Pats: Zero wins vs + .500 record

[BuffaloBlitz83]

Has this ever happened before in nfl history? A division winner that never got a win vs a team that finished above .500

[OpIv37]

Is that stat right?

I'm sure it's happened to a division winner- it's become common for the NFCW and AFCW winners to have only 8 or sometimes only 7 victories, so it has to have happened before.

I don't see how any team can get 12 wins like the Pats did without beating a winning team. It doesn't even seem possible that they'd have that many .500 or worse teams on their schedule.

[JCBills]

Is that stat right?

I'm sure it's happened to a division winner- it's become common for the NFCW and AFCW winners to have only 8 or sometimes only 7 victories, so it has to have happened before.

I don't see how any team can get 12 wins like the Pats did without beating a winning team. It doesn't even seem possible that they'd have that many .500 or worse teams on their schedule.

Well, they have been handed vanilla schedules recently, so I wouldn't be shocked.

[Mr. Pink]

Well, they have been handed vanilla schedules recently, so I wouldn't be shocked.

Pretty much the same vanilla schedule everyone in the AFC East has been handed recently too.

[OpIv37]

wow- the only teams over 8-8 that they played were Pittsburgh and NJA, and they lost both games.

They did beat a ****load of 8-8 teams: NJB (2x), Den, KC, Oak, Dallas, Philly.

[Ickybaluky]

Has this ever happened before in nfl history? A division winner that never got a win vs a team that finished above .500

I am sure it has, I know at least once it was a Super Bowl winner.

The 1999 St. Louis Rams, of Greatest Show on Turf fame, only played one team that finished above .500 all year and finished 13-3. That team was the 13-3 Tennessee Titans, who they eventually beat in the Super Bowl.

That Rams team did go 3-1 against .500 teams, beating Carolina (twice) and Baltimore while losing to Detroit.

They played a pretty easy overall schedule. The winning percentage of their opponents that year was .363 for all 16 games. The winning percentage of the teams they beat was only .322.

[Stewie]

If you don't count the game those 8-8 teams played against NE, and you shouldn't, they were all above 500.

[YardRat]

Doesn't matter...it's the playoffs and the slate is wiped clean.

[Skooby]

Baltimore will snap the Pats streak.

[PTI]

Happens all the time, just beat all the losers on your schedule and you can make the playoffs. Basically don't lay an egg. That's how the Falcons made the playoffs, and was how the Bucs and Eagles in the 2000's constantly made the playoffs, beat up on all the bad teams.

[Cali512]

Denver was 9-8

[Bruce is Loose]

Denver was 9-8

They ended the regular season at 8-8....
They ended the postseason at 9-9...
Either way, .500

[BuffaloBlitz83]

Happens all the time, just beat all the losers on your schedule and you can make the playoffs. Basically don't lay an egg. That's how the Falcons made the playoffs, and was how the Bucs and Eagles in the 2000's constantly made the playoffs, beat up on all the bad teams.

Not accurate on 2 grounds. They beat detroit who was over .500 and atlanta didnt win the division. Saints won it. I stated division winners.

And seattle for example went 7 9 but beat chicago n sd who were over .500

[Ickybaluky]

Looked it up.

Besides the 1999 Rams, the 1974 Steelers also won it all without beating a team with a winning record during the regular season.

[BuffaloBlitz83]

Looked it up.

Besides the 1999 Rams, the 1974 Steelers also won it all without beating a team with a winning record during the regular season.

Thanks!

[pats-were-right]

I've seen this stat about 5000 times this week. It doesn't quite have the same lustre as "The Patriots are 9-2 this season against teams .500 or better." (which is also true)