Good news for Colts' chances if they make the playoffs

[Warhawk]

I just did some Colts-related research, looking at teams who have made the playoffs with a negative point differential.

The conclusion is that they are at an overwhelming disadvantage against the top 2 seeds, BUT, you do NOT want to face a team with a negative point differential in the wild card round.

Since 1990, when the playoffs expanded to 6 teams per conference, there have been 17 teams to make the playoffs with a negative point differential. 2 of them went 10-6, 12 went 9-7, 2 went 8-8, and 1 went 7-9 (the Colts could very easily be the third at 10-6, if they can beat Tennessee and Kansas City - it's not inconceivable they could be the first to do it at 11-5 or 12-4, because even if they did somehow win out and sweep Houston, they'd have to win those 4 games by an average of over 10 points per game, which doesn't seem likely the way they've been winning).

Teams with a negative point differential (all of whom played in the wild card round) are a combined 10-7 in wild card round games, and 13-16 overall in the playoffs. However, 5 of those wild card losses came prior to 1997. Since 1997, those teams are an astonishing 7-2 in the wild card round, and 10-8 overall. That would include the 2011 Giants (who won the Super Bowl), the 2011 Broncos, 2010 Seahawks, 2006 Seahawks, 1999 Dolphins, 1998 Cardinals, and 1997 Vikings (who all won their first playoff games), and the 2004 Seahawks and 1999 Lions (both of whom lost their first playoff games).

Even more astonishing is the record if you take out teams who only have negative point differentials by a small margin. Teams with a double-digit negative point differential are 7-3 in their first playoff games, and are currently on a 4-game winning streak in first-round games.

Still, that means that teams with a negative point differential are 1-9 in the divisional round, and teams with a double digit negative point differential are 0-7.

[throwing BBZ]

Plain and simple, We need to get BETTER over these last 4 games.

Being able to beat teams in Close Games that are under .500 tells a story. So does getting Mopped by good teams.

30 incompletions with 3 Int`s. and winning in the playoffs?

No, that would be more like "GOAT", 7 Time in the Playoffs One & Done Manning losing to the Jets 40-0 in the Playoffs.

[Tark The Shark]

I don't think we will do too well in these playoffs because we haven't beaten any good teams on the road this year.

The accomplishment is definitely making the playoffs.

[chad72]

Slice the data provided above as to who were home teams. That matters a lot.

If I remember right, the 7-9 Seahawks in 2010 had a home game, so did the 2006 Seahawks with Romo muffing a hold for the game winning FG. The 2011 Broncos with Tebow, we know Ryan Clark cannot play there and Polamalu has to play last line of D instead of a game changing role which he does by instinct up front. In all my years of playoff watching, that was the worst game that Dick LeBeau has ever called in the playoffs on D. Give credit to Tebow to make the throws that he had to but a lot of things were not right with the Steelers' D that night, cant explain why.

The big question, just like the 32nd ranked rush D did a 180 in the 2006 playoffs, can Luck and the O do a 180 and take care of the ball come playoff time? If they do, they will be in every single game, no doubt about it.

[FanFromtheWasteland]

Could be bad news if you factor in the law of averages.

[Warhawk]

Could be bad news if you factor in the law of averages.

Which is really just a more sophisticated way of saying something is "due" to happen.

[Warhawk]

Slice the data provided above as to who were home teams. That matters a lot.

If I remember right, the 7-9 Seahawks in 2010 had a home game, so did the 2006 Seahawks with Romo muffing a hold for the game winning FG. The 2011 Broncos with Tebow, we know Ryan Clark cannot play there and Polamalu has to play last line of D instead of a game changing role which he does by instinct up front. In all my years of playoff watching, that was the worst game that Dick LeBeau has ever called in the playoffs on D. Give credit to Tebow to make the throws that he had to but a lot of things were not right with the Steelers' D that night, cant explain why.

Home teams are 6-1 (4-0 in their last 4), Away teams are 4-5 (although 3-1 in their last 4). Oddly, the last 5 teams were all home teams, while the 6 previously were all away teams.

[Indianapolis-Colts-Fan]

If the colts go no huddle I believe we can win in the playoffs.... If...

[LoudandProud]

Could be bad news if you factor in the law of averages.

agreed I think I'd rather the teams with negative point differentials be 0-100 entering the playoffs.

[lollygagger8]

I don't get into statitics like this. Any given Sunday.

[oldunclemark]

I just did some Colts-related research, looking at teams who have made the playoffs with a negative point differential.

The conclusion is that they are at an overwhelming disadvantage against the top 2 seeds, BUT, you do NOT want to face a team with a negative point differential in the wild card round.

Since 1990, when the playoffs expanded to 6 teams per conference, there have been 17 teams to make the playoffs with a negative point differential. 2 of them went 10-6, 12 went 9-7, 2 went 8-8, and 1 went 7-9 (the Colts could very easily be the third at 10-6, if they can beat Tennessee and Kansas City - it's not inconceivable they could be the first to do it at 11-5 or 12-4, because even if they did somehow win out and sweep Houston, they'd have to win those 4 games by an average of over 10 points per game, which doesn't seem likely the way they've been winning).

Teams with a negative point differential (all of whom played in the wild card round) are a combined 10-7 in wild card round games, and 13-16 overall in the playoffs. However, 5 of those wild card losses came prior to 1997. Since 1997, those teams are an astonishing 7-2 in the wild card round, and 10-8 overall. That would include the 2011 Giants (who won the Super Bowl), the 2011 Broncos, 2010 Seahawks, 2006 Seahawks, 1999 Dolphins, 1998 Cardinals, and 1997 Vikings (who all won their first playoff games), and the 2004 Seahawks and 1999 Lions (both of whom lost their first playoff games).

Even more astonishing is the record if you take out teams who only have negative point differentials by a small margin. Teams with a double-digit negative point differential are 7-3 in their first playoff games, and are currently on a 4-game winning streak in first-round games.

Still, that means that teams with a negative point differential are 1-9 in the divisional round, and teams with a double digit negative point differential are 0-7.

with respect to your effort..

Its hard to base the projecetd performance of an all-new offense....against past history..

History does not really repeat itself...and 20 years of playoffs really isnt a large sample..

..Our team is unmusual in its makeup and situation..and it probably cant be lumped in with other teams with a negative point differential.

Maybe they were just bad. We are young.

..a negative point differntial is a negative thing for winning team...but we have a freakish team so you dont know