficit in the third quarter in another Super Bowl, and they stopped Russell Wilson with a goal-line interception in the final minute to hold onto a victory.

Their games against the Colts are the stuff of legend. Brady vs. Manning is in my opinion the NFL's greatest rivalry, on a par with Yankees vs. Dodgers, Bird vs. Magic, and Ali vs. Frazier. Their meetings were postseason classics, and the regular season games were key games that often decided home field advantage in the postseason, and they rarely failed to deliver. New England was 8-5 in games against Peyton Manning teams regular season (Colts 2001-10, Denver 2012-15), and they split the six postseason games.

How did New England fare against the better AFC teams of the Belichick era? New England from 2001-17 is 8-2 against Pittsburgh in the regular season and 3-0 in AFC Championship Games. Baltimore has been one of the stronger AFC teams from 2001-17; over that span, New England was 6-1 against them regular season, 2-2 postseason. Cincinnati has been generally a pretty decent team during the Marvin Lewis era (2003-17); during that era, New England has been 6-1 against the Bengals. Denver was a team who did well against New England even before Peyton Manning showed up there; from 2001-10 NE was 3-4 against the Broncos regular season, 1-1 postseason.

According to my math, the Patriots from 2001-17 were 37-22 regular season against AFC teams that would go on to make the postseason during that particular postseason, and 17-11 regular season against NFC teams that would go on to make the postseason during that season.

[rhickok1109]

It's a different sport, but in the 90's, there were critics that said that the Bulls won in a watered-down era. The same can be said for the Patriots the last 16 years. They have played in a weak division that whole time. The Bills, Dolphins, and Jets have combined for about 18 different coaches and 40+ different starting QB's, and they are way below .500 against teams that finished the season with a winning record.

You combine that with the preferential treatment that they get from the league (they covered up Spygate for example), and you see why they are so successful.

Hmmm ... let's see ... they've gone 25-9 in the playoffs under Belichick. How many of those games were against teams with a losing record?

The two times they lost in the Super Bowl, they lost in the final minute of the game.. They held off The Greatest Show on Turf, they came back from a 28-3 deficit in the third quarter in another Super Bowl, and they stopped Russell Wilson with a goal-line interception in the final minute to hold onto a victory.

Their games against the Colts are the stuff of legend. Brady vs. Manning is in my opinion the NFL's greatest rivalry, on a par with Yankees vs. Dodgers, Bird vs. Magic, and Ali vs. Frazier. Their meetings were postseason classics, and the regular season games were key games that often decided home field advantage in the postseason, and they rarely failed to deliver. New England was 8-5 in games against Peyton Manning teams regular season (Colts 2001-10, Denver 2012-15), and they split the six postseason games.

How did New England fare against the better AFC teams of the Belichick era? New England from 2001-17 is 8-2 against Pittsburgh in the regular season and 3-0 in AFC Championship Games. Baltimore has been one of the stronger AFC teams from 2001-17; over that span, New England was 6-1 against them regular season, 2-2 postseason. Cincinnati has been generally a pretty decent team during the Marvin Lewis era (2003-17); during that era, New England has been 6-1 against the Bengals. Denver was a team who did well against New England even before Peyton Manning showed up there; from 2001-10 NE was 3-4 against the Broncos regular season, 1-1 postseason.

According to my math, the Patriots from 2001-17 were 37-22 regular season against AFC teams that would go on to make the postseason during that particular postseason, and 17-11 regular season against NFC teams that would go on to make the postseason during that season.

And the moral is that it's okay to express mere opinions that can be disputed but not refuted, but it's not a good idea to make baseless assertions that can actually be checked against facts.

[RRMarshall]

]n that most-likely event of the Vikings hosting the Super Bowl, how will the ticket distribution go about as compared to a regular home Vikings game? I’m assuming all season-ticket holders will get automatic dibs. But wouldn’t season-ticket holders of the opposing team all have dibs as well? And then all of those nationwide attending the event no matter who the participants are. I’m sure a share of them won’t even be Vikings-fans. Exactly how much “at-home” would they feel compared to a regular home-game?

And keep this in mind...the AFC champ will technically be the home team meaning they’ll be in the dark unis instead[/i]

Here in NE being a season ticket holder does not mean an automatic Super Bowl ticket. All season ticket holders go into a lottery and the winners get to buy tickets. I assume it works the same for most teams. I also believe the home team gets their choice of jerseys to wear, for example the Cowboys would opt to use their home whites instead of those supposedly jinxed dark jerseys (remember SB V ??)