Official 2018 Flex Scheduling and Playoff Tracker Thread

[kleese]

23 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

Right...it's tough seeing us beat a motivated Eagles team. Then again, in similar late-season runs that we've had in 2005, 2007, 2012, and 2015 there was always a game or two that I didn't expect us to win. 

 

I know this thread is just about the math...but I really think this discussion comes to a close on Saturday night. It was fun though, after the month-long losing streak, to get a sweat again about the post-season. Even if just for a week. 

 

It won’t come to a close on Saturday night. The “fun” part might, but the math part won’t. 

 

Let’s just say we lose Saturday and the Vikings lose Sunday at Lions and the Seahawks lose to Chiefs (or even if just one of those things happen). Then we’d enter Week 17 needing to win and for the Bears to beat Vikings and we’d be in. I am totally with you that the excitement level for that will take a nosedive if we lose Saturday, but would I be excited about a week 17 game where we needed to win and only one other game to go our way? Yeah, by Friday I’d probably be looking forward to it. 

 

It would be remicent of 1997. We entered Week 17 at 7-7-1 and we were playing the Eagles at home. We needed to win and for the Jets to beat the Lions. We took care of our part and then sat back and watched the Lions game in the late slot that day. It was a really low scoring, close game at the Silverdome. I want to say Detroit held on late and won 13-10 or something like that, knocking us out at about 6pm central on the last day of the season... not that I remember the details  

[TD_washingtonredskins]

2 minutes ago, kleese said:

 

It won’t come to a close on Saturday night. The “fun” part might, but the math part won’t. 

 

Let’s just say we lose Saturday and the Vikings lose Sunday at Lions and the Seahawks lose to Chiefs (or even if just one of those things happen). Then we’d enter Week 17 needing to win and for the Bears to beat Vikings and we’d be in. I am totally with you that the excitement level for that will take a nosedive if we lose Saturday, but would I be excited about a week 17 game where we needed to win and not one other game to go our way? Yeah, by Friday I’d probably be looking forward to it. 

 

It would be remicent of 1997. We entered Week 17 at 7-7-1 and we were playing the Eagles at home. We needed to win and for the Jets to beat the Lions. We took care of our part and then sat back and watched the Lions game in the late slot that day. It was a really low scoring, close game at the Silverdome. I want to say Detroit held on late and won 13-10 or something like that, knocking us out at about 6pm central on the last day of the season... not that I remember the details  

 

Nice memory...the Lions actually came back from a 10-0 deficit to eek out that 13-10 win! 

 

And you're right, it won't be OVER but it'll feel over. haha

[kleese]

1 minute ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

Nice memory...the Lions actually came back from a 10-0 deficit to eek out that 13-10 win! 

 

I still consider 1997 to be the most traumatizing year of my fandom. 2000 isn’t far behind, but 1997 still takes the cake. Oh, the stories and the painful losses from that year... 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Just now, kleese said:

 

I still consider 1997 to be the most traumatizing year of my fandom. 2000 isn’t far behind, but 1997 still takes the cake. Oh, the stories and the painful losses from that year... 

 

Me too...between 1996 and 1997 when you combine the heart-wrenching losses with the fact that many had identified us as the NFC team on the rise (young talented coach, very young team, progression from 3-13 to 6-10 to 7-1 start), it was tough to stomach. We were still close enough to the glory years (even though in the moment it seemed like an eternity) to believe that the Redskins were just one of those teams destined to get it right in a rebuild. 

 

Just off the top of my head, here are a handful of losses/ties between those two seasons (9-7 and 8-7-1) that seem individually unbelievable, let alone ALL of them happening to the same team in two seasons: 

 

1996

37-34 (OT) to Arizona (Boomer)*

19-16 (OT) to San Fran (we had them)

24-10 to Tampa Bay (gross)*

27-26 to Arizona (FG issues)*

 

* those 3 came against a 6-10 TB and 7-9 Arizona (would have been 5-11 if not for us) team. Granted, both were slightly better than their reputation as they were only a year or two away from being competitive teams 

 

1997

14-13 to Pittsburgh

20-17 to Baltimore (not a good team)

17-14 to Dallas (blew a late lead)*

7-7 to New York (where do I begin)*

23-20 to St. Louis (horrible team)*

30-10 to New York (it was a huge game and we trailed 17-0 before most people had started watching!)

 

* those 3 were consecutive to drop from 6-4 to 6-6-1

[ColonialWBSkinsFan]

If Philly loses to Houston this week, are they out, regardless of what anyone else does?

