Resting players to end the season has not been a formula for success in recent history... and I don't really buy into the idea that a team rests players when it doesn't have homefield locked up! The Pats wanted homefield, and they wanted it BAD! No team benefits from homefield this time of year more than the Patriots...
This team had a meltdown to end the year...
Tom Brady is 4-2 in Superbowl appearances. If anyone has the formula for success it is the Pats and BB (and I HATE the Pats from a fan perspective).
0
Quote Originally Posted by Duderonomy:
Resting players to end the season has not been a formula for success in recent history... and I don't really buy into the idea that a team rests players when it doesn't have homefield locked up! The Pats wanted homefield, and they wanted it BAD! No team benefits from homefield this time of year more than the Patriots...
This team had a meltdown to end the year...
Tom Brady is 4-2 in Superbowl appearances. If anyone has the formula for success it is the Pats and BB (and I HATE the Pats from a fan perspective).
Chiefs played the 14th ranked schedule this year, with 6 games against top 10 opponents, and 7 games against playoff teams...
Patriots played the 22nd ranked schedule this year, with 2 games against top 10 opponents (fewest of any playoff team) and 3 games against playoff teams...
Chiefs play in the AFC West (#2 ranked division in football)... and faced the NFC North in interconference play (#3 ranked division in football)
Patriots play in the AFC East (#5)... and faced the NFC East (#7) in Intercoference play...
Let's be very very clear! No team in the playoffs had a more cupcake schedule than New England, with the possible exception of Carolina... but at least Carolina went 15-1 against their cupcake schedule, and didn't blow homefield advantage down the stretch, in spite of their cupcake schedule.
In case I haven't made myself clear... the term CUPCAKE does apply to one of these teams... and it isn't the Chiefs!
...I think we're looking at the Sagarin ratings from different perspective. The entire NFL was a dumpster fire outside of the teams in the playoffs (2 teams shouldnt have made it, WAS and HOU are jokes), difference between #1 conference and #5 is 1.9...if NYJ would have made playoffs AFC east would have been #2 or #3 strongest conference....this does not effect the Pats.
When you break down H2H SOS and vs top 10 and top 16 schedules, Chiefs finished 2-4 and 5-4 respectively, whete as Pats finished 1-1 and 6-2 respectively.. and chiefs SOS is higher because they "played", not "won" a more difficult front loaded schedule (lost to Broncos, Vikings, Packers, Begnals - Beat steelers w/o Big Ben and banged up Broncos led by osweiler). Pats lost 1/3 of their offense and half their defense and still won #2 seed in the AFC.
The Chiefs faced the raiders twice, SD twice, and caught a beat up BAL and terrible CLE squad en route to their win streak.
Did we forget Brady is on a war path for deflategate? Or that the Pats get away with cheating? Ask for anything besides #2 seed given the injruries the Pats have suffered is asking for moses to part water. Taking KC on the road with without Maclin (the Edelman of the Patriots) and their greatest strength on D being Bradys strength is hoping to hit a half court shot in a game of horse...boldy asking to get lucky.
Fade the public on Packers and Panthers if thats your thing. Pats and Broncos as on point.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Duderonomy:
Whoops! Hold the Phone!
Chiefs played the 14th ranked schedule this year, with 6 games against top 10 opponents, and 7 games against playoff teams...
Patriots played the 22nd ranked schedule this year, with 2 games against top 10 opponents (fewest of any playoff team) and 3 games against playoff teams...
Chiefs play in the AFC West (#2 ranked division in football)... and faced the NFC North in interconference play (#3 ranked division in football)
Patriots play in the AFC East (#5)... and faced the NFC East (#7) in Intercoference play...
Let's be very very clear! No team in the playoffs had a more cupcake schedule than New England, with the possible exception of Carolina... but at least Carolina went 15-1 against their cupcake schedule, and didn't blow homefield advantage down the stretch, in spite of their cupcake schedule.
In case I haven't made myself clear... the term CUPCAKE does apply to one of these teams... and it isn't the Chiefs!
