Schedule makers did us no favors

[4merper4mer]

I’m probably making more out of this than need be, but something has struck me as off since the schedule came out.  Two of our tougher games, KC and Tenn; games which could have an impact on seeding, are coming up.  Forgetting the fact that they are back to back….again…..they also come after games which put us at a schedule disadvantage.

 

1. We play Wash coming off a mini-bye

2. We play Hou coming off a mini-bye

 

Granted these teams aren’t great but still.

 

3. And most importantly, the NFL added an extra game to the schedule this year.  It involved an inter-conference opponent that was not in the previous formula.  Ours is Wash.  So not only do we head into KC/Tenn after playing two teams off byes, but we’ve already played our extra game.  I’m glad this is week 5/6 rather than say 11/12 but by then maybe KC and Tenn would have played an extra game too.  
 

This seems unfair.

[DasNootz]

3 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

I’m probably making more out of this than need be, but something has struck me as off since the schedule came out.  Two of our tougher games, KC and Tenn; games which could have an impact on seeding, are coming up.  Forgetting the fact that they are back to back….again…..they also come after games which put us at a schedule disadvantage.

 

1. We play Wash coming off a mini-bye

2. We play Hou coming off a mini-bye

 

Granted these teams aren’t great but still.

 

3. And most importantly, the NFL added an extra game to the schedule this year.  It involved an inter-conference opponent that was not in the previous formula.  Ours is Wash.  So not only do we head into KC/Tenn after playing two teams off byes, but we’ve already played our extra game.  I’m glad this is week 5/6 rather than say 11/12 but by then maybe KC and Tenn would have played an extra game too.  
 

This seems unfair.

We played Washington already and it went alright.  I suspect a similar outcome vs. Houston.

[Bferra13]

All teams will have this one way or another. It is what it is. 

[Bob Chandler's Hands]

5 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

 

3. And most importantly, the NFL added an extra game to the schedule this year.  It involved an inter-conference opponent that was not in the previous formula.  Ours is Wash.  So not only do we head into KC/Tenn after playing two teams off byes, but we’ve already played our extra game.  I’m glad this is week 5/6 rather than say 11/12 but by then maybe KC and Tenn would have played an extra game too.  
 

This seems unfair.

In bold is one of the more logically non-sensical statements I've ever seen on TBD. 

[BuffaloBillies]

3 of our first 4 at home

3 of our last 4 at home

Bunch of prime time games

 

I ain't complaining

[RiotAct]

let’s see… Kansas City and Buffalo will have both played four games when they square off at Arrowhead.   So your 3rd point makes no sense whatsoever.

[RoyBatty is alive]

It is not nearly as bad as the "old days" when I swear they were punishing Ralph.  Almost every year without fail we would get the Pats afterr their bye week.

 

Another huge schedule issue was getting Pittsburgh for the first game.  Big Ben was almost guaranteed to break down this year after a few games and sure enough he already has.  

[TheBrownBear]

Honestly, I'm not following your logic.  All teams have sections of their schedule (or back-to-back weeks) that are tougher than others.  I could just as easily spin it as Buffalo getting three easy/crappy opponents (Phins, WFTs and Texans) to build confidence/momentum and stack wins before coming into the KC and TE games.  

[corta765]

The Bills have one of the easiest schedules right now opponent wise and before the season I think it was rated as 5th easiest. If you have an issue with Houston then they are not SB caliber

[4merper4mer]

4 minutes ago, Bferra13 said:

All teams will have this one way or another. It is what it is. 

Right but we already had our extra game and will play KC/Tenn when they haven’t had an extra game.

[TheBrownBear]

1 minute ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

It is not nearly as bad as the "old days" when I swear they were punishing Ralph.  Almost every year without fail we would get the Pats afterr their bye week.

 

Another huge schedule issue was getting Pittsburgh for the first game.  Big Ben was almost guaranteed to break down this year after a few games and sure enough he already has.  

Generally agree, but Big Ben honestly sucked against us too.  His receivers made some plays for him, but he was nothing special.  We lost that game because of the 4th and 1 brainfart from Daboll and a blocked punt TD.  That was a game that we just pissed away.

[Coach Tuesday]

4 minutes ago, Bob Chandler's Hands said:

In bold is one of the more logically non-sensical statements I've ever seen on TBD. 

Not even in the top five for the OP.

[TheBrownBear]

1 minute ago, 4merper4mer said:

Right but we already had our extra game and will play KC/Tenn when they haven’t had an extra game.

What does this even mean?

[Mr. WEO]

3 of the first 4 games with backup QBs. 

 

 

Only 2 good QBs between weeks 2 and 14 

[Bangarang]

2 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Right but we already had our extra game and will play KC/Tenn when they haven’t had an extra game.

This makes absolutely no sense

[K-9]

11 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

I’m probably making more out of this than need be, but something has struck me as off since the schedule came out.  Two of our tougher games, KC and Tenn; games which could have an impact on seeding, are coming up.  Forgetting the fact that they are back to back….again…..they also come after games which put us at a schedule disadvantage.

 

1. We play Wash coming off a mini-bye

2. We play Hou coming off a mini-bye

 

Granted these teams aren’t great but still.

 

3. And most importantly, the NFL added an extra game to the schedule this year.  It involved an inter-conference opponent that was not in the previous formula.  Ours is Wash.  So not only do we head into KC/Tenn after playing two teams off byes, but we’ve already played our extra game.  I’m glad this is week 5/6 rather than say 11/12 but by then maybe KC and Tenn would have played an extra game too.  
 

This seems unfair.

True, but since the extra game was against an NFC opponent, in reality it’s like playing an extra half game because wins and losses vs. NFC teams aren’t as impactful to the overall W/L record. 

[4merper4mer]

5 minutes ago, Bob Chandler's Hands said:

In bold is one of the more logically non-sensical statements I've ever seen on TBD. 

Let me break it in two:

 

1. Based on previous schedules, Washington would not have been a team we played.  They were the extra game.

2. We already played them.

 

So we’ve already played our extra game.

[Ned Flanders]

14 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

I’m probably making more out of this than need be

Yes, you are.

[4merper4mer]

2 minutes ago, K-9 said:

True, but since the extra game was against an NFC opponent, in reality it’s like playing an extra half game because wins and losses vs. NFC teams aren’t as impactful to the overall W/L record. 

Although correct, it’s more the wear and tear of playing the game than the impact on the record.

[YattaOkasan]

2 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Let me break it in two:

 

1. Based on previous schedules, Washington would not have been a team we played.  They were the extra game.

2. We already played them.

 

So we’ve already played our extra game.

Based on the schedule we will have played the same number of games.  I get that we played a team we wouldnt have but whats more important is number of games which will be the same.

Edit: you mention wear and tear above, thats dependent on number of games not if it was a team you wouldnt have played before

Edited September 28, 2021 by YattaOkasan