NFL Playoffs 2005-2006

[sluggo]

So here we go. We've pretty much known who the playoff teams would be for months now; it's about time everyone dropped the gloves and had at it. My predictions:

- Washington @ Tampa Bay: Remember all the whining everyone did about how the refs cost the Redskins the first game? Jon Gruden won't need a 2-point conversion at the end to win this time. Tampa wins this handily, 31-13.

- Jacksonville @ New England: ABC gets two losers for Wild Card Saturday -- it might be tight at halftime, but the Pats pull away, 24-9.

- Carolina @ Giants: I suspect this game might be sloppy, but tight. This has 23-20 written all over it. The question is: who makes / misses their field goals? I say Giants in a coin flip.

- Pittsburgh @ Cincinnati: I think Pittsburgh pulls the upset here and ends Cincy's party, 27-24.

With any luck, this sets up Indy / Pitt and Pats / Denver for the divisional playoffs, which would be fun. :)

[andtron]

So here we go. We've pretty much known who the playoff teams would be for months now; it's about time everyone dropped the gloves and had at it. My predictions:
Amen!
- Washington @ Tampa Bay: Remember all the whining everyone did about how the refs cost the Redskins the first game? Jon Gruden won't need a 2-point conversion at the end to win this time. Tampa wins this handily, 31-13.
Gibbs > Gruden. I know the 'Skins limped their way into the playoffs but I'm not a believer in Simms. I think Gibbs can get those guys in shape and take advantage of a young QB for teh w33n.
- Jacksonville @ New England: ABC gets two losers for Wild Card Saturday -- it might be tight at halftime, but the Pats pull away, 24-9.

Depends on how/if Leftwich plays (as far as how good or how close this game will be). . I, too, like the Patsies in Foxsboro for the win.
- Carolina @ Giants: I suspect this game might be sloppy, but tight. This has 23-20 written all over it. The question is: who makes / misses their field goals? I say Giants in a coin flip.
You're right about ugly. I'm going to go with Giants too. Tiki's been great this season. They're at home. I don't like the match up of Carolina's O line v the Giants o line. When Carolina played the Bears earlier this season they gave up 8 sacks. Osi and Strahan should have a very good day.
- Pittsburgh @ Cincinnati: I think Pittsburgh pulls the upset here and ends Cincy's party, 27-24.
Think/hope we'll win bigger than that. We should. Cincy's been playing lousy ball to close the season. This team plays a lot better when backed into a corner. Cowher's never won on the road in the playoffs before though. It'll be a tough one.
With any luck, this sets up Indy / Pitt and Pats / Denver for the divisional playoffs, which would be fun. :)
=( maybe fun for you.

[BaconTastesGood]

Gibbs > Gruden. I know the 'Skins limped their way into the playoffs but I'm not a believer in Simms. I think Gibbs can get those guys in shape and take advantage of a young QB for teh w33n.

It's a tough call, because I think TB.defense > WAS.offense, but WAS.defense > TB.offense. I think it comes down to some lucky plays, but at this point I'll give the nod of Moss/Portis/Brunell over Galloway/Williams/Simms and call it 20-16, Washington wins.

Depends on how/if Leftwich plays (as far as how good or how close this game will be). . I, too, like the Patsies in Foxsboro for the win.

Leftwich is going to be rusty, big time. He's their franchise QB, but Garrard played well (think he'll be trade bait in the off season?). I think Pats win it 24-17

You're right about ugly. I'm going to go with Giants too. Tiki's been great this season. They're at home. I don't like the match up of Carolina's O line v the Giants o line. When Carolina played the Bears earlier this season they gave up 8 sacks. Osi and Strahan should have a very good day.

Unless Carolina suddenly ignites and Delhomme learns how to look at anyone OTHER than his #1 receiver (last year he threw almost every pass to Moose, and this year almost every pass to Smith, no matter how wide open Proehl or Colbert may have been), this has got to be the Giants. Speaking of which, I think Barber was robbed of the MVP -- he was something like 45% of the Giants total offense and had the second most yards from scrimmage in history but didn't get MVP. Whatever.

Anyway, I think this really comes down to whether Eli Manning plays well or chokes. I'll call it Giants in a sloppy win over the Panthers, 27-17

As for Pitt/Cincy, it's not like Cowher has a better track record of AFC championships at home. A part of me wants Cowher to get a ring, but a part of me is irritated with his conservative play in last year's playoff and thinks he doesn't deserve a ring at this point. I'd like to see Bettis* get a ring, just because he's a lovable big guy.

And, well, Cincy shouldn't get greedy -- they were hoping to break 0.500 this year, and somehow walked with a division crown AND going to the playoffs. Asking for a playoff win? That's just crazy talk.

What's funny is that Cincy is in a tizzy because odds makers have made them 3 point underdogs at home against a team they've beat. The sexy pick is Steelers by a hair, but I'm going to get crazy here and go against the grain and call it Bengals 31 Steelers 20 with Roethlisberger choking dramatically in his second playoff appearance. (Of course, the reality is it's going to go the other way as Chad Johnson disappears in the biggest game of his life, but whatever).

* Speaking of which, they may as well rename the Hall of Fame to the "Hall of Very Good With Long Careers". Somehow Bettis is a "shoe in" for the HoF but Faulk and Terrell Davis are "longshots"? WTF?

[SlyFrog]

* Speaking of which, they may as well rename the Hall of Fame to the "Hall of Very Good With Long Careers". Somehow Bettis is a "shoe in" for the HoF but Faulk and Terrell Davis are "longshots"? WTF?

I get Davis being a longshot, but I don't get Faulk (and have never heard that). Although I suppose the argument is that Faulk had a few glory years with the Rams rather than a long consistently great career. I also think the HoF is biased against guys like Faulk who are not "pure" runners.

As for the picks, I've got Redskins over Tampa. The Redskins are a team on the rise, still building higher under Gibbs. The Bucs are a team on the decline, with Gruden still playing with what he has left from Dungy, with the admittedly non-minor addition of Cadillac. He, however, is worn down and is still a year or two away from my being able to say he could reliably carry a team through the playoffs.

Carolina over Giants. I do not trust Eli yet. He's slumped big time lately. Shockey is over-rated, and the Giants just are not consistent enough. I know that's the strike against Carolina as well, but I'll still take the team that was there two years ago with what I believe is a better defense for games like this.

Cincinatti over Pittsburgh. They've done it once at home when it mattered, they can do it again. Pittsburgh is another team that I think is on the overall decline. I'm not convinced of Big Ben's ability to really step up in a game where he is needed to do more than handoff, and if Cincy gets scoring, giving the ball to Bettis and watching him plow won't be an option.

Patriots take out Jacksonville for the obvious reasons. I feel bad for del Rio - he puts together good, hard working teams, but they always somehow manage to be so quiet. I admire the Patriots and Belichek for what they've done, but would not be that upset by Jacksonville getting some credit for winning this game that they are not supposed to.

[BaconTastesGood]

I get Davis being a longshot

Most dominant runner for a couple years, and was the guy that allowed Elway to finally get two SuperBowl rings. Would have continued to be dominant if not for his knee injuries. The two knocks against him were "not enough time" and "product of the system".

Although I suppose the argument is that Faulk had a few glory years with the Rams rather than a long consistently great career. I also think the HoF is biased against guys like Faulk who are not "pure" runners.

He sure made a lot of yards rushing for not being a "pure" runner =) 1300+ yards for five years in a row, and two of those years he was out for two games and so could have easily had two 1500 yard seasons in there. In addition he had 80+ receptions a season for four seasons in a row, and broke 1000 yards receiving one year (when he had 2400+ yards from scrimmage, which I think was the record).

But yeah, I think the knock is longevity. He had about a 5 year dominant stretch and all the "Greats" had 9+ years of greatness. But I just don't see how "consistently above average" backs like Curtis Martin, Jerome Bettis, etc. are considered HoF candidates even though any given year they aren't the most feared runners in the league.

That's basically my criteria for HoF worthiness -- was this person the most dominant player at his position for a while? If he was never dominant then I'm sorry, why are we talking about him as if he was a player for the ages?

Now, JUST being dominant for a couple years isn't good enough, but I think someone like Warner is way more HoF worthy than someone like Bledsoe or Testaverde, both of whom have long careers and huge numbers of yards. I think other contributions, such as changing how the game is played or perceived, should be taken into account as well, so I think it's legit to say guys like Warren Moon and Randall Cunningham should be in.

with Gruden still playing with what he has left from Dungy

??? That team is almost completely revamped. The defensive stars of the Dungy era are mostly gone, and that offense is pretty much 100% turned over except the OL. New QB, RB, receivers.

I feel bad for del Rio - he puts together good, hard working teams, but they always somehow manage to be so quiet.

That's because his teams have a tendency of barely winning.

[TriggerHappy]

The Bucs are a team on the decline

That seems a pretty bizarre statement considering Tampa's win/loss record over the last 3 years, and the increase in Simm's passer rating.

Buc's D is number 1 in the league, but that's mostly against the run. I like the Bucs over the Skins, 17-10.

Also, Pittsburgh over Cincinatti isn't an upset. Pittsburgh is actually favored to win.

[SlyFrog]

That seems a pretty bizarre statement considering Tampa's win/loss record over the last 3 years, and the increase in Simm's passer rating.

I'm not saying they suck, but I do think they've been on the decline. I believe that no one fears the Tampa Bay defense nearly as much as they did in the Tony Dungy era/Gruden Superbowl year. Gruden has lost a lot of that team and spirit, but has not sufficiently replaced it on the defensive or offensive side (the offense is better, but not enough to offset the loss in defensive prowess). They may be number 1, but they do not even come close to having the threat and intimidation that they once had.

