Thread: All we have to do is beat KC and we win the division?

Originally Posted by GEM

An opinion can't be wrong. What it really means is that you and Nomad have different standards. He wants to get in on the Broncos winning out and not depending on other teams. You don't care how they get it.

In the end, you both want them in the playoffs....so how about ending the silly bickering where you tell him his opinion is wrong.

I know what he's trying to say but if the Broncos have already done enough to get in, they deserve to get in. His fixation with ignoring what theyve done prior to this point artificially creates some way to discredit what they've done to this point. Again, if they've already done enough, then they've already done enough. And if they've already done enough, they deserve to get in. That's not opinion.

Originally Posted by Agent of Orange

I know what he's trying to say but if the Broncos have already done enough to get in, they deserve to get in. His fixation with ignoring what theyve done prior to this point artificially creates some way to discredit what they've done to this point. Again, if they've already done enough, then they've already done enough. And if they've already done enough, they deserve to get in. That's not opinion.

I guess you didn't get the full scope of his opinion then...not just for the sole purpose of getting in, but for the purpose of getting in and going somewhere, you don't want to back in. It's a semantics issue. He doesn't discredit anything, but for the purposes of not just getting there, but hopefully winning, he doesn't want them depending on anyone. He wants to win out and go into the playoffs with motivation and momentum.

Arguing for the sake of arguing.

Originally Posted by GEM

I guess you didn't get the full scope of his opinion then...not just for the sole purpose of getting in, but for the purpose of getting in and going somewhere, you don't want to back in. It's a semantics issue. He doesn't discredit anything, but for the purposes of not just getting there, but hopefully winning, he doesn't want them depending on anyone. He wants to win out and go into the playoffs with motivation and momentum.

Arguing for the sake of arguing.

No, like I said, I understand what he's trying to say. Perhaps you should revisit what he's saying. He doesn't want to rely on other's losing to make it in. But that's the case for a lot of teams. And the language he used about being accountable but only focusing on the last two games in applying this creates a factual discrepancy.

Whether you back in or pull in your still parked.

Originally Posted by BroncoBJ

Yea, crazy that if San Diego loses tonight, or next week.

And we lose to Buffalo, while KC beats Oakland.

That week 17 game vs KC will be for the division.

I bet that game would get flexed. Can you imagine Tebow vs Orton for the division title?

Really don't want it to get to that though.

Originally Posted by jhildebrand

I don't think the last game of the year has an evening game because it would create an inherent disadvantage for the winner of that game especially if it is the travelling team headed to the PO's.

I am 99% sure there is no flex in week 17.

Originally Posted by bcbronc

I don't think that's correct. No Monday night game because of the advantage, but I'm 100% certain that when we got blown out by SD in Wk17 with the division on the line, it was in prime time. Unless they've change it since, but I don't think the few hours difference between starting at 1pm or 5:30pm is a big advantage.

Originally Posted by jhildebrand

Youre right!

I just went schedule slumming to double check.

The 100% correct answer is that there will not be any primetime games (Thursday, Sunday or Monday) on week 17.

http://www.nfl.com/schedules

Originally Posted by Agent of Orange

I heard that we don't have to win a game if the Raiders beat the Chiefs, the Chargers lose to Detroit, and then, in week 17, the Chargers beat the Raiders.

If that was confusing this might help:

Week 16
Lions over Chargers
Raiders over Chiefs

Week 17
Chargers over Raiders

It's because there are only a total of 6 different games left involving the 4 AFC West teams, all of which are against common opponents (and all but 2 of which are Divisional, all but 1 Conference.)

Best way to understand it is to just check each teams record in order of tiebreak, most of which can be taken from any listing of NFL standings:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/standings

Denver 8-6 Division 3-2 Common opponents 6-4 Conference 6-4
Raiders 7-7 Division 2-2 Common opponents 4-6 Conference 5-5
SDiego 7-7 Division 2-3 Common opponents 4-6 Conference 6-5
Kansas 6-8 Division 2-2 Common opponents 4-6 Conference 3-7

That makes it easy to see FOR DENVER:*

If Oakland beats KC they get another Division, common and Conference win; the Chiefs get a loss.
If Detroit beats SD they get another common loss.
If SD beats Oakland they get another Division, common and Conference win while Oakland gets a loss.
If Buffalo beats us we get another common and conference loss, and we get one more (plus a Division loss) if KC beats us.

