ESPN Playoff Machine

[RINGLEADER]

It's back...

http://www.espn.com/nfl/playoffs/machine

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by TomBarndtsTwin

This.

It's not about the home field advantage. In fact, I can make a strong argument that the Chiefs are a better team on the road this year than they are at home. Most of their big 'statement' wins have been on the road.

It's all about that extra week off, giving guys more rest, healing from injuries, and the long mental grind of this COVID season. So getting that bye is a BIG advantage over other teams.

And, again, having to only win 2 games to get to the Super Bowl, is a lot less wear and tear on a team that late in the season than having to win 3.

I would argue that's because most of their big statement games have been on the road.

Handled the Texans at home on TNF (of course, not nearly as impressive as people thought at the time, but they played like it).
Handled the Ravens, MNF on the road.
Handled the Bills, MNF on the road.
Vegas, SNF on the road.
@TB, @Miami, @NO

That leaves what.... NE at home (no problems there), Raiders, NYJ, Carolina, Denver.

I could argue they've had all of 1 or 2 'statement games' at home (and that's if you want to count the Texans), while they've had 5 on the road (not including the Saints).

All that said, I definitely won't be traveling for the playoffs this year to experience their 30% capacity "HFA".

[Bearcat]

Not to belabor the point, but it made me curious...

Record of opponents they've played at home... 26-52 (.333), one winning record (7-6 Raiders). Add the Chargers and Falcons and it's 34-70 (.327)

Road opponents... 50-41 (.549), 5 winning records, minus the Chargers and Broncos. Add the Saints and it's 60-44 (.568).

Dog shit schedule for anyone who's paid Covid prices to go to Arrowhead this season.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by Go Royals

I'm tryin to figure out how Buffalo factors at all?

If we win we'll be 13-1 and have the tiebreaker over them. They best they could do is 13-3 and with a win this week the worst we could do is 13-3?

Is there some tiebreaker I'm missing?

If the Chiefs, Bills, and Steelers go 13-3 then it’s different tiebreakers which can’t be determined yet. So the Bills getting a fourth loss eliminates that possibility resulting in our known tiebreaker advantage over the Steelers coming into play.

[KChiefs1]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

Not to belabor the point, but it made me curious...

Record of opponents they've played at home... 26-52 (.333), one winning record (7-6 Raiders). Add the Chargers and Falcons and it's 34-70 (.327)

Road opponents... 50-41 (.549), 5 winning records, minus the Chargers and Broncos. Add the Saints and it's 60-44 (.568).

Dog shit schedule for anyone who's paid Covid prices to go to Arrowhead this season.

Crazy thing is that the Chiefs are better on the road too.

[Renegade]

Here is how I got it

#1 KC 14-2
#2 Buffalo 12-4
#3 Pittsburg 12-4
#4 Tennessee 12-4
#5 Cleveland 12-4
#6 Indianapolis 12-4
#7 Miami 11-5

NFC
#1 Saints 13-3
#2 Green Bay 12-4
#3 LA Rams 12-4
#4 Washington 8-8
#5 Tampa Bay 11-5
#6 Seattle 11-5
#7 Arizona 9-7

I don't think we will lose to the Saints this week, but this could be a week that Andy tries to hard to win.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

If the Chiefs, Bills, and Steelers go 13-3 then it’s different tiebreakers which can’t be determined yet. So the Bills getting a fourth loss eliminates that possibility resulting in our known tiebreaker advantage over the Steelers coming into play.

It would still go by conference record first and then head-to-head.

[Azide22]

Originally Posted by mr. tegu

If the Chiefs, Bills, and Steelers go 13-3 then it’s different tiebreakers which can’t be determined yet. So the Bills getting a fourth loss eliminates that possibility resulting in our known tiebreaker advantage over the Steelers coming into play.

This is true - though tiebreaker vs. Pittsburgh isn't assured YET. There is some good news though, on the tiebreaker front. First, if Pittsburgh loses again - in ANY of their remaining games, KC will have any tiebreaker against them, regardless of which 2 games KC would have to lose for it to come into play (by conference record or common games tiebreaker depending on which 2 games were lost). KC obviously holds a two-way tie vs. Buffalo in any circumstance by H2H. This means that KC can't finish worse than the 2 seed. Of course this year, that 2 seed not as great as it once was.

Next, KC would win the 3 way tie, IF the two losses were to the 2 NFC teams, because they'd have a better conference record than Buffalo or Pittsburgh.

If it's one vs NFC and also lose to Chargers, then it would come down to strength of victory. This is where it's crazy close, and it would be fairly critical that Chiefs one remaining win is vs. Saints rather than Falcons. If it was, the wins by opponents currently would be as follows (more is better): KC 79, Buf 78, Pitt 78 (best case - this would be Pitt losing to Cincy, so I don't think they have a chance). Dead heat, and remaining games would make the difference. Of course, again, Chargers win is trump card.

This is a lot of blah,blah, blah to say, I don't see how Chiefs do NOT get 1 seed, shy of losing to Chargers and Pittsburgh winning out. IF KC loses 2 games - assuming they don't take that last week off because they've clinched by then - they do not deserve the 1 seed, even if they still got it.

[Azide22]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

It would still go by conference record first and then head-to-head.