I would be willing to give credit to the theory that they have been in decline, but are now on the way back up (due to Simms and Williams), but I won't know that for sure until I see a couple more years. :)

[SlyFrog]

Most dominant runner for a couple years, and was the guy that allowed Elway to finally get two SuperBowl rings. Would have continued to be dominant if not for his knee injuries. The two knocks against him were "not enough time" and "product of the system".

I completely get the reasoning, and I do not discredit it as stupid or anything. I just do not agree with it in the end. The whole thing is somewhat subjective, and a few good years, or a six year career (Gayle Sayers is the guy that's constantly mentioned in the same breath with Davis) is not enough in my opinion.

I actually think there needs to be a blend. I also agree that guys who were above average players who just had really long careers should not get in. I agree with the idea that you both need to have a respectfully long career and be one of the most if not the most feared players at your position for at least 4-5 seasons of it.

[Old Man Gravy]

Yeah, I'm just happy to see the muthafuckin Seahawks in the second round. Finally.

Yeesh, has it ever been a dry spell.

[Bill Dungsroman]

I'm not saying they suck, but I do think they've been on the decline.

In that they haven't won another Superbowl, yes. Pretty harsh measuring stick, that.


I believe that no one fears the Tampa Bay defense nearly as much as they did in the Tony Dungy era/Gruden Superbowl year.

Agreed, but I believe they fear the team as a whole in the playoffs more than they ever did in the Dungy years.


Gruden has lost a lot of that team and spirit, but has not sufficiently replaced it on the defensive or offensive side (the offense is better, but not enough to offset the loss in defensive prowess). They may be number 1, but they do not even come close to having the threat and intimidation that they once had.

But...that doesn't make them losers. They went from 6-11 to 11-6 this year. That deserves some props.


I would be willing to give credit to the theory that they have been in decline, but are now on the way back up (due to Simms and Williams), but I won't know that for sure until I see a couple more years. :)

"In decline... on [their] way back back up." You should consider politics, SF.


Most dominant runner for a couple years, and was the guy that allowed Elway to finally get two SuperBowl rings. Would have continued to be dominant if not for his knee injuries. The two knocks against him were "not enough time" and "product of the system".

I agreee with you here BTG, and more's the pity. The average is 5 years for a pro RB, yeah? Being the motive force for back-to-back Superbowls should be enough. As for "product of the system" that's the worstest, lamest-assest complaint ever. I dunno, do you (and I don't mean you, Bee Tee) figure Joe Montana and Jerry Rice were products of the system, seeing as how the WCO was the A#1 offensive system in pro football ever? Or Emmitt Smith? man, if you applied that train of thought to every HOF player, after 1970 there would be like Fran Tarkenton, Barry Sanders, and nobody.Similarly, if Faulk doesn't qualify, then I'm stuck for how a lot of other dudes managed to qualify.

[Ryan A]

Washington at Tampa Bay: Washington's the better team but they will lose as Brunell will get taken out of the game in the first quarter due to his knee injury.

Jacksonville at New England: nobody can beat Tom Brady's dimples.

Carolina at Giants: The Panthers are the best team not from Seattle in the NFC playoffs.

Pittsburgh at Cincinatti: The Bengals will come out looking like a team that's never been in the post season and once they're behind, they won't recover even at home: Pittsburgh in a low-scoring snoozer.

[jeffd]

[Gibbs > Gruden. I know the 'Skins limped their way into the playoffs...

Pretty sure a 5 game win streak doesn't qualify as limping.

[Guido Jones]

But I just don't see how "consistently above average" backs like Curtis Martin, Jerome Bettis, etc. are considered HoF candidates even though any given year they aren't the most feared runners in the league.

Bettis is #5 on the all time rushing list - Martin is #4. That's why they'll be in the hall of fame. They have the numbers to match their good seasons. If Martin can stay health a few more years, he'll pass Smith too.

As to complaints against TD as "product of the sytem" - what they're trying to say is that you could have dropped any half decent running back into the Bronco's offense and they would have had similar numbers. I don't necessarily agree with that, but the Broncos have shown they can just cycle through the backs.

[SlyFrog]

In that they haven't won another Superbowl, yes. Pretty harsh measuring stick, that.

My measuring stick is that they haven't even had a whiff of it. Dungy had them on the border for a lot of years (championship game or games if I remember correctly). Then they won it. They have been nowhere near since (unless I'm not remembering some championship game or late playoff run they've had lately).




Agreed, but I believe they fear the team as a whole in the playoffs more than they ever did in the Dungy years.

I disagree, but reasonable enough. The Dungy year teams were seen as a Superbowl threat. I have not heard anyone talking that way about the Bucs this year (or the last couple).

But...that doesn't make them losers. They went from 6-11 to 11-6 this year. That deserves some props.

Did I call them losers somewhere? What's the deal here with turning, "They've been on the decline and I think they'll lose this game," into, "These guys blow oats?"

I don't think they suck. In fact, I think I specifically said, "I'm not saying they suck." They've been in decline. Of course, being in decline from being a Superbowl team isn't exactly the worst thing you could have happen to you. But I do not think they have been a Superbowl threat in most people's eyes since that year (or perhaps for the first 3 weeks or so of the season after it).

We're at a point now where 37% of the teams in the NFL make the playoffs. Making the playoffs alone is no longer indicative of being a really serious contender.

"In decline... on [their] way back back up." You should consider politics, SF.

Just being honest, you can trust me Bill. :)

The "spin" was just my attempt to say in a different way that they have not exactly been sitting at 3-13, and may in fact be back on the ride to the top. I don't think so, but it's not an implausible theory.

[BaconTastesGood]

Bettis is #5 on the all time rushing list - Martin is #4. That's why they'll be in the hall of fame.

And is anyone, and I mean anyone in 10 years going to look back and go "Man, I remember watching Bettis in the day, he was awesome. And that Martin guy...he was amazing!" That's the real yard stick -- were you glad to have seen them play in their prime? Do you REMEMBER what they were like? For all the shit I give Vick, I'd put that kid in just because he changed the entire way the NFL was viewed. I'll have far more fond remembrances of Warner, Faulk, Sterling Sharpe, than guys like Testaverde, Bettis, and Art Monk -- the latter three have career numbers that put the first three to shame, but the first three were memorable game changers.

That's what FAME is about. Do people remember you?

Raw numbers shouldn't get you in, because unless your name is Jerry Rice, those numbers are going to eventually be surpassed. It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Didn't Have a Career Ending Injury And Was Good Enough Not to Get Waived or the Hall of Former Record Holders.

Martin was rushing champion ONE time and that was only because other top flight RBs were injured that same season and Alexander got pulled by Holmgren. Bettis I don't think was ever a rushing champion. So again, it's longevity, whee. I'd put Jamal Lewis in ahead of those two guys even though he's only had about two productive seasons, but goddamn, that 2000 yard season he was a fucking MONSTER.

I'd put Dillon in ahead of those two because that boy was consistent on a shitty, shitty team, whose opponents never, ever had to stop the pass. And he had the top rushing day by a rookie for the longest time and the top rushing day, ever, until Lewis snatched the title. AND he has a fucking Super Bowl ring. But no one will vote his ass in even though he played on a miserable goddamned team for most of his career.

As to complaints against TD as "product of the sytem" - what they're trying to say is that you could have dropped any half decent running back into the Bronco's offense and they would have had similar numbers.

If the system were that infallible, why isn't every other team in the league using it? Seriously. The WCO was effective, and wham, it was everywhere. The 46 D, the Cover-2, the 3-4 Zone blitz, etc. etc. All got jacked at some point, but somehow the Broncos have some secret sauce over a 10 year span that no one else can reproduce?

Or MAYBE the Broncos just know RB talent when they see it and also have good OL?

[jeffd]

Skins at Bucs: Skins are a better team. Sure Bucs beat them, but that was on a questionable 2 point conversion. Skins may have only squeaked into the playoffs, but that's because they went 0-4 against the AFC West; against the NFC they are 10-2. What's more, they're coming off a 5 game win streak. TB was declining toward the end of the season. Skins will win this.

Jacksonville at New England: Jacksonville really didn't do so hot in the second half of the season. New England is coming off of several impressive wins against shitty teams (2 wins against the Jets, a win against the Bills, and one against TB). New England's defense is better but still not great. Fortunately their passing game is very good, and Jacksonville's pass defense seems to have declined as the season progressed. Plus seriously who bets against Brady & Bellichick in the playoffs when they're not obviously super overmatched. They're also playing in Foxboro, but my folks up in NJ say the weather's been warm so that might not be as big a factor. If it gets cold though... Pats win here.

Carolina at Giants: Giants are a better team, the only thing that gives Carolina a chance are injuries to the Giants. Carolina's offense basically consists of throw the ball to Steve Smith, then throw the ball to Steve Smith some more. That's probably not something the Giants will stop effectively... but the Giants offense should be able to beat up Carolina's defense - both Tampa Bay and Dallas demonstrated how to do this. Giants also have Tiki Barber, who is sweet. Giants win here.

Steelers at Bengals: Game of the weekend - both teams are pretty evenly matched and they don't like one another. My coin toss says Pittsburgh.

[Bill Dungsroman]

Skins at Bucs: Skins are a better team. Sure Bucs beat them, but that was on a questionable 2 point conversion. Skins may have only squeaked into the playoffs, but that's because they went 0-4 against the AFC West; against the NFC they are 10-2. What's more, they're coming off a 5 game win streak. TB was declining toward the end of the season. Skins will win this.

I have to agree. Chris Sims didn't even think he'd be starting this season. I'm not saying he hasn't done very well, but you've got Brunell, Portis, Coles, all these key guys on the Skins that are postseason vets. Not that the Bucs don't, but if the QB is raw, it may as well end there.