 

They'd be 7-8, now that I look at it, the only way they'd still be alive at 7-8 is if Minnesota also lost (to put them at 7-7-1)

 

So Skins best scenario might be to win this week ourselves, have Minny win this week, and the Eagles lose to Houston. 

 

Then Philly would have nothing left to play for against us in week 17, and we'd have to win and pull like hell for da Bears to take out Kurt and company in Minnesota.

 

Am I right on this?  

[TMK9973]

1 hour ago, ColonialWBSkinsFan said:

If Philly loses to Houston this week, are they out, regardless of what anyone else does?

 

They'd be 7-8, now that I look at it, the only way they'd still be alive at 7-8 is if Minnesota also lost (to put them at 7-7-1)

 

So Skins best scenario might be to win this week ourselves, have Minny win this week, and the Eagles lose to Houston. 

 

Then Philly would have nothing left to play for against us in week 17, and we'd have to win and pull like hell for da Bears to take out Kurt and company in Minnesota.

 

Am I right on this?  

you are right on this! How did i miss this! IF Eagles lose and Vikes win - that is it for them.  they are out.  EVEN if they beat us.  nice.  So if we can pull of the upset sat (Big if) I'll probably still be rooting for the lions so we are in control, but if the Vikes win and eagles lose -that wont be so bad either!  

[kleese]

1 hour ago, TMK9973 said:

you are right on this! How did i miss this! IF Eagles lose and Vikes win - that is it for them.  they are out.  EVEN if they beat us.  nice.  So if we can pull of the upset sat (Big if) I'll probably still be rooting for the lions so we are in control, but if the Vikes win and eagles lose -that wont be so bad either!  

 

For me, I’d rather the Eagles win. If they are eliminated before Week 17 they will still likely play all their guys and they would be doing it without any pressure... and if we were still alive they could take a little pride in knocking us out. I’m a glutton so here is what I WANT: 

 

Redskins beat Titans

Eagles beat Texans

Lions beat Vikings 

 

That would set up a win and in situation for us and Philly (regardless of what happens in  Dallas/Seattle games). Oh, and if the above happened...you can pretty much take it to the bank we’d be hosting the SNF game at FedEx. 

[Hoover-ball]

3 hours ago, kleese said:

 

It won’t come to a close on Saturday night. The “fun” part might, but the math part won’t. 

 

Let’s just say we lose Saturday and the Vikings lose Sunday at Lions and the Seahawks lose to Chiefs (or even if just one of those things happen). Then we’d enter Week 17 needing to win and for the Bears to beat Vikings and we’d be in. I am totally with you that the excitement level for that will take a nosedive if we lose Saturday, but would I be excited about a week 17 game where we needed to win and only one other game to go our way? Yeah, by Friday I’d probably be looking forward to it. 

 

It would be remicent of 1997. We entered Week 17 at 7-7-1 and we were playing the Eagles at home. We needed to win and for the Jets to beat the Lions. We took care of our part and then sat back and watched the Lions game in the late slot that day. It was a really low scoring, close game at the Silverdome. I want to say Detroit held on late and won 13-10 or something like that, knocking us out at about 6pm central on the last day of the season... not that I remember the details  

I was at that game for my birthday. It was cold and they showed the late game afterwards on the jumbotron but so few fans were left by halftime that they then kicked us out and we drove to a nearby bar and caught the end. That second game was delayed by a serious neck injury.

 

 

[TMK9973]

3 minutes ago, Hoover-ball said:

I was at that game for my birthday. It was cold and they showed the late game afterwards on the jumbotron but so few fans were left by halftime that they then kicked us out and we drove to a nearby bar and caught the end. That second game was delayed by a serious neck injury.

 

 

me too! I was also at the game and we drove to Green Turtle. The yong'ns on the board might not remember -but the idea that you could go to any bar and watch any game was not always the case. Sunday ticket came out in 1994.  Prior -a sport bar had a few TV's and only showed what was on local TV for the most part. Even in 1997 - Not many bars had Sunday ticket!  This was actually the first time I was at a bar that was showing all games being played right then and was AMAZED!  

[JSSkinz]

2 hours ago, ColonialWBSkinsFan said:

If Philly loses to Houston this week, are they out, regardless of what anyone else does?

