Peter King Drops A No. 9 On The Bucs

January 3rd, 2011

Oatmeal-slurping, popcorn-shoveling NFL super scribe Peter King, of Sports Illustrated and NBC Sports, spit up his infamous 2-12 prediction for the Bucs along with his other season gaffes this morning in his Monday Morning Quarterback column.

In my worst display of prognosticating since, well, since John Fox, I said the Bucs would finish with the worst record in the league (2-14). Tampa Bay won 10 and was in playoff contention until Sunday afternoon.

And that, dear readers, is why they pay me the big bucks.

Well, that was nice to read. Keep up your endless research, Peter. Just don’t pick the Bucs to make the playoffs next season, that would concern Joe.

In King’s final rankings of all NFL teams, the Bucs checked in at No. 9.

9. Tampa Bay (10-6). There are a few coaches who are glad they don’t have to face the Bucs in the playoffs. What a handful. And let’s put it out there right now: I love Josh Freeman. What a treat it’ll be to watch him play over the next 10 years.

Ugh. How painful is to sit at No. 9 and be home for the playoffs.

Raheem Morris told his team in the locker room, per NFL Network video, that they should remember the feeling running through them now as it relates to 10 wins not being enough. Joe hopes this makes the Bucs hungrier than they were this season. 

10 Responses to “Peter King Drops A No. 9 On The Bucs”

  1. Dave Says:


    Please explain this to me. How come the NY Giants would have won the tie breaker over the Bucs but yet……….
    the NFL released this for the draft:

    1. Panthers — 2-14
    2. Broncos — 4-12
    3. Bills — 4-12
    4. Bengals — 4-12
    5. Cardinals — 5-11
    6. Browns — 5-11
    7. 49ers — 6-10
    8. Titans — 6-10
    9. Cowboys — 6-10
    10. Redskins — 6-10
    11. Texans — 6-10
    12. Vikings — 6-10
    13. Lions — 6-10
    14. Dolphins — 7-9
    15. Rams — 8-8
    16. Jaguars — 8-8
    17. Patriots (from Raiders) — 8-8
    18. Chargers — 9-7
    19. Giants — 10-6
    20. Buccaneers — 10-6

    Why wouldn’t the Bucs pick 19th if the Giants were ahead on the tie breaker?

  2. Dave Says:

    One last thing on the draft order:
    Would it be safe to put Seattle at #21?

  3. flmike Says:

    It feels so good not to be picking in the top 10 again this year, finally we can wash the Gruden/Allen stink off this team and move on into the Morris/Dominick era full force.

  4. BamBamBuc Says:

    Dave, I saw the same thing. The explanation had something to do with “Strength of Schedule”. I’m guessing that since the Bucs had an easier schedule this season, the Giants get to pick first? I’m not sure how that works, maybe it’s based on next years schedule. That’s what I heard though, it’s strength of schedule that puts us at 20.

  5. BamBamBuc Says:

    OK, clarification. It is based on strength of schedule THIS year. The Giants opponents THIS year had a combined .453 win %. The Bucs opponents THIS year had a combined .477 win %.

    Just so it’s known, that’s higher than the Saints, Chiefs, Colts, and Bears…. who all made the playoffs with their “easy” schedule. And even then, only the Saints and Bears had a better record than the Bucs at 11-5.

  6. d-money Says:


    I’m guessing it had something to do with the Packers winning their game and changing the strength of schedule calculations.

  7. Number 41 Says:

    I think (but I’m not certain) it’s because playoff tiebreakers are different than draft tiebreakers.

    Playoff tiebreakers consider “Strength of Victory” (W-L record of games against teams you won) before it gets to “Strength of Schedule” (W-L record of all teams on your schedule). The Draft only uses the latter (SOS) to break ties.

    The Bucs lost the “Strength of Victory” tiebreaker to the Giants for playoff purposes, but they beat the Giants on “Strength of Schedule” overall, resulting in the Giants getting the better pick.

  8. JD Says:

    Schmuckstein Allen will ensure the Redskins pick in the top 10 for years to come.

    Don Banks wrote an article about the post-season seeding if the planned changes come through. But he kept referring to teh Seahawks. Wonder why the changes to the seeding wouldn’t eliminate the need for a conference representative and seed everyone based on record. Chargers raged about that several years ago when they went 14-2 and missed the playoffs. Those cats fired Schottenheimer becuawse of it. 14-2!!!!!

  9. Dave Says:

    Mkaes sense because the division has ATL and NO in it so the SOS got boosted up.

    Still kind of messed up how the NYG would have won the tie breaker to get in the playoffs and they win the tie breaker in the other direction to get a better draft pick.
    Oh well, should not matter in the first two rounds anyway.

  10. Joke Says:

    “Number 41” has the right idea on why it’s different.

    For playoff purposes, the tiebreakers go as follows (if 2 teams are tied not from same division):
    1. Head-to-head record
    2. Conference record
    3. Record in common games (minimum of four)
    4. Strength of victory
    5. Strength of schedule
    … other, weird stuff
    … eventually, a coin flip

    If the Pack had lost, the Bucs would’ve lost the tiebreaker to the Giants on #3, record in common games (Giants were a perfect 5-0 against Lions, Panthers, Seahawks, Redskins twice, whereas the Bucs went 4-1 losing to the Lions).

    But since the Pack won, the tiebreakers played out differenlty. Tiebreaker #3 didn’t apply because there weren’t 4 games in common between the 3 teams, so it went to #4 strength of victory, and the Pack was first, Giants second, and Bucs third in that measure.

    For draft purposes, the first tiebreaker (among non-playoff teams) is always strength of schedule. Then if there’s still a tie, they use the procedure outlined above (or a slightly different one for teams in same division, or flip a coin for teams not in same conference).

    For those of you looking to inflict a little pain on yourselves, the easiest way for the Bucs to have snuck into the playoffs on a tiebreaker would’ve been to win tiebreaker #2 (conference record). TB, GB, and NYG all went 8-4 in conference. If we could just swap the comeback win over the crappy Bengals for the comeback loss to the crappy Lions, we still would’ve gone 10-6 but would’ve been 9-3 in conference and would be getting ready for Philly right now.