• Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

NFL/NCAAF Thread

Hunter Zolomon

Into the Shadows
Staff member
Moderator
You still have to play the game. The Patriots just happen to play very good football at home! The Patriots could slip up you never know.

The team that executes the best wins. Today the Cardinals executed better than the Lions. The home fans weren't on the field winning the game for Arizona. Fans just make it loud in a stadium. Being at home doesn't guarantee you anything in football. You still have to play the game, and execute better than the other team. The Broncos played terrible football, and the Rams were executing.

Hats off to the Rams.
 

ebevan91

Well-Known Member
Such a good bye week for the Cowboys.

The other 3 NFC East teams lost today.
 

Hunter Zolomon

Into the Shadows
Staff member
Moderator
Wow, the Seahawks this season.

They out gained the Chiefs today in total yards and even time of possession, but in the end the Chiefs came out on top.
 

Mye

Someone has to win..
Such a good bye week for the Cowboys.

The other 3 NFC East teams lost today.

Not only that, but all three of those teams lost in pretty humiliating fashion. The giants looked like they have in the past with eli throwing 5 INTS, the redskins lost to a bucs team that I personslly thought would go 1-15, and the eagles surrendered 50 points to the packers with the "resurging" sanchez throwing 2 int's in a game for the 24th time in his career. Don't get me wrong, I still think the cowboys are overrated and very streaky (they've had a pretty light schedule to start the year). Still, after what happened sunday they should feel safe when it comes to securing a playoff spot.
 

Sid87

I love shiny pokemon
Wow, the Seahawks this season.

They out gained the Chiefs today in total yards and even time of possession, but in the end the Chiefs came out on top.

Yeah, they won the turnover battle, too.

Didn't win the officiating battle, though. The non-call Illegal Contact in the end zone on 4th and goal was AWFUL. How do you not call that? The Chief extended his elbow into Baldwin and completed knocked him off his route.
 

SlowPokeBroKing

Future Gym Leader
What about Jonas Gray last night? I'm writing it off as a fluke until I see some more games with this guy but I was absolutely shocked at his performance. This weekend was for the running backs (side-reference to the almighty Melvin Gordon).
 

Nightlingbolt

AKA Nightlingbolt
Wow, the Seahawks this season.

They out gained the Chiefs today in total yards and even time of possession, but in the end the Chiefs came out on top.

The Jets say hi.

What about Jonas Gray last night? I'm writing it off as a fluke until I see some more games with this guy but I was absolutely shocked at his performance. This weekend was for the running backs (side-reference to the almighty Melvin Gordon).

That's the genius of Belichick. If you follow his scheme as close to the letter as the universe will allow, chances are you'll see results.

With the Patriots beating the Colts and the Broncos somehow losing to St. Louis, people are already saying the road to the Super Bowl runs through Foxboro. Guess what: It doesn't. We hold tiebreakers over both Denver and Indy at this point. Two problems here: The Broncos are tied for first with the Chiefs, and the Chiefs hold the tiebreaker over us. Add to that, the Chiefs have a gimme game against Oakland Thursday, and the Broncos are at home against Miami Sunday, and you can't even begin to tell me Peyton Manning doesn't want blood after a seven-point debacle like that! So basically, Denver has to beat Kansas City in two weeks, and until then, the Patriots' next two games are must-win, because while winning the Championship at Arrowhead would make an awesome narrative, I do NOT want it to come to that. Not against a team that's blown us out at home before.
 

SlowPokeBroKing

Future Gym Leader
The Jets say hi.



That's the genius of Belichick. If you follow his scheme as close to the letter as the universe will allow, chances are you'll see results.

