#2 seed is all in the hands of San Diego and Cincinnati.

what's crazy is if there is a 4 way tie for best record in the conference, Steelers would end up playing at Denver in round 1

 

Negative. I believe division tie breakers are settled first and thus the Steelers would be the 5th seed if there were a 4-way tie. The only way for the Steelers to finish ahead of Baltimore is to finish one game better than them in the standings.

 

The Steelers have basically played themselves out of any chance of a first round bye. There is no way they can pass the Ravens unless they drop both of their final two games, and even if the Patriots lose we have the tiebreaker over them.

 

If the Steelers win out AND Baltimore loses one AND Houston (or New England) loses one, Pittsburgh gets the 2 seed and a first round bye.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/machine

Spoiler

Like I said, Steelers could be tied for best record in the conference and play on the road in round 1.

 

So all the Texans need to do is win the next 2 games and as long as the Patriots drop one of their remaining 2 games they get the #1 seed and home field throughout the playoffs. But this is not possible if the Patriots lose both their games. This is crazy, I thought the possibility of the Texans getting the top seed in the AFC was a bygone after that poor showing against the Panthers, but apparently not. So as long as the Texans win out the Ravens are irrelevant here. If they lose good we get it outright, even if they win out the Texans still prevail in a 3 way tie.
My My its going to be an interesting last two weeks of the season.

 

I just don't see the Patriots losing at home to Miami and Buffalo. Well, maybe Miami. It's still such a huge long-shot. The hilarity of it is that if they do lose to Miami, then Texans will be rooting like crazy for a Patriots win in the last week so we'd get the #1 seed instead of the #2 seed.

 

My bad, I misread what you were trying to say last night. You're correct. Repped

 

Current Probabilities, via Football Outsiders
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds

Bye
1 NE 83% (HOU 8%)
2 BAL 49% (PIT 23%)
-------------
3 HOU 77% (PIT 10%)
4 DEN 84% (KC 8%)
--------------
WC
5 PIT 59% (BAL 38%)
6 NYJ 45% (CIN 35%)

* second most likely team for slot listed in ( )

So the biggest x-factor to be played out is Baltimore. It all comes down to whether they trip up. Browns look like dogmeat with Colt done for the year, but the Bengals have something to play for if the Jets keep them in the hunt.

Overall, I'd start game planning for Dirty Sanchez in Reliant.

 

Best chances for us to move up: MIA @ NE (wk 16), and BAL @ CIN (wk 17)

We really need the NYG to beat the NYJ this week so that CIN will be able to control their own fate for getting into the playoffs, thus making them play their best game in that final week against BAL.

Games that I'm watching this Saturday at Noon CST: MIA @ NE, ARI @ CIN, NYG @ NYJ, and CLE @ BAL (not holding my breath)

 

I love how the Miami/New England game is likely to determine whether the Texans get the No. 1 overall seed and homefield throughout, and CBS has decided that Houston should be shown the Tebows game instead.

 

Sunday Ticket baby =)

 

The Texans chances at the 2 seed are pretty fair as well though, aren't they? If the Patriots, Steelers and Texans all win out, and the Ravens lose to the Bengals in Week 17, the Texans will gain the 2 seed, right? Doesn't that seem like a more likely scenario than having the Patriots AND Ravens both losing one of their final 2 games?

 

Have they had a good game? They ran the ball extremely well against Atlanta and Cincinnati. But Yates has been a big problem, turning the ball over and taking far too many sacks. Schaub had 7 TOs in 9.5 games; Yates has 5 in three starts (and had a potential killer sixth wiped out by penalty against ATL). Schaub was sacked 16 times; Yates 10. They've had balls bounce their way and, by and large, the defense has played extremely well. But they've scored 17, 20 and 13 points with Yates. You're not going to beat NE averaging 17 points a game. You're probably not beating Baltimore, either - but at least they've been held to 17 or fewer points in 5 games. New England? Once.