Jacksonville at New England: Jacksonville really didn't do so hot in the second half of the season. New England is coming off of several impressive wins against shitty teams (2 wins against the Jets, a win against the Bills, and one against TB). New England's defense is better but still not great. Fortunately their passing game is very good, and Jacksonville's pass defense seems to have declined as the season progressed. Plus seriously who bets against Brady & Bellichick in the playoffs when they're not obviously super overmatched. They're also playing in Foxboro, but my folks up in NJ say the weather's been warm so that might not be as big a factor. If it gets cold though... Pats win here.

It'll be close, sure, since that's Jax' M.O. always and the Pats usually - up until recently. A lot of so-called football gurus keep referring to the Patriots as this ball-control stingy offense that relies heavily on its D to win games. Uh, yeah, that was like back when Brady was in his first season as the starter. They stretch the field, run every play in the book now. It'll be a tight half - Jax may even be up - but it'll be all over around the beginning of the 4th quarter. The usual Pats ending, where a desperate opponent tries to throw an intermediate out near the sidelines (but not right near) will be picked off and seal the deal.


Carolina at Giants: Giants are a better team, the only thing that gives Carolina a chance are injuries to the Giants. Carolina's offense basically consists of throw the ball to Steve Smith, then throw the ball to Steve Smith some more. That's probably not something the Giants will stop effectively... but the Giants offense should be able to beat up Carolina's defense - both Tampa Bay and Dallas demonstrated how to do this. Giants also have Tiki Barber, who is sweet. Giants win here.

No. Eli's the least capable QB in the playoffs (potential excluded). Yeah, it looks good, that Barber/Carolina run D matchup. But, you know, so does that Smith/Giants secondary. Who cares if Tiki can eat up the clock if they're losing to Carolina's deep game?


Steelers at Bengals: Game of the weekend - both teams are pretty evenly matched and they don't like one another. My coin toss says Pittsburgh.

It is? Okay. Actually, I agree, because I don't see Pitt as favored to win as many do. If they both show up 100%, I think Cincy will win. But Cincy has to tighten up their junk, which Pitt has long since been able to do, or they'll get run.

[TriggerHappy]

I disagree, but reasonable enough. The Dungy year teams were seen as a Superbowl threat. I have not heard anyone talking that way about the Bucs this year (or the last couple).

Huh? Under Dungy we never won more than one playoff game a year. Never went to even the NFC Championship. I lived in Tampa the whole time and we were maligned by almost every analyst out there, even after 3 years going to the playoff straight. Pasquerelli was particularly annoying (we'd blow out a high profile team, and he'd find ways to call it a fluke), but all of 'em were bad.

I still don't see how 5-11 to 11-5 can *ever* be considered 'on the decline'.

The "spin" was just my attempt to say in a different way that they have not exactly been sitting at 3-13, and may in fact be back on the ride to the top. I don't think so, but it's not an implausible theory.

So even if you have two losing seasons in a row, you aren't on an upswing unless you at least get to a championship game? I'm with Bill. That's pretty damn harsh.

[jeffd]

No. Eli's the least capable QB in the playoffs (potential excluded). Yeah, it looks good, that Barber/Carolina run D matchup. But, you know, so does that Smith/Giants secondary. Who cares if Tiki can eat up the clock if they're losing to Carolina's deep game?

Eli's definitely a weak QB, he's got accuracy issues... but I don't think Carolina will be able to exploit them.

If the Giants were healthy, I'd go with them without any hesitation. As it is they've got like all three of their opening day linebackers out. Carolina historically won't attack that weakness, though.

Tampa Bay beat Carolina with a short passing game, which has the double bonus of helping neutralize Carolina's pass rush. Dallas beat Carolina with a power running game. I'm sure the Giants coaching staff has watched these games carefully - if they make the appropriate adjustments to their gameplan I think they'll win.

[SlyFrog]

Huh? Under Dungy we never won more than one playoff game a year. Never went to even the NFC Championship. I lived in Tampa the whole time and we were maligned by almost every analyst out there, even after 3 years going to the playoff straight. Pasquerelli was particularly annoying (we'd blow out a high profile team, and he'd find ways to call it a fluke), but all of 'em were bad.

"The Bucs went 54-42 and made the playoffs four times under Dungy, who led them to the 1999 NFC championship game before gradually losing a grip on his job the past two seasons."

From ESPN's website.

So even if you have two losing seasons in a row, you aren't on an upswing unless you at least get to a championship game? I'm with Bill. That's pretty damn harsh.

It's the two seasons in a row that constitutes a decline. This season certainly was not strong enough to constitute a, "Damn, they're back and badass again," season in my opinion. Maybe they are, but we'll have to wait and see. I'm not sure it's not a simple anomaly. I also don't think that a team that has fallen from being a perennial playoff team like the Bucs were is suddenly snapped out of a decline because they make the playoffs one year. I'm talking about a longer term swing than that. But I do think there is a chance that Simms and Williams will bring them back.

But I think we're talking about what I meant about "decline" more than the Bucs. I don't think I'm saying anything that different than anyone else here. I think they're a fairly decent team this year. I just do not think they have anywhere near the magic they had a few years ago to get them to the Superbowl.

If anyone disagrees and sees them as a Superbowl favorite, or even a favorite to make a long and strong run to the Championship game and contend in it, I'd be surprised.

Of course part of the problem is that I'm not sure anyone other than the Seahawks (and maybe the Bears) fits that category, and I'm not even so sure about those two. :)

[Guido Jones]

That's what FAME is about. Do people remember you?


Hey, you're the one that asked - that's the reason they're going to be in the Hall of Fame, because you know, they have Fame and are in the record books for being some of the most productive rushers of all time. It doesn't really matter if you don't like that it works that way.

As to the Broncos - as I said, I don't necessarily agree with "product of the system" argument.

[Sarkus]

I'm inclined to think veteran QB's will play a big part in the playoffs this year and that puts Cincinnati, Jacksonville, New York, and Tampa behind the 8 ball as each is starting QB's with no playoff experience. Still, it's rare for a team to lose 3 times to the same team in a season so I'm picking Cincinnati. Leftwich's layoff will hurt so I'm going with New England. I'm giving the slight edge to Carolina over New York because of the Giant's defensive issues and Eli's inexperience. Finally, I'll go with Tampa because they're at home but that game could go either way.

While I know I'm biased, I'm just amazed how this season continues to fall in the Seahawks favor. If they don't make the Superbowl we will all look back at this year as a gigantic lost opportunity for them.

[jeffd]

I know how you feel - I'm like some kind of kicked puppy with the seahawks. Things are going so well and I'm so happy but secretly I'm just waiting to get the boot.

I'm inclined to think veteran QB's will play a big part in the playoffs this year and that puts Cincinnati, Jacksonville, New York, and Tampa behind the 8 ball as each is starting QB's with no playoff experience. Still, it's rare for a team to lose 3 times to the same team in a season so I'm picking Cincinnati. Leftwich's layoff will hurt so I'm going with New England. I'm giving the slight edge to Carolina over New York because of the Giant's defensive issues and Eli's inexperience. Finally, I'll go with Tampa because they're at home but that game could go either way.

While I know I'm biased, I'm just amazed how this season continues to fall in the Seahawks favor. If they don't make the Superbowl we will all look back at this year as a gigantic lost opportunity for them.

[Midnight Son]

Oh yeah the 'skins limped their way into the playoffs..... five straight wins, heloooo! Skins all the way, fuck Chuckie!

[Xaroc]

So here we go. We've pretty much known who the playoff teams would be for months now; it's about time everyone dropped the gloves and had at it. My predictions:

- Washington @ Tampa Bay: Remember all the whining everyone did about how the refs cost the Redskins the first game? Jon Gruden won't need a 2-point conversion at the end to win this time. Tampa wins this handily, 31-13.


Good call. ;)

It was a butt ugly game but our defense out uglied theirs. Obviously the Redskins are going to go down in flames if the offense has another game like that in Seattle or pretty much anywhere else. Still a win is a win and we will take it. :)

-- Xaroc

[BaconTastesGood]

Well, I called 20-16, Washington wins, which wasn't TOO far off.

[Crispus]

Darn. I was hoping the Bears would get Tampa Bay, because I figured they'd be the easiest team to beat. Guess I'll have to root for the Giants now. They worry me less than Carolina does, plus I'd love to get a shot at knocking them out of the playoffs. Of course, with the Giants, cold weather would be less of a factor...but I don't think it's supposed to be cold or snowy in Chicago anytime soon, so I guess that doesn't matter.

[Midnight Son]

Resskins! Booyah!

[Nick Walter]

Darn. I was hoping the Bears would get Tampa Bay, because I figured they'd be the easiest team to beat. Guess I'll have to root for the Giants now. They worry me less than Carolina does, plus I'd love to get a shot at knocking them out of the playoffs. Of course, with the Giants, cold weather would be less of a factor...but I don't think it's supposed to be cold or snowy in Chicago anytime soon, so I guess that doesn't matter.

The Bears would have an easier time with Carolina. As the last game between the two teams showed, the Bears match up well with Carolina. Carolina might be playing a bit better now but the Bears will have a for-reals pro offense this time.

The Giants on the other hand are explosive and dangerous in a lot of ways. I think they can beat the Bears.

[BaconTastesGood]

- Jacksonville @ New England: ABC gets two losers for Wild Card Saturday -- it might be tight at halftime, but the Pats pull away, 24-9.


Final score was 28-3, so pretty good there Sluggo! Almost makes up for the Tampa Bay misprediction =)

[BaconTastesGood]

Interesting stat I saw posted somewhere else -- the Colts have the best record against playoff teams this season than anyone else (6 games out of 16), and they went 5-1 on those. Their one loss was the trash game to Seattle. Contrast this with Pitt, which went 2-4 against playoff teams. The next best team is Denver, at 3-1 vs. playoff teams, and Jax, at 3-2. The remaining 9 playoff teams all have either tied or losing records vs. playoff teams.

