PDA

View Full Version : playoffs more possible than you might think


Pages : 1 2 [3]

imatexan
12-29-2009, 03:16 PM
Who gives a shit? We should probably give a shit. If the Patriots go all out, I don't see us winning the game. The Texans better come out and play four quarters of football. Something they haven't done all year.

Bengals game?
Bills game?
Raiders game?

brakos82
12-29-2009, 03:21 PM
Bengals game?
Bills game?
Raiders game?

Like he said, 4 quarters of football. You've only got 7 between those 3 games.

imatexan
12-29-2009, 03:27 PM
Like he said, 4 quarters of football. You've only got 7 between those 3 games.

We played a full game of good football in all 3 of those games, especially against the Bengals who are at least a 10 win team on the road.

Ndevine7
12-29-2009, 03:30 PM
if we beat the pats then the bengals have something to play for and i could easily see either the broncos getting upset by oakland who shows up agianst good teams for example beating cinn pitt eagles

gary
12-29-2009, 03:40 PM
Are the playoffs more possible than I might think?

brakos82
12-29-2009, 03:47 PM
Are the playoffs more possible than I might think?
That depends on how likely you think they are.

gary
12-29-2009, 03:52 PM
That depends on how likely you think they are.I say the two or three teams lose but so do the Texans so there you have it.

barrett
12-29-2009, 03:53 PM
Are the playoffs more possible than I might think?

The title of this thread was probably more relevant to you a few weeks ago when I first started it. Back then your soap was probably more relevant too.

Vinny
12-29-2009, 03:57 PM
Are the playoffs more possible than I might think?
no, but it's great marketing. Nobody circles the wagons...

BIG TORO
12-29-2009, 04:13 PM
So like im confused are we going to the super bowl or not?:thinking:

Thorn
12-29-2009, 04:15 PM
So like im confused are we going to the super bowl or not?:thinking:

Drink heavily and it won’t matter. Either that or you won't notice, one of the two.

brakos82
12-29-2009, 04:17 PM
Drink heavily and it won’t matter. Either that .. ... ...'. ............

:drunk:

BIG TORO
12-29-2009, 04:17 PM
Drink heavily and it won’t matter. Either that or you won't notice, one of the two.

Thats exactly what I plan on doing!

Thorn
12-29-2009, 04:18 PM
Say.....wait a minute.....are these guys making fun of me? :foottap:

ObsiWan
12-29-2009, 04:25 PM
Say.....wait a minute.....are these guys making fun of me? :foottap:

ummm... no.
why do you ask?
:)

brakos82
12-29-2009, 04:25 PM
Who..... me?! :runaway:

HOU-TEX
12-29-2009, 04:26 PM
Who..... me?! :runaway:

Couldn't be

BIG TORO
12-29-2009, 04:26 PM
Say.....wait a minute.....are these guys making fun of me? :foottap:

We would never do that Thorn You are avery well liked and respected member of this forum, at least thats what your rep says.

Thorn
12-29-2009, 04:28 PM
:bat:

brakos82
12-29-2009, 04:29 PM
Couldn't be

I blame Thorn.

Texan_Bill
12-29-2009, 04:42 PM
I blame Thorn.

He was drunk, so he doesn't remember.

brakos82
12-29-2009, 04:44 PM
He was drunk, so he doesn't remember.

Fine. We'll blame Jack Daniels.

Texan_Bill
12-29-2009, 04:46 PM
Fine. We'll blame Jack Daniels.

And there you have it.

Thorn
12-29-2009, 06:30 PM
My Uncle Jack Daniels has gotten me in a lot of troubles in the past, I blame him too.

infantrycak
12-29-2009, 06:36 PM
My Uncle Jack Daniels has gotten me in a lot of troubles in the past, I blame him too.

As long as Jack doesn't make you forget your Dickel.

brakos82
12-29-2009, 06:36 PM
I'll take the duty of disposing of him then.

