T1B

1. How is it that a game (Denver at San Diego) that has zero playoff implications for either team involved can impact another teams playoff chances?

2. How is it that KC would actually have the tie-breaker over Pittsburgh (better conference record) but still miss the playoffs in favor of the Steelers?

War Wagon wrote:1. How is it that a game (Denver at San Diego) that has zero playoff implications for either team involved can impact another teams playoff chances?

2. How is it that KC would actually have the tie-breaker over Pittsburgh (better conference record) but still miss the playoffs in favor of the Steelers?

None of this matters. The Steelers will beat the Lions.

BSmack wrote:

War Wagon wrote:1. How is it that a game (Denver at San Diego) that has zero playoff implications for either team involved can impact another teams playoff chances?

2. How is it that KC would actually have the tie-breaker over Pittsburgh (better conference record) but still miss the playoffs in favor of the Steelers?

None of this matters. The Steelers will beat the Lions.

...and you can take that to the bank...


sin, Golfing and fishing Charger players.

BSmack wrote: None of this matters. The Steelers will beat the Lions.

If the blots win on Saturday, they won't have to.

Although the Chargers have been eliminated, if they win vs. Broncos and they, the Chiefs and the Steelers all finish at 10-6, you would break division ties first. Chargers would win tiebreaker vs. Chiefs based on common opponents [8-4 vs 7-5] and that would eliminate the Chiefs. They would then go to tiebreaker vs. Steelers, which Pittsburgh would win based on its head-to-head win vs. Chargers).

kcdave wrote:Although the Chargers have been eliminated, if they win vs. Broncos and they, the Chiefs and the Steelers all finish at 10-6, you would break division ties first. Chargers would win tiebreaker vs. Chiefs based on common opponents [8-4 vs 7-5] and that would eliminate the Chiefs. They would then go to tiebreaker vs. Steelers, which Pittsburgh would win based on its head-to-head win vs. Chargers).

Yep, and that had me wiggin out for a bit.

The 3rd division tiebreaker after head to head and division record used to be conference record, until they re-aligned the divisions a few years back.

I understand why they changed the tiebreaker, it only makes sense, but that common opponent rule is a ball breaker in this instance.


Aarrrggggh!!!

Wags, understand now why I was so pissed about the Philly choke, and why Scott and I basically said "Fuck it," after the no-show in Buffalo?

Superbowl winning teams can only afford to lose 1, 2, 3, maybe 4 games, and none of those losses can be double digit choke jobs at home, or on the road to shitty teams. Playoff contenders can not afford to lose those types of games in years like this, when the conference has so many heavy hitters.

In the rare event that its all just a case of bad luck, teams with real aspirations of winning rings rebound, and win games like @ Dallas, and/or @ NY Giants. The Chiefs did not. Plain and simple.

Do I like it? No. And before you start any bullshit about being a loyal fan, just stop already. It only makes you sound like primer and soot fan, or a few of the others here that rely on blind faith.

kcdave wrote:Wags, understand now why I was so pissed about the Philly choke, and why Scott and I basically said "Fuck it," after the no-show in Buffalo?

You don't think I was just as pissed after Philly? As for Buffalo, they were never in the game, so no angst here. That shit happens to us, especially in Buffalo. I didn't say "Fuck it" after that game, however.

Superbowl winning teams can only afford to lose 1, 2, 3, maybe 4 games, and none of those losses can be double digit choke jobs at home, or on the road to shitty teams. Playoff contenders can not afford to lose those types of games in years like this, when the conference has so many heavy hitters.

We could've afforded to lose all of those early season games.

...teams with real aspirations of winning rings rebound, and win games like @ Dallas, and/or @ NY Giants. The Chiefs did not. Plain and simple.

The Dallas game was the killer. That one will stick in my craw for a long, looong, time. I may melt down over it again, if not careful.

Do I like it? No. And before you start any bullshit about being a loyal fan, just stop already.

It's not about loyalty.

It's about passion, and there's a big difference.

Wags, wtf with the cut/paste? You aint keeping me up all night, and Im not gonna play the if game. You can melt all you want about the Dallas game, but why the fuck would you waste time knowing the Chiefs couldnt win a game against that miserable excuse of a team in Buffalo this year?

You mean the same team that just beat Cincy...at Cincy?

It's the NFL, dave.

Any given Sunday, or Saturday in this case.

I still haven't given up btw.

Nice to know that we can fuck the chefs, even in losing a game. It's a win-win situation, baby.

Surest money you'll bet all season is the chargers to cover 8 vs. Denver.

I'd take the Lions and the 17 after San Diego wins, though as I think Cower will rest his regulars

War Wagon wrote: The Dallas game was the killer. That one will stick in my craw for a long, looong, time. I may melt down over it again, if not careful.

Cmon you little fucking douche bag. Your bitch ass squad couldn't sac up and get laid in a free whore house. Side with Scott and realize your team sucks dick and wait till next year.

DallasFanatic wrote:Your bitch ass squad couldn't sac up and get laid in a free whore house.

Huh?

You couldn't get laid in a monkey whorehouse with a bushel of bananas.

UCant Unretires Again wrote:

DallasFanatic wrote:Your bitch ass squad couldn't sac up and get laid in a free whore house.

Huh?

You couldn't get laid in a monkey whorehouse with a bushel of bananas.

Very nice UCunt. But I don't remember asking your opinion.

:D