Conference Championship Prediction Thread

[Art Sandusky 0]

god I hate when people make the wrestling angles to sports comparisons.

I love it.

[MARTYEWR 0]

AFC: The Jets definitely gave the Steelers all they could handle last week. Ben Roethlisberger looked like a completely different quarterback at times than he was all season, making mistakes that, not coincidentally, a rookie would make. I was very impressed by the Patriots' performance yesterday, as they played a game that strong playoff teams normally do, running the football well, playing solid defense, and basically keeping the ball away from the Colts' offense. They'll have a more difficult time playing ball control offense in Pittsburgh against a stronger defense, but in my opinion, the Patriots reminded us yesterday why they've won two of the last three Super Bowls. My final score: Patriots 13, Steelers 6 in an incredibly tough and intense match-up.

 

NFC: The Falcons did what I thought they would do against the Rams: run, run, and run. Their game plan was similar to the Patriots, but it happened to be far more explosive, as they had well over 200 yards in the first half. Again, much like the Patriots, they'll have a much tougher time against a tougher D this week, as the Eagles D looked strong yesterday. Randy Moss was pretty much non-existent. The Falcons have a strong D as well and with Terrell Owens likely out this week, they'll catch a break there. Bryan Westbrook of the Eagles displayed flashes of a running game that the Eagles need for the playoffs against the Vikings, but will it be enough against the Falcons? To me, this game is almost way too close to call. I think if I knew that Owens was playing, I'd side with the Eagles, but instead, I'll go with the team that I feel is underrated by everyone over the team that traditionally falls apart in the conference championship. My final score: Falcons 13, Eagles 10.

[Ripper 0]

It's not like the Falcons would have a snowballs chance in hell of beating the Patriots if they went to the Super Bowl. Hell it's not like they'd beat the Steelers.....

The Pats....not a great offensive team that depends on the run and the short pass against an Atlanta Defense that plays great against the run and the short pass....

 

...

 

 

hmmmm....

 

 

I would say they stand more than a snowball's chance. I mean...Miami beat them.

[UseTheSledgehammerUh 0]

T.O. is definately out this week, not likely, btw.

 

The Eagles match up poorly with New England.

 

The birds also didn't fare that well against Pittsburgh, but that was without Westbrook and before the new Trotter-led defensive arrangements were made.

 

I'd rather see Philly/Pittsburgh, because hey, thge Super Bowl is one game. 9 out of 10 times the Steelers might win, but its only ONE game.

 

If the Eagles receivers have a great game against Atlanta, McNabb keeps rolling, and T.O. comes back for motivational/on-field support, I think Philly has a chance to defeat the AFC winner.

[Black Lushus 0]

Big Benny finally hits the wall harder than he did Saturday, Patriots capitalize on mistakes unlike the Jets and Vinatieri does NOT miss those FGs...Pats take this one...

 

Falcons win a tight one with a TD in the final minute or so...

 

Pats kill the Falcons in Jacksonville....and no I'm definently not a Pats fan...

[Guest Vitamin X]

I would say they stand more than a snowball's chance. I mean...Miami beat them.

By 1 point.. in a nearly meaningless game.. against a team they always struggle against? Fuck that.

 

I watched the Patriots game yesterday, and I LOVE the way they play. It must feel great to be a Pats fan, because they've got one hell of a well-coached team there. Seriously, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them win this year again and I'd love to see it, unless it were the Steelers (since I like their franchise and Bill Cowher). I just hope whoever wins in the NFC gets absolutely crushed in the Super Bowl, really.

 

I think we'll be seeing a surprisingly close Atlanta-NE Super Bowl, with Vinatieri (sp?) kicking the game winning FG yet again.

[Spaceman Spiff 0]

I would say they stand more than a snowball's chance.  I mean...Miami beat them.

By 1 point.. in a nearly meaningless game.. against a team they always struggle against? Fuck that.

That game was hardly "nearly meaningless". NE still had a shot to get home field in the AFC had they won the game.

