AFC East vs. AFC South
Posted by Andrew on Friday, January 4th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Or: Andrew's Attempts to Rationalize the Colts' Chances Under the Guise of Analysis
As this year's NFL playoffs approach, I thought I might have a look at the AFC side of things, specifically the Patriots' division and the Colts' division. As the #1 team in the NFL and the #1 contender, one of these two teams representing the AFC in the Super Bowl is as close to an automatic one can get in football.
One caveat: I really don't know football that well. It's definitely not my best sport for analysis and commentary. I'll admit that up front. So if my ideas/musings are not up to the usual half-baked standards 'round these parts, that's just too bad.
First, a look at how each division stood at the conclusion of the regular season.
Final Standings
| AFC SOUTH | W | L | PCT |
| Indianapolis | 13 | 3 | 0.813 |
| Jacksonville | 11 | 5 | 0.688 |
| Tennessee | 10 | 6 | 0.625 |
| Houston | 8 | 8 | 0.500 |
| AFC EAST | W | L | PCT |
| New England | 16 | 0 | 1.000 |
| Buffalo | 7 | 9 | 0.438 |
| New York | 4 | 12 | 0.250 |
| Miami | 1 | 15 | 0.063 |
| EAST | SOUTH | |
| Combined Record | 28-36 | 42-22 |
| Combined WP | 0.438 | 0.656 |
| Head-to-Head Wins | 1 | 3 |
| Playoff Teams | 1 | 3 |
| Teams Below 0.500 | 3 | 0 |
I'm not going to sit here and say that the Patriots aren't as good as their record or that 16-0 isn't deserved. They are quite rightly the #1 seed in the AFC. That doesn't mean I have to like it.
Now, yes, I might be a bit biased, but it seems to me that the Patriots' 16-0 season - while still very impressive - was helped out a bit by the fact they played in a division that was a combined 12-36 (0.250!) among the other 3 teams. The worst team in the South was Houston at an even 8-8, and this is just their 6th year of existence. The only game the South lost to the East was the Colts defeat at the hands of the Patriots. Which, if I may remind you, happened when the Colts were without the services of one Marvin Harrison.
Of the Colts' losses, there is the aforementioned Patiots game that the Colts were winning 20-10 halfway through the 4th quarter. Another one of the Colts losses was a game where the outcome was so unimportant that Jim Sorgi threw 24 pass attempts. The only game this year where the Colts looked completely inept was the San Diego game where Peyton threw 6 interceptions , but they still were just a missed FG as time expired away from winning that one as well.
The Colts have won the last 2 times they went to Foxboro. They beat them in the AFC Championship game last year at the Hoosier Dome as well. In fact, that makes the Colts the last team to beat the Patriots (not counting the joke of the NFL preseason, of course). Of anyone, I'd say the Colts have the best chance of beating the Patriots, but that doesn't mean anything until the game is played. Some of the talk of Peyton being unable to win in pressure situations has abated in the past 2 years or so once they Colts have played the Patriots better.
Just smash your helmet into your locker three times and repeat after me - The Colts are the defending Super Bowl champs. The Colts are the defending Super Bowl champs. The Colts are the defending Super Bowl champs.
Man, I feel better.
Loading ...
The Colts are pretty close to an undefeated season themselves. An AFC championship game with NE and Indy will be great.
Let me start by saying my bias is idential to Andrew's. Now I'm going to ramble...
The AFC East was a complete joke this year, but the Pats did win at Indy, Dallas, Pittsburgh, and NYG, an impressive feat.
Unfortunately, I think no Freeney = no Super Bowl for the Colts. They have been fortunate to face some bad/average-at-best QBs, with the exception of Garrard, since Freeney went down, so the lack of a pass rush hasn't been as exposed as it will be by Brady. The Colts defense relies on the front four pressuring the QB, they just don't blitz often and the LBs aren't very effective when they do. They are still the best bet to defeat the NE Evil Empire.
I have no faith in Harrison playing or being effective in the playoffs. But I think the Colts win the first matchup with New England if Anthony Gonzalez doesn't dislocate his thumb on the first drive.
If Jacksonville beats Pittsburgh and the weather is terrible in NE, I think they have a chance to knock off the Pats.
I am probably one of the very few people sad to see the RCA Dome host its final game sometime this month. I still remember going there as a kid to watch terrible Colts teams lose and eating the worst nachos ever with an awful, pale-yellow foam-like cheese
The AFC East was a complete joke this year, but the Pats did win at Indy, Dallas, Pittsburgh, and NYG, an impressive feat.