Texan_Bill
12-29-2009, 06:46 PM
As long as Jack doesn't make you forget your Dickel.

:lol:

**************************

I'll take the duty of disposing of him then.

/Thorn

Thorn
12-29-2009, 06:49 PM
No respect for old people on this board. Yall should be ashamed. :slapfight:

jaayteetx
01-01-2010, 10:31 AM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8156574c&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true
interesting article on nfl.com, would bode well for the Texans if they can win.

barrett
01-01-2010, 01:28 PM
Marshall is ruled out against the Chiefs! That can only help!

http://blogs.nfl.com/2010/01/01/mcdaniels-ailing-marshall-a-no-go-for-broncos/

Also, did you notice that Cincinnati has the 2nd ranked run defense going up against the Jets Sunday?

Furthermore, the OLine of the Texans will get to face a 3-4 for the second week in a row. That should help with continuity.

Go Texans!

barrett
01-01-2010, 07:22 PM
Week 17 injuries: Ravens trio ailing

The Ravens listed WR Derrick Mason (knee), S Ed Reed (groin) and LB Terrell Suggs (thigh) as questionable for Sunday’s game in Oakland. Reed, who has been out of action since Nov. 29, was limited in practice the last two days. Mason, meanwhile, missed two days of practice but returned Friday in a limited role.

Cornerback Donald Strickland will miss the New York Jets' Sunday night game against the Cincinnati Bengals because of a strained quadriceps, and punter Steve Weatherford is questionable to play with a tweaked hamstring.

per NFL.com

barrett
01-02-2010, 06:28 AM
Just heard on ESPN that Schefter the TE for the Broncos is being benched as well for attitude problems.

rockabilly
01-02-2010, 10:05 AM
Geez, I hate to get too excited - but it just seems like a lot of variables are going in the Texans favor as far as the other games go. If we can take care of our business, the rest of the afternoon should be REALLY interesting.

Grams
01-02-2010, 10:24 AM
We just have to start off this Sunday with a win and see what presents the football Santa leave us.

Lucky
01-02-2010, 11:28 AM
Looking at the odds to Sunday's games, I would give the Texans about a 24-1 shot of having all of the stars align for a playoff spot. But, that's much better than the 250-1 odds they had a few weeks ago.

jppaul
01-02-2010, 03:02 PM
From what I have read if we beat the Patriots then that opens the door for the Bengals to grab the # 3 seed, and that they will play their starters if that opportunity is available.

The Pencil Neck
01-02-2010, 04:53 PM
From what I have read if we beat the Patriots then that opens the door for the Bengals to grab the # 3 seed, and that they will play their starters if that opportunity is available.

I heard the same thing.

But, why? There's not a huge difference between the #3 and #4. You don't get a bye week. You just get a home game IF you win your 2 games and the #4 seed wins their 2 games in the playoffs.

Getting rest might mean more to you than the seeding advantage.

jaayteetx
01-02-2010, 05:04 PM
I heard the same thing.

But, why? There's not a huge difference between the #3 and #4. You don't get a bye week. You just get a home game IF you win your 2 games and the #4 seed wins their 2 games in the playoffs.

Getting rest might mean more to you than the seeding advantage.

homefield is huge, i personally would want the Texans to fight for every possible way to host a home playoff game.

Ndevine7
01-02-2010, 05:04 PM
I heard the same thing.

But, why? There's not a huge difference between the #3 and #4. You don't get a bye week. You just get a home game IF you win your 2 games and the #4 seed wins their 2 games in the playoffs.

Getting rest might mean more to you than the seeding advantage.

getting the 3rd seed also means not potential playing the colts in the second round.

brakos82
01-02-2010, 05:06 PM
getting the 3rd seed also means not potential playing the colts in the second round.

Umm.... you say that like it's a good thing. Give me Indy over SD.

Ndevine7
01-02-2010, 05:09 PM
Umm.... you say that like it's a good thing. Give me Indy over SD.

