So Wait A Minute, A Win Sunday Doesn't Guarantee Playoffs?

[brimsalabim]

If we don’t make it how does it affect our draft? Is missing the playoffs more helpful in the long run than squeaking in and losing first round?

 

[Cyrus12]

Would rather a game in warm Dallas than one in cold ass Chicago. Wilson is a fair weather QB and we actually would have a chance to beat Dallas.

 

[sdog1981]

If we don’t make it how does it affect our draft? Is missing the playoffs more helpful in the long run than squeaking in and losing first round?

Then they should have put everyone on IR and gone 0-16

 

[Silver Hawk]

It's quite simple. Regardless of this Sunday, if we can't beat the shitty Cardinals with playoffs on the line AT HOME then we don't deserve to be in the playoffs anyways.

Essentially yes.

This weekend is about seeding..

Real interesting battle is mn and philly


If philly wins out, mn has to win out as well, or they miss the playoffs. Seattle could get the 5th seed if they finish 9-7, beating the Cards, and philly or mn dont win out.

Philly hosts the Texans then at Washington.

Mn is at Detroit than host Chicago

If Philly wins out (9-7) and is tied with Seattle for a wild card spot (regardless of what MN does), Seattle wins the conference tie breaker. If MN wins out, it would be for the 6th seed. If they don’t, it would be for the 5th. We do not need Philly to lose (unless we lose 8 games).

 

[Silver Hawk]

We only have to win 1 of the last 2 games, to guarantee a playoff spot.

This is not true. While the odds may be quite high of clinching with a win over KC, there is no guarantee of a playoff spot with just that win. AZ yes, KC, no.

 

[Silver Hawk]

People are way over thinking this. We are in the playoffs. There is a reason we had a 97% chance of making the playoffs after the Minnesota win.

Probably correct but it’s kind of fun.

 

[Silver Hawk]

If we don’t make it how does it affect our draft? Is missing the playoffs more helpful in the long run than squeaking in and losing first round?

Probably not much.

Draft positions 1-20 are based on final regular season record.

Positions 21-32 are based on how each of the 12 teams did in the playoffs. Wild card round losers get positions 21-24. Divisional round losers get 25-28. Conference final losers get 29-30. SB loser at 31. SB winner at 32.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Do people forget that Russ played college ball in Wisconsin???
Clearly we have a better chance at Dallas, for various reasons. But we are also very capable of beating the Bears.

 

[Silver Hawk]

We will know after the Early games on Sunday. If Houston and Tennessee win the Seahawks are in.

Not quite technically. Even if both Washington and Philly lose (which is what you posit), Seattle would still have to win to be in OR Minny would have to lose (to Detroit) as well. What Seattle has to avoid is a tie with Washington without beating Arizona.

8 win Washington is in over 8 win Seahawks due to win percentage in common games. I don't think I've seen that one before.

If it came down to the 8-8 scenario, the Seahawks and Redskins would tie on conference record. They would also tie on common games. So, the next tie break would be strength of victory, which would be a bit of a crap shoot.

As far as common games, each team would have 4-1 records. The common games include AZ, GB, Carolina and Dallas. You have 5 games each since Seattle plays AZ twice and Washington plays Dallas twice.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

We will know after the Early games on Sunday. If Houston and Tennessee win the Seahawks are in.

Not quite technically. Even if both Washington and Philly lose (which is what you posit), Seattle would still have to win to be in OR Minny would have to lose (to Detroit) as well. What Seattle has to avoid is a tie with Washington without beating Arizona.

8 win Washington is in over 8 win Seahawks due to win percentage in common games. I don't think I've seen that one before.

If it came down to the 8-8 scenario, the Seahawks and Redskins would tie on conference record. They would also tie on common games. So, the next tie break would be strength of victory, which would be a bit of a crap shoot.

As far as common games, each team would have 4-1 records. The common games include AZ, GB, Carolina and Dallas. You have 5 games each since Seattle plays AZ twice and Washington plays Dallas twice.