[Ripper 0]

Everyone needs to stop picking the Falcons to beat the Eagles. You guys are jinxing it.

[2GOLD 0]

Miami has always owned Tom Brady.

So that loss wasn't shocking.

 

As for the Philly/Falcons game....umm, I have no clue.

I really think both defenses are getting underrated.

The Eagles and Falcons both have good defenses and neither gets an ounce of respect.

 

I'll pick the Eagles, just because.

[The Man in Blak 0]

This has nothing to do with potential results, but I'll predict that the Steelers/Patriots game, quality-wise, will be what the Indy/NE game was billed to be (and should have been) on Sunday.

[Guest Vitamin X]

I would say they stand more than a snowball's chance.  I mean...Miami beat them.

By 1 point.. in a nearly meaningless game.. against a team they always struggle against? Fuck that.

That game was hardly "nearly meaningless". NE still had a shot to get home field in the AFC had they won the game.

That's why I said NEARLY meaningless. And homefield advantage isn't really what it used to be anymore.

 

Also, NE would not only have had to win that game but also hope for Pittsburgh to lose again to get the homefield advantage since the Steelers had beaten them earlier in the season, so it really was a bit of an outside shot anyways.

[the pinjockey 0]

Pitt still had games with Baltimore (the team that gave them their one loss) and Buffalo (who was one of the hottest teams in the second half of the season), so I would hardly call it an outside shot that they could have lost one of those games.

[The Man in Blak 0]

And homefield advantage isn't really what it used to be anymore.

Sez the Green Bay Packer fan. All four home teams won this week.

[Ripper 0]

I just think the Pats/Falcons would be interesting because the Pats have never played vick, and vice versa. i would like to see how they would handle it.

 

And everyone keeps saying "Just watch what Tampa did"

 

Unless every team has a time machine and can go back in time and pick linebackers and DE that can run a 4.4, then I don't exactly think that is possible. Plus, Tampa was only 1-1 against them this year. Shutting that guy down isn't EASY.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Sez the Green Bay Packer fan. All four home teams won this week.

 

And the week before, only one did.

[The Man in Blak 0]

Plus, Tampa was only 1-1 against them this year. Shutting that guy down isn't EASY.

Actually, yeah it is. Tampa finished 1-1, sure, but Vick had a QB rating of 46.9 with a 48.8% completion percentage and three picks in those two games, which makes for a pretty good impression of Heath Shuler.

[Ripper 0]

Plus, Tampa was only 1-1 against them this year.  Shutting that guy down isn't EASY.

Actually, yeah it is. Tampa finished 1-1, sure, but Vick had a QB rating of 46.9 with a 48.8% completion percentage and three picks in those two games, which makes for a pretty good impression of Heath Shuler.

thats factoring in the incredible shittyness of the second game. Vick went 8-of-16 for 147 yards and an interception in the first game, which isn't exactly good, but it ain't shutting him down either especially considering how he ate them alive in the first half. They just couldn't move the ball in the second.

 

The second game....okay...I give you that. 2 picks, no touchdowns, 45% completions....thats a bad game.

[The Man in Blak 0]

Sez the Green Bay Packer fan. All four home teams won this week.

 

And the week before, only one did.

The Chargers (or, more accurately, MartyBall) pissed away a game that they should have won and they still only lost in overtime, Green Bay has played like crap at home all year (Bears, Titans, Giants, Jaguars), and the Seahawks have no home field advantage in Seattle, where they look behind their back all game to make sure there isn't an angry mob of fans chasing them with pitchforks and torches.

 

To use these three examples to decry the value of home-field advantage doesn't exactly build a strong case.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Also, this week the away team is favored in one game (The AFC Championship), and many people expect the other away team to win.

 

I read an article some time ago about homefield "advantage" not meaning quite as much as it used to as parity becomes more rampant throughout the NFL, and it's true. You see teams winning on the road a whole lot more than you used to.