By pretty much every estimation the Colts should go all the way. Every correlation to previous teams (discounting the 15-1 Vikes in 1998) shows them going the distance. But I have a really bad feeling that if they encounter the Pats at this point, they're going to be hurt.

I really would like Dungy and Manning to get a ring though. I'm a huge fan of Brady and Belichick, but c'mon, let's not get greedy.

[jeffd]

Well my predictions are 2-0 so far.

Skins got way lucky - 14 of their points came from the defense. Interception and fumble returns are pretty random events.

Barring some bizarre meltdown, Seattle is going to kill the Skins. They won't give Washington the turnovers that Tampa Bay did, and they'll be able to put up more than 10 points against 'em.

[jeffd]

Oh and before anyone jumps on my back - I realize that the defense only had one touchdown, but they also returned an interception to like the 3 yard line which is just about as good as scoring. Offenses very rarely don't score 7 points when starting a drive at first and goal from the 3.

[Mattc0m]

I think the Cincy vs Pitt game is going to be this week's game. They've both come away with a win against eachother, and both games have been really rough and physical football. I think Pittsburg will win simply because they have a reliable defense and running game - which opens up the passing game for Ben. Though he's had his good and bad days, I think he's done great considering last year he was a third string QB (and a rookie, at that).

But I think it'll probably be pretty high scoring, but more than that, there's going to be a lot of "attitude" in both of this team's play. It's the playoffs, but traditionally both teams simply try to "out tough" eachother.

[andtron]

Skins beat the SeaChickens at Seattle during the season. It'll be interesting. If they can shut down Alexander and put a little pressure on Hasselbeck they can get him to make plenty of mistakes. Wouldn't be surprised to see them pull the upset.

[SlyFrog]

I really would like Dungy and Manning to get a ring though. I'm a huge fan of Brady and Belichick, but c'mon, let's not get greedy.

I'm in the same camp, but would also really like to see the Patriots make history. I mean, three in a row, four in five years has not been done - it would be a true record that has eluded all of the other great teams like the 49ers, Dolphins, Steelers, Packers, etc.

I'm just torn because I do not know whether I want it to come at the Colts's expense. At some point the Colts's window is going to start shrinking.

[Crispus]

The Bears would have an easier time with Carolina. As the last game between the two teams showed, the Bears match up well with Carolina. Carolina might be playing a bit better now but the Bears will have a for-reals pro offense this time.

The Giants on the other hand are explosive and dangerous in a lot of ways. I think they can beat the Bears.

Carolina makes me nervous. Steve Smith had a huge game against the Bears. One of the only reasons the Bears won, besides the fact that they were able to beat one man on Carolina's offensive line consistently, was that Delhomme threw some pretty stupid interceptions. I wouldn't count on that happening again. Plus, I figure it's probably testing fate to try beating a team as good as Carolina twice in one season.

The Giants have a softer defense and a quarterback who I think will make crucial mistakes. Tiki Barber is the only thing on that team that worries me, and I'd be willing to gamble that the Bears can contain him. Plus, I'd derive some pleasure from knocking a New York team out of the playoffs...the overhyped east coast teams perpetually get on my nerves.

[Xaroc]

Well my predictions are 2-0 so far.

Skins got way lucky - 14 of their points came from the defense. Interception and fumble returns are pretty random events.

Barring some bizarre meltdown, Seattle is going to kill the Skins. They won't give Washington the turnovers that Tampa Bay did, and they'll be able to put up more than 10 points against 'em.

Interceptions and fumbles are caused but they did get lucky overall since the offense didn't do anything. I wouldn't count on the offense having another game like that next week. I still think the Seahawks have the better chances by a good bit but I don't think they will kill the Skins. They have lost 1 time by over 7 points this entire season in that Wellington Mara lovefest game, which is why sluggo's bizzare two TD loss prediction had me befuddled. My guess is the game will be close and the Redskins offense will play significantly better than they did this week.

-- Xaroc

[Xaroc]

Skins beat the SeaChickens at Seattle during the season. It'll be interesting. If they can shut down Alexander and put a little pressure on Hasselbeck they can get him to make plenty of mistakes. Wouldn't be surprised to see them pull the upset.

It was at Washington but yeah I don't think Washington is an easy out for the Hawks. Then again at this time during the season no one is an easy out (except maybe the Jags, ugh).

-- Xaroc

[sluggo]

Heh, I'd brag about how well I predicted the Pats/Jags game, except for how far off I was with Tampa/Skins. :)

[BaconTastesGood]

I'm just torn because I do not know whether I want it to come at the Colts's expense. At some point the Colts's window is going to start shrinking.

The window is almost gone after this year. Wayne, James, and Freeney are all close to being free agents, and no way can the colts keep them all. And I'm guessing that Tarik Glenn, Jeff Saturday, and Mathis might be up soon.

[jeffd]

Huh, I don't think anyone saw the Giants/Carolina game ending up that way. At least I sure didn't.

[Bill Dungsroman]

Heh, I'd brag about how well I predicted the Pats/Jags game, except for how far off I was with Tampa/Skins. :)


Man. I'm thinking the problem was, Leftwich should have either been out for the season, or had gotten to come back earlier. He just wasn't ready, although I can't fault Jax for going with him. Tough deal.

I'm 3-0 so far. I'm taking Cincy for the PM game.

[Crispus]

Huh, I don't think anyone saw the Giants/Carolina game ending up that way. At least I sure didn't.

Me neither. I figured someone would win a tight 24-21 game, though I wasn't sure who the winner would be.

[Sarkus]

It was at Washington but yeah I don't think Washington is an easy out for the Hawks. Then again at this time during the season no one is an easy out (except maybe the Jags, ugh).

-- Xaroc

I'm not so sure that Seattle won't crush Washington on Saturday. That earlier game was at Washington and Seattle would have won if their kicker hadn't missed a very makeable field goal at the end of regulation. Throw in the homefield advantage (check out the Giants players comments after their game here if you don't think Seattle has a homefield advantage; that and the fact they are 8-0 at home for the second time in three years) and it could get ugly for Washington really fast.

Of the remaining 3 NFC teams that Seattle will/could play, Carolina is the only one that really concerns me.

[Bill Dungsroman]

Nice hit, Kimo.

[Mattc0m]

Ouch, Pitt crushed Cincy. Tough break for them losing their QB... that game could have been really close.

[Robert Sharp]

I didn't think Kitna played that poorly. They weren't able to establish the run; that was the real problem (for the Jags too...can't really pin that loss all on Leftwich). And the Bengals defense just fell apart in the second half.

[Xaroc]

I'm not so sure that Seattle won't crush Washington on Saturday. That earlier game was at Washington and Seattle would have won if their kicker hadn't missed a very makeable field goal at the end of regulation. Throw in the homefield advantage (check out the Giants players comments after their game here if you don't think Seattle has a homefield advantage; that and the fact they are 8-0 at home for the second time in three years) and it could get ugly for Washington really fast.

Of the remaining 3 NFC teams that Seattle will/could play, Carolina is the only one that really concerns me.

I still don't get the crush thing. The odds just aren't there at all for it. Only one loss by more than 7 points all season. If you manage to make that kick you win by 3. I am sure your homefield is great and all but at Denver and at KC, two far worse places to play than Seattle, the Redskins lost by 2 then 7 and had chances to win both of them. I just don't think with the caliber of defense we play you are going to walk all over us.

Personally I would be concerned with everyone you face at this point. It isn't like the Seahawks are the Patriots and have had a ton of success in the playoffs. I think you have a better than average chance of winning this game but don't be surprised if it goes the other way. :)

-- Xaroc

[Alan Dunkin]

Bungles receivers refused to catch passes in the second half as well, that doesn't help. Kitna unable to simply hold on to the ball also not good.

--- Alan

[Bob Cherub]

That Pitt/Cincy game was horrendously officiated (a goal line pass interference no-call on Pitt then a goal line pass interference call on Cincy that wasn't even pass interference).. not to mention the hit on Palmer was dirty. He wasn't blocked into him and basically dove at his legs.

[Sarkus]

I still don't get the crush thing. The odds just aren't there at all for it. Only one loss by more than 7 points all season. If you manage to make that kick you win by 3. I am sure your homefield is great and all but at Denver and at KC, two far worse places to play than Seattle, the Redskins lost by 2 then 7 and had chances to win both of them. I just don't think with the caliber of defense we play you are going to walk all over us.

Personally I would be concerned with everyone you face at this point. It isn't like the Seahawks are the Patriots and have had a ton of success in the playoffs. I think you have a better than average chance of winning this game but don't be surprised if it goes the other way. :)

-- Xaroc

You could be right but it's just a feeling I have. :-)

[BaconTastesGood]

Reading the recaps of the Cincy/Pitt game I find it somewhat appalling that they blame the loss, basically, on Kitna? Uh, what? I'm sure losing Palmer deflated the team, but Kitna got them scoring and was playing pretty damned well. The OL just clearly stunk it up, and their defense folded, completely.

Kitna's not the second coming of Manning, but Cincy could have won today if they hadn't basically given up in the second half. Maybe next year.

[sluggo]

Hey, I almost nailed the Giants / Panthers score -- 23-20, 23-0 ... it's just a digit off. :)

I thought the turning point of the Cincy / Pittsburgh game was the botched FG. That would have made it 20-14 Cincy ... instead Pittsburgh scores and takes a 21-17 lead. Pittsburgh seemed to take control of the game at that point, with the gimmick TD the killing blow.

I can't wait for next week's games. NE / Denver, Pitt / Indy ... sweeet.