 

They'd be 7-8, now that I look at it, the only way they'd still be alive at 7-8 is if Minnesota also lost (to put them at 7-7-1)

 

So Skins best scenario might be to win this week ourselves, have Minny win this week, and the Eagles lose to Houston. 

 

Then Philly would have nothing left to play for against us in week 17, and we'd have to win and pull like hell for da Bears to take out Kurt and company in Minnesota.

 

Am I right on this?  

This is incorrect.

 

If Philly loses this week and we also lose this week we will both have the same record but Philly would have the tiebreaker by having the better division record at 3-2 as well as the head to head tiebreaker which means we would have to beat them in week 17, if we finish 8-8 and the Vikes win one of their last 2 they also have the better record and we are out.

 

Its very simple folks, we need to win both games and we need the Vikes to lose to the Bears, its doubtful the Vikes lose to the Lions so they will be 8-7-1 going into week 17 which means we can't catch them if we lose to the Titans.

[TMK9973]

14 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

This is incorrect.

 

If Philly loses this week and we also lose this week we will both have the same record but Philly would have the tiebreaker by having the better division record at 3-2 as well as the head to head tiebreaker which means we would have to beat them in week 17, if we finish 8-8 and the Vikes win one of their last 2 they also have the better record and we are out.

 

Its very simple folks, we need to win both games and we need the Vikes to lose to the Bears, its doubtful the Vikes lose to the Lions so they will be 8-7-1 going into week 17 which means we can't catch them if we lose to the Titans.

false. If we both lose this weekend we have the same record yes.  But doesn't matter.  Because we play the eagles the following week.  We already discussed this.  

If we both lose this week, then we win the following week. We have the tie breaker over them.  so they are out.  IF vikes win (AND we lose) we cant catch them anymore. BUT we could still catch Seattle and we have tie breaker of Seattle if Seattle lose to the chiefs and cards in week 17. That is how we can still get in with a loss this sat and a vikes win on sunday.   

IF we both lose this week - and the vikes win against the lions - once again -neither of us can catch the vikes.

But - while WE could catch the seahawks if the seahawks lose twice - the Eagles can not.  They best they could do is tie the seahawks, who have the tiebreaker over the eagles -but not us.

 

Make sense?  

 

Bottom line

Eagles and Lions lose this weekend - Eagles cant make the playoffs no matter what else.  

But skins lose and Seahawks lose - we can still make playoffs.  

 

BTW -ColonialWBSkinsFan  actual post is not about seattle. ITs about Us winning - eagles lose, Vikes win.  Meaning Eagles are out. Period. No matter what happens. But we would still get in with a win against eagles and bears winning.  that is 100% true.  

 

 

 

[kleese]

4 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

Me too...between 1996 and 1997 when you combine the heart-wrenching losses with the fact that many had identified us as the NFC team on the rise (young talented coach, very young team, progression from 3-13 to 6-10 to 7-1 start), it was tough to stomach. We were still close enough to the glory years (even though in the moment it seemed like an eternity) to believe that the Redskins were just one of those teams destined to get it right in a rebuild. 

 

Just off the top of my head, here are a handful of losses/ties between those two seasons (9-7 and 8-7-1) that seem individually unbelievable, let alone ALL of them happening to the same team in two seasons: 

 

1996

37-34 (OT) to Arizona (Boomer)*

19-16 (OT) to San Fran (we had them)

24-10 to Tampa Bay (gross)*

27-26 to Arizona (FG issues)*

 

* those 3 came against a 6-10 TB and 7-9 Arizona (would have been 5-11 if not for us) team. Granted, both were slightly better than their reputation as they were only a year or two away from being competitive teams 

 

1997

14-13 to Pittsburgh

20-17 to Baltimore (not a good team)

17-14 to Dallas (blew a late lead)*

7-7 to New York (where do I begin)*

23-20 to St. Louis (horrible team)*

30-10 to New York (it was a huge game and we trailed 17-0 before most people had started watching!)

 

* those 3 were consecutive to drop from 6-4 to 6-6-1

 

Why did you do that? Now I feel compelled to add my own memories/traumas from those games. 

 

Of the ones listed from 1996, three of those four losses were truly awful. Just so bad (Cardinals x2 and Bucs). The Niners loss was insanely painful because as you said, we’d had it. But I actually never considered that a “Norv loss” because the Niners were good and we played really well that day. It was a good game with a lot of fight. We just needed one more play (which we had at the bottom of the pile on the fumble and just didn’t come out with it). The Tampa loss was such an egg-laying. We just didn’t show up. I’ve talked about those two Cards losses on here so many times over the years.... the Romeo play took place in that second meeting. 

