Quantcast
The NFL Thread 2015: Denver Broncos win Super Bowl 50

Forums - Sports Discussion - The NFL Thread 2015: Denver Broncos win Super Bowl 50

Who will win Super Bowl 50?

Patriots 116 25.00%
 
Seahawks 41 8.84%
 
Colts 7 1.51%
 
Packers 42 9.05%
 
Broncos 85 18.32%
 
Ravens 8 1.72%
 
Cowboys 18 3.88%
 
Panthers 56 12.07%
 
Other 74 15.95%
 
Scoreboard 17 3.66%
 
Total:464

I forgot about the game in London. Hope my pick was before kickoff.



Around the Network
Zelhawks37 said:
RolStoppable said:
BAL-PIT 1 NYJ-MIA 2 JAC-IND 2 NYG-BUF 2
CAR-TB 1 PHI-WAS 1 OAK-CHI 2 HOU-ATL 2
KC-CIN 2 CLE-SD 2 GB-SF 1 STL-ARI 2
MIN-DEN 2 DAL-NO 2 BYE   DET-SEA 2 by 10


Hawks will be back to .500. I wouldn't be surprised if they win their next 5 TBH. 


Oh what the hell. Changing my pick for the Jac-IND game to the Jaguars winning. Colts are just more awful with Luck out now. 



Estelle and Adol... best characters ever! XD

Zelhawks37 said:
Zelhawks37 said:


Hawks will be back to .500. I wouldn't be surprised if they win their next 5 TBH. 


Oh what the hell. Changing my pick for the Jac-IND game to the Jaguars winning. Colts are just more awful with Luck out now. 

Well, they might not have as many interceptions at least ;)



dongo8 said:
Andrew Luck is officially not playing today, and that team sucks even WITH him at QB, seriously wondering if the Jags will now win that game...I think I'll keep my pick though


Matt Hasselbeck in.  Thought about changing, but Jacksonville is horrible.



The Dolphins are terrible, but the Jets got bad after a good start, so the game isn't quite over yet. Fitzpatrick is also flirting with an interception because he threw already three or four passes that could have been picked.

As for Luck not playing, yeah, Jacksonville is horrible and Hasselbeck should still be a solid enough backup at his age.

EDIT: The German broadcast seems to love the 49ers for some reason. Already planned to be shown in week 2 (but changed to NE@BUF), they had the 49ers last week against the Cardinals and will have them this week vs. the Packers. Oh well, I won't complain this time.

EDIT2: One more thing about the Dolphins, this is a game that can be won with good coaching and adjustments for the second half, but I really don't think that the Miami staff is competent enough. We need Fitztragic!



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Around the Network
ljigga said:
RolStoppable said:
BAL-PIT 1 NYJ-MIA 1 JAC-IND 1 NYG-BUF 2
CAR-TB 1 PHI-WAS 1 OAK-CHI 1 HOU-ATL 2
KC-CIN 2 CLE-SD 2 GB-SF 1 STL-ARI 2
MIN-DEN 2 DAL-NO 1 BYE   DET-SEA 1 by 28


I have no faith in Vick being able to not turn the ball over. 





I have lived as a warrior. I have died as a god. Having suffered the ultimate sacrifice, I have been denied release. I...I will defeat Olympus. I will have my revenge

--Kratos

Updated Super Bowl Odds....