Final standings:
Denver 8-8 Div 3-3 Com 6-6 Con 6-6
SDiego 8-8 Div 3-3 Com 5-7 Con 7-5
Raiders 8-8 Div 3-3 Com 5-7 Con 6-6
Kansas 7-9 Div 3-3 Com 5-7 Con 4-8

That's the critical reason a Denver win now eliminates everyone but Oakland, and an Oakland loss eliminates them, too: We're 2 games up on EVERYONE against common opponents, which is all anyone has left to play. It's also what made the Bears win so important. Only the Raiders and Chiefs still have a chance at a better Division record, and only if they win out and we lose to KC; otherwise the worst we do is tie, and our better record against common opponents brings us home.

Note that San Diego would have a better Conference record but lose to us because common opponents come first: We lost a wildcard spot that way in 2006, even though we had a better Conference record than all other potential #6 seeds. The reason was one of them was KC, which had a better Division record so, even though we had the best Conference record of the lot, we could only be the #6 seed IF KC were the #5.





*The above listing for "common opponents" is only with respect to Denver, because teams don't play themselves, which means that while Denver and Oakland have the same common opponents, and Denver and KC do, Denver, KC AND Oakland do NOT (because Denver and Oakland play KC but KC does not, etc.) Also, the list does not include strength of victory and lesser tiebreaks because they can't be precisely known with 2 games left, though strength of victory and schedule can be estimated with a 2 game variance (per team beaten.)

Originally Posted by Shazam!

KC game might be meaningless.

Broncos beat Bills.

Detroit beats SD.

KC beats Oakland.

Broncos clinch AFC West on Saturday.

The finale vs. KC will not matter as Denver will likely sit starters for the Playoffs

If we win another game only Oakland can catch us, because KC can't get to 9 wins and San Diego can't get to 7 wins against common opponents.

Originally Posted by BroncoStud

lol, I think you custom order any jersey you want from NFL Shop.

That's not really true. The NFL practices censorship. Remember all those people ordering "Ron Mexico" Jerseys with Vick's number after Michael Vick got busted using that alias. They banned all "Mexico" Jersey sales.

For the record, MY opinion (take it for what it's worth) is that if we can't beat one of two teams whose COMBINED record is barely good enough to make the playoffs, we don't belong there, and won't be long.

Originally Posted by Joel

For the record, MY opinion (take it for what it's worth) is that if we can't beat one of two teams whose COMBINED record is barely good enough to make the playoffs, we don't belong there, and won't be long.

I would say you do a fine job of breaking things down and articulating your opinions.

First and foremost Denver needs to take care of their business in Buffalo. If they do it automatically eliminates the Chargers for division title. It doesn't eliminate them from playoff contention but they can't win the division.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

earning it is better than backing in-- but backing in's still better than not going. . . .


didn't stop seattle from beating new orleans last year, and some playoff experience would be great for this young squad regardless of how we get there. . .

Originally Posted by Nomad

I would say it does.....rely on yourselves, win out and you're there. Buffalo and KC are very winnable games because the BRONCOS are the better team.

Originally Posted by Nomad

Funny... http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nati...n-stopper.html


I forgot nowadays you can't be held accountable by doing your own work but rely on others to do your dirty work.

Originally Posted by Mike

I don't want them to back in to the playoffs. They need to take care of their own business and own the division, not get it handed to them.

"The night of the fight, you may feel a slight sting. That's pride ****ing with you. **** pride. Pride only hurts. It never helps. You fight through that shit."

Originally Posted by Nomad

I would say you do a fine job of breaking things down and articulating your opinions.

Thanks, I do try and (contrary to appearances) to avoid being verbose, but, forced to choose, I'll always trade concise for clear and civil (though I don't always do well with the latter.)

The worst case scenario is Kyle Orton returns on Jan 1 and knocks us out of the playoffs.
Chewing on that all offseason would suck

Originally Posted by jhildebrand

I don't think the last game of the year has an evening game because it would create an inherent disadvantage for the winner of that game especially if it is the travelling team headed to the PO's.

I am 99% sure there is no flex in week 17.

Well you'd be 100 percent wrong. Theres always been flexed games in week 17 since they started. We got flexed in 08 vs the Chargers. Then it was Bengals/Jets in 09 I remember, and last year it was Seahawks/Rams.

Probably already been discussed in this thread, but I sure hope we handle business. Although a Tebow vs Orton game to decide the division would be pretty epic, I don't want it to get to that point.