 

In 1997, the Ravens loss was “the Bam Morris game” and the Rams loss was the “Amp Lee game.” Awful. And yes that Giants game on road was on the road essentially for the division and we crapped our pants. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Don't think I didn't know that posting about the late-1990s Norv team would strike a nerve and spark a @kleese reply!

[JSSkinz]

50 minutes ago, TMK9973 said:

false. If we both lose this weekend we have the same record yes.  But doesn't matter.  Because we play the eagles the following week.  We already discussed this.  

If we both lose this week, then we win the following week. We have the tie breaker over them.  so they are out.  IF vikes win (AND we lose) we cant catch them anymore. BUT we could still catch Seattle and we have tie breaker of Seattle if Seattle lose to the chiefs and cards in week 17. That is how we can still get in with a loss this sat and a vikes win on sunday.   

IF we both lose this week - and the vikes win against the lions - once again -neither of us can catch the vikes.

But - while WE could catch the seahawks if the seahawks lose twice - the Eagles can not.  They best they could do is tie the seahawks, who have the tiebreaker over the eagles -but not us.

 

Make sense?  

 

Bottom line

Eagles and Lions lose this weekend - Eagles cant make the playoffs no matter what else.  

But skins lose and Seahawks lose - we can still make playoffs.  

 

BTW -ColonialWBSkinsFan  actual post is not about seattle. ITs about Us winning - eagles lose, Vikes win.  Meaning Eagles are out. Period. No matter what happens. But we would still get in with a win against eagles and bears winning.  that is 100% true.  

 

 

 

You're incorrect.

 

Go look at the post by @ColonialWBSkinsFan, this is the post I responded to so I'm not sure where the disconnect is here.

 

@ColonialWBSkinsFan wrote:

"If Philly loses to Houston this week, are they out, regardless of what anyone else does?"

 

The answer is NO!

 

If Philly and the Skins both lose this week we are both 7-8 going into week 17 and Philly still holds the tiebreaker on us for head to head so why would you think they would be out, if they are out then we are out as well.

 

Make sense?

 

[kleese]

46 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

You're incorrect.

 

Go look at the post by @ColonialWBSkinsFan, this is the post I responded to so I'm not sure where the disconnect is here.

 

@ColonialWBSkinsFan wrote:

"If Philly loses to Houston this week, are they out, regardless of what anyone else does?"

 

The answer is NO!

 

If Philly and the Skins both lose this week we are both 7-8 going into week 17 and Philly still holds the tiebreaker on us for head to head so why would you think they would be out, if they are out then we are out as well.

 

Make sense?

 

 

Yes Philly can absolutely be eliminated this week just like we can. 

 

Philly loses to Texans, they are 7-8. If Minnesota wins they get to 8-6-1 so Philly can’t catch them. Also Philly LOSES an 8-8 tie breaker with Seattle so it wouldn’t matter what the Seahawks do. If the Eagles lose this week and Minnesota wins, the Eagles are OUT. 

 

That is actually NOT the case with the Redskins. If we lose this week, BOTH Minnesota and Seattle need to win in order for us to be out. This is because we would win an 8-8 tie-breaker with the Seahawks. We als win an 8-8 tie-breake with the Eagles (if we beat them).

[JSSkinz]

21 minutes ago, kleese said:

That is actually NOT the case with the Redskins. If we lose this week, BOTH Minnesota and Seattle need to win in order for us to be out. This is because we would win an 8-8 tie-breaker with the Seahawks. We als win an 8-8 tie-breake with the Eagles (if we beat them).

Ok, I get what you're saying but its highly unlikely Seattle loses to the Cards in week 17 at home but I guess anything can happen, I mentioned that scenario earlier in the week but wrote it off because it's a bit far fetched.

 

I think Dallas has a better chance of dropping its last two than Seattle does but if it's still mathematically possible then I guess you have to acknowledge it can happen.

 

 

[NewCliche21]

5 hours ago, ColonialWBSkinsFan said:

If Philly loses to Houston this week, are they out, regardless of what anyone else does?

 

They'd be 7-8, now that I look at it, the only way they'd still be alive at 7-8 is if Minnesota also lost (to put them at 7-7-1)

 

So Skins best scenario might be to win this week ourselves, have Minny win this week, and the Eagles lose to Houston. 