Indy has not lost a legit game all year and despite winning a couple close games they couldve lost, i would rather face philip rivers and the chargers over peyton manning and the colts

ObsiWan
01-02-2010, 05:29 PM
Umm.... you say that like it's a good thing. Give me Indy over SD.

Oh most definitely!
SD looks like the hotter of the two, IMO. Even without all that Go for 16-0 craziness. Look at how they crushed Jeffy's kids.

Ndevine7
01-02-2010, 05:32 PM
Oh most definitely!
SD looks like the hotter of the two, IMO. Even without all that Go for 16-0 craziness. Look at how they crushed Jeffy's kids.

i disagree with you because how can u be hotter then a team who has yet to lose a game with their starters in

brakos82
01-02-2010, 06:14 PM
i disagree with you because how can u be hotter then a team who has yet to lose a game with their starters in

We've seen this script before from Indy, sitting starters = losing first playoff game. The year they won it all they were still fighting for 2 and 3 seeds.

awtysst
01-02-2010, 06:16 PM
getting the 3rd seed also means not potential playing the colts in the second round.

It means you would get San Diego though. The Chargers are no slouch.

Ndevine7
01-02-2010, 06:22 PM
It means you would get San Diego though. The Chargers are no slouch.

i know they are not but i am more afraid of the colts then sd maybe just because they have given the texans such a hard time.

HollywoodLeo
01-02-2010, 06:27 PM
If the Texans get in odds are it's as the 6 seed, which means a trip to INDY if you pull off the win in the WC round.

Although, I did find a scenario where you're the 5th seed.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/playoffscenario?algorithm=custom&16=15145155

brakos82
01-02-2010, 06:27 PM
If the Texans get in odds are it's as the 6 seed, which means a trip to INDY if you pull off the win in the WC round.

Although, I did find a scenario where you're the 5th seed.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/playoffscenario?algorithm=custom&16=15145155
Leo? What the hell are you doing here?!

HollywoodLeo
01-02-2010, 06:31 PM
Leo? What the hell are you doing here?!

I got bored and started looking around to other teams' boards. :user:

Ndevine7
01-02-2010, 06:32 PM
i dont care that we would have to play indy as long as we make the playoffs

brakos82
01-02-2010, 06:32 PM
I got bored and started looking around to other teams' boards. :user:

Well welcome to our version of The Psycho House.

And stop using my smilie. :pissed:

:user:

ObsiWan
01-02-2010, 06:35 PM
i disagree with you because how can u be hotter then a team who has yet to lose a game with their starters in

See the NE Patriots v. NYG. 2007; Super Bowl XLII.
The Patriots also had yet to lose with their starters in but the Giants were the hotter team championship time came.

and Indy's starters, with a full half of football completed, and then some, could only manage a 15 pts on the Jets.
We've seen - up close and personal - what a hot Manning and Colt offense can do. And that wasn't it.

Ndevine7
01-02-2010, 06:38 PM
See the NE Patriots v. NYG. 2007; Super Bowl XLII.
The Patriots also had yet to lose with their starters in but the Giants were the hotter team.

I disagree that the giants were the hotter team. Both teams were extremely hot and i believe that 7 times out of 10 the pats would've won that game and it shows that any given sunday any team can win.

J_R
01-02-2010, 06:50 PM
I'm sure this has already been mentioned but what if we end up losing tomorrow and the 2 of the 3 teams we need to lose do lose and.....we end up missing. Will the boards go crazy? Will heads be called for? lol
:hides:

ObsiWan
01-02-2010, 06:59 PM
I disagree that the giants were the hotter team. Both teams were extremely hot and i believe that 7 times out of 10 the pats would've won that game and it shows that any given sunday any team can win.