With the Patriots beating the Colts and the Broncos somehow losing to St. Louis, people are already saying the road to the Super Bowl runs through Foxboro. Guess what: It doesn't. We hold tiebreakers over both Denver and Indy at this point. Two problems here: The Broncos are tied for first with the Chiefs, and the Chiefs hold the tiebreaker over us. Add to that, the Chiefs have a gimme game against Oakland Thursday, and the Broncos are at home against Miami Sunday, and you can't even begin to tell me Peyton Manning doesn't want blood after a seven-point debacle like that! So basically, Denver has to beat Kansas City in two weeks, and until then, the Patriots' next two games are must-win, because while winning the Championship at Arrowhead would make an awesome narrative, I do NOT want it to come to that. Not against a team that's blown us out at home before.

The Broncos-Dolphins game will surely be a good one. Although, I do see Denver taking it mainly because Miami's offense isn't producing the kind of numbers it needs to pass up Denver's defense. Sure, the Dolphins' secondary can prevent some of Peyton's efficiency but it's nothing to what the Broncos will do to Tannehill.

As for the Pats, I agree for two reasons. My first is that you are correct in these must-win scenarios. The Patriots cannot slip up or their home-field advantage will be stripped. But I also agree because I am tired of hearing these analysts prematurely talk about the postseason. There are several scenarios in which the playoff picture could change drastically and we need to just sit back and watch the games be played.
 

Nightlingbolt

AKA Nightlingbolt
See, if the Chiefs had lost that game against Seattle, then the Patriots could slip up once and be fine. That was breathing room we desperately needed to get us through these next few games, and unless Oakland pulls something out of its ***, we don't have that kind of breathing room. Either way, it's not home-field that scares me so much as the prospect of playing one more game at Arrowhead. Last night's win proves we can win big games on the road, but I am not gonna bet against Aaron Rodgers after how many 50-point games?

EDIT: I don't follow college football. How does their new playoff system work?
 
Last edited:

SlowPokeBroKing

Future Gym Leader
See, if the Chiefs had lost that game against Seattle, then the Patriots could slip up once and be fine. That was breathing room we desperately needed to get us through these next few games, and unless Oakland pulls something out of its ***, we don't have that kind of breathing room. Either way, it's not home-field that scares me so much as the prospect of playing one more game at Arrowhead. Last night's win proves we can win big games on the road, but I am not gonna bet against Aaron Rodgers after how many 50-point games?

EDIT: I don't follow college football. How does their new playoff system work?

The college football playoff, at least currently in its first season, takes a panel of analysts that determine the 4 best teams in college to compete in a post-season playoff. First seed v fourth seed and second v third. Then obviously the winners of those two games compete for the National Championship. All other ranked teams (and some with good enough records but not ranked) still play in the usual bowl games.
 

Nightlingbolt

AKA Nightlingbolt
A PANEL of ANALYSTS?! Why isn't it based on records?!
 

SlowPokeBroKing

Future Gym Leader
A PANEL of ANALYSTS?! Why isn't it based on records?!

Because there are so many other factors that are taken into account like strength of schedule, conference, how much you won by, who you lost to, how well you played in those games, if you're consistent, injuries, etc. College ball is different than the pros in that not every conference is on the same level as another.

Personally, I hope they soon take the 64 most worthy teams in the country and split them into 8 conferences, composed of 8 teams each. From there, they could take the top two teams per conference based on record and pit them against each other in a 16 team bracket. There could be seeds for home-field advantage and the like, but wild cards wouldn't be needed so it's not exactly like the NFL Playoffs.

The argument against a 16 team bracket is that it would stretch the season out too much. I disagree with that. With 16 teams, that would only be 4 games maximum, and that's only for the two teams that end up in the championship game. If they drop conference championships and bowl games and shorten the season to 12 games instead of 13, that would really only be 1 extra game a season for the championship teams.

It's extremely plausible a concept. I hope they implement something very similar in the near future.
 

Pikachu Fan Number Nine

Don't Mess wit Texas
In the Pac-12, Saturday's USC-UCLA game essentially decides the state title in California. A USC win would give them a sweep, while a UCLA win would give them a clear path to the state title, only needing to beat Stanford after that, and Stanford isn't themselves this season.
 

