Philadelphia Eagles vs. Dallas Cowboys @ 4:15 on FOX: How is this not the flex game?
Peter King stated that the Bengals/Jets game was the only choice since it's the last game at the Meadowlands, the Jets have a win-and-in scenario, and the Bengals have been clamoring for a shot to show the nation how good they can play. But the Bengals are only playing for the 3rd or 4th seed. So, no matter if they win or lose, they will be hosting in the wild-card round and --if they win-- they will be on the road in the divisional round. The Bengals don't gain anything by playing all-out in week 17. While the Eagles/Cowboys are playing for the division, making it essentially the NFC East title game and guaranteeing that both teams starters play for the entirety. Whatever the reasoning in picking the Jets/Bengals game, NBC missed the chance in showing a potentially great game on Sunday night. So when J.T. O'Sullivan is dropping back in the second half, you know who to blame. Eagles 34, Cowboys 28.
Cincinnati Bengals vs. New York Jets @ 8:20 on NBC: If the Jets win this game, they can close out the Meadowlands on a good note while also clinching a playoff spot. But they will have to do it with a soberer than usual crowd, as the Jets announced they will not be selling any booze. The
team spokesman said they came to this decision after talking it over with the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority. After the discussion, they came to the conclusion because of concerns over fan behavior. Essentially they are admitting their fans are drunken bozos who can't be trusted to act like civil human beings during a nationally televised game. However I think they are missing a big opportunity to save money. Obviously alcohol sales make a ton of money at the games, but they could also save a lot on labor costs by allowing their drunk fans to dismantle the stadium. Missed opportunity, thats all I'm saying. Jets 21, Bengals 18.
9 comments:
You're right about the Bengals really having nothing to gain.
January 3, 2010 at 12:23 PMI'm interested to see what happens in the Vikings game because if they lose to the Giants, then I think we know they're done as contenders.
I'm with you, if they lose to this bad Giants team they are toast in the playoffs.
January 3, 2010 at 1:20 PMokay, the vikings are still good
January 3, 2010 at 2:30 PMOr could the Giants just be that bad?
January 3, 2010 at 3:06 PMI'd prefer to think they're that bad. Still, the Viking defense played better than it had been, and they got Harvin back, which makes it harder to defend Rice and Peterson. People really focused too much on the "feud" between Childress and Favre as the reason for Minnesota's slide when it probably had more to do with Harvin's headaches and injuries on defense.
January 3, 2010 at 3:57 PMI'm still not sold. The Giants are ranked in the bottom 5 of the league in total defense for a reason, they stink. However the Saints haven't looked good lately either, so maybe a bye week is what both these teams need.
January 3, 2010 at 5:10 PMI'm more worried about the Saints than the Vikings. I can't think of any excuses for their last three games. If the Vikings have Harvin, then they have an explosive offense that's also balanced. Plus, they have a rhythm from a Bears game. Are they light years ahead of the rest of the conference like everyone thought at the beginning of the year? No.
January 3, 2010 at 5:20 PMPersonally, I could see any of the teams that get into the NFC Playoffs making the Super Bowl.
All the teams in the NFC have 10 wins or more, and only one of those teams has only 10 (Arizona). I can't remember the last time that's happened in a conference. I think, I heard it was in 2005 in the AFC. Either way, its rare and should make for some awesome games.
January 3, 2010 at 8:33 PMBy the way, nice job on the Hook'em Horns pic
January 3, 2010 at 9:32 PMPost a Comment