...I think we're looking at the Sagarin ratings from different perspective. The entire NFL was a dumpster fire outside of the teams in the playoffs (2 teams shouldnt have made it, WAS and HOU are jokes), difference between #1 conference and #5 is 1.9...if NYJ would have made playoffs AFC east would have been #2 or #3 strongest conference....this does not effect the Pats.
When you break down H2H SOS and vs top 10 and top 16 schedules, Chiefs finished 2-4 and 5-4 respectively, whete as Pats finished 1-1 and 6-2 respectively.. and chiefs SOS is higher because they "played", not "won" a more difficult front loaded schedule (lost to Broncos, Vikings, Packers, Begnals - Beat steelers w/o Big Ben and banged up Broncos led by osweiler). Pats lost 1/3 of their offense and half their defense and still won #2 seed in the AFC.
The Chiefs faced the raiders twice, SD twice, and caught a beat up BAL and terrible CLE squad en route to their win streak.
Did we forget Brady is on a war path for deflategate? Or that the Pats get away with cheating? Ask for anything besides #2 seed given the injruries the Pats have suffered is asking for moses to part water. Taking KC on the road with without Maclin (the Edelman of the Patriots) and their greatest strength on D being Bradys strength is hoping to hit a half court shot in a game of horse...boldy asking to get lucky.
Fade the public on Packers and Panthers if thats your thing. Pats and Broncos as on point.
Regarding the schedule discussion, I want to add another point:
The Chiefs started 1-5 and 1-4 against 5 playoff teams with their starting QB.
Then they went on to an 12-game-winning-streak:
Steelers w/o Big Ben.
Lions in London before they made coaching adjustments to finish the season 6-2. Lions were 1-6 coming into that game.
Broncos against a declining PM who had his worst career game. Chiefs had one scoring drive of over 50 yards. Chargers (2-8) in a meltdown.
Bills which I would describe as in the near of a quality win.
Raiders off THREE Derek Carr interceptions in the fourth quarter. KC scoring drives were about 2 and 13 yards plus a pick-six. Raiders were up 20-16 coming into the fourth.
Chargers (3-9) on a last-second goal line stand.
Ravens (4-10) easy. Browns (Nr. 2 pick) in a home game in which the Chiefs were outgained by 0.2 YPP with playoffs on the line. Browns had a shot at the end.
Raiders ugh yeah.
Texans a team that wasn't a playoff team by any means and would have finished behind the Fins in the AFC East. KC also benefited from 6 turnovers. The Pats killed the Texans banged up with no turnover advantage.
Just one win against a team above .500 and that was the worst career game of Peyton Manning. If that's impressive enough to go into Foxboro and cover +5 against Tom & Bill on four weeks rest, let it be. People talk about the Chiefs being efficient and not turning the ball over. That's true, but no team on this winning-streak schedule was able to jump a lead on the Chiefs to disturb their conservative gameplan. These teams are leagues below the Pats. They had real competition against the Packers and Bengals on the road. Once these teams built a lead, the game was literally over, because the KC offense isn't built to come from behind.
Everyone talks about the Pats OL being the weakness, but how about the KC OL? Clowney was out (he complements the pass rush) and Watt played half a game last Saturday. The Pats have the #7 scoring defense, and the 2nd-best adjusted sack rate. They are #13 in pass DVOA and their number is - attention - deflated by their injuries down the stretch. They are #10 in run DVOA, this front seven has been playing EXTREMELY well. I would say they have one of the best front sevens in the league. I just remember the first Jets game when the Jets who had good OL play at that point, had a complete mismatch in the trenches. But they still had a great receiving corps and a QB who can hit some medium-ranged passes on the money at times. Something the Chiefs don't have. The Pats defense had a weak schedule, no doubt about that. But we are talking about the Chiefs without Maclin and a weak OL here who collected their offensive output against teams below .500.
This game isn't just about the Pats offense getting healthy on rest. It's also about the Pats defense totally dominating the Chiefs in the trenches which puts Alex Smith in more uncomfortable 3rd down situations w/o Jeremy Maclin (most likely) and his RG. Chiefs TT Under everything above 17 will be a bet for me.
0
Regarding the schedule discussion, I want to add another point:
The Chiefs started 1-5 and 1-4 against 5 playoff teams with their starting QB.