I think the Giants were hotter because to make it to the big game, they had to post a series of playoff wins on the road.
@ Tampa
@ Dallas
@ Green Bay

The Pats played all their playoff games at home.
- bye
- Jacksonville
- San Diego
Also note that they had a bye week to rest up and then played two warm weather clubs up in frigid Foxborough...

treduke
01-02-2010, 07:04 PM
I think the Giants were hotter because to make it to the big game, they had to post a series of playoff wins on the road.
@ Tampa
@ Dallas
@ Green Bay

The Pats played all their playoff games at home.
- bye
- Jacksonville
- San Diego
Also note that they had a bye week to rest up and then played two warm weather clubs up in frigid Foxborough...
also rivers was playing with a torn up knee,lt played one series,and gates got hurt in indy if 100% sd might have beat the pats:bender:

HollywoodLeo
01-02-2010, 07:08 PM
also rivers was playing with a torn up knee,lt played one series,and gates got hurt in indy if 100% sd might have beat the pats:bender:

Yep.

I was about to post the same thing.

Rivers had knee surgery 5 days before that game.

Ndevine7
01-02-2010, 07:28 PM
im just saying i fear the colts more then i fear the chargers. Both teams are scary and i wouldnt want to face either of them but i would rather have the 3rd seed to avoid playing the colts in the 2nd round and also having the possibility of having a home game

TheRealJoker
01-02-2010, 07:34 PM
See the NE Patriots v. NYG. 2007; Super Bowl XLII.
The Patriots also had yet to lose with their starters in but the Giants were the hotter team championship time came.

and Indy's starters, with a full half of football completed, and then some, could only manage a 15 pts on the Jets.
We've seen - up close and personal - what a hot Manning and Colt offense can do. And that wasn't it.

15 pts in less than 2.5 quarters isn't bad against the league's best defense...

jppaul
01-02-2010, 09:58 PM
If I were the Patriots I would want the # 3 seed because they have historically been pretty dominant in that series v. Indy.

If I was Cincinnati I would definitely prefer to take my chances with Indy over SD, as Indy just stands out as a much better matchup for Cincinnati with two topflight corners and an outstanding secondary. Further, With Maluluaga out Cincinnati's D is much more susceptible to the run, a SD specality and a Indy weakness.

JB
01-02-2010, 10:03 PM
If I were the Patriots I would want the # 3 seed because they have historically been pretty dominant in that series v. Indy. If I was Cincinnati I would definitely prefer to take my chances with Indy over SD, as Indy just stands out as a much better matchup for Cincinnati with two topflight corners and an outstanding secondary. Further, With Maluluaga out Cincinnati's D is much more susceptible to the run, a SD specality and a Indy weakness.

#3 seed would probably face SD not Indy

SD has the 29th ranked rushing offense...

... just saying

kiwitexansfan
01-02-2010, 10:40 PM
Wow, if we win tomorrow those afternoon/evening games are going to be mighty interesting!

Just so I'm sure of this we need two out of these three teams to lose; Denver, Baltimore and NY Jets.

brakos82
01-02-2010, 10:47 PM
Wow, if we win tomorrow those afternoon/evening games are going to be mighty interesting!

Just so I'm sure of this we need two out of these three teams to lose; Denver, Baltimore and NY Jets.

Correct. :shades::goodluck:

ObsiWan
01-02-2010, 10:47 PM
Yep.

I was about to post the same thing.

Rivers had knee surgery 5 days before that game.

So you guys are saying that a healthy SD team might have beaten the Pats before they got to the SB??
I think that supports my point that the Pats weren't the "hot team", the Giants were.

HollywoodLeo
01-03-2010, 02:38 AM
So you guys are saying that a healthy SD team might have beaten the Pats before they got to the SB??
I think that supports my point that the Pats weren't the "hot team", the Giants were.

I agree.

The Giants were the "hot" team, not New England.

Even with LT on the sidelines and Rivers, Gates, and Merriman playing injured San Diego was driving the ball down the field.

They just couldn't get the ball in the endzone once they got to the red zone.

A healthy LT, Rivers, and/or Gates might have made the difference in that regard.