EVERY Game Is Must Win Now

[Joel]

Melodramatic? Maybe. Accurate? Maybe. Just look at our schedule and KCs (and if an Admin knows how to display these tables side by side I'd be much obliged if one did:)
Denver http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/schedule/_/name/den/denver-broncos

WK
DATE
OPPONENT


8
Sun, Oct 27


vs Washington (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/wsh/washington-redskins)




9
BYE WEEK


10
Sun, Nov 10


@ San Diego (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/sd/san-diego-chargers)




11
Sun, Nov 17


vs Kansas City (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/kc/kansas-city-chiefs)




12
Sun, Nov 24


@ New England (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/ne/new-england-patriots)




13
Sun, Dec 1


@ Kansas City (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/kc/kansas-city-chiefs)




14
Sun, Dec 8


vs Tennessee (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/ten/tennessee-titans)




15
Thu, Dec 12


vs San Diego (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/sd/san-diego-chargers)




16
Sun, Dec 22


@ Houston (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/hou/houston-texans)




17
Sun, Dec 29


@ Oakland (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/oak/oakland-raiders)




Kansas City


8
Sun, Oct 27


vs Cleveland (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/cle/cleveland-browns)




9
Sun, Nov 3


@ Buffalo (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/buf/buffalo-bills)




10
BYE WEEK


11
Sun, Nov 17


@ Denver (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/den/denver-broncos)




12
Sun, Nov 24


vs San Diego (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/sd/san-diego-chargers)




13
Sun, Dec 1


vs Denver (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/den/denver-broncos)




14
Sun, Dec 8


@ Washington (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/wsh/washington-redskins)




15
Sun, Dec 15


@ Oakland (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/oak/oakland-raiders)




16
Sun, Dec 22


vs Indianapolis (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/ind/indianapolis-colts)




17
Sun, Dec 29


@ San Diego (http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/sd/san-diego-chargers)




Fact is the Chefs only games before us are Cleveland and @Buffalo (the equivalent of our Baltimore and @NE games; thus the difference between first and last in a division.) Maybe the Browns get lucky again or KC's so focused on us they let the Bills steal one—but us losing to Washington or @SD is at least as likely. Best case scenario is they blow an easy win and we win our next two, but even then we'll be tied when they come to Denver; if they win their next two or we lose a game we'll be two games behind them. If they win both AND we lose one or two... ugh.... :(

So hosting KC begins to look like a must-win game, along with hosting Washington and visiting San Diego. After that, we just have to win @NE, but that's never been hard for us, right? Oh, and win at Arrowhead the next week, also a historically effortless feat, right? The stark reality is we must play VERY good football, every week, for the next two months, or the AFCW could be decided by the start of December—AGAINST us.

We might get a game back later when Indy hosts KC, but that's not till Christmas, so the Colts could be riddled with injuries then; we can't count on them beating KC for us. Even if they did, that would just even the score; our games and KCs against each other and San Diego will still probably decide the division regardless. Unless we sweep the Chiefs we have to do better than they against San Diego; if KC sweeps US, well, down three games plus the first tiebreak we'd probably be out of the division race. As much as people sneer at KCs weak schedule, it probably few losses; they could easily finish 12-4 even if we sweep them.

Having said all that, it should be noted the 1996 Denver Broncos went 13-3 and got the #1 seed only to let it go to their heads and lose their first playoff game. In other words, just like the 2012 Broncos. The 1997 Broncos went 12-4, which was still very good—but the Chiefs went 13-3 and won the division, so we had to pay back the Jags in a wildcard game, beat KC in the divisional round and win the AFCCG in Pitt (even though they were 11-5) before we got to beat the Packers in SB XXXII. So even if we lose the division it's not the end of the world as long as we make the playoffs.

Yet unless we get Orlando Franklin back soon and the line begins to look like it previously did, that history could prove very welcome but uncertain comfort. Clady's not coming back this year, and Champ's return looks like it'll be some time between the playoffs and never. Franklin probably won't play Sunday and Woodyard may not either, but we can't afford to try "wait till the bye" with anyone who can play. Meanwhile, the toughest non-divisional game KC has left is Indy (who just beat us, so that would only pull us even.) They don't have to visit NE.

Next game up, and don't look past it—until the final gun; at that point focus on NOTHING but the next opponent in what looks to be a very long season....

[Poet]

I would like to congratulate you on making a thread that does not suck. Well done. You have exceeded my expectations.

I also agree with your assertion that every game matters. The Broncos want to be the first seed - as does everyone - and the Chiefs stand in their way. The Chiefs have the edge in that their schedule is easier. They also have the one win advantage, so that is another factor that is favorable to the Chiefs.

