HISTORY OF THE NO. 2 SEED IN THE AFC PLAYOFFS

[quote=feltdizz]Never said it wasn't worth playing for... I said it wasn't worth showing all the packages you have on D. [/quote]
That Titans offense must be frightening if we are giving up home field advantage and sandbagging defensive packages [u]just in case[/u] we play them again. Hopefully Dick LeBeau thought this far ahead when we played the Eagles, Giants, Colts, SD and Ratbirds.

[quote=feltdizz] and recent numbers do not lie.. the #1 seed is over rated and I would much rather lose now and win later then the other way around.[/quote]
Which seed # goes on to win the SB most often?
Are you saying that we couldn't win [u]both[/u] the last time we played the Titans AND the next time?
8)

once again you get juvenile with the theory shades.. no one says every loss is due to sandbagging or holding back.. but when you are playing a team in week 17 for the #1 seed...

why would Lebeau holding back on a few blitzes be a outside the realm of possibilities?

I have no idea why you keep going back to our other losses and using this same theory...

sheez, I'm starting to question how old you are... not once have I said every loss is due to the theory of "not showing too much" but if you want to go back to every loss and apply it then have at it.

[quote=Steeler Shades][quote=feltdizz]Never said it wasn't worth playing for... I said it wasn't worth showing all the packages you have on D. [/quote]
That Titans offense must be frightening if we are giving up home field advantage and sandbagging defensive packages [u]just in case[/u] we play them again. Hopefully bad word LeBeau thought this far ahead when we played the Eagles, Giants, Colts, SD and Ratbirds.

[quote=feltdizz] and recent numbers do not lie.. the #1 seed is over rated and I would much rather lose now and win later then the other way around.[/quote]
Which seed # goes on to win the SB most often?
Are you saying that we couldn't win [u]both[/u] the last time we played the Titans AND the next time?
8)[/quote]

I'm saying winning the second time around is more important then the first. Of course the ideal is to win every game but if there was ever a game to not throw the whole sink at a team the Titans game was it.

[quote=feltdizz]once again you get [u]juvenile[/u] with the theory shades....

sheez, I'm starting to question how old you are...[/quote]
Be VERY careful feltdizz. Very careful. 8)

[url="http://planetsteelers.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=532"]viewtopic.php?f=1&t=532[/url]
"You may, from time to time, find yourself in disagreement with someone else's opinion. At times like these, please keep in mind it's safer and more polite to take issue with the comments rather than the person.

o Any communication that is intended to harass, belittle, humiliate, threaten or cause embarrassment to a fellow member, coach or player."

[quote=feltdizz].. no one says every loss is due to sandbagging or holding back.. but when you are playing a team in week 17 for the #1 seed...

why would Lebeau holding back on a few blitzes be a outside the realm of possibilities?[/quote]
Holding back on a few blitzes is NOT outside of the realm of possiblilities. Giving up home field advantage and letting a team spank you like the Titans did our # 1 defense is very un-LeBeau like. Again, I don't believe he[u] purposely[/u] LET the Titans beat us so that he could hide some secret blitzes just in case we faced them again.

[quote=feltdizz]I have no idea why you keep going back to our other losses and using this same theory...
... not once have I said every loss is due to the theory of "not showing too much" but if you want to go back to every loss and apply it then have at it.[/quote]
Seems unrealistic to believe that LeBeau only sandbagged against the Titans and not against any other teams. There is NO GUARANTEE that we would play the Titans again and if we did I have to believe that home field would be more of an advantage than a few secret blitzes. Just my opinion.....8)

[quote=Steeler Shades][quote=feltdizz].. no one says every loss is due to sandbagging or holding back.. but when you are playing a team in week 17 for the #1 seed...

why would Lebeau holding back on a few blitzes be a outside the realm of possibilities?[/quote]
Holding back on a few blitzes is NOT outside of the realm of possiblilities. Giving up home field advantage and letting a team spank you like the Titans did our # 1 defense is very un-LeBeau like. Again, I don't believe he[u] purposely[/u] LET the Titans beat us so that he could hide some secret blitzes just in case we faced them again.

[quote=feltdizz]I have no idea why you keep going back to our other losses and using this same theory...
... not once have I said every loss is due to the theory of "not showing too much" but if you want to go back to every loss and apply it then have at it.[/quote]
Seems unrealistic to believe that LeBeau only sandbagged against the Titans and not against any other teams. There is NO GUARANTEE that we would play the Titans again and if we did I have to believe that home field would be more of an advantage than a few secret blitzes. Just my opinion.....8)[/quote]

Saw an analysis today where the Titans game was broken down play by play. On only 3 occasions in the entire game did we bring more than 4 pass rushers - and on each of those, we brought 5. One resulted in a big sack and forced punt by Timmons. We dropped 7 into coverage the vast majority of plays, and played 8 deep more often than we blitzed. doesn't sound like typical LeBeau to me.

Just off the top of my head, but I believe that since the 6th team was added, the AFC #1 seed has only gone to the Super Bowl 5 out of 17 times, including last year with the *'s.... In '06, Indy was a 3, we were a 6 in '05, the *'s were a 2 in '04... I think the *'s in '03 and Raiders in '02 were 1's. The *'s were a 2 in '01, the Rats won it all as a 4 in '00. I know the Titans won in Jax to go in '99. Historically, I believe the #4 has won the AFC as frequently as the #1, although that was accomplished mostly prior to 2002, when the #4 was the top wildcard team and sitting kind of like Indy is this year, tied for the 2nd best record in the conference.

The NFC #1 seed has played through with a lot more regularity. For whatever reason, the AFC has been upset plagued. Actually, the reason is named Bill Cowher, but we won't open that can of worms any further here...

[quote=Steeler Shades][quote=feltdizz]once again you get [u]juvenile[/u] with the theory shades....

sheez, I'm starting to question how old you are...[/quote]
Be VERY careful feltdizz. Very careful. 8)

[url="http://planetsteelers.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=532"]http://planetsteelers.com/phpBB3/viewto ... ?f=1&t=532[/url]
"You may, from time to time, find yourself in disagreement with someone else's opinion. At times like these, please keep in mind it's safer and more polite to take issue with the comments rather than the person.

o Any communication that is intended to harass, belittle, humiliate, threaten or cause embarrassment to a fellow member, coach or player."[/quote]

I'm not trying to humiliate you at all..

but when you try to link every loss we have had to the theory I applied for a week 17 game for the #1 seed I found that to be humiliating to the argument.

Tally pretty much just posted what I suspected.. less blitzing and probably a more vanilla D then we are used to seeing. Now maybe it was due to the 4 TO's and poor field position most of the game....

I really think the TO's made our D look worse then it was... I also truly believe DL held back on the blitzes some...

we agree to disagree...

[quote=feltdizz]...we agree to disagree...[/quote]
Yes we do. At this point, I just [u]hope[/u] we have a chance to play them again and find out that you and Tally are correct. 8)