|12-13-2012, 01:31 PM||#1|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Phoenix, AZ
#3 seed better then #4 seed, even if that means playing in NE 2nd round
I think some of the comments we've heard on the mane this past week make no sense at all when it comes to the playoff seeding.
If things stay as they are and Houston keeps the #1 seed and NE keeps the #2 seed, some folks what to believe it's a better deal for us to end up as the #4 seed rather then the 3rd seed, all to avoid having to go to NE in the 2nd round.
Well let's just assume Broncos and Ravens win the wildcard round games, and Ravens go to Houston as the #4 seed and we go to NE as the #3 seed.
What happens if both Denver and Baltimore win? hh, that means Denver gets to host the AFC Championship game against the Ravens. So why would we want the #4 seed and have to play 2 games on the road when it is still possible we could play 1 on the road and 2 at home.
If we had the #4 seed we would go to Houston and if we win, we play the winner of the Ravens and NE, and if NE wins, we still have to go to NE.
So that's 2 scenarios out of 3 (if the top 4 teams in AFC remain the same) where we still have to go to NE to play.
So if you ask me, I'll take that #3 seed. Because odds are we'll have to play either round 2 or 3 in NE. But I'd like to have that chance to host the AFC Championship game if we beat NE and Houston loses, which is possible, they don't look really strong right now.
Get what I'm sayin'? So I'd really like to know why some people think getting the #4 seed would be better. Let's face it, going to play in NE looks inevitable, it just depends on what round we go there.