Nightlingbolt

AKA Nightlingbolt
And this panel of analysts is somehow qualified to consider all that? How many people are on the panel anyway?

On the subject of playoff formats, if the NFL postseason is decided by division winners and two wild-cards, they at least need to seed the six teams in each conference based on overall record instead of dividing the teams into division winners and wild-cards. With the NFC South performing the way it has been, no one from that division deserves the opportunity to host a game (as I understand it, the Falcons would currently be the No. 4 seed based purely on being a division winner, with the right to host the No. 5 seed).
 

Mye

Someone has to win..
And this panel of analysts is somehow qualified to consider all that? How many people are on the panel anyway?

On the subject of playoff formats, if the NFL postseason is decided by division winners and two wild-cards, they at least need to seed the six teams in each conference based on overall record instead of dividing the teams into division winners and wild-cards. With the NFC South performing the way it has been, no one from that division deserves the opportunity to host a game (as I understand it, the Falcons would currently be the No. 4 seed based purely on being a division winner, with the right to host the No. 5 seed).

Agreed. After the debocal that was the Florida Panthers' playoff run a few years ago I truly do hate it when crappy teams make the playoffs and good teams don't. It's why I'm all for the idea of just scrapping the divisions entirely, and having the 8 best teams of each conference face eachother in the playoffs. Then we get more football games, and better quality football games that don't result in a possible 6-10 or 7-9 team making the superbowl.
 

Nightlingbolt

AKA Nightlingbolt
I would keep the divisions intact if only for scheduling purposes. But even so, being a division champion shouldn't automatically result in a playoff berth.
 

SlowPokeBroKing

Future Gym Leader
And this panel of analysts is somehow qualified to consider all that? How many people are on the panel anyway?

On the subject of playoff formats, if the NFL postseason is decided by division winners and two wild-cards, they at least need to seed the six teams in each conference based on overall record instead of dividing the teams into division winners and wild-cards. With the NFC South performing the way it has been, no one from that division deserves the opportunity to host a game (as I understand it, the Falcons would currently be the No. 4 seed based purely on being a division winner, with the right to host the No. 5 seed).

As for the committee, there are 13 judges and most of them have a lot of football playing/coaching experience. Except for Condoleeza Rice. God only knows why she's on the panel.

I agree for the most part about the divisional championship stuff, but at the same time you have to think that there are wild card teams who win the Super Bowl. So, in a way, these teams could be said to have a bad record because they started off slow or were injury-plagued. Also, I believe divisions exist partially for record races. These four teams are duking it out all season and it helps with rivalries and the divisional standings give the teams that extra push to do better. However, I do agree that it should just be the best records overall.
 

deathseer

Oh, u mad bro?
So one division has one bad year and every idiot in the world is calling for the playoff system to be tossed? Nevermind the fact that the NFC South just last season produced 2 playoff teams and that any division is subject to a bad year.

Teams have bad years all the the time. Clam your tits and just let the season just play out as it should. The weaker teams will get weeded out, just as they always do when it comes playoff time.
 

Nightlingbolt

AKA Nightlingbolt
Speaking of bad teams, somehow the Raiders actually beat Kansas City! That gives the Patriots a little breathing room, but if we lose and Denver beats Miami, then Green Bay becomes a must-win, and if they have to lose a game from now until the last three games, I'd rather it be after that game.
 
Last edited:

Navin

MALDREAD
So if Michigan wins tomorrow against Maryland, it becomes bowl eligible. Sad how a team that should be challenging for the B10 title hasn't yet clinched bowl eligibility. Honestly, I don't even think the team should play in a bowl game if it goes 6-6 and wins against Maryland but loses to Ohio State.

Then again, that's my gripe with 6-6 and 7-5 teams making bowl games. More so with 6-6 teams. Seems like you should have more than a 50% win rate to move onto a postseason game, but then again, all these bowls are money-making machines.
 
Top