 

Then Philly would have nothing left to play for against us in week 17, and we'd have to win and pull like hell for da Bears to take out Kurt and company in Minnesota.

 

Am I right on this?  

 

Your math might be right, but to think a division rival will throw in the towel instead of cost us the playoffs is kind of unrealistic.  With the number 2 overall pick, the Giants still beat us last year in Week 17.

 

If you can't make the playoffs, make sure nobody else in the division does.

[NoCalMike]

If the Bears have anything to play for in Week 17 (gaining a higher seed) I am pretty confident they will take out the Vikings, so I am approaching the final two weeks of the season with the mindset that winning out gets the 'Skins in.  Not that I am confident they will win out, just that at least they are playing meaningful games in December, which, if you take into consideration the disaster(s) surrounding this team after the 6-3 start?  It is more than we probably could have hoped for.

[kleese]

38 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

Ok, I get what you're saying but its highly unlikely Seattle loses to the Cards in week 17 at home but I guess anything can happen, I mentioned that scenario earlier in the week but wrote it off because it's a bit far fetched.

 

I think Dallas has a better chance of dropping its last two than Seattle does but if it's still mathematically possible then I guess you have to acknowledge it can happen.

 

 

 

For sure, of all the things we could potentially need, that is by far the least likely, but it's a possibility, so we list it. 

 

That list is easy... from most to least likely (things we need to get in at 9-7)

 

1. Vikings lose 1

2. Cowboys lose 2

3. Seahawks lose 2 

 

I think what is messing with people (it did me earlier in the thread) is that we would need Seattle to lose 2 in EITHER our 9-7 or 8-8 scenario. It's weird, but that's how it works out. We lose a 9-7 tie-breaker with them and win an 8-8 tie-breaker with them. 

 

I totally agree that catching Seattle in either scenario is probably wasted breath because it assumes they lose Week 17 at home to Arizona. If the Seahawks need that game to get in and lose it would be one of their worst (perhaps THE worst) losses in franchise history. Arizona is really, really bad. That said, they ARE an NFL team and a division team at that. Seattle struggled to win in Zona earlier this year. But yes, if we enter week 17 with our only hope being we win and Seattle loses, I won't be holding my breath on that. 

 

I do think the Dallas scenario is also a little more plausible than some may think. The Bucs are pretty competitive and if you keep games close in the NFL anything can happen. Their offense has been highly explosive at times this year. And we all know Dallas is one of those teams that can always drop a head-scratcher out there randomly. And you KNOW the Giants would come to bring it week 17 if it meant possibly knocking Dallas out. 

 

Without question though, the Vikings are our best shot here. I think they are going to win on Sunday in Detroit, but i do think that is any sort of lock at all. As mentioned previously by myself and others, division teams won't just lay down at the end of the year-- Detroit will play hard Sunday. And we will just cross our fingers that the Bears take care of the Niners meaning they will remain motivated week 17 at Minnesota. 

[Franklin60]

I've read this thread -- and the similar ones from previous years -- with interest, and I want to jump in with a point that seems to have been overlooked. In fact, it's the only reason I signed up for this message board.

 

The ESPN simulator has a "known bug" in it with concern to Common Opponents. Because of this bug, it shows the Redskins winning an 8-8 tiebreak with the Eagles (yes, I'm an Eagles fan) when that's not actually the case. kleese was correct with his initial thoughts on the matter, and apparently was swayed by the fans who cite the simulator.

 

Let's look at this one specific scenario. Vikings and Panthers both fail to finish .500. Seattle goes 9-7. Eagles beat Houston. Redskins lose to Tennessee. Redskins beat Eagles. Obviously the Seahawks are the fifth seed. The sixth seed would come down to a tiebreak between the Eagles and Redskins. The teams would have split their games with each other. Both teams would be 3-3 in the division, with Washington splitting all series and the Eagles sweeping the Giants and being swept by the Cowboys. The next step is Common Opponents, not conference record. This is true for teams from the same division. And when you do this step, the Eagles have the better record. There were only two games on each team's schedule which were not common...Eagles played the Vikings and Rams while the Redskins played the Packers and Cardinals. The Redskins swept those two "other" games. The Eagles split theirs. This means that the Eagles have the better record in common games, 7-7 as opposed to 6-8.

 

The simulator does not handle the Common Opponents scenario properly and apparently looks first at conference record, which only applies to teams from different divisions.

 

Of course, this scenario isn't all that likely. I'm not too optimistic about the Vikings losing twice, and I'm sure Redskins fans feel the same way.