[Bob Cherub]

I agree sluggo, the botched FG was a huge momentum swing. And Bacon is right, Kitna tossed some picks but it wasn't his fault they lost. The defense was terrible in the second half coupled with several questionable calls.

I hope Indy destroys them.

[Bill Dungsroman]

Huh, I don't think anyone saw the Giants/Carolina game ending up that way. At least I sure didn't.

Eli's the least capable QB in the playoffs (potential excluded). Yeah, it looks good, that Barber/Carolina run D matchup. But, you know, so does that Smith/Giants secondary. Who cares if Tiki can eat up the clock if they're losing to Carolina's deep game?

Man, I'll tell you what, things just keep shaping up for New England. Assuming they beat Pitt - and they will - they'll play Indy (assuming they win, and they will), of course - but not with Indy fresh off the bye. Now, you could argue it allows Manning a full game to shake off whatever rust he may have, but I don't think so. Shorn rust will turn to wear after the first half against Pitt.

[Woolen Horde]

Man, I'll tell you what, things just keep shaping up for New England. Assuming they beat Pitt - and they will - they'll play Indy (assuming they win, and they will), of course - but not with Indy fresh off the bye. Now, you could argue it allows Manning a full game to shake off whatever rust he may have, but I don't think so. Shorn rust will turn to wear after the first half against Pitt.

Actually, New England goes to Denver. Pittsburgh goes to Indy.

[Mattc0m]

Hey, I almost nailed the Giants / Panthers score -- 23-20, 23-0 ... it's just a digit off. :)

I thought the turning point of the Cincy / Pittsburgh game was the botched FG. That would have made it 20-14 Cincy ... instead Pittsburgh scores and takes a 21-17 lead. Pittsburgh seemed to take control of the game at that point, with the gimmick TD the killing blow.

I can't wait for next week's games. NE / Denver, Pitt / Indy ... sweeet.

I agree. Those match-ups are going to lead to some (hopefully) great football games. The AFC seems like a much stronger conference than the NFC... or is that just me?

[Bill Dungsroman]

Actually, New England goes to Denver. Pittsburgh goes to Indy.

Oops! Doesn't change the winners, though. Plus, I'm willing to bet Pitt puts up more of a fight against Indy than Denver has (if history is any teacher).

[AlanT]

I'm inclined to think veteran QB's will play a big part in the playoffs this year and that puts Cincinnati, Jacksonville, New York, and Tampa behind the 8 ball as each is starting QB's with no playoff experience. And now that all's said and done, I'd like to congratulate Sarkus on his fine read of the situation...
Still, it's rare for a team to lose 3 times to the same team in a season so I'm picking Cincinnati. D'oh!

[balut]

:( for my Giants. I wouldn't mind a loss, as they already beat my expectations for them this season, but they were just CLOWNED by Carolina, and that hurts.

Sarkus' observations on the QB situation was quite prescient, though, as Eli seemed woefully intimidated by his first playoff appearance. Carolina really just had to contain Tiki, and since Eli was a bundle of nerves anyway, a little rattling by Peppers and Rucker and Eli's handing them 4 interceptions. John Fox used all his knowledge as the former Giants D-Coord to exploit them, as well.

[jeffd]

So next week we have:

NE @ Denver
Pitts @ Indy

Skins @ Seattle
Carolina @ Chicago

Who wants to be the first to make predictions?

[andtron]

I agree sluggo, the botched FG was a huge momentum swing. And Bacon is right, Kitna tossed some picks but it wasn't his fault they lost. The defense was terrible in the second half coupled with several questionable calls.

Kitna has no pocket presence and can't throw the ball beyond 20 yards. He might not be the reason they lost but that offense definitely got neutered without Palmer. The coaching wasn't stellar either. Rudi was running pretty well and they've always had success using screens against the Steelers. I'm not impressed with Lewis or his staff. They could have won that game without Palmer. DeShea Townsend was HORRIBLE, they had success when they picked on him and should have continued to harass him all day long. Also Foote was feeble as ever in run defense.

I hope Indy destroys them.
They already have and probably will. Bill Cowher's record after first playoff win is 1-7. Yesterday was his first road victory in the post season and he needed two freak injuries for it to happen. And no, I don't think KVO's intent was to injure Carson. It happens, its football. You're running ahead at full speed, trying to get a hat on a guy, things land funny and someone gets hurt. Happens all the time.

4-0 this weekend on my picks. Don't think I'll do as well next week. Here we go.

CAROLINA
WASHINGTON
NEW ENGLAND
INDIANAPOLIS

hmm, 3 road wins seems bizarre. probably won't shake out this way. I'm probably underestimating the Seahawks but I'm still not a fan of theirs. I like that Carolina has come on at the right time plus I'm going against a first time playoff starter (Grossman). Also, both Seattle and Chicago came out of weak divisions, that sort of thing usually shows up in the postseason.

New England has a tough run defense and Jake Plummer will find some way to give the game away when the onus is on him.

Pittsburgh v Indy part 2. I know the Steelers will be crowing all week about getting no respect, etc and Ben has had a couple of games to get back into rhythm which he didn't have last time he faced this D. As a Steelers' fan I'll be rooting for them to win, but I know this team and what they're capable of. Unless they fix the problems with the silent count and can stick with some sort of running game I don't see them winning this game. That being said, I think if Ben keeps up his play they'll at least be able to make it competitive.

[TriggerHappy]

Simms played tons better than I thought he would, despite the loss. If we had an O-line that could keep the Skin's D-Line from tipping 5 different passes at the line, including the interception that went back to the house, we'd have won that game. Or if our O-line could keep Caddilac from getting hit behind the line on every run play.

Once again, Tampa's O-line lets us down. It's getting silly.

[SlyFrog]

And no, I don't think KVO's intent was to injure Carson. It happens, its football. You're running ahead at full speed, trying to get a hat on a guy, things land funny and someone gets hurt. Happens all the time.

We'll never know. I have seen a lot more plays in the last five or ten years where it looks like the DE or DT could have done a hell of a lot more to not fall on a QB's knee just a bit after the throw was made. I'm not saying that they are diving at the knee for sure, just that they often look like they could avoid it and certainly don't make much effort to do so.

Subjective, I know.

[Sarkus]

My picks for next weekend:

Seahawks over Redskins
Panthers over Bears
Broncos over Patriots
Colts over Steelers

That's three home winners, one road winner.

[Jason Becker]

We'll never know. I have seen a lot more plays in the last five or ten years where it looks like the DE or DT could have done a hell of a lot more to not fall on a QB's knee just a bit after the throw was made. I'm not saying that they are diving at the knee for sure, just that they often look like they could avoid it and certainly don't make much effort to do so.

Subjective, I know.


The reason you think you have seen more plays in the last five years is becasue of replays and ESPN which shows the slo-mo 50 times over the next day. You see something enough you will begin to think maybe it does or yea I think so. A couple of games ago Peyton Manning got taken down a couple of times by the legs that I'm sure made Indy fans gasp for a second but he got up. People wern't talking about a guy taking a cheap shot at his legs because he didn't get hurt. It didn't happen then but it did against Palmer. Its football, a violent and fast moving contact sport.

[SlyFrog]

The reason you think you have seen more plays in the last five years is becasue of replays and ESPN which shows the slo-mo 50 times over the next day. You see something enough you will begin to think maybe it does or yea I think so. A couple of games ago Peyton Manning got taken down a couple of times by the legs that I'm sure made Indy fans gasp for a second but he got up. People wern't talking about a guy taking a cheap shot at his legs because he didn't get hurt. It didn't happen then but it did against Palmer. Its football, a violent and fast moving contact sport.

Well, that is part of what I'm noticing. Not just the plays where people get injured, but the seemingly larger number of plays where a D-lineman seems to fall on a knee, grab the leg, and watch the QB topple over (I've noticed in particular that the D-lineman does not seem to let the leg go when it is obvious the QB is falling - again, they can always say it is because you are trained to tackle them until they are actually on the ground).

But I think you've made a good point regarding ESPN and otherwise. Likewise, you no longer have "legal" plays that are basically intended to hurt someone or knock them senseless, like the patented Deacon Jones open-palmed slap to the helmet earhole that he used over and over. Yet we talk about how the game has become more violent, and don't remember how a 15 yard intentional facemask today would probably have just been considered a "tackle" in the 60s-70s, or how a spearing head-to-head blow to a quarterback was just a big sack.

Although I don't fully recall if it was a helmet blow (I'm pretty sure it was, but won't say without seeing the video again), I recall to this day the year the 49ers got knocked out of the playoffs because a Giants DE basically popped his helmet into the back of Joe Montana's head/upperback from behind. Granted, he had not released the ball yet, but possibly/probably an intentional blow to the head/leading with the helmet these days, at the time I think it was just a "good hard hit."

[BaconTastesGood]

So next week we have:

NE @ Denver

NE 32, DEN 13


Pitts @ Indy
INDY 24, PITT 17


Skins @ Seattle
SEA 24, WAS 6


Carolina @ Chicago
CAR 13 CHI 9

[BaconTastesGood]

Kitna has no pocket presence and can't throw the ball beyond 20 yards.

What?! While he doesn't have Palmer's arm, he sure doesn't have a noodle arm a la Ken Dorsey either. He can make all the throws. His pocket presence has gotten steadily better, pretty much inline with how all the Bengals have gotten steadily better under Lewis.

He had good enough presence in the pocket to evade the pass rush that was constantly in his face, and he scrambled like he had never scrambled before in his life. And he kept his head up the whole time instead of just cradling the ball and falling to the ground like a lot of QBs do when faced with a rush.

He might not be the reason they lost but that offense definitely got neutered without Palmer.

That defense choked. Period. And that OL was just embarrassing.

