3-Way Tie favors Cards

[KYCardFan]

10-7 or 9-8 doesn’t matter

 

[TJ]

Just win, baby

 

[Cheesebeef]

So, this just occurred to me... if by some miracle we win the next three games and we're able to beat the Rams and the Seahawks lose one more game, to set up a scenario where we are 10-7, and the Rams and Seattle are both 9-7... don't the Rams have nothing to play for? Now, I THOUGHT that game has already been flexed to SNF, meaning we'd be sitting there at 10-7, knowing that a Rams win puts us into the playoffs.

So the Rams wouldn't have that much incentive to beat Seattle because even if they won, if they know we already have, both teams finishing at 10-7 gives us the tie-breaker.

But... I just did a little googling and the SNF game hasn't been flexed yet. If every team is 9-7 or 10-6 (Seattle) going into that game, you figure that's a prime game for NBC to put on - Win and Seattle's in. The only other big flex possibility is Vikings v. Detroit, which could be for the 1 or 2 seed is the vikings keep winning.

eh... this is all pointless. There's no way Kyler goes into his house of horrors in LA and beats a streaking Rams team with the playoffs possibly on the line.

 

[TheCardinal]

10-7 or 9-8 doesn’t matter

. . . almost. This works at 10-7, but NOT for ALL 9-8 ties.

The three-way jump-Seattle thingy works only if the following conditions are met:
A) We beat the Rams for the season sweep
B) The Rams beat the Seahawks to sweep them (evening out the H2H at 2-2 across the board)
C) We beat the 49ers to match the Rams' divisional record (4-2) thus knocking out Seattle (3-3) and setting up the mini-tie-breaker against only the Rams, where we win on H2H sweep.

At 10-7, these conditions are automatically met. We would have had to win out (beating LA and SF) and the Rams would have to have won against the Jets and Seahawks (which is why the Rams-Jets game is strange for our rooting interests).


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

HOWEVER, at 9-8, there are ways of getting the three-way tie-breaker where we DON'T win.

- If our loss is to LA, we are eliminated. This is a literal must-win game. Though we could still match the Rams at 9-8, Seattle would have had to have beaten them in the finale, and thus the Seahawks would win the 9-8 tie on H2H (3-1 vs 2-2 vs 1-3).

- If our loss is to Carolina, we would have wins against LA and SF to reach 9-8. However, it matters whether the Rams' lone remaining win is against the Jets or the Seahawks. If it is against the Jets, Seattle wins the three-way tie on H2H (3-1 vs 2-2 vs 1-3). However, if the Rams' lone remaining win is against Seattle (here requiring the Rams to LOSE to the Jets), the three conditions above are met, and we win the three-way tie-breaker. The H2H is 2-2 vs 2-2 vs 2-2, and it moves on to divisional record where AZ and LA are 4-2, and SEA eliminated from the tie at 3-3. Then it reverts back to H2H between AZ/LA and we win on the sweep.

- If our loss is to San Francisco, we would have beaten LA for the sweep. However, even if the Rams beat Seattle to tie up the H2H at 2-2 vs 2-2 vs 2-2, the RAMS would win the three-way tie on the next step, divisional record, 4-2 over the 3-3 posted by both AZ and SEA. Here, the Rams use the three-way tie to jump *US* despite our season sweep of them. We could still win the division at 9-8 with a loss to SF, but it would require SEA to lose ALL THREE GAMES so that there isn't a three-way tie. We would win the two-way tie with just LA on H2H sweep. In this scenario, SF can also get to 9-8, but it wouldn't change who wins the tie-breaker.

 

[TheCardinal]

So, this just occurred to me... if by some miracle we win the next three games and we're able to beat the Rams and the Seahawks lose one more game, to set up a scenario where we are 10-7, and the Rams and Seattle are both 9-7... don't the Rams have nothing to play for? Now, I THOUGHT that game has already been flexed to SNF, meaning we'd be sitting there at 10-7, knowing that a Rams win puts us into the playoffs.

So the Rams wouldn't have that much incentive to beat Seattle because even if they won, if they know we already have, both teams finishing at 10-7 gives us the tie-breaker.

But... I just did a little googling and the SNF game hasn't been flexed yet. If every team is 9-7 or 10-6 (Seattle) going into that game, you figure that's a prime game for NBC to put on - Win and Seattle's in. The only other big flex possibility is Vikings v. Detroit, which could be for the 1 or 2 seed is the vikings keep winning.

eh... this is all pointless. There's no way Kyler goes into his house of horrors in LA and beats a streaking Rams team with the playoffs possibly on the line.

I would be surprised if either NFC West game got flexed if we are still alive for the division. You are correct in that it could give one team a competitive advantage. If all three enter the final week at 9-7, Seattle gets first crack at the division. If they lose, it's ours with a win. If we also lose, it goes to the Rams.

