I'm sure it would be good to have home field advantage for playoffs but for last several years a wold card team has won the superbowl.

There is some counter intuitive evidence it may be better to not have a week off in the playoffs in
the name of consistency and staying hot when your hot.

So main goal of being in playoffs is reached.

Now try to get even better this last quarter of the season.

try to get/stay healthy would be my preference. the texans have a lot of injuries that having that extra week off would assist with

Totally agree, BUT.....its still pretty cool. ;)

With Baltimore's loss, the Texans have a two-game lead on New England and a 2-1/2 game lead on Baltimore and Denver because of head-to-head wins. Beating the Patriots practically seals the home field advantage whereas a loss would remove our margin for error. We'd probably need to win out against the Colts and Vikings if we lost to the Pats.

not sure that is right. even with the loss the texans would be 1/2 a game up on the pats, and the pats still have the 49ers on their schedule. i think it is likely the pats lose one game downt the strecth. if they do the texans could lose this coming week, and one more (the finaly indy game maybe) and it not make a difference.

Denver and Baltimore play each other (@BAL) in Week 16, too.

NE's remaining schedule:
14 Mon, Dec 10 vs Houston 8:30 PM
15 Sun, Dec 16 vs San Francisco 8:20 PM NBC
16 Sun, Dec 23 @Jacksonville 1:00 PM CBS
17 Sun, Dec 30 vs Miami 1:00 PM CBS

Indy's remaining schedule:
14 Sun, Dec 9 vs Tennessee 1:00 PM CBS
15 Sun, Dec 16 @Houston 1:00 PM CBS
16 Sun, Dec 23 @Kansas City 1:00 PM CBS
17 Sun, Dec 30 vs Houston 1:00 PM CBS

The SF @ NE game is maybe a tough one for NE since they play a good 49er defense just 6 days after playing the Texans. So even though the Pats get SF at home, that ought to be a good one.

I think we'll learn a lot more about just how good the Patriots really are in these next two games. They put up a lot of points against weaker opponents. They mauled a decent Rams team 45-7, though that was under unusual circumstances (game played in London), and they mauled a surprising Colts team 59-24, but we're already questioning just how good the Colts really are anyway.

I'm not sure I'd pin my hope on a team traveling east three time zones that isn't even sure who their starting quarterback should be. If this was the old Montana-Craig-Rice 49ers, that would be different.

i don't think he was pinning hopes. rather he was stating that playing them coming off the texans game will do a lot to offset the traveling east issues.

i agree that the next two weeks will give us a very good idea of who the pats are this year. they have really been all over the place. the the team who played in the two big victories discussed by keith, or the team that lost to the cards at home?

What kills me is to hear the TV guys (ESPN, NFLN) talking on the subject of "who's the best in the AFC?".... They so want to give the love to the Manning/Broncos and the Brady/Pats (power polls be damned).... Someone mentions the Texans and they'll mumble something about "defensive problems"..... One guy is still not over the Texan's loss to Green Bay pointing to that as proof they are "not worthy".... smfh....

The lone exception I've seen is Darren Sharper on NFLN. He's been in the Texan's corner for several weeks, now...

A Texan victory of the Pats might just rearrange the paradigm... I've heard one or two of the play-by-play guys mention what some of us are already thinking..... that there is a new player in the top dogs of the NFL and one that is built to stay there for a while....

I can't take ESPN seriously anyway. I don't watch ESPN unless there's a live event to be watched. And NFL Network is in a major slide, looking more and more like ESPN every day.

Sad.

From Paul K @ ESPN AFC South Blog:

Houston clinches AFC South division with:

1) HOU win + IND loss or tie OR

2) HOU tie + IND loss

Houston clinches a first-round bye with:

1) HOU win + IND loss or tie + BAL loss or tie OR

2) HOU win + IND loss or tie + DEN loss or tie

Houston clinches home-field advantage throughout AFC playoffs with:

1) HOU win + IND loss or tie + BAL loss + DEN loss

I think a lot of TV guys have simply forgotten or somehow ignored that the Texans beat Denver IN DENVER already this season. I get less irritated when others still claim the Pats are the best... they are the defending AFC champs at least with a credible resume this season, at least for one more week.

These things are earned. Brady and the Pats have done it. Manning in the past has done it. The Texans have never been to an AFC Championship game and you always wonder when nerves will come in to play. So, I'm not worried the Texans get dissed a bit. In fact, I think it is good for the team to maintain focus by reminding them that there are still doubters out there.

The Texans will get their due soon enough.

I'm on board with all of this. Just win, baby.

I'm not worried about it either.... It's just I'm aghast at how far the devil-worshipping-east-coast-media-bias-conspiracy-illuminati (is that enough hot-topics?), have their craniums stuck up their rectums..... ;)

And yep, if the Texans are who we think they are, they'll get that defense tweaked and make some noise.....

Recognition and respect typically arrives too late and lasts too long. Like Bob says, if Houston wins it will come.

Plus I truly could care less about respect and attention from the media. I don't need a national news outlet to validate the Texans. It's not a beauty contest like the BCS. Everyone in the world can agree that Denver and NE are the best, and it doesn't change that those teams will have to come play in Reliant.

Whelp, we have pretty much removed our margin of error.

Go Ratbirds, and Go 9'ers.

3 horse race looks like it will come down to week 17.
Of course I am assuming our guys get thier heads out of thier a$$es.........

I had factored in this loss even back when the schedules came out. Surprised it was so one-sided but not really surprised that we lost. I knew all along it would be our hardest game of the season. We still got that half-game lead and three to play. None will be easy but none should be impossible.

I hope the Texans line the field with Houston cops for when AP comes to town. ;)

Super Bowl matchups of the past 10 years:

2011 -- No. 3 Giants over No. 1 Patriots

2010 — No. 6 Packers over No. 2 Steelers

2009 — No. 1 Saints over No. 1 Colts

2008 — No. 2 Steelers over No. 4 Cardinals

2007 -– No. 5 Giants over No. 1 Patriots

2006 — No. 3 Colts over No. 1 Bears

2005 — No. 6 Steelers over No. 1 Seahawks

2004 — No. 2 Patriots over No. 1 Eagles

2003 — No. 1 Patriots over No. 3 Panthers

2002 — No. 2 Buccaneers over No. 1 Raiders

You can see that #1 seeds in the playoffs don't prosper as well as most of us think, although I also think this misleads a bit. Home field advantage is still huge but the SB winner often seems to be the team that "gets hot" at the right time. This often bodes well for the healthier teams, of which I'd say we're probably about 80% on the health scale right now.

Ya, looks like #1's are 2-7 in the big game (including 2009 when both #1's made it). I think the thing is, if you're a #1, you have a really good chance of "getting there". Didn't remember that Seattle was a #1 back in 2005....