[The Man in Blak 0]

Here are the number of games won by the road team out of the total non-Super Bowl games played each year:

 

2004: 3/8 (all three road victors eliminated)

2003: 4/10 (Panthers won two of these on their way to the SB)

2002: 2/10 (Buccaneers won in Philly on their way to winning it all)

2001: 3/10 (NE beat PIT on the road before beating the Rams)

2000: 2/10 (Ravens won both of them and the Super Bowl)

1999: 3/10 (Titans won two before losing to the Rams in the SB)

1998: 2/10 (Falcons upset Minnesota in OT)

1997: 4/10 (Broncos win two, Packers win one, meet in SB)

1996: 2/10 (Jaguars win both of them, lose to Pats in AFC Championship)

 

Road Winning %: 28.4%

 

Then, for fun, let's take out the teams that made it all the way to the Super Bowl (we can't use this year's yet):

 

2003: 2/8

2002: 1/9

2001: 2/9

2000: 0/8

1999: 1/8

1998: 1/9

1997: 1/7

1996: 2/10

 

Road Winning % of Non Super Bowl teams: 14.7%

 

Which means that, unless you're going all the way to the Super Bowl, you've got a little over a 1/7 chance of winning on the road. And, even when you count the conference champions, the odds aren't really all that great.

 

Home-field advantage is still important.

[Ripper 0]

Especially when you take into effect a game like the Falcons and Eagles, where the falcons are a dome team and have to play in the elements. Plus, back to the inzone in away stadiums= hell if a home crowd is into it. Homefield is VERY important, in football more than any other sport honestly (except maybe boxing)

[nl5xsk1 0]

Excellent point, Ripper, about the effects of playing outdoors for a dome team. Theoretically, being a road-warrior should be harder for the Falcons (indoor team playing outdoors, in the cold) than it should be for the Patriots (outdoor, cold weather team playing outdoors in cold weather).

 

Having said that, though, the effects of the noise of the crowd shouldn't be overlooked. It'll be awfully tough for either Atlanta or New England to call plays with the noise from the stands.

 

And, having said that, give me the Pats & Eagles to make the Super Bowl. I think that Philly will find a way to slow Vick down, and to limit the effectiveness of Dunn & Duckett ... and I don't think that a team will win a championship game with the TE being their primary (only???) target. And I just think that New England is playing too well right now; if Roethlisberger plays half as poorly against the Patriots as he did the Jets, the Steelers will lose bad. Even if he plays well, I think New England will keep a ton of guys in the box and make the Steelers beat them with the rookie's arm. I don't care how many games in a row he's won, you have to give the edge to the Pats if it comes down to a rookie QB.

[Ripper 0]

I think Bens lack of knowledge and wealth of confidnence is going to help against the Pats. he just knows he has a 6'5" reciever going down the field and won't give a shit if he is covered or not. I just think someone needs to try this secondary and they stand a chance.

 

I think the combo of staley and bettis will be tough against the pats, and Dillon will be tough on the steelers. It SHOULD be a hell of a game. I can't really pick a winner there, although i would prefer the Steelers(since I think the Eagles are going to the bowl, and I think this will be a more interesting game).

[The Man in Blak 0]

Even if he plays well, I think New England will keep a ton of guys in the box and make the Steelers beat them with the rookie's arm. I don't care how many games in a row he's won, you have to give the edge to the Pats if it comes down to a rookie QB.

 

Here's my problem with this theory. The Patriots knew they had a rookie quarterback going in the first game and Roethlisberger proceeded to go 18/24 for 196 yards and two touches. The Pats never sacked him, never forced a fumble, never made a pick. They had game footage from his bad games earlier in the year for that game. What makes you think they're going to poof up a magic plan now?