It appears as though the Patriots' non-conference games outweighed their weak in-conference games in terms of SOS, but not by much. Over at football-outsiders.com, they have some team stats, and one of those "Past Sched" measures strength-of-schedule. By this measure, the Pats had the 8th-most difficult schedule this year, and the Colts had the 11th-most difficult schedule--which seems to me to basically be a dead heat.
The AFC East was a complete joke this year
I think if the Pats had to play the Jags and Colts twice each this year, their chances would have been greatly diminished that they still go 16-0.
I have no faith in Harrison playing or being effective in the playoffs
If you're the opposing defensive coordinator, would you stake the game, maybe your job, on the hunch that Harrison won't be effective? I think you still have to plan for the possibility of him being the #1 receiver until it's shown otherwise.
If Jacksonville beats Pittsburgh and the weather is terrible in NE, I think they have a chance to knock off the Pats.
In Taylor/MJD I trust. Those guys are the best 1-2 combo in the AFC. It's between those two and the other Taylor and Purple Jesus for the best in the entire NFL.
The worst thing I ever ate at the Hoosier Dome (I don't call it the RCA Dome) was a giant pretzel with the "cheese" inside the pretzel itself. Ugh! If I remember correctly, that was during the pre-1996 Olympics Dream Team tour vs. Greece. We drove by the new stadium, corporately called Lucas Oil Field, herein referred to as Hoosier Field, over Thanksgiving. I swear you could fit 2 or 3 dome into the new place. It looked absolutely massive.
Lucas Oil Field? Slick.
Fortunately I'm just a pessimistic fan, not a defensive coordinator. I agree with you though, you have to plan for Marvin and if he doesn't play, good for coordinator.
The Dome had some awesome Pizza Hut french bread pizzas back in the early 90s, that became my go-to move at the concession stand.
The new stadium is massive, I haven't driven past it since it was mostly a concrete skeleton, but even then it made the Dome look tiny.
I'm not going to sit here and say that the Patriots aren't as good as their record or that 16-0 isn't deserved.
Well, if you won't then I will. No one is as good as a perfect record. The Patriots are really, really, really good, but they are not perfect. The above-mentioned football-outsiders rankings have the Patriots estimated for 11.3 wins per 16 games on average if they faced a league average schedule over and over again. That maybe seems a little low to me, but the Patriots do handily lead the league in estimated wins. The Colts are 3rd in the NFL in estimated wins, at 9.5.
As for whether or not the Patriots deserved their record, well, in the words of William Munny, "deserve's got nothing to do with it."
To me, it certainly seems as though the Colts would have a decent chance in a match-up with the Patriots. I would set the odds slightly in favor of the Patriots, but any time you match up two of the league's best teams, I wouldn't set the odds of either team winning much higher than 55% or 60%, if that.
(Interestingly, the Vikings wound up 7th(?!) in the estimated wins rankings.)
NE was as lucky as a football team could be to beat the Ravens. Imagine if the Ravens had beaten the Pats. They could have beaten a 15-1 team and lost to a 1-15 in the same season. Oh, that would have been delicious.
Kind of like when the Vikings lost to every 4-12 team in the league (there were three or four that year).
That would have been pretty funny.
I didn't see the NE/Baltimore game, but it's not surprising to hear that NE had at least one lucky win along the way. Setting a record like that nearly always requires some degree of luck.
NE would've lost to Baltimore when they failed to convert on a late 4th down, but a Ravens assistant called time out just before the snap, so the Pats got a do-over. Then I think they got a pass interference call to extend the drive, and the Ravens felt like NE got away with a push-off or something on the winning TD. It easily could've been a loss, but the Pats got the breaks in the end.
The Ravens defensive players were apoplectic after that time out. I don't think they got a bad call on that drive, but good god, the Ravens had them beat.
There were four 4-12 teams that year: Chargers (Flutie's last good start iirc), Raiders, Cardinals, and Giants. No team had a worse record than those four.
The Vikings ended up 9-7, and a win over any one of those teams would have put them in the playoffs. Started 6-0 and missed the playoffs. The Vikings were the only team that had the four worst teams on their schedule, and they lost to all four.
A .750 record against teams that weren't tied for worst in the league. Wins over 13-3 Chiefs, 10-6 seahawks, 10-6 Packers, and 10-6 Broncos.
This season is the essence of the Vikings, even more than the NFC championship game losses to the Falcons and Giants.
Yep, that was a dandy year. Then, there was the year (2001) that they got killed on opening day by the Panthers, who promptly lost their next 15 games. Then, they lost to the previously 0-12 Lions, who won again in the last week of the season by 5 points to avoid 1-15. The Vikings almost lost to two 1-15 teams that year.