Teams Sorted by Odds 
From Favorites to Longshots 
2016 Super Bowl 50 (L) Futures 
Super Bowl Money Odds (Payout Per $100 Bet.)
Green Bay Packers +$300 (3 to 1)
New England Patriots +$500 (5 to 1)
Seattle Seahawks +$1,000 (10 to 1)
Arizona Cardinals +$1,200 (12 to 1)
Denver Broncos +$1,200 (12 to 1)
Cincinnati Bengals +$1,800 (18 to 1)
Atlanta Falcons +$2,500 (25 to 1)
Indianapolis Colts +$3,000 (30 to 1)
Philadelphia Eagles +$3,000 (30 to 1)
Carolina Panthers +$3,200 (32 to 1)
Buffalo Bills +$3,500 (35 to 1)
Minnesota Vikings +$3,500 (35 to 1)
Dallas Cowboys +$4,000 (40 to 1)
New York Giants +$4,000 (40 to 1)
Pittsburgh Steelers +$4,000 (40 to 1)
Baltimore Ravens +$5,000 (50 to 1)
Kansas City Chiefs +$6,000 (60 to 1)
Miami Dolphins +$6,000 (60 to 1)
New York Jets +$6,500 (65 to 1)
Oakland Raiders +$7,000 (70 to 1)
San Diego Chargers +$7,500 (75 to 1)
Houston Texans +$10,000 (100 to 1)
Detroit Lions +$15,000 (150 to 1)
St. Louis Rams +$15,000 (150 to 1)
Tennessee Titans +$15,000 (150 to 1)
Washington Redskins +$20,000 (200 to 1)
New Orleans Saints +$25,000 (250 to 1)
Tampa Bay Buccaneers +$25,000 (250 to 1)
San Francisco 49ers +$27,500 (275 to 1)
Cleveland Browns +$30,000 (300 to 1)
Jacksonville Jaguars +$40,000 (400 to 1)
Chicago Bears +$100,000 (1,000 to 1)



Oh shit the Jets game already started...ffs London



I have lived as a warrior. I have died as a god. Having suffered the ultimate sacrifice, I have been denied release. I...I will defeat Olympus. I will have my revenge

--Kratos

RolStoppable said:
MTZehvor said:

Firstly, I picked the scenario that is most likely to happen under a system where the teams with the six best records make the playoffs, as I am proposing. If we implemented a seven team scenario, with the top 7 records making the playoffs, last year would have included the 9-7 Houston Texans and the 7-8-1 Carolina Panthers (who admittedly did make it under the equally silly current playoff rules). The year before, the 8-8 New York Jets and the 8-7-1 Green Bay Packers (again, admittedly made under the silly playoff rules) would have made it. You have to go all the way back to 2012 to find a single team better than 9-7 who would have benefitted from this, and even there, it would have resulted in another .500 or worse team (the Pittsburgh Steelers) making the playoffs in the other conference. The VAST majority of the time, the seventh best team is a fairly mediocre squad as opposed to a genuinely good one left out because the conference was so stacked.

I can't say I really agree with the exciting point, either, especially now that the games are divisional, as you mentioned. So instead of two teams phoning it again, we get to watch a couple of really desperate mediocre teams playing against good teams that have either already clincehd their division and are playing their backups or against bad teams that won't care regardless. Either way, it's not particularly exciting.

More than anything else, what I dislike is punishing the number two seed by taking away their bye just for the sake of letting what is usually a pretty mediocre squad in the playoffs. If we have to operate under division winners get into the playoffs regardless of how bad they are rules, then I'm more open to it, but nothing about this strikes me as better than a system where the top 6 records get in.

Last year would have had the Texans (9-7) and Eagles (10-6). In 2013 it would have been an 8-8 AFC team (there were four) and the Cardinals (10-6). In 2012 the Steelers (8-8) and the Bears (10-6). That's three years in a row where a 10-6 team got left out. All of them from the NFC, but it's just the reality of things that the AFC hasn't had many good teams in recent years. Might as well make the argument that only four AFC teams should be in the playoffs under such circumstances, because there aren't enough genuinely good squads to make it six.

But it's going to be more interesting than what we currently get.

If the number two seed gets punished with an additional playoff game, your point about making the group of six playoff teams can be used here. You said that teams that want to be in the playoffs just have to get a top 6 record, so why shouldn't a team that wants the bye week just get the best record in the conference.

 

This is why reading posts is important, kids.

Firstly, I picked the scenario that is most likely to happen under a system where the teams with the six best records make the playoffs, as I am proposing.

This argument is going solely under the reasoning that we could have a Top 6 playoff system, as opposed to what we currently have. Had division winners not been allowed automatically into the playoffs, and it was merely done under a Top 6 system, the Eagles would have been in last year as a six seed.

The argument about the #2 seed still can be used, because it doesn't add anything. There's no reason to punish the #2 seed with a game against a mediocre opponent just so we can have one more playoff game and the playoffs can be more "exciting" by watching some team get stomped into the dirt.



The Dolphins don't get to play the AFC South, huh? Well, they might at least get one of the first draft picks!