 

And, on top of that, what makes you think that the Steelers aren't going to adjust either? Roethlisberger turned in a pretty average day against the Ravens in his first outing (12/20, two picks), but he managed to carve them up for a 125.1 QB rating in the rematch (14/19, 221 yards, two TDs, one pick). Believe it or not, he got better against the Jets in the playoffs, as they handed him the worst game of his career during the regular season (9/19, two picks). And now he gets the Patriots at home with a game of playoff experience. I'm not saying he's going to light them up for 300+, but I think he's still capable of chipping in 200 yards and one or two touchdowns, which may be all the Steelers require.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

Even if he plays well, I think New England will keep a ton of guys in the box and make the Steelers beat them with the rookie's arm. I don't care how many games in a row he's won, you have to give the edge to the Pats if it comes down to a rookie QB.

 

Here's my problem with this theory. The Patriots knew they had a rookie quarterback going in the first game and Roethlisberger proceeded to go 18/24 for 196 yards and two touches. The Pats never sacked him, never forced a fumble, never made a pick. They had game footage from his bad games earlier in the year for that game. What makes you think they're going to poof up a magic plan now?

 

And, on top of that, what makes you think that the Steelers aren't going to adjust either? Roethlisberger turned in a pretty average day against the Ravens in his first outing (12/20, two picks), but he managed to carve them up for a 125.1 QB rating in the rematch (14/19, 221 yards, two TDs, one pick). Believe it or not, he got better against the Jets in the playoffs, as they handed him the worst game of his career during the regular season (9/19, two picks). And now he gets the Patriots at home with a game of playoff experience. I'm not saying he's going to light them up for 300+, but I think he's still capable of chipping in 200 yards and one or two touchdowns, which may be all the Steelers require.

Keep in mind that they had a distinct advantage in TOP with 42:58 to 17:02. They also had 40 carries and 190 yards rushing between Duce Staley and Jerome Bettis. Brady also was 27/43(63%) for 271 yards in that game. With Dillon running 20-25 times, Brady should lower his attempts to around the 32-33 level and have a similar completion % without trying to win the game with his arm. With the huge upgrade in the running game, the TOP should level out to 32 vs 28 or so between both teams. I think it will come down to defense and which team can force the turnovers. Both teams have solid special teams, have a great running game, very good defenses, and mistake-free QB's.

 

The Steelers also converted 9/16 3rd down conversions, so if the Pats can limit that number then they should see the ball more. Interesting to note that the Steelers had more penalties(9 vs 6) for more yards(90 vs 55).

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Many of those completions for Brady were in garbage time.

[the pinjockey 0]

MiB, I agree with you to an extent in the idea that they are not going to have a magic plan fall out of thin air. But at that time, film was still limited on Roethlisberger (3rd or 4th game?) and since that point the Jets have played well and had to have shown things. Belichek will also know, now, what the defense runs that does not work against Ben and will eliminate it. I don't see him shutting down Roethlisberger, but I do see him coming up with something to slow him down which combined with Dillon coming back could be enough to pull off the win.

 

Another thing, that I don't think can be discounted, is the appearance that Roethlisberger may be hitting the rookie wall. He is far beyond the schedule he is used to playing and the 4/7 TD/Int ratio in his last four games may be evidence of that.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Especially when you take into effect a game like the Falcons and Eagles, where the falcons are a dome team and have to play in the elements. Plus, back to the inzone in away stadiums= hell if a home crowd is into it. Homefield is VERY important, in football more than any other sport honestly (except maybe boxing)

Baseball has big home field advantage because a park can be unique enough to mess with a road team, basketball seems to have the home team get a lot of calls their way. Hockey's home ice advantage has seemed pretty negligible.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

I'm going with what was the preseason pick for almost EVERYBODY.

 

Eagles-Pats, but I hope Cowher proves me wrong and finally wins the big one.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Especially when you take into effect a game like the Falcons and Eagles, where the falcons are a dome team and have to play in the elements.  Plus, back to the inzone in away stadiums= hell if a home crowd is into it.  Homefield is VERY important, in football more than any other sport honestly (except maybe boxing)

Baseball has big home field advantage because a park can be unique enough to mess with a road team, basketball seems to have the home team get a lot of calls their way. Hockey's home ice advantage has seemed pretty negligible.

Baseball's home field advantage is weak, home teams win about 52% of the time.