I could see the Rams losing at least 2 of their last 3. You guys can't?
@ Cowboys
@ 49ers
vs. Cardinals
The real Bears-related headline coming out of the Rams' win over the Seahawks is that the Bears can no longer afford to drop a game if the Rams don't lose out. (If I'm reading the tiebreak scenario correctly)
We already knew the margin was extremely thin for the Bears in these last few games, and we already knew playoff hopes were extremely slim. The Rams' win over the Seahawks doesn't change much of that. It just tightens the lid, although it does suck.
Here's the tiebreak procedure:
https://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures
A little convoluted, and I could see how some people (including myself last week) could read it incorrectly. I believe if I'm reading it right now, though, if the Rams, Bears and Vikings were all tied at the end of the year, since the Bears and Vikings are in the same division, the tiebreak first eliminates one of them in order to only have one team from each division involved in the tiebreak. The Bears would win that tiebreak and advance to the tiebreak with the Rams. Then the Rams would win the tiebreak head-to-head with the Bears, since they beat the Bears. It's only if the Bears and Rams hadn't played each other that they would look to in-conference record.
Long story short, the Rams win the 3-team tiebreak between the Rams, Bears and Vikings.
The Bears might end up one. game. short. If that happens, we'll look back pretty heartbreakingly at the Raiders game, the Chargers game, the Rams game.