{"id":530,"date":"2016-09-08T13:20:14","date_gmt":"2016-09-08T17:20:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thisfootballblog.com\/?p=530"},"modified":"2016-09-08T13:23:45","modified_gmt":"2016-09-08T17:23:45","slug":"2016-nfl-season-predictions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.thisfootballblog.com\/?p=530","title":{"rendered":"2016 NFL Season Predictions"},"content":{"rendered":"

I shouldn’t be doing this. It’s late (the Wednesday evening before the start of the season as I write). My anger with the NFL<\/a> over its treatment of Tom Brady<\/a> has (once again) eroded my ability (and willingness) to pay as much attention as I had until the 2015 off-season to goings-on around the league. And even setting that aside, making predictions in September about what will happen in football games to be played in December, January and February is always the very definition of pointlessness.<\/p>\n

But here I go again just the same. Now I’ll have something to go to in five months when I’m looking for evidence of my own utter idiocy.<\/p>\n

As in prior years, I’m not going to try to predict final win-loss records. Instead, I’ll offer range of how many games I think each team is likely to win. And then it’s on to predicting postseason seedings and outcomes. Because that’s always a good idea.<\/p>\n

Less text than usual this time. Because it’s all bullshit anyhow.<\/p>\n

AFC East<\/strong><\/p>\n

New England Patriots<\/a>, 11-14<\/strong>
\nPatriots fans are convinced that the team is going to run the table once Tom Brady returns from his unjust, unwarranted suspension in week five. It’s a nice enough thought. But I’m inclined to think they drop one somewhere along the way. And if they don’t, they may well end up in position to take week 17 off. The Pats appear to have assembled a bruising defense. And their O, which should sing once Brady’s back on the field, ought to be able to operate well enough with Jimmy Garoppolo<\/a> behind center. The opener at Arizona looks like a loss to me. Beyond that, I think it’s just a matter of how many of the next three games New England can win. I expect them to take at least two. But even if they drop all four, I think the team will be OK. (The fans, not so much. And don’t even get me started on the Boston sports media.)<\/p>\n

New York Jets<\/a>, 9-11<\/strong>
\nThe Jets are a well coached team with a lot of the right pieces. As long as they can keep Ryan Fitzpatrick<\/a> upright, I expect the Jets to pose a threat to the Patriots throughout much of the season, only to fall away in December. And even then, they may well catch a wild card berth.<\/p>\n

Miami Dolphins<\/a>, 5-8<\/strong>
\nOnce again, it’s all about Ryan Tannehill<\/a> in Miami. And once again, we see that a quarterback can only take a team so far.<\/p>\n

Buffalo Bills<\/a>, 5-7<\/strong>
\nI don’t see that the Bills used the offseason to solve the problems that dogged them in 2015. And in the NFL, if you’re not getting better, you’re getting worse.<\/p>\n

AFC North<\/strong><\/p>\n

Pittsburgh Steelers<\/a>, 10-13<\/strong>
\nConventional wisdom says that the Steelers success this season will depend on he maturation of their defense. I kind of think that’s about fans expecting Pittsburgh to be Pittsburgh, and I’m not so sure it holds up. I think we might see a team that’s carried by a high-scoring offense through most or all of the season. If the D comes together \u00e2\u20ac\u201d especially if they do it down the stretch \u00e2\u20ac\u201d all the better.<\/p>\n

Cincinnati Bengals<\/a>, 9-11<\/strong>
\nWill this be the year the Bengals finally win a game in the postseason? Probably not. But they may well get to lose another one.<\/p>\n

Baltimore Ravens<\/a>, 6-10<\/strong>
\nWe should be in the up part of the up-down cycle for the Ravens (and their quarterback<\/a>) this year. And maybe there’s something to that. But facing a tough schedule and playing in a tough division with a geriatric roster isn’t usually a very good formula for up. We’ll see.<\/p>\n

Cleveland Browns<\/a>, 3-5<\/strong>
\nIt’s possible (because anything’s possible) that this latest rebuilding project is the one that will finally pay off for the Browns. But not this year.<\/p>\n

AFC South<\/strong><\/p>\n

Houston Texans<\/a>, 8-11<\/strong>
\nI’m not one of those folks who expect the Texans to be a great football team this season. (Which is your surest sign that they will be.) I’m not even confident that they’ll be much better than good. But that might still win them a second straight AFC South title. Or not.<\/p>\n

Indianapolis Colts<\/a>, 7-11<\/strong>
\nI think it’s the same, simple formula for the Colts: Keep Andrew Luck<\/a> on his feet and you win the division. Expose him to constant punishment via shoddy O line play and you start your offseason January 2.<\/p>\n

Tennessee Titans<\/a>, 6-10<\/strong>
\nI think the Titans could be a much better team than anyone expects. I like their quarterback<\/a>. I think their plan to emphasize the run will allow Mariota to continue to grow into the role. And I suspect their D may be better than advertised, especially if a ball-control offense allows them to play rested and defend leads. Of course, I’m usually wrong about these things.<\/p>\n

Jacksonville Jaguars<\/a>, 4-8<\/strong>
\nIt’s easy and popular to blame the problems the Jaguars have faced in recent seasons on the defense. And if it’s also accurate, this team should be poised to make a huge leap this season. But I’ve got this weird notion that the Jags’ failure to protect Blake Bortles<\/a> has been significant factor. And I don’t see where they’ve fixed that.<\/p>\n

AFC West<\/strong><\/p>\n

Oakland Raiders<\/a>, 9-12<\/strong>
\nThat’s right. I’m looking for the Raiders not only to be relevant for the first time in 14 years, but to actually win a division title. Why? Maybe because they’ve built a talented team. And, you know, maybe because I’m a dolt.<\/p>\n

