My Colts started out 1-5, and now they’re 8-6 and have a really good chance, I think, of making the playoffs. Of our last two regular-season opponents, the Giants are already eliminated from playoff contention, and the Titans are right there with us.
I worried it’d be a trap game and it was. Oh well, the Hawks are doing well enough they can afford it.
Colts are a quality team. Indy’s defense is legit - so much so that Andrew Luck doesn’t feel like he has to win the game with his arm, which is what he’s needed his entire career.
According to what I see, Denver is not effectively out of it, they are literally out of it. Apparently they have no path to the playoffs. Only the Colts, Titans, Dolphins or Browns have a shot at the Ravens WC slot – if the Browns beat the Bengals and the Ravens lose to the Chargers (both within the realm of possibility) it could come down to the game they play in Week 17 in Baltimore.
This will not be the year of the Patriots. In fact, this year just might be the long-anticipated beginning of the end of the dynasty.
Are we absolutely sure the Patriots haven’t become a pro-wrestling franchise? Each week the storyline seems a bit more obviously scripted, and the big plays and controversial ref calls at key moments are just a little bit more obviously faked.
This week was just ridiculous. Gronk heroics AND a big blown defensive play AND a reversed touchdown on replay AND a last minute interception on an unnecessary touchdown pass.
I don’t think it’s the year of the Patriots, but not the end of the dynasty either. Just proof in action that a football team needs to be able to do more than run, pass and catch the ball.
You see correctly. The best Denver can do is 8-8; whichever of the Chiefs or Chargers doesn’t win the AFC West, and the winner of the Colts-Titans game in week 17 (or both of them, if it ends in a tie) are guaranteed to have a better record for the wild card spots.
Eagles baby !!!
OK, here’s a question completely unrelated to any team or the playoffs or the officiating. Apologies if it’s been previously discussed.
Why can’t both networks (CBS and FOX) each show two games on Sunday afternoon? Yesterday there were two good games in the late timeslot, but we were only shown one (Pats/Steelers). Is there something contractual that prevents both networks from each showing two games?
Yep, only one network can have a doubleheader on a Sunday, except for week 17. They each get eight from Weeks 1-16.
Because nobody would watch the Buccaneers.
CBS gets AFC vs. AFC games, FOX gets NFC vs. NFC games. So FOX couldn’t cover the Pats-Steelers game.
So I guess that leads to my next question: why is that written into the broadcasting contracts? Obviously, every game in the NFL is broadcast somewhere, even the Tampa Bay games, so it wouldn’t take much effort to have two national games on both networks each Sunday. Is it to guarantee one network a ‘captive’ audience for one game every other week?
Right. CBS showed the Pat/Steelers game nationwide, while FOX was airing the Seahawks/Niners game to those regional markets. But if not for the contracts, FOX could have shown that game to a national audience.
This, exactly (and it’s been the way that the NFL has run the schedule with its primary network partners, with fairly minimal tweaks, for decades).
If there’s a “late” (i.e., 4pm-ish ET start) game that’s not a doubleheader game (i.e., it’s on Fox on a week when CBS has the doubleheader), it’s almost always because it’s a game being hosted by a West Coast team, and is essentially a 1pm start locally. Those games are typically seen primarily in the home market areas for the participating teams, as an exception to the doubleheader rules.
Here are the maps for which markets carried which games yesterday. You can see that the other “late” game (Seattle at San Francisco) was only shown in the Northwest, and in a few other markets which opted to show that Fox game, rather than one of the early games (in most cases because their home team was playing an early game on CBS, and they generally don’t run a game simultaneous to a home game on a different channel).
Basically yes. I’m sure the networks figured out it’s better to have a game with a full audience on half the weeks rather than a game with a half audience every week. Also, the times where they don’t have a doubleheader, they’re usually airing a different sport.
That’s what I would have guessed, but thanks for the confirmation.
But here’s the thing: Next week, CBS has one national game, while FOX has two. Let’s assume that CBS will show the Steelers/Saints late game to most of the nation. But there are five early games on CBS. If you live in one of those 10 markets, you won’t see what might be the best game of the day.
CBS has the doubleheader next week. Everyone in the early game markets will see the late game no problem. The only people who won’t are the people have have the late game on Fox, at home (Arizona and San Francisco). The Fox Games are not national.
But didn’t CBS have the doubleheader yesterday? We only saw one FOX game yesterday, while we saw two games on CBS.
They each get half, but it doesn’t necessarily alternate.