 

Incidentally, this would still hold true if the Panthers finish 8-8, forcing a three way tie with the Eagles and Redskins. Divisional ties are broken first which would put the Eagles ahead of the Redskins. And the Panthers would get the sixth seed based on their win over the Eagles. The fact that the Redskins beat the Panthers would not apply.

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

8 hours ago, Franklin60 said:

This means that the Eagles have the better record in common games, 7-7 as opposed to 6-8.

 

 

Current common games for Eagles (assuming they beat the Texans):

 

Cowboys 0-2

Giants 2-0

Falcons 1-0

Bucs 0-1

Colts 1-0

Jags 1-0

Titans 0-1

Panthers 0-1

Saints 0-1

Texans 1-0

 

Record 6-6

 

 

Common games for Redskins (assuming they lose to the Titans):

 

Cowboys 1-1

Giants 1-1

Falcons 0-1

Bucs 1-0

Colts 0-1

Jags 1-0

Titans 0-1

Panthers 1-0

Saints 0-1

Texans 0-1

 

Record 5-7

 

 

 

[JSSkinz]

2 hours ago, kleese said:

I think what is messing with people (it did me earlier in the thread) is that we would need Seattle to lose 2 in EITHER our 9-7 or 8-8 scenario. It's weird, but that's how it works out. We lose a 9-7 tie-breaker with them and win an 8-8 tie-breaker with them. 

So if they beat KC this week and lose to the Cards in week 17 and we win out, we are both 9-7 and we are both tied for the conference win %.

 

So we go to the 3rd tiebreaker which is common opponents win %, based on the scenario above the only difference I see is we lost to the Cowboys once but also beat them, if the Hawks lost to the Cards it would be the same scenario but the inverse, we would have beaten the Cards and only played them once while they would have played them twice while only beating them once, I'm guessing its a wash at that point, not sure how they use common games when one team plays the common opponent twice in the same season while the other team only played them once.

 

I think if this insane scenario played out it falls to the 4th tiebreaker which is strength of victory percentage and the Hawks would win that.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

If the Skins would just beat the Titans it would make a LOT of things clearer lol...

[JSSkinz]

3 hours ago, Franklin60 said:

I've read this thread -- and the similar ones from previous years -- with interest, and I want to jump in with a point that seems to have been overlooked. In fact, it's the only reason I signed up for this message board.

 

The ESPN simulator has a "known bug" in it with concern to Common Opponents. Because of this bug, it shows the Redskins winning an 8-8 tiebreak with the Eagles (yes, I'm an Eagles fan) when that's not actually the case. kleese was correct with his initial thoughts on the matter, and apparently was swayed by the fans who cite the simulator.

 

Let's look at this one specific scenario. Vikings and Panthers both fail to finish .500. Seattle goes 9-7. Eagles beat Houston. Redskins lose to Tennessee. Redskins beat Eagles. Obviously the Seahawks are the fifth seed. The sixth seed would come down to a tiebreak between the Eagles and Redskins. The teams would have split their games with each other. Both teams would be 3-3 in the division, with Washington splitting all series and the Eagles sweeping the Giants and being swept by the Cowboys. The next step is Common Opponents, not conference record. This is true for teams from the same division. And when you do this step, the Eagles have the better record. There were only two games on each team's schedule which were not common...Eagles played the Vikings and Rams while the Redskins played the Packers and Cardinals. The Redskins swept those two "other" games. The Eagles split theirs. This means that the Eagles have the better record in common games, 7-7 as opposed to 6-8.

 

The simulator does not handle the Common Opponents scenario properly and apparently looks first at conference record, which only applies to teams from different divisions.

 

Of course, this scenario isn't all that likely. I'm not too optimistic about the Vikings losing twice, and I'm sure Redskins fans feel the same way.

 

Incidentally, this would still hold true if the Panthers finish 8-8, forcing a three way tie with the Eagles and Redskins. Divisional ties are broken first which would put the Eagles ahead of the Redskins. And the Panthers would get the sixth seed based on their win over the Eagles. The fact that the Redskins beat the Panthers would not apply.

 

5

My bad, you were right.

 

But you still suck! 

 

[skinny21]

@JSSkinz I was just going to ask @kleese about the 9-7 scenario with Seattle if they (improbably) beat the Chiefs but lost to the Cards.  Thanks for the info, and man, wouldn’t that a be crazy scenario.