Yeah, when they go up against Seattle, it really could go either way. I wasn't really looking at context either, just going through the individual games and choosing the team I think will win. Wasn't factoring in any variables.

But yeah, whoever wins that game, will likely end up winning the conference.

Agreed, that's why I'm beginning my tailgate tomorrow! :clap:

I think if we beat denver we are
if not one and done

we shall be remembered as the worse 9-0 team ever

AFC:
1. Denver (14-2)
2. New England (12-4)
3. Cincinnati (10-6)
4. Indianapolis (10-6)
5. Kansas City (12-4)
6. San Diego (9-7)

Missing - Jets, Pittsburgh, Baltimore (8-8)

NFC:
1. Seattle (15-1)
2. New Orleans (12-4)
3. Philadelphia (10-6)
4. Chicago (10-6)
5. Carolina (12-4)
6. San Fran (10-6)

Missing out Dallas, Arizona (9-7)

This team isn't good enough to make the super bowl. I would rather be the 5th seed and play cincy or indy and win than getting a bye and playing denver just to lose.

Wouldn't happen. Unless we ended up with the 2 seed, we wouldn't play Denver until the AFCCG. I'm with you though, I just want the ****ing playoff loss streak snapped at this point.

Im concerned Knile Davis is not getting carries. He has to be our bruiser back, without one we're finished quick. Get Davis involved especially with Vickerson out.

Correct me if I'm wrong but if the Chiefs win out they would be the 1. Denver would be the wildcard which most likely puts them at 5? The chiefs would play the lowest seed no?

A lot of divisional football left. No one should be gauranteeing anything, a lot could go down these final 5 weeks. Homefield is more important to Denver than us IMHO.

I would fear much more having to go to Foxboro.

They lost to a team that wins by an average of 3 touchdowns at home by 10 points while holding them to their lowest score of the season. Then they lost by 3 points with both of their best defensive players out. That means they're a 9-7 team.

Mmmmmkay.

I think you're right. The #1 and #5 seeds will almost surely be KC and Denver, regardless of the order it happens in. The #1 seed's first game will be against the lowest remaining seed. So if the #5 seed advances and the #6 doesn't, it'll be 1 vs. 5.

I'd honestly rather be the #5. There's a bunch of stats showing that a #1 seed is overrated these days. If I remember right, from 2005-2012 a #1 seed has lost their first game every year but one. And in two years in that span, both the #1s lost.

I'm sure there's a variety of reasons why that is, but there's a lot of pressure being in that position. You're supposed to win and you're playing an underdog that already has a playoff win under their belt and is playing fast and loose.

I don't see this team this year being the sort of group to handle that pressure well. And we already know Denver gagged as the #1 a year ago.

I think NE has a legit shot at #1 overall. Especially if we beat the Donks.

Very true, they do.

The way Cincinnati is playing Baltimore might just win the North. Thought's on the Chiefs going to Baltimore round 1?

I think that has more to do with all those 1 seeds not matching up well with the team coming in more than anything else. It's more about that than pressure. Over the years I can only think of a couple times (specifically on the AFC side, it's late lol) where I seriously thought the 1 seed matched up well with the WC team coming in the following week. Just bad luck/timing or whatever you wanna call it. A lot of things have to go right to win a playoff game and let alone MAKE it to the Super Bowl not just win it, no matter how good your team is because this isn't a seven game series the best team doesn't always win. I've always thought it's about playing well and who you play contributes to the playing well part.