I assume you mean h2h after one team wins or is eliminated?

h2h sweep is first tiebreaker even in 3 or more way tie. Then conference games. Once one team is eliminated or finishes ahead, then it starts over at h2h again. Obviously, there is no h2h sweep among these 3 though.

If KC's lone win in this scenario is vs. Chargers, Chiefs win the 3 way tiebreaker on conference record. Otherwise, it's the hairy Strength of Victory one...

[DaFace]

It's really pretty simple to me:

We get the one seed if:
-We win out
-We lose only one game to either the Saints or the Falcons

Other scenarios get murky, but even most of those go our way. In short, as long as we don't majorly screw up (e.g., losing 2+ games), we should be good.

[DaFace]

FWIW, the NYT simulator says we're 73% likely to get a bye if we lose one game and it's to the Chargers.

If we lose two games but both are to the NFC teams, we're 64% likely to get a bye.

If we lose two games, but one of them is to the Chargers, it becomes a coin flip.

EDIT: Eh, these were messed up. See below.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Azide22

I assume you mean h2h after one team wins or is eliminated?

h2h sweep is first tiebreaker even in 3 or more way tie. Then conference games. Once one team is eliminated or finishes ahead, then it starts over at h2h again. Obviously, there is no h2h sweep among these 3 though.

If KC's lone win in this scenario is vs. Chargers, Chiefs win the 3 way tiebreaker on conference record. Otherwise, it's the hairy Strength of Victory one...

Yeah, I'm an idiot. That was a really lazy response.

So, the first tiebreaker when there are 3 or more conference teams tied is to apply the division tiebreaker first. Since all 3 will be their division winner, the first tiebreaker would result in a tie.

The 2nd tiebreaker is head-to-head sweep. Buffalo is the only one to play both of the others but they lost to us, so on to tiebreaker 3.

3rd tiebreaker is the SAME as the first tiebreaker in a 2-team scenario - conference winning percentage. Buffalo has lost to both Tennessee and KC. Unless KC loses to the Chargers, they win this tiebreaker with BOTH Buffalo and the Steelers because the Steelers only have AFC games left so to finish 13-3, they would have to lose at least one AFC game.

[Azide22]

Originally Posted by DaFace

FWIW, the NYT simulator says we're 73% likely to get a bye if we lose one game and it's to the Chargers.

If we lose two games but both are to the NFC teams, we're 64% likely to get a bye.

If we lose two games, but one of them is to the Chargers, it becomes a coin flip.

Those first 2 being different is a bit amusing to me. They should be identical, because either of them requires Pittsburgh to lose 1 more (or more, but either way, it's still the same effect), and either scenario ensures KC would at least win the 3 way tie, or the 2 way tie with Pittsburgh.

Truly, in effect, losing the 2 NFC games is equivalent for KC to losing the 1 vs. the Chargers in terms of seeding. Either one requires one Pitt loss, and Buffalo doesn't matter.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by DaFace

FWIW, the NYT simulator says we're 73% likely to get a bye if we lose one game and it's to the Chargers.

If we lose two games but both are to the NFC teams, we're 64% likely to get a bye.

If we lose two games, but one of them is to the Chargers, it becomes a coin flip.

If the Chiefs lose both NFC games but beats the Chargers, they cannot lose a tiebreaker to the Bills, who already have two AFC losses.

In fact, the Steelers would also have two AFC losses if they finish 13-3 because they only have AFC opponents left.

If the Chiefs beat the Chargers, there's almost no chance they don't get the #1 seed unless the Steelers win out.

[Azide22]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Yeah, I'm an idiot. That was a really lazy response.

So, the first tiebreaker when there are 3 or more conference teams tied is to apply the division tiebreaker first. Since all 3 will be their division winner, the first tiebreaker would result in a tie.

The 2nd tiebreaker is head-to-head sweep. Buffalo is the only one to play both of the others but they lost to us, so on to tiebreaker 3.

3rd tiebreaker is the SAME as the first tiebreaker in a 2-team scenario - conference winning percentage. Buffalo has lost to both Tennessee and KC. Unless KC loses to the Chargers, they win this tiebreaker with BOTH Buffalo and the Steelers because the Steelers only have AFC games left so to finish 13-3, they would have to lose at least one AFC game.

Yeah, you're right on the Division winner thing too. I assumed that step, of course...

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by Azide22

Those first 2 being different is a bit amusing to me. They should be identical, because either of them requires Pittsburgh to lose 1 more (or more, but either way, it's still the same effect), and either scenario ensures KC would at least win the 3 way tie, or the 2 way tie with Pittsburgh.

Truly, in effect, losing the 2 NFC games is equivalent for KC to losing the 1 vs. the Chargers in terms of seeding. Either one requires one Pitt loss, and Buffalo doesn't matter.

Yeah, you're right. I hadn't actually selected that the Chiefs "won" against the Chargers in the second one. If you do, they're identical scenarios. Same deal with the last one.

So to try and summarize again, we get the bye if:
-We win out.
-We only lose one, and it's to either the Saints or Falcons.
-The Steelers drop one more game. (Technically there are super weird tiebreaker scenarios that would make this untrue, but they are VERY unlikely.)