The Broncos stretch-run is very difficult with multiple away games and a conclusion at San Diego. The teams they play aren't juggernauts (at this time of the year) but it is the three East Coast trips in five weeks that will be tough. Not calling it the most difficult but at least a candidate.

The Bears schedule is weird. Starting in week 7, they have 3 straight home games (with a bye after the first one), followed by 3 straight road games, followed by 3 straight home games. The last of those home games (in week 16) is the last Monday night game of the year, against the Packers. (If Brett Favre returns, the hype meter will be set to 11 for his annual last MNF game.)

The Bears have 5 primetime games, that's a little surprising after last year.

By my quick count, the Bolts face a total of 10 playoff contenders. That's not a bad schedule at all. 5 prime time games, 4 of which are at home.

This year is setting up nicely for the Chargers.

3: The Bears' November 30 game against Minnesota could be switched from prime time under the flex schedule.

I have to say that I love the Seahawks schedule. Other than the Thanksgiving/Pats segment, it doesn't look bad at all. I could easily see 12 wins in it. No Monday night games though which bites, but what can you do?

Looks like the Giants are backloaded again.

Was the information regarding the Bills playing a game in Toronto this year widely known, or is this the first time it has been publicly released?

I am decidedly nonplussed about the Patriots' pair of back-to-back west coast trips, both of which occur after the early bye.

RE 9:

Yes

I'm completely plussed about them myself. I can't recall getting to see the Patriots play a game out on the Left Coast, against teams I know well.

N.F.L. executives must be praying that the NFC East race comes down to the Cowboys and Eagles, scheduled to play each other Week 17. If that rivalry makes the difference between going to the playoffs and going home, it will be a ratings bonanza.

Cleveland at Pittsburgh ain't bad either.

I'm shocked, shocked, that Miami don't have a prime-time game this year.

We'll still see them a minimum of 3 times in the UK though, so it's all good.

I thought every team was guaranteed at least one primetime game.

Figures the Eagles get an NFL Network game AFTER Gumbel leaves. I was looking forward to watching Michael Westbrook run wild on the St. Louis Cardinals.

I'm happy about the Bucs schedule. No cold weather, a late bye, a full slate of beatable opponents, no Thursdays, only like 1 or 2 trips out west, two Sunday nights and one MNF game. Very doable. No reason to think we shouldn't make the playoffs again.

Cleveland at Pittsburgh ain’t bad either [as a possible week 17 prime time game].

If that gets moved to NBC, the Steelers will play one home game at 1:00 this season, and that'll be in week 1.

What's the maximum number of primetime games a team can play?

very favorbnale schedule for Raiders. 11-5 or 12-4 are still definitely possible.
Raiders are definitely going to playoffs. There should be no question about it when you look at personel; coaching, and schedule. Playing two games against Chiefs and 2 games against Broncos is very good too. That is 4-0 right there.
Lets see Sierra Nevada pale ale or Tullamore dew- how should I celebrate tonight?

Re # 19:

Raiderjoe, why choose when the two beverages go together so well?

Cowboys Redskins game snubbed from monday night football for second year in a row. most stupid list shows that have "best rivalries of all sports" have Redskins cowboys at #2 behind the obvious Yankees Redsox. You would think they would get a MNF game... like anyone cares about redskins vs STEELERS...

Oh, by the way: if you are going to tell me about how teams X and Y are bigger rivals, I really dont care, im just saying they are big rivals. Big enough to be ranked as #2, whether or not they are actually #2.

The Patriots MAY start 4-0, but the schedulers didn't do them any favors. A painfully early bye, the only warm weather/dome team they get to host in December is the Cardinals, and two DOUBLE road trips to the West Coast, both after their bye.

I know how they determine who plays who, but how do they determine which teams play which games where? For example, the AFCE gets to play the AFCW and the NFCW. How do they decide that NE has to play AT OAK, SD, SEA, and SF, while hosting the nearer DEN, KC, STL, and ARI, while BUF gets to host the four further away teams and has to travel to the four closer teams?

Nov. 16 Oakland Raiders at Miami Dolphins. # 1 pick 2009 could be decided!

22: Please, no sympathy from over here. Raiderjoe's "favorable" schedule is a -3.3% average 2007 DVOA. The Buffalo Bills' schedule (thank you AFC West) is -4.3%. The Tom Brady Bestest Ever Team Go USA's schedule is a freaking -9.9% average DVOA. Good lord, they should be playing games in Japan.