[Nick Walter]

I find it interesting that a lot of people are picking Carolina over Chicago, despite Chicago already having proven an ability to beat Carolina this season. I know Carolina is a more mature team in terms of playoff experience and will be playing at a high level but the Bears are obviously the more upgraded team since the last matchup what with the Grossman/Orton switcheroo.

I guess I'll make my own picks just to buck the trend

Skins over Hawks

The Hawks haven't faced the kind of desperate do-or-die pressure that the Skins have been thriving in for 6 weeks. I picked this game based purely on that.

Bears over Panthers.

See above for justification.

Pats over Denver.

This one is tough. If there is any AFC team that I think can beat the Pats it's the Broncos. If the Pats squeak this one out they get to stomp on Indy again and advance to the Superbowl.

Colts over Steelers

Steelers are a tough team but they aren't in the Colts league. I predict a slow start to this one as the Colts shake off the rust. First two quarters won't be too crazy, followed by a third quarter where the Colts put up 21 unanswered.

[Bill Dungsroman]

I find it interesting that a lot of people are picking Carolina over Chicago, despite Chicago already having proven an ability to beat Carolina this season. I know Carolina is a more mature team in terms of playoff experience and will be playing at a high level but the Bears are obviously the more upgraded team since the last matchup what with the Grossman/Orton switcheroo.

Or...are they? I'll tell you what I think: I think the Panthers have proven, as much as any team in the league, that they bring their A game to the playoffs. They don't play mediocre football, they don't get stuck in their own quicksand. The only postseason game they've lost of late is the Superbowl, against the Patriots, in which they gave the Patriots the toughest fight they've had in the Superbowl, which is saying something after the Rams SB.

Contrast that to the Bears. The only reasons why Eli Manning won my vote as Least Capable Playoff QB over Grossman is a)Rex hasn't had to play the entire season and suffer the fatigue rookie/first-time-full-time players do by the playoffs and b)Lovie Smith will not ask him to do as much as Coughlin did of Eli and c)the Bears' D won't make Rex put the game entirely on his shoulders.

But, the Panthers will make Rex beat them. Anyone still on that "Carolina can't stop the run" tip? Stop the run, pick. It's how Chico beat the Cats in the regular season and although that earns merit, I'm not writing off the game as a default Bears win. Mostly because, I don't give the Bears better than a .500 record against the Panthers in a playoff game, maybe 2 out of 5 tops. Be a good game between this year's CotY and a former one in Fox, though - for purists, anyway.


I guess I'll make my own picks just to buck the trend

Skins over Hawks

The Hawks haven't faced the kind of desperate do-or-die pressure that the Skins have been thriving in for 6 weeks. I picked this game based purely on that.

Stranger things have happened, but with both Brunell and Portis banged up, I'd have to seriously doubt it. Saturday's game wasn't thriving, it was gasping.


Bears over Panthers.

See above for justification.

Pats over Denver.

This one is tough. If there is any AFC team that I think can beat the Pats it's the Broncos. If the Pats squeak this one out they get to stomp on Indy again and advance to the Superbowl.

Wow, you give Denver a better shot at beating New England over Indy? Okay. I think Denver is going to get smoked because no QB in the league, in the playoffs, is playing at Brady's level right now. He did nothing but carry his team on his shoulders and as soon as they were all healthy, he just kept on keepin' on, and the Patriots just went ballistic. Brady is the best leader in all of pro football. He wasn't really pissed off about not getting respect a few weeks ago - he just knew he needed to stoke the fire on his guys to hit the playoffs fired up, instead of backing in like every other team that locked up a playoff spot early on (props to Denver, though). You got Doug Flutie pulling a silly drop-kick one week, then Brady torching the Jags the next. And how about that 4th quarter pick by NE on that intermediate hashmarks pass?

Goddamn, though, this game is gonna be good.


Colts over Steelers

Steelers are a tough team but they aren't in the Colts league. I predict a slow start to this one as the Colts shake off the rust. First two quarters won't be too crazy, followed by a third quarter where the Colts put up 21 unanswered.

Agreed. After being O-fer on road playoff games, does anyone seriously think the Steelers are going to go on a 2-0 run? Through Indy? No, see, this is the game where Indy blows it's wagon-circling Win-One-For-Tony wad. Indy and Manning are monstro in their off-the-bye opening playoff game. Then, after the fun is done, the Patriots kill them.

And then, the Patriots square off against the Panthers in the Super Bowl again, because that's how things work out for those crazy kids.

[andtron]

What?! While he doesn't have Palmer's arm, he sure doesn't have a noodle arm a la Ken Dorsey either.
EXTREME! Not that bad, I know.
He can make all the throws.
Now you're just talking crazy.
His pocket presence has gotten steadily better, pretty much inline with how all the Bengals have gotten steadily better under Lewis.
?? Were we watching the same game? He doesn't read the field particularly well, he doesn't "feel" the rush and when he does see it you get blooper reel plays like the one he had where he had all the time in the world to either committ to scrambling or dump it off to someone to make a play. Instead he ran from one side of the field to the other before fumbling away an opportunity and taking a sack.
He had good enough presence in the pocket to evade the pass rush that was constantly in his face, and he scrambled like he had never scrambled before in his life. And he kept his head up the whole time instead of just cradling the ball and falling to the ground like a lot of QBs do when faced with a rush.
lol. Did you watch him in Seattle? That scrambling from sideline to sideline and getting no where was a big reason he's not with that team anymore.

That defense choked. Period. And that OL was just embarrassing.
That defense was awful all season. Can you call it a choke when a defense is that consistently awful through the entire season?

[Robert Sharp]

Well, the Bengals were at least opportunistic early in the season, but yeah, those turnovers masked some bigger issues.

Here are my picks for this week:

Carolina over the Bears (The Bears defense is phenomenal, but the Panthers also have a good D. Guess who has the better offense?)

Seahawks over Redskins (every game I have seen the skins play, they have been awful, but that defense keeps them in it. It won't stop the Hawks offense though. Hawks only need to score 17 to win)

Indy over anyone, but in this case, the Steelers. (Steelers look decent right now, but I picked Indy to win it all this year, and I have no reason to change my mind)

Patriots over Denver (Denver has played well all year, and this is the toughest game for me to pick. Plus, I hate the Patriots already....but I think they will win. Brady is probably the best QB in the NFL right now and the Patriots defense is looking good again)

[Alan Dunkin]

Oh Kitna didn't cradle the ball all right. He had it in his hand, ran around, and let it drop on the ground as if he realized it was giant brown turd he was holding instead of a pigskin.

--- Alan

[BaconTastesGood]

Now you're just talking crazy.

Kitna can throw the deep out. He can throw a 50 yard bomb. That's pretty much what you're expected to do as an NFL QB. Beyond that -- say, hitting a 25 yard deep out with a defender closing on the ball; or tossing a 65 yard bomb through the air -- is just gravy because you just don't call those plays that much.

The throws a QB HAS to make are the slants, crossing routes, fades, flys, posts, corners, ins, and intermediate outs. Not having the strength to toss the deep out can definitely bite you in the ass because DBs back off a lot more knowing they can jump the route (or knowing that it's never going to come), and I don't think Kitna can do that all day long, but then again I don't think Brady can either.

So his arm strength is good enough. He made that out to Johnson just fine.

He doesn't read the field particularly well, he doesn't "feel" the rush and when he does see it you get blooper reel plays like the one he had where he had all the time in the world to either committ to scrambling or dump it off to someone to make a play. Instead he ran from one side of the field to the other before fumbling away an opportunity and taking a sack.

That was one play. In the game I watched I saw him scrambling, looking downfield for a receiver, and running for the first down marker when all his options were exhausted. I saw him heaving the ball away and out of bounds instead of taking a sack. He did pretty well IMO and only imploded when the rest of the team gave up and he started throwing stupid passes a la Favre.

lol. Did you watch him in Seattle? That scrambling from sideline to sideline and getting no where was a big reason he's not with that team anymore.

He was a lot younger back in his Seattle days. He has really improved to being an average to above average QB the past few years. He's probably one of the best backups in the league and could start for 10 other teams. He'd do a better job than Brooks, Bollinger, Testaverde, Losman, Boller, Jamie Martin, and a few others.

That defense was awful all season. Can you call it a choke when a defense is that consistently awful through the entire season?

Yeah, good point, I thought their D was better than that. But I still stand by my statement that if the D had vaguely stepped up and if his OL had bought him just a bit more time they could have won. It's not like he was dancing back there weighing his options, the goddamned LBs would practically be in his face before he had a grip on the ball.

[jeffd]

Skins @ Seattle: Seattle should win.
-- Skins are pretty badly banged up (Brunell and Portis, plus they just lost one of their defensive linemen). They had an atrocious game offensively this past weekend; the only thing that kept them alive was their defense getting very lucky on returning turnovers.
-- Skins are traveling across three time zones to play the best team in their division.
-- All of Seattle's recievers are finally healthy, for the first time this season.

Carolina @ Bears: Bears will win
Bill is high on Carolina, especially after they beat the Giants - but seriously, the Giants just rolled over on 'em. Their O-line was a disaster, Barber was a nonfactor, and Eli was... Eli. Defensively the Giants just let the Panthers do what they wanted - the Carolina O-line just manhandled the Giants. That will not happen against the Bears.

Carolina will not be putting up 23 points against the Bears (who have arguably the best defense in the NFL right now). The Bears offense on paper isn't as good as the Giants, but it'd be hard for them to play worse than the Giants did. Getting rid of Orton was a big upgrade.

Oh, and let's not forget - it's Chicago in winter. It's going to be coooooooold. Home team with a bye gives you an advantage already, cold weather just magnifies it.

Pittsburgh at Indy: I don't think anyone sees the Steelers winning here. I suer don't.

New England at Denver: This is the most interesting game of the weekend, in my book.