It would also be the same if Seattle goes into the game 10-6, and AZ/LA are both 9-7.

 

[kerouac9]

So, this just occurred to me... if by some miracle we win the next three games and we're able to beat the Rams and the Seahawks lose one more game, to set up a scenario where we are 10-7, and the Rams and Seattle are both 9-7... don't the Rams have nothing to play for? Now, I THOUGHT that game has already been flexed to SNF, meaning we'd be sitting there at 10-7, knowing that a Rams win puts us into the playoffs.

So the Rams wouldn't have that much incentive to beat Seattle because even if they won, if they know we already have, both teams finishing at 10-7 gives us the tie-breaker.

But... I just did a little googling and the SNF game hasn't been flexed yet. If every team is 9-7 or 10-6 (Seattle) going into that game, you figure that's a prime game for NBC to put on - Win and Seattle's in. The only other big flex possibility is Vikings v. Detroit, which could be for the 1 or 2 seed is the vikings keep winning.

eh... this is all pointless. There's no way Kyler goes into his house of horrors in LA and beats a streaking Rams team with the playoffs possibly on the line.

Saints-Bucs will be the SNF finale to decide the NFC South

 

[Metcalf Rules]

So, this just occurred to me... if by some miracle we win the next three games and we're able to beat the Rams and the Seahawks lose one more game, to set up a scenario where we are 10-7, and the Rams and Seattle are both 9-7... don't the Rams have nothing to play for? Now, I THOUGHT that game has already been flexed to SNF, meaning we'd be sitting there at 10-7, knowing that a Rams win puts us into the playoffs.

So the Rams wouldn't have that much incentive to beat Seattle because even if they won, if they know we already have, both teams finishing at 10-7 gives us the tie-breaker.

But... I just did a little googling and the SNF game hasn't been flexed yet. If every team is 9-7 or 10-6 (Seattle) going into that game, you figure that's a prime game for NBC to put on - Win and Seattle's in. The only other big flex possibility is Vikings v. Detroit, which could be for the 1 or 2 seed is the vikings keep winning.

eh... this is all pointless. There's no way Kyler goes into his house of horrors in LA and beats a streaking Rams team with the playoffs possibly on the line.

I’ve had my heart broken by the Cardinals so many times. I was reminded of it earlier today when I saw a clips of the Redskins game in 84 for the NFC East title. That being said, I expect the Cardinals to beat the Panthers, stun the Rams and lose the division by shanking a 25 yard last second fg.

 

[WisconsinCard]

I would be surprised if either NFC West game got flexed if we are still alive for the division. You are correct in that it could give one team a competitive advantage. If all three enter the final week at 9-7, Seattle gets first crack at the division. If they lose, it's ours with a win. If we also lose, it goes to the Rams.

It would also be the same if Seattle goes into the game 10-6, and AZ/LA are both 9-7.

Yes the NFL does a good job of keeping all "important games" playing in the same time slot. So therefore they wouldn't flex any of this games to give someone a competitive advantage.

 

[SoonerLou]

So, this just occurred to me... if by some miracle we win the next three games and we're able to beat the Rams and the Seahawks lose one more game, to set up a scenario where we are 10-7, and the Rams and Seattle are both 9-7... don't the Rams have nothing to play for? Now, I THOUGHT that game has already been flexed to SNF, meaning we'd be sitting there at 10-7, knowing that a Rams win puts us into the playoffs.

So the Rams wouldn't have that much incentive to beat Seattle because even if they won, if they know we already have, both teams finishing at 10-7 gives us the tie-breaker.

But... I just did a little googling and the SNF game hasn't been flexed yet. If every team is 9-7 or 10-6 (Seattle) going into that game, you figure that's a prime game for NBC to put on - Win and Seattle's in. The only other big flex possibility is Vikings v. Detroit, which could be for the 1 or 2 seed is the vikings keep winning.

eh... this is all pointless. There's no way Kyler goes into his house of horrors in LA and beats a streaking Rams team with the playoffs possibly on the line.

In terms of personnel the 49ers are a scarier matchup than the Rams for Kyler.

 

[GatorAZ]

Not thinking about this until we prove next week that we don’t lay an huge egg in Carolina.

 

[slanidrac16]

So, this just occurred to me... if by some miracle we win the next three games and we're able to beat the Rams and the Seahawks lose one more game, to set up a scenario where we are 10-7, and the Rams and Seattle are both 9-7... don't the Rams have nothing to play for? Now, I THOUGHT that game has already been flexed to SNF, meaning we'd be sitting there at 10-7, knowing that a Rams win puts us into the playoffs.

So the Rams wouldn't have that much incentive to beat Seattle because even if they won, if they know we already have, both teams finishing at 10-7 gives us the tie-breaker.