#22:

The rotating division matchups alternate home and away. In your example, the Pats are @ OAK & SD because the opposite was the case the last time the AFCE and AFCW played each other in 2005. The same is true for the AFCE-NFCW matchups-- they're in the opposite of the locations they were in 2004.

Re: #22

Home/Away should alternate each time two non-division teams meet. So you know right now which NFC West teams NE will play at home in 2012, and that NE will be at SEA and SF again in 2016.

It gets a little trickier in-conference, since teams can play more often than every three years. But they do attempt to alternate home teams when possible, subject to the conditions that each team plays 2H/2A against their "different division, same conference" opponents and 1H/1A vs. "same conference, same division finish" opponents.

Or you can just imagine conspiracy theories like most people ...

#22 - MJK, I believe it's based on what happened in the first iteration of this schedule. So if team 1 played team 2 at home in the beginning, it keeps flip/flopping every four years.

The Saints have to have one of the easiest schedules. They play the NFC North, AFC West, San Francisco, and Washington. The "home game" against San Diego will be hard, but other than that, they avoid most of the strongest teams. The only teams they play who had a positive DVOA last year are:

Tampa twice
Green Bay (minus Favre)
@ Washington
vs Minnesota.

That means the Saints will probably get only 5 games vs above average teams. Meanwhile, they get to play Atlanta twice, Carolina twice, Detroit, San Francisco, Kansas City, and Oakland. That's 8 games vs the some of the worst teams in the league last year, with all -20% DVOA. Well, Detroit had a -19.9%.

Anyone check strength of schedule yet? Pat's win with the weakest at .387

Somebody explain that to me (actually don't). Just surprising.

I'll call any schedule that involves a Cleveland/Steelers game in the last week exciting. Playing at Heinz is favorbnale.

With their schedule and the general not-so-good-anymoreness of everybody not named Ben Roethlisberger on the team... well, what Steelers unit is likely to be better in 2008 than 2007? The offensive line lost Faneca, Hines Ward is older... maybe the defense will improve a little, but it was pretty good last year.

Point is, I think it's likely a lot of people will be surprised when the Steelers roll into week 17 6-9. And if Roethlisberger gets hurt and misses most of the year, more like 3-12. Their schedule is very tough.

28, actually not surprising at all given that the teams in their own division won only 12 games total this year(mia-1, nyj-4, buf-7). That takes care of 6 games and a good chunk of that percentage right there

re23
You are crazy if you think Raiders playing for #1 pick in 2009 draft. Raiders going to playoffs in 2008. Look at roster. Lets see Javon Walker Curry leading very good WR corps, RB corps very good, QB position good, TE great up and cominger, offensive line solid. lets see the defense is great, one of the best in whole league. secondary is bets in league- Hall, Wilson, Huff, Asomugha, Routt, Washington- that is a great. T Howard one of best young veersatile Lbs in league, d burgess excellent, t kelly great, defense is going to be a great unti all over
I'm saying the Raiders will go at least 11-5, maybe 12-4. Should win division and get 1 or 2 seed (colts are other team that could get 1 or 2 seed. Patriots should be like 10-6, lost too many players, schedules is not as easy as other posters think it is. also time for Tom Beady to get a injury sooner or later. No way can Pates win if Matt Cassel or the other guy has to play Qb. Team would be crap.
Jets- junk
Bills- crap
Dolphins- joke
Browns- okay
Steelers- scheudle id too hard
Texans- average
Jaguars- wont be as good
Chargers- playoffs
Chiefs, Broncos- sucky
Bengals- dumb team
Ravens- don't have good QB, sorry
Titans- could be good

playoff teams- Raiders, Colts, Chargers, Pates, Browns, Titans

The Pats have the easiest schedule, the Colts the second hardest. Thus it will be all the more impressive when the Colts beat the Patriots on Nov. 2 and go on to win the Super Bowl.

Colts fan here. Looks like the Colts have a difficult schedule, but I will optimistically venture a 14-2 season (losses to Chargers and one other road loss, probably the Jags), which should be good for a #1 seed. Of course, this means they will probably lose their playoff opener. Since Manning arrived in Indy, the Colts are 7-7 in playoff games, with all the victories coming as a #3 seed. They are 0-3 as a 1 or 2 seed. I suspect that their proclivity to shut things down once they clinch their playoff seed hurts them when they have byes, but I cannot prove or disprove that.

Call me crazy, but I prefer that the Colts play all their games on Sundays at 1 pm. This is especially true if I attend a home game.

