I mean goddamn this conference seems wrapped up doesn’t it? Not trying to jinx us but it really seems like injuries are our biggest opponent at this point.
The Ravens are fucking frauds. They’re a warm up for us. We literally made these guys look like the JV squad the last 2 meetings.
And sure the Bills and Titans may make us work for the win, but in all honesty we have to play pretty goddamn shitty to lose to those guys.
In order to have any shot at beating us you need 3 things:
1. Elite pass rush
2. Top 10 QB capable of making critical plays
3. Overall talented roster
Steelers are the only team in the AFC that has those 3 things, and even them it’s not like they’re some serious threat like the Patriots a couple years back, but they seem like the best of the rest.
I think at this point it would be disappointing for this team to not get to the SB 3 straight times.
We’re just that good, and we keep drafting well and get better and better. [Reply]
I read an article last year that talked about whether bye weeks matter. First round bye’s I mean:
The conclusion was that, half of the teams that made the Super Bowl in last 10 years (from when that article was written), did NOT have a first round bye.
I hope for your sake that the Bills lose another game.
Originally Posted by Bearcat:
That article would be wrong.
It could also be a bit of a false narrative to say the bye matters that much... it's not like there are a ton of SB contenders every season and it's not nearly the 50/50 parity that the NFL wants you to believe. So, is it really "that much more difficult" for the 3-6 seed because of the extra game, or is it just that the level of competition drops off dramatically (enough) at that point?
I'm sure it's both. Sometimes a team gets a 1 or 2 seed because of an easy schedule (see: the Patriots last season just before FitzMagic), so they're ousted early. Sometimes a 3+ seed is pretty damn good, but maybe had a major injury in the regular season or a really tough schedule. Sometimes, maybe there are actually more than a couple of true SB contenders. And sometimes shit happens and underdogs win (just not nearly as often as people predict).
In the end though... yeah, it matters a lot, for whatever reasons.
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
The Giants beating the Patriots in the Super Bowl years ago gives no advantage to the Bills against the Chiefs, sorry.
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
No, it's not from 1990.
Oh. Why does it say from 1990?
What year does the data start then?
Edit: Maybe you’re misunderstanding. The graph wasn’t made in 1990. The data is from 1990 and onward.
Most people don’t include 30 year old stats because times change. In the last 10 years, approximately 50% of Super Bowl teams have NOT had a first round bye.
But if you go beyond 10 years, that changes. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
Okay, I'm willing to learn. How can the graph be from 1990 when all the teams listed on it are teams from after 1990?
Right next to the '3 seed' bar, is shows "'03 CAR and '06 IND."
Am I looking at the wrong graph?
The data is 1990-2017... it took me a minute of looking through the reddit comments to figure out the wording of the comment.
Still doesn't quite make sense though.... there are 3 teams on that graph from '10-'17, so that would mean seven more 3-6 teams made it to the SB in '18 and '19.... and none made it in '19 (stupid Patriots in '18).
And even if it was true, the numbers still heavily favor the 1-2 seeds, considering there are twice as many 3-6 seeds.... I would hope there's enough league parity that out of eighty 3-6 seeds, 10 of them could make it to the SB in a 10 year span.
There's a graphic around that includes Mahomes, but this graphic is all you need to know about AFC parity...