Then they went on to an 12-game-winning-streak:
Steelers w/o Big Ben.
Lions in London before they made coaching adjustments to finish the season 6-2. Lions were 1-6 coming into that game.
Broncos against a declining PM who had his worst career game. Chiefs had one scoring drive of over 50 yards. Chargers (2-8) in a meltdown.
Bills which I would describe as in the near of a quality win.
Raiders off THREE Derek Carr interceptions in the fourth quarter. KC scoring drives were about 2 and 13 yards plus a pick-six. Raiders were up 20-16 coming into the fourth.
Chargers (3-9) on a last-second goal line stand.
Ravens (4-10) easy. Browns (Nr. 2 pick) in a home game in which the Chiefs were outgained by 0.2 YPP with playoffs on the line. Browns had a shot at the end.
Raiders ugh yeah.
Texans a team that wasn't a playoff team by any means and would have finished behind the Fins in the AFC East. KC also benefited from 6 turnovers. The Pats killed the Texans banged up with no turnover advantage.
Just one win against a team above .500 and that was the worst career game of Peyton Manning. If that's impressive enough to go into Foxboro and cover +5 against Tom & Bill on four weeks rest, let it be. People talk about the Chiefs being efficient and not turning the ball over. That's true, but no team on this winning-streak schedule was able to jump a lead on the Chiefs to disturb their conservative gameplan. These teams are leagues below the Pats. They had real competition against the Packers and Bengals on the road. Once these teams built a lead, the game was literally over, because the KC offense isn't built to come from behind.
Everyone talks about the Pats OL being the weakness, but how about the KC OL? Clowney was out (he complements the pass rush) and Watt played half a game last Saturday. The Pats have the #7 scoring defense, and the 2nd-best adjusted sack rate. They are #13 in pass DVOA and their number is - attention - deflated by their injuries down the stretch. They are #10 in run DVOA, this front seven has been playing EXTREMELY well. I would say they have one of the best front sevens in the league. I just remember the first Jets game when the Jets who had good OL play at that point, had a complete mismatch in the trenches. But they still had a great receiving corps and a QB who can hit some medium-ranged passes on the money at times. Something the Chiefs don't have. The Pats defense had a weak schedule, no doubt about that. But we are talking about the Chiefs without Maclin and a weak OL here who collected their offensive output against teams below .500.
This game isn't just about the Pats offense getting healthy on rest. It's also about the Pats defense totally dominating the Chiefs in the trenches which puts Alex Smith in more uncomfortable 3rd down situations w/o Jeremy Maclin (most likely) and his RG. Chiefs TT Under everything above 17 will be a bet for me.
If the NFL was really about what you guys talk here - your points would be valid. But it is not about Football. If it was - the line would be NE -9.5. Yes. Not 7.5 and definitely not 4.5.
Manning is the SB winning QB. So it is WRITTEN and so IT WILL BE. NE has no chance reaching the SB unless... And that unless is not happening. Backdoor or front door - I do not see the Pats covering here.
0
If the NFL was really about what you guys talk here - your points would be valid. But it is not about Football. If it was - the line would be NE -9.5. Yes. Not 7.5 and definitely not 4.5.
Manning is the SB winning QB. So it is WRITTEN and so IT WILL BE. NE has no chance reaching the SB unless... And that unless is not happening. Backdoor or front door - I do not see the Pats covering here.
If the NFL was really about what you guys talk here - your points would be valid. But it is not about Football. If it was - the line would be NE -9.5. Yes. Not 7.5 and definitely not 4.5.
Manning is the SB winning QB. So it is WRITTEN and so IT WILL BE. NE has no chance reaching the SB unless... And that unless is not happening. Backdoor or front door - I do not see the Pats covering here.
I agree that there are stupid lines at times, but not in this game. KC on 11 winning games off a 31-0 performance take on the Pats off 2-4 in their L6 of which many people say it was their true performance. There is NO way the line would be 9.5. This line is set perfectly to attract 50/50 money. KC backers will take everything above 3.5 and Pats backers everything up to 7.