[Northman]

The 1997 Broncos went 12-4, which was still very good—but the Chiefs went 13-3 and won the division, so we had to pay back the Jags in a wildcard game, beat KC in the divisional round and win the AFCCG in Pitt (even though they were 11-5) before we got to beat the Packers in SB XXXII. So even if we lose the division it's not the end of the world as long as we make the playoffs.

Pretty much how i feel about it all. Good teams win on the road and really all that matters is what they do in the postseason either at home or on the road. Last year showed we just got to cocky and complacent. Having home games would be great but just not a necessity.

[SR]

Denver's second half is going to be tough, but if they can't do it in the regular season my expectation for the playoffs wouldn't be very much.

[Slick]

One thing that will help us is the fact that the Chiefs aren't flying under the radar anymore. They are going to get everyone's best shot.

I realize that they aren't hyped up on TV and radio talk shows like Denver was when we were on a tear but I think teams and coaches around the league have taken notice of the Chiefs.

[Dapper Dan]

I think it's important after we make the playoffs that we win every game.

[DenBronx]

I think it's important after we make the playoffs that we win every game.

Im on board with that!

[wayninja]

I find this thread wildly melodramatic and absurdly inaccurate.

[Joel]

I would like to congratulate you on making a thread that does not suck. Well done. You have exceeded my expectations.
Backhanded compliment noted and appreciated to the full measure of its merit. ;)


I also agree with your assertion that every game matters. The Broncos want to be the first seed - as does everyone - and the Chiefs stand in their way. The Chiefs have the edge in that their schedule is easier. They also have the one win advantage, so that is another factor that is favorable to the Chiefs.
Their schedule is easier, but I'm not sure it's significantly so. The only real difference is we get last years AFCN/E champs and they get the last place teams, but we already beat Baltimore in the season opener so the worst that difference could make is one game IF KC wins its next two AND NE beats us in Foxborough. Other than that, the only difference is location, and sometimes not even that (e.g. we both play @Indy.) That's kind of a problem of its own though: Since both our schedules are so easy, EVERY loss is rare enough it's hard to make up down the road.

It's not the end of the world if we don't win the division, but since EVERY team's playing hurt in December that extra week to rest and recuperate can be huge, especially given how wracked we've been with injuries this year. So much for the new strength and conditioning coach immunizing us against the injury bug. :(

[Poet]

I wanted to be meaner, but I made a promise to the mods.

[Joel]

Pretty much how i feel about it all. Good teams win on the road and really all that matters is what they do in the postseason either at home or on the road. Last year showed we just got to cocky and complacent. Having home games would be great but just not a necessity.


Denver's second half is going to be tough, but if they can't do it in the regular season my expectation for the playoffs wouldn't be very much.
These responses belong together in my mind, because 1) winning a division isn't a SB prerequisite (as the '97 team proved,) but 2) regular season games against playoff teams can be a good postseason bellwether.

That's not to say the '07 Pats beating the Giants 38-35 in week 17 proved they'd win a Super Bowl shootout, but the wildcard Giants hanging with the "perfect" team till the final gun was strong evidence they'd do the same in the SB. Some people (including me) feel the difference between NYs week 17 loss and SB win was having to play a wildcard game, then go on the road against the #1 seed that swept them in the regular season, then beat the #2 seed on Lambeaus frozen tundra. That forced them to raise their game each week until they were ready for NE.

Perhaps all that started in week 17, when they came within a Tom Brady 2:00 drill of spoiling the perfect season before the playoffs even started. Had the Giants been crushed by 30 points they might've been so shellshocked they couldn't even beat Tampa; instead, going the distance with the leagues "best" team may have convinced them they could do the same with anyone. It's hard to say what might've been or what went on in the minds of 60 strangers six years ago, but had the Giants collapsed at seasons end no one—including them—would've expected much in the playoffs.

[BroncoWave]

If we beat KC twice then every other game isn't a must win. We would have at least a one-loss cushion. So for now, this thread is inaccurate.

[Joel]

I find this thread wildly melodramatic and absurdly inaccurate.
Show me where we can lose another game without the division race becoming a steep uphill battle. If Cleveland or Buffalo upsets KC, maybe, but that's less likely than them coming to Denver 9-0, so we must beast Washington and @SD just to draw even by beating KC then. Losing any one of those three game leaves us in a hole unless KC just completely falls apart starting tomorrow; losing more than one shovels dirt onto the hole in which we'll be. Even if we do everything right for the next four weeks we'll most likely be 8-1 just like KC, but we'll be headed to NE, then Arrowhead.