New England for the first part of the season was terrible, especially in the pass defense department. They've improved dramatically, but it's pretty much impossible to say how much - New England's second half schedule (especially their final five weeks) was a joke. The defense put up some big games against the Jets, Buffalo, and TB - not exactly the elite offenses of the NFL.

On the other hand, Denver has one of the best offenses in the NFL, particularly their passing game. New England's pass defense was very problematic this year - it got better, but how much better...?

One big factor will be the running game. Denver had one of the best rushing offenses in the league, but New England's rush defense is just as good. What's more, New England led the league in preventing runs over 10 yards (for the third straight year no less, during that time no other team has managed to be in the top ten for all three years). Denver's running game often depends on big runs to set up third and short situations; that won't happen which means they're going to be relying on their passing game.

So is Denver's passing game great because they have such a good running game supporting it? Can it stand on its own?

Offensively New England can score. This game will come down to New England's defense.

I think New England will pull the upset here. I think their defense has improved enough to force Denver into the third and long situations they didn't face as many of during the regular season. I suspect this will be a high scoring game, but NE will pull off the upset win and go on to Indianapolis.

Question: If New England wins this game without anyone going down, do they immediately become favorites to win the Super Bowl?

[Nick Walter]

Stranger things have happened, but with both Brunell and Portis banged up, I'd have to seriously doubt it. Saturday's game wasn't thriving, it was gasping.

Is Portis banged up? I thought the Skins were claiming he was fine. If he is too injured to bring his A game that does change the equation.


Wow, you give Denver a better shot at beating New England over Indy? Okay.

Absolutely. Indy is Belichick's bitch. He knows how to get in Manning's head and disrupting Manning screws the entire Indy offense.


I think Denver is going to get smoked because no QB in the league, in the playoffs, is playing at Brady's level right now. He did nothing but carry his team on his shoulders and as soon as they were all healthy, he just kept on keepin' on, and the Patriots just went ballistic. Brady is the best leader in all of pro football. He wasn't really pissed off about not getting respect a few weeks ago - he just knew he needed to stoke the fire on his guys to hit the playoffs fired up, instead of backing in like every other team that locked up a playoff spot early on (props to Denver, though). You got Doug Flutie pulling a silly drop-kick one week, then Brady torching the Jags the next. And how about that 4th quarter pick by NE on that intermediate hashmarks pass?

Goddamn, though, this game is gonna be good.

Well I agree with all the nice things you are saying about Brady. But there's more to a football game than good quarterbacking. How many losing QBs put up better stats than Brunell this last week? I honestly haven't researched that question, but I'd be surprised if the answer isn't "all of them".

[Jason Levine]

Don't much disagree with Jeff, but apparently it isn't going to be cold in Chicago. The prediction, as of now, is mostly cloudy and mid-40s, a balmy January day by the lake shore. Still, the Bears defense isn't going to feature linebackers who were watching the NFL from their sofas a month ago, so don't expect Carolina to put up those kind of points on the Bears.

[Ryan A]

Anybody who thinks Kitna lost the game clearly wasn't watching the game. The Bengals' lack of defense was a given going in, yet they somehow managed to underwhelm regardless. How do you underwhelm when people already expect you to suck? By crapping your pants like the Bengals D. did in the second half.

The fact the Cincy's offensive line decided not to block didn't help matters either.

So - there are only two games I really care about this week:

Seattle vs. Washington: Hey that's kinda funny -- 'cause Seattle's *in* Washington! Get it? Get it? No? Nevermind, here's the skinny: I'm not going to be able to watch my 'hawks whoop up on the Redskins in front of my new widescreen HDTV I got in August SPECIFICALLY TO WATCH THE SEAHAWKS because I'll be in Maui looking for a Lahaina sportsbar to crash at approximately 11:00 am local time. I hope me watching the 'hawks in front of my new t.v. isn't responsible for the Seahawk mojo, 'cause if it is we're in trouble. But if the 'hawks have been winning all year long because, I don't know, they're really good then they'll cruise all the way to the Superbowl. And if you're still reading and thinking "wow what's with all this pointless rambling?" the point is this: the Seahawks will win and nothing anybody says about it matters.

Chicago vs. Carolina: I only care about this one because I'm scared of the Panthers. They're looking REALLY good right now. I'm hoping Soldier Field will prove to be a big enough advantage for the Bears to pull through because I think Carolina has them outclassed. If the Bears win, it will be in a squeaker.

[Nick Walter]

Question: If New England wins this game without anyone going down, do they immediately become favorites to win the Super Bowl?

Absolutely.

[VegasRobb]

I wasn't really surprised by the outcomes ... I was surprised by the blowouts.

How's the Palmer injury playing in the media? I thought it was a gray-area shot and all the replays haven't changed my mind.

[jeffd]

btw I 100% agree that Kitna was not the reason Cincinatti lost that game. Sure he was a factor, but there were others that were probably larger.

[BaconTastesGood]

btw I 100% agree that Kitna was not the reason Cincinatti lost that game. Sure he was a factor, but there were others that were probably larger.

And I would argue that he only became a factor once it dawned on him that if they were going to win, it was all on him. And as hard as he tries, and I love the guy for his effort, he simply isn't the kind of QB that can force a team to win through sheer will. Instead he tries to make Favre like throws without a Favre like arm.

[Bill Dungsroman]

Is Portis banged up? I thought the Skins were claiming he was fine. If he is too injured to bring his A game that does change the equation.

Reports this morning indicate he's definitely got more than a shoulder "burner," as Washington's front office claims. I mean, why's he on the sidelines on so many plays? It's the playoffs, you have to have your RB in the game - unless, you can't.


Absolutely. Indy is Belichick's bitch. He knows how to get in Manning's head and disrupting Manning screws the entire Indy offense.

But, Indy beat New England on Monday night...well, you're right, of course. It's just that New England isn't fazed by road games, the cold, playing outside, etc. Not Brady, the defense, Adam Vinatieri, nobody. Put this way: Jax has a crushing D. Almost a nonfactor in the second half. The Broncos win by passing to get the lead, then run it down your throat to eat clock. Worked great this year...provided they get a lead and keep it. If they fall behind...well, nobody beats New England once New England takes the lead. And I'm thinking nobody's offense, not the Colts, Seahawks, Panthers, Broncos, nobody is running an offense more dangerous than the Patriots right now.


Well I agree with all the nice things you are saying about Brady. But there's more to a football game than good quarterbacking. How many losing QBs put up better stats than Brunell this last week? I honestly haven't researched that question, but I'd be surprised if the answer isn't "all of them".

Yeah, but great quarterbacking, great coaching, along with solid, disciplined play by the receivers, line, running game, defense and special teams, well that's pretty much all there is to football, and New England has all of those things, IMO. My particular worry with Denver isn't even Plummer, really - New England has clowned better QBs than him, no matter where he is in terms of ability - it's Shanahan. I'm hoping he has the guts to fight it out early on with them, like Indy did on that Monday nighter. You want to beat the champ, you got to knock him down. Early. I've seen Denver do this thing a lot of WCO-bred coaches (although props to Mike for totally changing his system up more than once upon leaving SF) do: play it close to the chest and try not commit any errors (by not taking any risks), and get to halftime, hopefully ahead, tied ok, at least not losing by more than a field goal. That's just not gonna do it. I get the rationale, but it's just not gonna do it.

See, the thing here is that New England - like all of the true NFL dynasties, are neither daunted nor blase about the Superbowl; they're driven. I'd've thought they'd grow blase, like their fans, but they haven't. And they certainly aren't daunted. That's why I'm favoring them and the Panthers, for the same reasons. Holmgren and Shanahan, they may be blase (I doubt Shanahan is, really) and the other guys may be daunted (Lovie Smith himself a notable exception; his players, not so much), but not Fox or Belicheck.

To your point: the Redskins...well, they just don't have what it takes at this point. Too thin, although fuck if my hat's not off to them. Yeah, QBing in and of itself isn't the only deciding factor. But, see, there's a hell of a lot of factors. Also, you almost imply that New England can't get into Plummer's head. Now, you know that's some crazy talk.


As for Kitna on Sunday: I don't think he did any more than a backup QB could do. In order to beat the Steelers, they needed an elite, MVP candidate at QB playing at 100%. So, I can't fault him, simply because he's not one of the best QBs in the league currently.


How's the Palmer injury playing in the media? I thought it was a gray-area shot and all the replays haven't changed my mind.

Nobody's busting caps at Steeler HQ, at any rate, but it is getting lumped in with the Marcus Vick fiasco and Taylor's spitting incident. Palmer himself stated that he does not feel that Kimo acted with deliberate intent to injure. The rest of the Bengals seem more pissed off at the refs than Kimo.

I thought at first he did, though. But, if you look closely, Kimo is trying to flip Palmer backwards, like a body slam from his legs, hoping to pancake him that way, or at least bung up his throw. But, Palmer is right in the middle of his throw, so his body moves forward away from Kimo's intended direction, and his leg twists as a result. Also, Kimo's down there doing his thing while Palmer still has the ball and is going for that pass (which he made brilliantly), so it's not an after the whistle act, either. It's a toss-up, I guess. Only Kimo knows for sure.

[Nick Walter]

Yeah, QBing in and of itself isn't the only deciding factor. But, see, there's a hell of a lot of factors. Also, you almost imply that New England can't get into Plummer's head. Now, you know that's some crazy talk.


Don't get me wrong, I totally agree NE can get into Plummer's head. They get into any QB's head, that's a big part of their ability to win games when playing third string little league rejects as linebackers or defensive backs. It's just that so much of Indy's offense is in Mannings head that it gives NE an even bigger edge than normal against Indy.