Ok...this is a little muddy for me. I do understand that Washington plays Dallas 2 times, we play them one time. I understand that we play Az 2x and Washington played them one time. So How do we get to the common games that they use both dallas games and we use both Az games? I would think that we would use a win as a barometer as it is based on wins. If they end up 1-1 in the division, the win takes precedence. If they go 0-2 or 2-0, then wins dont really matter with exception of the amount of wins. One game is common opponents, is it not? We did not play Dallas 2 times, only one? UW only played Az one time, not twice. I looked at the site and it did not specify. I also looked for how they would determine this more by scores and there was a distinct method.

https://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures

Please advise.

 

[Seymour]

It's quite simple. Regardless of this Sunday, if we can't beat the shitty Cardinals with playoffs on the line AT HOME then we don't deserve to be in the playoffs anyways.

Exactly why I'm not worried about it. It comes down to beating the Tards at home, and if we don't then it wasn't meant to be anyway.

 

[Silver Hawk]

Not quite technically. Even if both Washington and Philly lose (which is what you posit), Seattle would still have to win to be in OR Minny would have to lose (to Detroit) as well. What Seattle has to avoid is a tie with Washington without beating Arizona.

8 win Washington is in over 8 win Seahawks due to win percentage in common games. I don't think I've seen that one before.

If it came down to the 8-8 scenario, the Seahawks and Redskins would tie on conference record. They would also tie on common games. So, the next tie break would be strength of victory, which would be a bit of a crap shoot.

As far as common games, each team would have 4-1 records. The common games include AZ, GB, Carolina and Dallas. You have 5 games each since Seattle plays AZ twice and Washington plays Dallas twice.

Ok...this is a little muddy for me. I do understand that Washington plays Dallas 2 times, we play them one time. I understand that we play Az 2x and Washington played them one time. So How do we get to the common games that they use both dallas games and we use both Az games? I would think that we would use a win as a barometer as it is based on wins. If they end up 1-1 in the division, the win takes precedence. If they go 0-2 or 2-0, then wins dont really matter with exception of the amount of wins. One game is common opponents, is it not? We did not play Dallas 2 times, only one? UW only played Az one time, not twice. I looked at the site and it did not specify. I also looked for how they would determine this more by scores and there was a distinct method.

https://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures

Please advise.

Yes - you just tally up the total wins and losses (and ties) related to the common opponents and calculate the win percentage. This (using the win percentage) is because one team may have played more games against common opponents due to a common opponent being in the same division as one of the teams. For example, as you note, AZ is a common opponent but we played them twice. We count them twice, Washington counts them once. They count Dallas twice, we count Dallas once.

For the site you mention, scroll down to the “Other Tie-Breaking Procedures” section. Item 2 says: “In comparing records against common opponents among tied teams, the best won-lost-tied percentage is the deciding factor, since teams may have played an unequal number of games”.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

It's quite simple. Regardless of this Sunday, if we can't beat the shitty Cardinals with playoffs on the line AT HOME then we don't deserve to be in the playoffs anyways.

Exactly why I'm not worried about it. It comes down to beating the Tards at home, and if we don't then it wasn't meant to be anyway.

I think even if we lose the last two games we still have like a 50% chance of making the playoffs, cause we hold tiebreakers on everyone else.

Not that it's the greatest thing, to limp into the playoffs. But it's also not the dire situation people are making it out to be that these are MUST win games.

But yes, if we can't beat an atrocious Cards team fighting for the #1 pick in the draft?

 

[Silver Hawk]

It's quite simple. Regardless of this Sunday, if we can't beat the shitty Cardinals with playoffs on the line AT HOME then we don't deserve to be in the playoffs anyways.

Exactly why I'm not worried about it. It comes down to beating the Tards at home, and if we don't then it wasn't meant to be anyway.

I think even if we lose the last two games we still have like a 50% chance of making the playoffs, cause we hold tiebreakers on everyone else.

Not that it's the greatest thing, to limp into the playoffs. But it's also not the dire situation people are making it out to be that these are MUST win games.

But yes, if we can't beat an atrocious Cards team fighting for the #1 pick in the draft?

