Playoff matchup possibilities

[onepicknick1]

A playoff team should never be concerned with who they play. It's the playoffs, if you're not ready for any team that comes your way, you're not a contender.
Way too much time spent talking about who people don't want to face. Meh, bring it on. It's the Playoffs, no fear.

I tend to agree with this. My take is that if we are truly the best team, it shouldn't make any difference who we play. If we're not good enough to beat the Bucs, what makes us think that we're good enough to beat the Chiefs? For me, it's always Lombardi or bust.

My take is some teams are better matched up to beat us like the Bucs because of Brady. Why? because he's an excellent short yard passer he takes what the Defense will give him same for Rodgers I would rather see another team take them out that possibly has a better short game defense. That's just my opinion though.

 

[RiverDog]

My take is some teams are better matched up to beat us like the Bucs because of Brady. Why? because he's an excellent short yard passer he takes what the Defense will give him same for Rodgers I would rather see another team take them out that possibly has a better short game defense. That's just my opinion though.

That's absolutely true and I hear what you're saying, but especially being that we haven't even played the Bucs or Packers this season, we really don't know which teams match up better until they line up on the LOS and snap the ball. We're just looking at paper matchups. Jarran Reed might own the Packer's OG in front of him and create a living hell for Rodgers, or they could go through our defense like a hot knife through butter.

There's too many random elements in play, at least for me, to get hung up on which opponent gives us the best chance of advancing. Does playing WFT in the first round give us an advantage since we've already played and defeated them, or is it more problematic to beat the same team twice in 3 weeks? Which team's coaching staff will make the better adjustments to what they saw in the first game?

 

[LTH]

My take is some teams are better matched up to beat us like the Bucs because of Brady. Why? because he's an excellent short yard passer he takes what the Defense will give him same for Rodgers I would rather see another team take them out that possibly has a better short game defense. That's just my opinion though.

That's absolutely true and I hear what you're saying, but especially being that we haven't even played the Bucs or Packers this season, we really don't know which teams match up better until they line up on the LOS and snap the ball. We're just looking at paper matchups. Jarran Reed might own the Packer's OG in front of him and create a living hell for Rodgers, or they could go through our defense like a hot knife through butter.

There's too many random elements in play, at least for me, to get hung up on which opponent gives us the best chance of advancing. Does playing WFT in the first round give us an advantage since we've already played and defeated them, or is it more problematic to beat the same team twice in 3 weeks? Which team's coaching staff will make the better adjustments to what they saw in the first game?

I don't think it matters who the Hawks play other than weather conditions being a factor... but the Bottom line it comes down to the Hawks executing the game plan... When the Hawks O is playing well there is not a D in the league that matches up with them... We will find out how good this D is come sunday against the Rams but I think this D is good enough to make a SB run...


LTH

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

There are two things I don't like about the new playoff format: The dilution of the quality of teams that advance to the playoffs and the trivialization of Week 17 games.

Not sure Week 17 is any more trivial than before. In fact, it might be more important. Teams will still be playing for the #1/#2 seeding spot, but the difference this year is if they lose out on the #1 spot, they play a wild card game. The difference between #1 and #2 this year isn't "Meh, we may have to play one game on the road if we both win out," it's "We're on a bye week or we're playing an extra game." That's huge.

And as I see it, screwing around with the playoff scenarios, we have about a 75% chance of playing the Rams, with the remaining chance split between the Cardinals and Buccaneers.

There is a solid chance in order for the Seahawks to win the Superbowl they will need to beat:
Brady
Brees
Rodgers
Mahomes

Yikes!

There is a solid chance in order for any other NFC team to win the Superbowl they will need to beat:
Brady/Wilson
Brees/Wilson
Rodgers/Wilson
Mahomes

Double yikes!

 

[RiverDog]

There are two things I don't like about the new playoff format: The dilution of the quality of teams that advance to the playoffs and the trivialization of Week 17 games.

Not sure Week 17 is any more trivial than before. In fact, it might be more important. Teams will still be playing for the #1/#2 seeding spot, but the difference this year is if they lose out on the #1 spot, they play a wild card game. The difference between #1 and #2 this year isn't "Meh, we may have to play one game on the road if we both win out," it's "We're on a bye week or we're playing an extra game." That's huge.

Just looking at comparative W/L records heading into Week 16 without getting into tiebreakers, there are only 3 teams in the AFC (Chiefs, Bills, and Steelers) and 5 in the NFC (Packers, Saints, Seahawks, Rams, and Bucs) with records good enough to secure a first round bye. If there were a 2nd bye as in past years, that number jumps to a total of 8 in the AFC (add in Titans, Browns, Colts, Dolphins, and Ravens) that would be in the hunt for a first round bye and 6 in the NFC (toss in the Cards).

So bottom line is that by eliminating one of the byes, you've gone from 15 teams, all but one playing in separate games, that would have been in the hunt for two byes to 8 teams in the hunt for one. By the law of averages, you're cutting in half the number of teams that will be playing for something other than just first round seeding.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

Just looking at comparative W/L records heading into Week 16 without getting into tiebreakers, there are only 3 teams in the AFC (Chiefs, Bills, and Steelers) and 5 in the NFC (Packers, Saints, Seahawks, Rams, and Bucs) with records good enough to secure a first round bye. If there were a 2nd bye as in past years, that number jumps to a total of 8 in the AFC (add in Titans, Browns, Colts, Dolphins, and Ravens) that would be in the hunt for a first round bye and 6 in the NFC (toss in the Cards).

So bottom line is that by eliminating one of the byes, you've gone from 15 teams, all but one playing in separate games, that would have been in the hunt for two byes to 8 teams in the hunt for one. By the law of averages, you're cutting in half the number of teams that will be playing for something other than just first round seeding.

True, but you have to subtract all the teams that are guaranteed a #1 or #2 slot and rest all their starters, which we see happen a lot.

 

[RiverDog]

Just looking at comparative W/L records heading into Week 16 without getting into tiebreakers, there are only 3 teams in the AFC (Chiefs, Bills, and Steelers) and 5 in the NFC (Packers, Saints, Seahawks, Rams, and Bucs) with records good enough to secure a first round bye. If there were a 2nd bye as in past years, that number jumps to a total of 8 in the AFC (add in Titans, Browns, Colts, Dolphins, and Ravens) that would be in the hunt for a first round bye and 6 in the NFC (toss in the Cards).

So bottom line is that by eliminating one of the byes, you've gone from 15 teams, all but one playing in separate games, that would have been in the hunt for two byes to 8 teams in the hunt for one. By the law of averages, you're cutting in half the number of teams that will be playing for something other than just first round seeding.

True, but you have to subtract all the teams that are guaranteed a #1 or #2 slot and rest all their starters, which we see happen a lot.

Not necessarily. Under the old format, a team that had clinched at least a first round bye might still be motivated to secure HFA through the playoffs.