0
Quote Originally Posted by austrian:
If the NFL was really about what you guys talk here - your points would be valid. But it is not about Football. If it was - the line would be NE -9.5. Yes. Not 7.5 and definitely not 4.5.
Manning is the SB winning QB. So it is WRITTEN and so IT WILL BE. NE has no chance reaching the SB unless... And that unless is not happening. Backdoor or front door - I do not see the Pats covering here.
I agree that there are stupid lines at times, but not in this game. KC on 11 winning games off a 31-0 performance take on the Pats off 2-4 in their L6 of which many people say it was their true performance. There is NO way the line would be 9.5. This line is set perfectly to attract 50/50 money. KC backers will take everything above 3.5 and Pats backers everything up to 7.
What you do against your schedule, is, of course, important... but in pretty much any team sport, I have learned that battle-tested teams are more prepared and more likely to do well in post-season play, than teams that faced an easy road all year...
It is the typical Bruiser boxer with a 10-3 record facing championship caliber fighters, vs. the Flashy knockout king with the 19-0 record against a bunch of punching bags...
I look at the Pats and what I see is a team that people have built up in their minds to be something they are not. And I suspect very few fairweather NFL fans look at this game and want to take the Chiefs with less than a TD...
The Dude imbibes
0
What you do against your schedule, is, of course, important... but in pretty much any team sport, I have learned that battle-tested teams are more prepared and more likely to do well in post-season play, than teams that faced an easy road all year...
It is the typical Bruiser boxer with a 10-3 record facing championship caliber fighters, vs. the Flashy knockout king with the 19-0 record against a bunch of punching bags...
I look at the Pats and what I see is a team that people have built up in their minds to be something they are not. And I suspect very few fairweather NFL fans look at this game and want to take the Chiefs with less than a TD...
It wouldn't be difficult to go through the Patriots' schedule and down play every win they've had this season too.
I don't know why KC doesn't get credit for coming into this game with the longest current win streak in the NFL, but NE is brilliant for "resting" guys down the stretch and getting roughed up back to back weeks by divisional opponents, with home field throughout the playoffs on the line.
Two scenarios are likely in this game: NE wins a close game, KC wins a close game. One scenario is less likely, but a possiblilty: NE big. KC big doesn't seem likely at all. Taking KC and the points seems like the "right play" to me, but I feel there are better spots this week.
0
It wouldn't be difficult to go through the Patriots' schedule and down play every win they've had this season too.
I don't know why KC doesn't get credit for coming into this game with the longest current win streak in the NFL, but NE is brilliant for "resting" guys down the stretch and getting roughed up back to back weeks by divisional opponents, with home field throughout the playoffs on the line.
Two scenarios are likely in this game: NE wins a close game, KC wins a close game. One scenario is less likely, but a possiblilty: NE big. KC big doesn't seem likely at all. Taking KC and the points seems like the "right play" to me, but I feel there are better spots this week.
It wouldn't be difficult to go through the Patriots' schedule and down play every win they've had this season too.
I don't know why KC doesn't get credit for coming into this game with the longest current win streak in the NFL, but NE is brilliant for "resting" guys down the stretch and getting roughed up back to back weeks by divisional opponents, with home field throughout the playoffs on the line.
Two scenarios are likely in this game: NE wins a close game, KC wins a close game. One scenario is less likely, but a possiblilty: NE big. KC big doesn't seem likely at all. Taking KC and the points seems like the "right play" to me, but I feel there are better spots this week.
Let me do this for you:
The Patriots started 10-0, killing their opponents by 14.1 PPG with 2-3 rookie OL in the mix.
They started losing some key players like Edelman, Gronkowski etc.
They lost in OT at Denver.
They lost a game vs. the Eagles they lose one time out of 100. They outgained the Eagles per play and by almost 200 total yards. But it was a special teams and return festival win for the Eagles.
They went on to beat the Texans by 21 and the Titans by 17. Yeah they beat the Texans banged up by 21 points and didn't need 6 turnovers to do so.
Vs. the Jets & Dolphins they reportedly let several key players, who would have been ready to play atleast on a limited basis, at home. Everyone with a brain knew the Pats had just a slight chance to win at New York and Belichick knew that as well. Then against the Dolphins they ran the ball 65% of the time even though the Dolphins completely shut down the run game. You don't do that if you really want to win.