Barring (once again) KCs utter collapse, it's probably coming down to tiebreaks, either literally or effectively. If we don't finish even it'll probably be because one of us sweeps the other (first tiebreak: Head-to-head) or one of us sweeps/is swept by SD (second tiebreak: Divisional win percentage.) That's 5 of the 8 games both teams have left after tomorrow (if Chokeland wins the rematch with us it will be tragic; if they win the one with KC, comical.) Yet we're already a game back, and if KC@Indy might change that, Denver@NE is likely to make it worse first.

There's just not much margin for error when the season's only got sixteen games, neither schedule has many tough games, and KC's 7-0. I'd be perfectly happy with a wildcard that takes us to a title, but the worse we do in the regular season the harder it will become to believe a championship our final destination.

[Joel]

If we beat KC twice then every other game isn't a must win. We would have at least a one-loss cushion. So for now, this thread is inaccurate.
If we beat KC twice yet lose another game along the way we'd be even but have the first tiebreak, so we can technically afford ONE loss IF we sweep KC, but no more, and ONLY IF we sweep KC. Considering how hard it usually is for us to win at Arrowhead, I don't really want to bank the division crown on sweeping them.

[SR]

I don't care for all of these sabbaticals about "must win" and all that, really. Joel you make good points despite most of it being hypothetical. I say let's just enjoy the trampling teams are gonna get from us and hope KC drops one.

[Joel]

I don't care for all of these sabbaticals about "must win" and all that, really. Joel you make good points despite most of it being hypothetical. I say let's just enjoy the trampling teams are gonna get from us and hope KC drops one.
I'd enjoy it more with a cushion, but maybe that's precisely the mindset the team must AVOID to stay hungry and maintain a championship edge. Hoping KC drops one... Indy looks like a good possibility, maybe SD, but we've still got the road trip to NE sandwiched between hosting and visiting KC, plus our own SD games to play. Apart from NE, it mostly comes down to hoping SD and other teams are good enough to beat KC but NOT good enough to beat us, and/or that we sweep or at least split with KC. Lots of "ifs" and "maybes" there that keep me awake nights.

"If" we drop another game somewhere—ANYWHERE—it would all get that much harder, because we'd still be a game back even if KC DOES drop one, and two games if they don't. At that point we'd have to split with them and match their record against SD just to stay in the division race. Oakland's a good example of what I mean: While there's little chance we lose the rematch, there's little more chance KC does, so that game offers us nothing but downside: We gain nothing from winning, but losing a divisional game KC probably wins would cost us greatly, however unlikely it is.

Even a broken clock's right twice a day, and unfortunately it looks like all the people who kept predicting KC would finally be good again were finally right this year. We just have to beat them, and everyone else.

[chazoe60]

KC will lose 4 games at least. 2 to us, @SD, & vs INDY. No worries.

[SR]

I'd enjoy it more with a cushion, but maybe that's precisely the mindset the team must AVOID to stay hungry and maintain a championship edge. Hoping KC drops one... Indy looks like a good possibility, maybe SD, but we've still got the road trip to NE sandwiched between hosting and visiting KC, plus our own SD games to play. Apart from NE, it mostly comes down to hoping SD and other teams are good enough to beat KC but NOT good enough to beat us, and/or that we sweep or at least split with KC. Lots of "ifs" and "maybes" there that keep me awake nights. "If" we drop another game somewhere—ANYWHERE—it would all get that much harder, because we'd still be a game back even if KC DOES drop one, and two games if they don't. At that point we'd have to split with them and match their record against SD just to stay in the division race. Oakland's a good example of what I mean: While there's little chance we lose the rematch, there's little more chance KC does, so that game offers us nothing but downside: We gain nothing from winning, but losing a divisional game KC probably wins would cost us greatly, however unlikely it is. Even a broken clock's right twice a day, and unfortunately it looks like all the people who kept predicting KC would finally be good again were finally right this year. We just have to beat them, and everyone else.

Joel, if last Sunday is any indication of how this team plays catchup, I'm not interested.

[Joel]

KC will lose 4 games at least. 2 to us, @SD, & vs INDY. No worries.
If we sweep them life's definitely easier, since it effectively nets us 3 games (2 plus the first tiebreak,) but sweeping KC has never been easy even when we were awesome and they sucked. Arrowhead's a tough place to play unless it's a home game; I don't know if it's the noise or what, but it's hard to win there and we usually don't.

If they split with SD it doesn't help us unless we sweep SD, which is doable, but far from a given; the Bolts are starting to look much better than most expected. After all, they're one of the two teams who beat Indy (held them to 9 pts, in fact,) more than we could manage. If they hadn't gone to sleep in the second half against Houston we'd be talking about a three-way AFCW race. If the Chiefs have a blowout we still might; the Bolts are only two games behind us even now (though the Raiders loss hurts them.)

