Both would be 13-3.
They didn't play head to head.
Both would be 10-2 in the AFC.
Tiebreaker would be winning percentage in common games.

Common opponents (Steelers, Bills, Broncos, Texans).
Patriots are 1-0 vs PIT, 2-0 vs BUF, 0-1 vs DEN and 1-0 vs HOU = 4-1 = .800
Bengals are 1-1 vs PIT, 1-0 vs BUF, 1-0 vs DEN, 0-1 vs HOU = 3-2 = .600

Bengals would lose. The next tiebreaker is "strength of victory in all games" in which the Bengals would win easily (wins over Seattle, Denver) whereas the Patriots played the NFC East and AFC South. So essentially, the Texans game was the undoing.

Mulva;1771526 wrote:Why the hell did the Patriots elect to kick in overtime?

HighRoller74;1771530 wrote:Looks like there is some dispute regarding the coin flip for OT on that Pats game.

The Patriots thought that they could choose to kick and which end to defend, you only get to choose one. The should have chose the end to defend, then the Jets would choose to receive.

Sonofanump;1771543 wrote:The Patriots thought that they could choose to kick and which end to defend, you only get to choose one. The should have chose the end to defend, then the Jets would choose to receive.

They should have chose to receive.

Ironman92;1771469 wrote:Jets/Patriots
Rams/Seahawks
Steelers/Ravens
Panthers/Falcons

At least one of these will be an upset game today

Uh...yeah

This Arizona/GB game is unreal. Cards are just destroying this O-Line

Azubuike24;1771481 wrote:???

Are you implying HGH makes you slightly wacko? Huh???

Pretty sure he was just stating, that there were a bunch of guys that no one was surprised about, and then Manning which shocks everyone.

Much like the list of Basketball Player he posted, you wouldn't see those 4 on any of the same lists.

Ironman92;1771546 wrote:Uh...yeah

What would you have won if you would have bet $1000 on that in a 4 game parlay?

HighRoller74;1771559 wrote:Pretty sure he was just stating, that there were a bunch of guys that no one was surprised about, and then Manning which shocks everyone.

Much like the list of Basketball Player he posted, you wouldn't see those 4 on any of the same lists.

Thank You sir

superman;1771563 wrote:What would you have won if you would have bet $1000 on that in a 4 game parlay?

Well, me wagering would've definitely prevented it.

Looking down the list of games these were the 4 that any fan of those teams or someone pretty knowing wouldn't have been surprised about. I was at my son's basketball game about an hour away and I didn't even record the game. Steelers/Ravens is never a good watch for me. The Jets winning was the most important thing that happened to make the final week interesting.

Of course the Panthers were going to lose to the terribly cold Falcons team. Seahawks have been unbeatable so the Rams made sense....

If the NFL has it's wishes it looks good for the Bengals at Denver. Denver winning would make the Chiefs game meaningless next week and Bengals winning means the Patriots need to try next week.

Lol Eli Manning. Seems like he either has really great games, or really awful ones. No middle ground.

friendfromlowry;1771581 wrote:Lol Eli Manning. Seems like he either has really great games, or really awful ones. No middle ground.

He seems to sure get a lot of great benefits from insane catches or crazy collisions by the defense to allow long touchdown.

Author of Yahoo's Winners and Losers this week threw out an interesting conspiracy theory: New England wanted New York to win that game to help them into the playoffs and keep Pittsburgh, who looked like one of the hottest teams in the NFL before yesterday at home.

friendfromlowry;1771587 wrote:Author of Yahoo's Winners and Losers this week threw out an interesting conspiracy theory: New England wanted New York to win that game to help them into the playoffs and keep Pittsburgh, who looked like one of the hottest teams in the NFL before yesterday at home.

That's so crazy, tell us more.

DeyDurkie5;1771588 wrote:That's so crazy, tell us more.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/nfl-winners-and-losers--aaron-rodgers-far-from-from-his-mvp-level-040548539.html;_ylt=A0LEVw_C14BWYKoAkUJXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByMjB0aG5zBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--

Read up, douche.

friendfromlowry;1771590 wrote:http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/nfl-winners-and-losers--aaron-rodgers-far-from-from-his-mvp-level-040548539.html;_ylt=A0LEVw_C14BWYKoAkUJXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByMjB0aG5zBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--

Read up, douche.

I'm not saying that New England's curious decision to kick off to start overtime against the Jets was done with the playoff picture in mind, but it might be a nice unintended consequence of taking a loss on Sunday.

Ya, he didn't throw out a conspiracy theory. He was saying that the Patriots are a winner in that situation because overall their playoff road seemingly got easier.

I guess it got easier, but say the Jets are the 6-seed and come to Foxboro in the divisional game. Are they saying it's easy to beat the team who just beat them?

friendfromlowry;1771587 wrote:Author of Yahoo's Winners and Losers this week threw out an interesting conspiracy theory: New England wanted New York to win that game to help them into the playoffs and keep Pittsburgh, who looked like one of the hottest teams in the NFL before yesterday at home.

Lol....maybe Pittsburgh should've just beat the Ravens to nix that.

I can guarantee you one thing.....NE don't give a shit who or where they play in the playoffs, everyone else probably does.

Azubuike24;1771605 wrote:I guess it got easier, but say the Jets are the 6-seed and come to Foxboro in the divisional game. Are they saying it's easy to beat the team who just beat them?

The jets match up well against the pats. They gave the pats fits in their first matchup as well. Any team with a formidable front 7 has a shot of beating the pats.

like_that;1771613 wrote:The jets match up well against the pats. They gave the pats fits in their first matchup as well. Any team with a formidable front 7 has a shot of beating the pats.

Also, careful what you wish for

Ironman92;1771609 wrote:Lol....maybe Pittsburgh should've just beat the Ravens to nix that.

I can guarantee you one thing.....NE don't give a shit who or where they play in the playoffs, everyone else probably does.

Yep. That's been one really annoying thing about Pittsburgh the last few years -- they have one or two games against shitty teams they just don't show up for and lose, which winds up hurting their playoff position (or keeps them out of the playoffs). Yesterday was just mind-boggling because, shitty or not, it was the Ravens. The #1 team you'd think they'd want to beat under any circumstance at any time. Epic fail, for sure.

Heretic;1771628 wrote:Yep. That's been one really annoying thing about Pittsburgh the last few years -- they have one or two games against shitty teams they just don't show up for and lose, which winds up hurting their playoff position (or keeps them out of the playoffs). Yesterday was just mind-boggling because, shitty or not, it was the Ravens. The #1 team you'd think they'd want to beat under any circumstance at any time. Epic fail, for sure.

And Ryan Mallett. When I heard Baltimore was winning, I was thinking "how in the Hell is Jimmy Clausen beating Pittsburgh?" Had no idea the Ravens picked up Mallett. Also didn't know Schaub was healthy enough to be the backup.

Bengals 23
Broncos 17

Bengals reach the AFC Championship or better

Ironman92;1771705 wrote:Bengals 23
Broncos 17

Bengals reach the AFC Championship or better

Broncos 42 bengals 17
Two can play the reverse jinx game.

Bengal's won't put together 4 throws and catches that good in any drive the rest of the season.