They had four losses within one score, twice overtime. But they were killing their opponents by 15+ PPG in wins.
0
Quote Originally Posted by YouLikeThat:
It wouldn't be difficult to go through the Patriots' schedule and down play every win they've had this season too.
I don't know why KC doesn't get credit for coming into this game with the longest current win streak in the NFL, but NE is brilliant for "resting" guys down the stretch and getting roughed up back to back weeks by divisional opponents, with home field throughout the playoffs on the line.
Two scenarios are likely in this game: NE wins a close game, KC wins a close game. One scenario is less likely, but a possiblilty: NE big. KC big doesn't seem likely at all. Taking KC and the points seems like the "right play" to me, but I feel there are better spots this week.
Let me do this for you:
The Patriots started 10-0, killing their opponents by 14.1 PPG with 2-3 rookie OL in the mix.
They started losing some key players like Edelman, Gronkowski etc.
They lost in OT at Denver.
They lost a game vs. the Eagles they lose one time out of 100. They outgained the Eagles per play and by almost 200 total yards. But it was a special teams and return festival win for the Eagles.
They went on to beat the Texans by 21 and the Titans by 17. Yeah they beat the Texans banged up by 21 points and didn't need 6 turnovers to do so.
Vs. the Jets & Dolphins they reportedly let several key players, who would have been ready to play atleast on a limited basis, at home. Everyone with a brain knew the Pats had just a slight chance to win at New York and Belichick knew that as well. Then against the Dolphins they ran the ball 65% of the time even though the Dolphins completely shut down the run game. You don't do that if you really want to win.
They had four losses within one score, twice overtime. But they were killing their opponents by 15+ PPG in wins.
The Patriots started 10-0, killing their opponents by 14.1 PPG with 2-3 rookie OL in the mix.
They started losing some key players like Edelman, Gronkowski etc.
They lost in OT at Denver.
They lost a game vs. the Eagles they lose one time out of 100. They outgained the Eagles per play and by almost 200 total yards. But it was a special teams and return festival win for the Eagles.
They went on to beat the Texans by 21 and the Titans by 17. Yeah they beat the Texans banged up by 21 points and didn't need 6 turnovers to do so.
Vs. the Jets & Dolphins they reportedly let several key players, who would have been ready to play atleast on a limited basis, at home. Everyone with a brain knew the Pats had just a slight chance to win at New York and Belichick knew that as well. Then against the Dolphins they ran the ball 65% of the time even though the Dolphins completely shut down the run game. You don't do that if you really want to win.
They had four losses within one score, twice overtime. But they were killing their opponents by 15+ PPG in wins.
Your comments further prove my point:
They lost to Denver because they were banged up, but KC caught Denver in a good spot.
KC didn't create 6 turnovers, no, they "needed them" to route the Texans.
Watch, I can do the same thing: NE beat Pittsburgh in week 1, but Pittsburgh's defense hadn't gelled yet. Anyone with a brain knew that unit would struggle to start the season. Hell, one play Brady rushed to the line and slung it to an uncovered Gronk.
Best of luck to you sir, but it's a no play for me.
0
Quote Originally Posted by suuma:
Let me do this for you:
The Patriots started 10-0, killing their opponents by 14.1 PPG with 2-3 rookie OL in the mix.
They started losing some key players like Edelman, Gronkowski etc.
They lost in OT at Denver.
They lost a game vs. the Eagles they lose one time out of 100. They outgained the Eagles per play and by almost 200 total yards. But it was a special teams and return festival win for the Eagles.
They went on to beat the Texans by 21 and the Titans by 17. Yeah they beat the Texans banged up by 21 points and didn't need 6 turnovers to do so.
Vs. the Jets & Dolphins they reportedly let several key players, who would have been ready to play atleast on a limited basis, at home. Everyone with a brain knew the Pats had just a slight chance to win at New York and Belichick knew that as well. Then against the Dolphins they ran the ball 65% of the time even though the Dolphins completely shut down the run game. You don't do that if you really want to win.