If Plummer is rattled the boys in the booth upstairs can call a few run plays and let him settle down. If Manning is rattled then Indy is in trouble because Manning just doesn't throw the balls he calls the plays based on how he reads the defense. If he gets confused and starts losing confidence then Indy really really suffers.

[andtron]

If Kitna gets a job as a starter next year, you'll be looking at a top 10 draft pick. With maybe the exception of Miami who has a decent D and weapons on O. Sorry, he makes a couple of throws now and then but he doesn't have the arm you're saying he does. You guys are blaming the offensive line for a lot of the sacks but its not like the line got that much worse. The Steelers might have been blitzing a bit more but a good QB will shred a blitzing defense, as I've seen over and over again as Steeler fan. Hell, even Tim Couch made that defense look like a bunch of chumps when they started pinning their ears back.

The guy's scrappy but he's nothing to write home about. I definitely don't put the loss squarely on his shoulders, if anyone's to blame its the coaching staff for not helping their team get over the shock. Watching Lewis' post game press conference he looked as dejected and lost as he did when Palmer was injured initially and as he looked for the remainder of the game. Just my .02.

[Ryan A]

You guys are blaming the offensive line for a lot of the sacks but its not like the line got that much worse.

uh... you're right... it didn't get any worse THAN THE WORTHLESS LINE THAT COST PALMER HIS KNEE in the Bengals very first play. So, uh, "the line didn't get any worse" is hardly a rebuttal to the statement that the O-Line had more to do with the loss than Kitna did.

[BaconTastesGood]

You guys are blaming the offensive line for a lot of the sacks but its not like the line got that much worse.

All I kept hearing is how Jones, Steinbach, and Anderson were just these complete underrated bad asses. From what I saw -- no.

[andtron]

uh... you're right... it didn't get any worse THAN THE WORTHLESS LINE THAT COST PALMER HIS KNEE in the Bengals very first play. So, uh, "the line didn't get any worse" is hardly a rebuttal to the statement that the O-Line had more to do with the loss than Kitna did.
they gave him enough time to complete the pass didn't they? They've been decent all year long? Why does a freak injury somehow make that line so much worse?

[Robert Sharp]

That line looked bad, but granted the Steelers D makes a lot of OLs look bad. Kitna played well before Palmer started, so I think they will be OK next year. But Palmer won't play, probably at all. He tore his ACL and MCL, which is a one year recovery, minimum.

[Ryan A]

He tore his ACL and MCL, which is a one year recovery, minimum.

That's not true. With a good surgeon and intense rehab, a young man like Palmer can get back into competetive shape in six months.

[Xaroc]

I love all the underestimating of the Redskins. They had a couple of bad weeks offensively against really good defensive teams and having a couple of guys hurt but before that they put up 35 in two games straight against the Giants and Dallas. I wouldn't bet on another offensive performance like last week Gibbs just won't have it. I really hope the Seahawks are taking the Redskins lightly like most people here because that can only lead to good things happening for us. Like I have said before the Seahawks should win but it is definitely not a given by a long shot and I think it will be a relatively close game either way.

-- Xaroc

[Alan Dunkin]

Redskins are 9 point underdogs too. That's huge.

--- Alan

[Robert Sharp]

That's not true. With a good surgeon and intense rehab, a young man like Palmer can get back into competetive shape in six months.

I doubt it. It's certainly possible to be back in 6 months, but I can't think of anyone who was truly competitive again in that time from that injury. By a year, I am talking about being back to his old self again. His position will help though. If he were a RB, it would be 2 years before he would really be back to normal (though he could start playing sooner). I know the reports say he can be back in 6-9 months, but the Bengals better be real careful about this. I think he sits next season.

[Ryan A]

Well I was obviously never a professional athlete but I did play some small-time college soccer, where I blew out my ACL - it was completely severed (it basically snapped in two). I had a fantastic surgeon and a really agressive physical therapy regimen. Within 5 months of surgery I was out running 10-k road races and by the time I was 7 months out of surgery I was playing competitive soccer again with a special brace. Soccer, by the way, is statistically the most dangerous sport for knees - even more dangerous than football.

Between the ACL and MCL, the ACL is what takes the longest to recover from in terms of surgery, and a lot depends on the method of reconstruction not to mention the way the body responds to PT. I was very young at the time (19/20 years old) so perhaps my body healed faster than a guy in his mid twenties, but I'm not sure.. how old is Palmer, 25?

*edit* the main reasons people take longer to recover are:

1. crappy surgeon
2. crappy work ethic (they don't do all the PT they could)
3. crappy luck -- some people don't heal as quickly/generarate muscle mass as effectively. It's amazing how quickly muscles atrophy.

[Xaroc]

Redskins are 9 point underdogs too. That's huge.

--- Alan

Ouch, that is huge.

-- Xaroc

[andtron]

home team gets 3 by default IIRC. still picking the Skins to win. Colts also favored by 9 over the Pitters. Pickin the Colts but hoping for the PS to pull one out.

[Robert Sharp]

good points, Ryan. I am going mainly on watching guys try to return in the NFL. Actually, the Titans had this happen to several guys last year. It took them varying times to return, but frankly none of them played as well this year as they did before their injuries.

[TheRock]

The Seahawk game is tough to call. It's such a huge one for us with our non playoff winning traditions. More and more I hear how we should take care of The 'Skins with ease but with their good 'D' it should be closer than that spread indicates. If we can get off quick with one of our long scoring drives and have the crowd fired up getting our defense fired up it could turn into a blowout but if we don't get out quick, I can see a slugfest. All I'm hoping is that Chicago gets by those ever scary Panthers.

[Jason Levine]

In one day, the forecast high for Sunday in Chicago has dropped from the mid-40s to the mid-30s. At this rate, it'll be an icebowl by game time.

[Sarkus]

I love all the underestimating of the Redskins. They had a couple of bad weeks offensively against really good defensive teams and having a couple of guys hurt but before that they put up 35 in two games straight against the Giants and Dallas. I wouldn't bet on another offensive performance like last week Gibbs just won't have it. I really hope the Seahawks are taking the Redskins lightly like most people here because that can only lead to good things happening for us. Like I have said before the Seahawks should win but it is definitely not a given by a long shot and I think it will be a relatively close game either way.

-- Xaroc

Seahawks 20, Skins 10. We covered the spread. And that after MVP Shaun Alexander misses most of the game with a concussion and the Skins got 3 turnovers in their favor.

Either the Skins offense is just not that good or the Seahawk defense is better than anyone (outside of Seattle) wants to give them credit for.

[forgeforsaken]

That PI call that effectively gave the Broncos a touchdown was bullshit.

[Steve Canyon]

How long will a concussion keep Alexander out? He looked ok on the sidelines, but I'm no doctor. I don't hear anyone saying if he's out for just today's game or the rest of the season.

[Alan Dunkin]

Depends on what kind of concussion he got. A very light one he may share time next week... something worse will mean a lot more than a week. He seemed to be okay on the sidelines but it's hard to tell sometimes, and you may not feel the effects till the next day.

Just watched Denver-New England... wow. Never expected this to happen, especially with New England playing so well in the second half of the season. Denver just never seemed right for the most of the year despite the record.. maybe it's because I think Plummer will be a negative quantity in my head until he wins the Superbowl. Just don't have any confidence in the guy.

That being said, in the second half the Broncos just killed New England. Huge turnovers was the deciding factor - you can't just beat that when you're on the road.

--- Alan

[VegasRobb]

Nice to see what happens when the breaks don't go New England's way.

I recognize them as a good team, but there's a reason why most folks outside of the Northeast are cautious when talking about their greatness. They never came across as a dominant team. Just a team that did enough when it counted.

At least we're guaranteed a new Super Bowl Champ.

[Sarkus]

How long will a concussion keep Alexander out? He looked ok on the sidelines, but I'm no doctor. I don't hear anyone saying if he's out for just today's game or the rest of the season.

News here is that he should be available to play next week. Of course, they will run some tests and some players take longer to recover from concussions than others, but he doesn't have a history of them. In fact, there was some talk this may have been his first as a pro.

Even without him I'd say their chances against the Bears would be good. Against the Panthers, even with him it will be a tough game.

EDIT: Interesting Bronco stat - they're 6-2 in AFC championship games.

[Xaroc]

Seahawks 20, Skins 10. We covered the spread. And that after MVP Shaun Alexander misses most of the game with a concussion and the Skins got 3 turnovers in their favor.

Either the Skins offense is just not that good or the Seahawk defense is better than anyone (outside of Seattle) wants to give them credit for.

Still no blowout. I called it. :) The Redskins caused a couple of those turnovers and almost a few more (Rodgers almost got 6 on that near pick) and had a shot to tie the game late. That is why this wasn't going to be a blowout, as I said. Oh and Alexander was doing nothing before he went out.

Still congrats on the win. I think I would favor you guys against the Bears but probably not against the Panthers who are healthier than the Redskins and have more offensive punch.

-- Xaroc

[Robert Sharp]

The Seahawks defense has been underrated all year. Still, I think the secondary is weak, which will get exposed if they have to play the Panthers, and will get shredded if they play the Colts (or Denver, or even the Steelers).

But I like the Seahawks. They have nice balance.

[Bill Dungsroman]

News here is that he should be available to play next week. Of course, they will run some tests and some players take longer to recover from concussions than others, but he doesn't have a history of them. In fact, there was some talk this may have been his first as a pro.

Yeah, and seeing how he was jumping around on the sidelines afterwards, I'd bet he'll be okay for next week.


Even without him I'd say their chances against the Bears would be good. Against the Panthers, even with him it will be a tough game.

It's splitting hairs, but I'd be sorely worried without him in either case.


EDIT: Interesting Bronco stat - they're 6-2 in AFC championship games.

And they evidently own the Patriots. 2-0 in the playoffs, 4-1 since 2001, 16-8 lifetime when playing at home.