That leaves KCs probable Indy loss—if Indy's not banged up/hasn't secured a bye by Christmas, so all starters play, at 100%. Yet that would only offset OUR Indy loss; it wouldn't help with any others (e.g. @NE.)


Joel, if last Sunday is any indication of how this team plays catchup, I'm not interested.
Agreed, but that's the whole point: As of Sunday we ARE playing catchup until/unless KC loses a game; any more Denver losses just deepens and widens our hole. Counterarguments amount to "even if we DO lose one (and ONLY one) more game, sweeping KC would put us ahead by the tiebreak." We'll just completely ignore the NE road trip between the KC games, and the SD games a week before and two weeks later. ;)

I won't say we're COMPLETELY hosed if Shanny and RGIII beat us tomorrow—but will sure be thinking it loudly if they do. Same with SD two weeks later, but worse because divisional (second tiebreak.) Same hosting KC the week after THAT, but worse still because head-to-head (first tiebreak.) Lose more than one of those games and our boys will rack up lots of frequent flyer miles this January.

[olathebroncofan]

Who would have thought that 13-3 or 12-4 won't guarantee winning the division. Our division is pretty good this year. No doubt that Denver and KC make the playoffs but it could be sd and oak that determine who wins or loses.

Great season thus far

[Simple Jaded]

I think maybe you should try and enjoy the season as it unfolds. If you were having sex with Jessica Alba would you try to enjoy every second or would you waste it by worrying about whether or not you'll still be boning her in January?

[Lancane]

I think maybe you should try and enjoy the season as it unfolds. If you were having sex with Jessica Alba would you try to enjoy every second or would you waste it by worrying about whether or not you'll still be boning her in January?

If I was having sex with Jessica Alba, or she with anyone else on this board - I would be worried about what drugs she was on and the charges that would follow because there is no way that would happen otherwise...so January probably means a stint in prison! Your shooting too high, more like if someone was boning Molly Ringwald. Be happy she's successful and rich and do it well or you won't be boning **** come January.

[sneakers]

I would like to congratulate you on making a thread that does not suck. Well done. You have exceeded my expectations.




Now if only I could do the same thing :(

[BroncoNut]

I wanted to be meaner, but I made a promise to the mods.

I thought there was something different about you. I've really enjoyed posting with yuo the last several months. Keep up the good work

[VonDoom]

The two Chiefs games have become the most important of the season. I'd sign for winning both of those and losing to the Pats at this point, and I never thought I'd say that.

[Simple Jaded]

If I was having sex with Jessica Alba, or she with anyone else on this board - I would be worried about what drugs she was on and the charges that would follow because there is no way that would happen otherwise...so January probably means a stint in prison! Your shooting too high, more like if someone was boning Molly Ringwald. Be happy she's successful and rich and do it well or you won't be boning **** come January.

That's the point, where not watching the Molly Ringwald of the NFL every week.

[tripp]

I think we can afford 1 more loss or 2 at the most. I have nothing to base this off of outside of the simple fact that division rivals play each other differently than other teams. Chargers I think will beat the Chiefs once, We're good for one win against the Chiefs (I think 2, but I won't get ahead of myself). And I reckon the Colts will beat them.


GO BROWNS! haha

[Joel]

The two Chiefs games have become the most important of the season. I'd sign for winning both of those and losing to the Pats at this point, and I never thought I'd say that.
Right; sweeping them would remove a lot of pressure, but I just don't think it likely. We need to win at least one to stay in it though, and must outperform KC against SD and Oakland even then, because that only leaves 4 games to make up our deficit: Houston, Tennessee, Washington and NE. Even if the Colts beat KC we must win @NE to get even again.

So: Sweep KC, or split, sweep SD and hope they beat KC at least once. Otherwise our only hope is Indy beats KC AND we win @NE.


I think we can afford 1 more loss or 2 at the most. I have nothing to base this off of outside of the simple fact that division rivals play each other differently than other teams. Chargers I think will beat the Chiefs once, We're good for one win against the Chiefs (I think 2, but I won't get ahead of myself). And I reckon the Colts will beat them.

GO BROWNS! haha
You're not wrong about how divisional rivals play each other, but that's a wash since we have as many divisional games left as KC does, against the same opponents (each other and SD twice, and @Oakland.) That would be fine if we weren't a game back, but we are, so we have to make it up somewhere; the best place is the first tiebreak (head-to-head) and second choice is the second tiebreak (division record.)

Browns are down 20-10 at the half, and KC looks headed for 8-0. 8.5-0 since they're @Buffalo next week, then the bye and a trip to Denver most likely undefeated. Just beat the 'Skins, guys.