They had four losses within one score, twice overtime. But they were killing their opponents by 15+ PPG in wins.
Your comments further prove my point:
They lost to Denver because they were banged up, but KC caught Denver in a good spot.
KC didn't create 6 turnovers, no, they "needed them" to route the Texans.
Watch, I can do the same thing: NE beat Pittsburgh in week 1, but Pittsburgh's defense hadn't gelled yet. Anyone with a brain knew that unit would struggle to start the season. Hell, one play Brady rushed to the line and slung it to an uncovered Gronk.
Best of luck to you sir, but it's a no play for me.
Rationalizing things to fit your desired point of view is not a good way to handicap football games... not a good way to go through life in general, for that matter!
The Dude imbibes
0
Rationalizing things to fit your desired point of view is not a good way to handicap football games... not a good way to go through life in general, for that matter!
This is insane. Do people think that these teams are equal or they just dont get HFA. I would like to know someone who would take KC +1/+1.5 against NE on neutral field. If that is not -ev then I dont know what is.
0
This is insane. Do people think that these teams are equal or they just dont get HFA. I would like to know someone who would take KC +1/+1.5 against NE on neutral field. If that is not -ev then I dont know what is.
The Patriots started 10-0, killing their opponents by 14.1 PPG with 2-3 rookie OL in the mix.
They started losing some key players like Edelman, Gronkowski etc.
They lost in OT at Denver.
They lost a game vs. the Eagles they lose one time out of 100. They outgained the Eagles per play and by almost 200 total yards. But it was a special teams and return festival win for the Eagles.
They went on to beat the Texans by 21 and the Titans by 17. Yeah they beat the Texans banged up by 21 points and didn't need 6 turnovers to do so.
Vs. the Jets & Dolphins they reportedly let several key players, who would have been ready to play atleast on a limited basis, at home. Everyone with a brain knew the Pats had just a slight chance to win at New York and Belichick knew that as well. Then against the Dolphins they ran the ball 65% of the time even though the Dolphins completely shut down the run game. You don't do that if you really want to win.
They had four losses within one score, twice overtime. But they were killing their opponents by 15+ PPG in wins.
and look at the pass plays that they ran. no seam or crossing routes to Gronk or Danny. a couple out patterns, a couple back shoulder passes. very safe plays which avoid a potential injury.
0
Quote Originally Posted by suuma:
Let me do this for you:
The Patriots started 10-0, killing their opponents by 14.1 PPG with 2-3 rookie OL in the mix.
They started losing some key players like Edelman, Gronkowski etc.
They lost in OT at Denver.
They lost a game vs. the Eagles they lose one time out of 100. They outgained the Eagles per play and by almost 200 total yards. But it was a special teams and return festival win for the Eagles.
They went on to beat the Texans by 21 and the Titans by 17. Yeah they beat the Texans banged up by 21 points and didn't need 6 turnovers to do so.
Vs. the Jets & Dolphins they reportedly let several key players, who would have been ready to play atleast on a limited basis, at home. Everyone with a brain knew the Pats had just a slight chance to win at New York and Belichick knew that as well. Then against the Dolphins they ran the ball 65% of the time even though the Dolphins completely shut down the run game. You don't do that if you really want to win.
They had four losses within one score, twice overtime. But they were killing their opponents by 15+ PPG in wins.
and look at the pass plays that they ran. no seam or crossing routes to Gronk or Danny. a couple out patterns, a couple back shoulder passes. very safe plays which avoid a potential injury.
Patriots getting 4 weeks to rest is not a good thing. I would be more surprised if the Chiefs lost. Appreciate the write up but this one is pretty misguided.
0
Patriots getting 4 weeks to rest is not a good thing. I would be more surprised if the Chiefs lost. Appreciate the write up but this one is pretty misguided.
...I think we're looking at the Sagarin ratings from different perspective. The entire NFL was a dumpster fire outside of the teams in the playoffs (2 teams shouldnt have made it, WAS and HOU are jokes), difference between #1 conference and #5 is 1.9...if NYJ would have made playoffs AFC east would have been #2 or #3 strongest conference....this does not effect the Pats.
Hot Forum Topics