Not that I disagree with your point about the Cards but I was wondering, as a broader topic, how does a team go about “tanking”?

I would think that most, if not all, players would not intentionally tank. Every snap they play is an audition for a new contract, positioning for the next season or a spot on another team. The coach might be desperate to win, thinking it protects his job.

So, how does it happen? A coach that is not desperate calls a crappy game with bad decisions?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Not that I disagree with your point about the Cards but I was wondering, as a broader topic, how does a team go about “tanking”?

I would think that most, if not all, players would not intentionally tank. Every snap they play is an audition for a new contract, positioning for the next season or a spot on another team. The coach might be desperate to win, thinking it protects his job.

So, how does it happen? A coach that is not desperate calls a crappy game with bad decisions?

In other sports tanking is a real thing, like what the Mariners are doing now. Sucking for years trying to rebuild the roster the right way in order to achieve sustained success in the future.

But I don't believe tanking in the NFL exists, as we saw last weekend in Santa Clara. The NFL is a impatient win now or else your job's in jeopardy type of league. Owners aren't down with sucking on purpose in order to MAYBE get a high draft pick, of which is no guarantee of working out for you.

As we saw with the Niners, everyone on the Cardinals will be fighting for their jobs and therefore highly motivated to win and possibly knock us out of the playoffs.

Having said all this, you do see teams quit in the 2nd half of end of year games because football is also a game of effort and will.............and when you're not going anywhere, it's much harder to give that effort when you're not playing for anything.

That's why I said the biggest mistake we made against the Niners was allowing that KO return for a TD after we scored on the opening drive. You gotta step on these team's throats early and don't let them hang around and try.

 

[Silver Hawk]

Not that I disagree with your point about the Cards but I was wondering, as a broader topic, how does a team go about “tanking”?

I would think that most, if not all, players would not intentionally tank. Every snap they play is an audition for a new contract, positioning for the next season or a spot on another team. The coach might be desperate to win, thinking it protects his job.

So, how does it happen? A coach that is not desperate calls a crappy game with bad decisions?

In other sports tanking is a real thing, like what the Mariners are doing now. Sucking for years trying to rebuild the roster the right way in order to achieve sustained success in the future.

But I don't believe tanking in the NFL exists, as we saw last weekend in Santa Clara. The NFL is a impatient win now or else your job's in jeopardy type of league. Owners aren't down with sucking on purpose in order to MAYBE get a high draft pick, of which is no guarantee of working out for you.

As we saw with the Niners, everyone on the Cardinals will be fighting for their jobs and therefore highly motivated to win and possibly knock us out of the playoffs.

Having said all this, you do see teams quit in the 2nd half of end of year games because football is also a game of effort and will.............and when you're not going anywhere, it's much harder to give that effort when you're not playing for anything.

That's why I said the biggest mistake we made against the Niners was allowing that KO return for a TD after we scored on the opening drive. You gotta step on these team's throats early and don't let them hang around and try.

Yes, while many would fully expect the Cards to tank it on Sunday, it's more complicated than that.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

To those who say we don't deserve to be in the playoffs if we lose to ARI but beat KC:

 

[Seymour]

But I don't believe tanking in the NFL exists, as we saw last weekend in Santa Clara.

Disagree.
I saw SeaBass tank it in the first half on Sunday.
He checked out like he had a hot date with a triple cheeseburger. :snack:

 

[Silver Hawk]

But I don't believe tanking in the NFL exists, as we saw last weekend in Santa Clara.

Disagree.
I saw SeaBass tank it in the first half on Sunday.
He checked out like he had a hot date with a triple cheeseburger. :snack:

That was a “business decision”.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

But I don't believe tanking in the NFL exists, as we saw last weekend in Santa Clara.

Disagree.
I saw SeaBass tank it in the first half on Sunday.
He checked out like he had a hot date with a triple cheeseburger. :snack:

Is apathy and tanking the same thing?

I don't think so. Tanking is losing on purpose, I just think Janikowski doesn't care..........which makes for a great kicker to be able to miss and move on without caring, but for giving it your 100% on a KO return? Err, not so much.