But turnovers and missed opportunities are a big reason why the team is struggling to score, so, sorry, I'm not inclined to excuse those. You can't beat NE with wouldas, couldas and shouldas. They are, absolutely, going to score.

I agree; that's why I want no part of the Patriots. Yes, they have the worst defense among all AFC playoff contenders. And they're still going to likely be 13-3 and the first seed. And that's because they can score, score, score.

The Texans best chance, in my opinion, is to draw QBs that don't put them at a tremendous disadvantage. Flacco will make mistakes, get rattled - and he's having a pretty ordinary season. I'll take my chances that he'll be far more prone to turnovers and poor play, keeping us in the game and possibly shortening the field, than I would Brady.

 

Houston probabilities:
#1 8.3%
#2 14.6%
#3 77.0%
#4 00.0%

#1 Seed:
NE 83.3%
HOU 8.3%
PIT 7.6%
BAL: 0.8%

#2 Seed:
BAL 49.9%
PIT 23.0%
HOU 14.6%
NE 12.4%

#3 Seed:
HOU 77.0%
PIT 10.1%
BAL 8.5%
NE 4.3%

The biggest take home is that Baltimore opened the door for Pittsburgh to overtake them. They still own the head to head tiebreaker, they both play the Browns, but PIT gets the doormats of St Louis while the Ravens have to knock the Bengals out of the WC hunt.

I don't believe the tiebreakers are going to work in our favor, unless we tie the Steelers.

We need to win out and hope that Bal drops another one (CIN). I'd say odds of both happening are about 1 in 5.

 

Ric, all good thoughts. Devil's-advocate-type question: how many good defenses have the Patriots faced? I hear often that their schedule this year has been relatively weak compared to other contenders.

--> not arguing the Texans will hold them to a couple field goals, mind you.

 

50/50 - #1 Steelers (scored 17); #7 Jets (30, 37); #10 Eagles (38); #11 Chargers (35); #15 Dolphins (38); #16 Chiefs (34). So, 7 of 13 games against average+ defenses. Plus they also just hung 41 at Denver, who is ranked 22nd but has been a very good defensive team of late after a slow start.

If they're not making mistakes, they're pretty unstoppable.

 

The Yates "fumble" against Cincinnati was inconsequential. It was a fourth-down play in which if he went down, it was a turnover regardless, so he was a bit loose with the ball and trying to make a play. Oh, and his "fumble" against Atlanta was one of the single worst calls in the history of the NFL. The league apologized for it later that week. Those two really pad the numbers.

Also, and I know I've said this before, but you have to keep in mind the sample size. Three games is incredibly small, particularly when you factor in the missed field goals, fumble on the 1-yard line, etc. But if you want to play with small sample sizes, you also have to look at New England's offensive performances at home in the prior two Januarys. Two games, sure, but an average of 17 points (your figure) and it arguably should have been lower.

Oh, and Yates' first three opponents - Jacksonville, Atlanta and Cincinnati - all have defenses in the top 10 of the league. New England? Dead last. Sorry, the discrepancy there has to be taken into account when looking at predictive value.

But the entire premise of your argument is that the Texan offense is worlds different with TJ Yates. You're trying to beat people over the head with that. I showed you turnovers/missed opportunities in the Cincinnati game on plays that had nothing to do with TJ Yates. And, quite frankly, most reasonable observers would say are unlikely to happen again. Because in those instances, you can look back at offensive performance over the entire season and draw that conclusion.

You have a right to that opinion, of course, but as I see it, that's playing from a position of weakness. You're looking to mitigate your supposed weak spot (QB) by playing the team whose counterpart might have similarly poor play. You're playing not to lose, to use a game analogy.

To me, I want a chance for this team to go out and use its greatest strength and see if that's good enough. It worked in New England for the running games of the Ravens and Jets during the past two Januarys, and I think it can for us, too.

 

<-- still just geeked that we're in the playoffs :grin::grin:

 

For realsies: how much more fun is this conversation than calling for Kubiak's head and talking about how many years he's had?

I haven't had this much NFL fun since 1993.