But... I just did a little googling and the SNF game hasn't been flexed yet. If every team is 9-7 or 10-6 (Seattle) going into that game, you figure that's a prime game for NBC to put on - Win and Seattle's in. The only other big flex possibility is Vikings v. Detroit, which could be for the 1 or 2 seed is the vikings keep winning.

eh... this is all pointless. There's no way Kyler goes into his house of horrors in LA and beats a streaking Rams team with the playoffs possibly on the line.

Bingo… but you can bet it won’t be Kyler’s fault.

 

[CardNots]

Amazing we are still talking about the playoffs and not the draft or who will be our new coach next season.

 

[ajcardfan]

This is our situation according to CBS Sports. Not likely, but also not out of the question. The first bullet point is the key obviously.

2025 NFL playoffs: The Christmas miracle each team grasping for postseason needs to lock up elusive berth

These teams are hoping to be gifted some serious luck this holiday season

www.cbssports.com

Arizona Cardinals (7-7)​

• Need to win out
• Need Rams and Seahawks to go 1-2 down stretch (to win NFC West)
• Need Commanders to go 0-3 down stretch, Seahawks to go 1-2 down stretch, Falcons to go 2-1 down stretch (for wild-card spot)

Similar to Atlanta, Arizona has a path to the playoffs both as a division winner and a wild-card team. At 7-7, they are a game behind both the Rams and Seahawks in the loss column for first place, and they currently hold the head-to-head tiebreaker over Los Angeles (they play again in Week 17). If Arizona wins out and both the Rams and Seahawks finish the year no better than 1-2, the Cards are NFC West champions. As for the wild-card avenue, Arizona would again need to win out. From there, they'd need the Commanders to lose out, the Seahawks to finish no better than 1-2, and the Falcons to finish no better than 2-1.

 

[phillycard]

Not thinking about this until we prove next week that we don’t lay an huge egg in Carolina.

this 1000%. We need to worry about beating a scrappy Panthers team. We're not good enough to ease into an opponent.

 

[ajcardfan]

this 1000%. We need to worry about beating a scrappy Panthers team. We're not good enough to ease into an opponent.

We could lose Sunday. But I really do not believe it will because we overlooked Carolina and took them lightly.

 

[Cheesebeef]

We could lose Sunday. But I really do not believe it will because we overlooked Carolina and took them lightly.

Me neither. Gannon has his warts but his team almost always comes out playing hard and has been particularly good at handling teams that are worse than them.

 

[BulldogCard]

That's the funny thing is the Cards are plenty still alive. Building on a better game, good rb play. I've seen the Rams look terrible at times like the Seahawks. It almost seems like fate that it will be a wild finish; nail biting, cardiac, on the edge of your seat kind of torture. If you can't take that don't watch December football.

 

[BullheadCardFan]

this 1000%. We need to worry about beating a scrappy Panthers team. We're not good enough to ease into an opponent.

+1

 

[Quagmire]

Yes the NFL does a good job of keeping all "important games" playing in the same time slot. So therefore they wouldn't flex any of this games to give someone a competitive advantage.

By "competitive advantage" you mean from a betting standpoint. That's how most of these decisions are made

 

[jf-08]

this 1000%. We need to worry about beating a crappy Panthers team. We're not good enough to ease into an opponent.

FTFY.

 

[WisconsinCard]

By "competitive advantage" you mean from a betting standpoint. That's how most of these decisions are made

Well they go hand in hand. I mean that if team a plays early and team b play late and both are competing for the last playoff spot. It could be a competitive advance for one of those teams.

 

[kerouac9]

By "competitive advantage" you mean from a betting standpoint. That's how most of these decisions are made

It's an effort by the NFL to make as many week 18 games relevant as possible. There will be tiebreaker scenarios where, for example, both the Chargers (playing at Las Vegas) and Broncos (hosting KC) will be alive. The NFL wants those games on at the same time so neither team has an advantage of knowing they're in or out.

Same could potentially be true for Buffalo (visiting the Pats) and KC

 

[PACardsFan]

I’ve had my heart broken by the Cardinals so many times. I was reminded of it earlier today when I saw a clips of the Redskins game in 84 for the NFC East title. That being said, I expect the Cardinals to beat the Panthers, stun the Rams and lose the division by shanking a 25 yard last second fg.

I was at that 84 game. Cardinals trailed 23-7 going into the 4th quarter, rallied to take the lead, and then, as usual, the refs hosed us to put WA in position to win. O’Donnell missed a 50 yard FG on the last play. He was awful! Amazing he lasted as long as he did with us. My boss gave me her tickets as long as I would take her 10 year old son to the game. The only thing that kept me from hospitalizing a few Skins fans after the game was because I had that 10 year old with me and didn’t want to risk losing my job lol. After spending the day with me, and I bought him a Cardinals pennant, when he got home he told his mother he no longer liked the Redskins!! He said their fans were jerks lol.