Kansas City Chiefs<\/a>, 9-12<\/strong>
\nOr maybe it’ll be the Chiefs’ year. They looked pretty OK at the end of last season, right? And they appear to have got a bit better in the offseason. Or they have on offense, anyhow.<\/p>\n

Denver Broncos<\/a>, 7-9<\/strong>
\nThe Broncos’ defense was good enough to win them a Super Bowl last year in spite of shoddy quarterback play. And they kept enough of that unit around that they should be able to carry Trevor Siemian<\/a> and the offense. Right?\u00c2\u00a0 I’ll believe it when I see it.<\/p>\n

San Diego Chargers<\/a>, 5-8<\/strong>
\nThe biggest thing the Chargers needed to do in the offseason was figure out how to keep Philip Rivers<\/a> on his feet. They didn’t.<\/p>\n

NFC East<\/strong><\/p>\n

New York Giants<\/a>, 9-11
\n<\/strong>The Giants probably won’t be a truly great football team this season. But I suspect they’ll be a very good football team. And that’s all it should take in the NFC East.<\/p>\n

Washington Racists<\/a>, 6-9<\/strong>
\nThe defending division champs got away with being the best team in a bad division a year ago. That kind of luck almost never repeats itself.<\/p>\n

Philadelphia Eagles<\/a>, 5-8<\/strong>
\nSay what you want. This is a rebuilding year.<\/p>\n

Dallas Cowboys<\/a>, 4-6<\/strong>
\nWe’ve all seen this movie before<\/a>. We know how it ends. Tony Romo<\/a>‘s career is effectively over. And the Cowboys aren’t built to win without him.<\/p>\n

NFC North<\/strong><\/p>\n

Green Bay Packers<\/a>, 11-14<\/strong>
\nIt’s all about Aaron Rodgers<\/a>. <\/em>It always is for Green Bay. And that’s not a bad thing.<\/p>\n

Minnesota Vikings<\/a>, 8-10<\/strong>
\nAsk yourself how quickly you think the Vikings can get Sam Bradford<\/a> up to speed. Answer that and you’ll know how far the team can go.<\/p>\n

Chicago Bears<\/a>, 5-7<\/strong>
\nIt’s just hard to believe the Bears can get much done given how little they have to work with.<\/p>\n

Detroit Lions<\/a>, 4-6<\/strong>
\nThe Lions are just plain old headed in the wrong direction.<\/p>\n

NFC South<\/strong><\/p>\n

Carolina Panthers<\/a>, 13-14<\/strong>
\nBarring a Super Bowl hangover of epic proportions, it’s hard to imagine the Panthers falling far below their level of regular season success of a year ago.<\/p>\n

Tampa Bay Buccaneers<\/a>, 7-9<\/strong>
\nThe Buccaneers are on the ascent. The question isn’t whether they’ll be better than they were last year. It’s by how much?<\/p>\n

New Orleans Saints<\/a>, 6-9<\/strong>
\nThe Saints don’t have enough offense to overcome their shortcomings on D.<\/p>\n

Atlanta Falcons<\/a>, 5-8
\n<\/strong>Neither do the Falcons.<\/p>\n

NFC West<\/strong><\/p>\n

Arizona Cardinals<\/a>, 12-15<\/strong>
\nIt’s the Cardinals and the Seahawks this year \u00e2\u20ac\u201d not just in the NFC West, but in the conference as a whole (arguably in the NFL, though don’t look for me to make that argument) \u00e2\u20ac\u201d and everyone knows it. Barring a disastrous injury for one team, one is going to take the one seed and the other is going to settle in as an insanely dangerous five (cue the calls for reseeding in the playoffs). Which will be which? I don’t know. I’m defaulting to last year’s division winner mostly because I know everyone else is doing the opposite.<\/p>\n

Seattle Seahawks<\/a>, 12-15<\/strong>
\nSee above. (But keep an eye on the Seattle O line and their ability to keep Russell Wilson<\/a> healthy.)<\/p>\n

Los Angeles Rams<\/a>, 5-8<\/strong>
\nThe Rams have the misfortune of trying to find their way in a division dominated by two of the best teams in football.<\/p>\n

San Francisco 49ers<\/a>, 3-5<\/strong>
\nThe 49ers have the misfortune of trying to rebuild in that same division.<\/p>\n

Playoffs<\/strong><\/p>\n

OK, now it’s time to get truly stupid.<\/p>\n

AFC<\/strong>
\n1. New England
\n2. Pittsburgh
\n3. Oakland
\n4. Houston
\n5. Kansas City
\n6. Cincinnati<\/p>\n

NFC<\/strong>
\n1. Arizona
\n2. Carolina
\n3. Green Bay
\n4. NY Giants
\n5. Seattle
\n6. Minnesota<\/p>\n

Wild Card Playoffs<\/strong><\/p>\n

AFC
\nOakland defeats Cincinnati
\nKansas City defeats Houston<\/p>\n

NFC
\nGreen Bay defeats Minnesota
\nSeattle defeats NY Giants<\/p>\n

Divisional Playoffs<\/strong><\/p>\n

AFC
\nPittsburgh defeats Oakland
\nNew England defeats Kansas City<\/p>\n

NFC
\nSeattle defeats Arizona
\nGreen Bay defeats Carolina<\/p>\n

Conference Championships<\/strong><\/p>\n

AFC
\nNew England defeats Pittsburgh<\/p>\n

NFC
\nSeattle defeats Green Bay<\/p>\n

Super Bowl LI<\/strong>
\nNew England defeats Seattle<\/p>\n

There you go. Wrong from top to bottom, no doubt.<\/p>\n

<\/div>