Raiderjoe -- I do not agree with everything you write, but you never fail to entertain.

Colts @ Jags week 17 on NFL Network, likely to decide the division championship. Or just another chance to watch Jim Sorgi get crushed by defenses built to stop Peyton Manning.

MDS: Miami fans never like seeing their team travel to Buffalo in December. This year they’ll have to travel even farther north.

The Toronto game is in a dome. I think Miami fans likely prefer this.

#24: That's freaking bizarre, since the schedule is pre-set before the year begins. Did a lot of 1st place teams finish with worse DVOA than second place finishers? Or possibly NE's DVOA skews the difference between theirs and Buffalo's that much.

I sure don't agree with everything Raiderjoe says either, but I may have to agree the secondary could be the best in the league. Asomugha+Hall at corner is going to be tough to throw against.

#33 Chad shut up! Shut up! Shut Up! Sorry to be so blunt, and I am not superstutious, and I am pretty sure Indy will manage 12 wins against a tough sked once more, but let's not ... ahem, WHAT was it Harvey Keitel said in Pulp Fiction? Never mind. We can discuss the post season after 11/2.

Also, I find it hard to believe SD will beat them again. I found it hard to believe last year's playoff fold-a-rama, too, so I guess my predictive skills are none too sharp. I'd be happy with 12 wins and a 3rd seed. Higher seed will make me more nervous.

And it's hard to fault the league for "making" the Pats' sked easy and the Colts' sked tough, when much of that comes from their own division sucking or being good. Can't do much about that, can you? I can still gripe, though. gripe gripe gripe. There, I'm done.

Re 36:

It's not that bizarre. I bet most division winners have an easier schedule DVOA wise. The difference is that Buffalo has to play New England twice, while New England gets to play Buffalo twice. New England had an astronomic 51.8% DVOA, while Buffalo had a middling -3.8%.

Otherwise the difference between 1st and 2nd place schedule is playing Jacksonville (23.7%) and Cleveland (5.8%) instead of Pittsburgh (17.5%) and Indy (33.0%).

Re # 32:

Raiderjoe, I'm pleased to see that you took my advice (# 19 & 20)about combining beverages!

21 - Sunday night with Madden and company is now the highlight game of the week. That's where you'll find Dallas/Wash (11.16) along with GB/Dallas, NE/SD, NE/Ind, NYG/Dallas, Pitt/Jax, & NYG/Phil. Monday night you might get two good teams or matchups like SF@Ariz or Jets@SD. As a Packers fan, I'm fairly happy with the schedule.

Lets see Sierra Nevada pale ale or Tullamore dew- how should I celebrate tonight?

Either would be favorbnale, but consider a Widmer. Smooth as silk. And skip the lemon slice!

Changing gears, I'm surprised to see the Cowboys getting just one Monday game. I understand they get Thanksgiving every year (though the significance of that is being diluted somewhat by the NFL), but isn't that franchise one of the league's (and the networks') biggest cash cows? I'm not complaining, since my personal schedule usually makes prime-time games difficult to watch, I'm just surprised.

raiderjoe: "I’m saying the Raiders will go at least 11-5, maybe 12-4."

the Raiders? the? You better quit mixing your beverages.

Re:27
As a Saints fan, I think our sched is pretty easy--EXCEPT for getting screwed in the middle of it. 43!!! days between true home games!!! This is the 2nd time in 4 years we LOST a home game--and it's not like we only half-fill the stadium. There is a waiting list for season tickets, and I don't think there were any individual game seats left last year by the start of pre-season. Other than that, I'm cool with it. My personal (slightly biased) prediction--if the Saints start 3-0 (not easy, but doable), then they will be undefeated going to London.

The genius of Raiderjoe for being satisfied the Raiders got two games each against the Chiefs and Broncos cannot be overlooked.

Ugh. I think the Texans will be a slightly above average team next year, but they could easily start the season 1-4, or even 0-5 if the Ravens are good. @PIT, BAL, @TEN, @JAX, IND. That's the sort of thing that could demoralise a young team. And we have to play in Green Bay in December and Cleveland in late November. Could we not just have left the Seahawks where they were and played in the NFC West?

"Changing gears, I’m surprised to see the Cowboys getting just one Monday game. I understand they get Thanksgiving every year (though the significance of that is being diluted somewhat by the NFL), but isn’t that franchise one of the league’s (and the networks’) biggest cash cows?"

The reason for that is simple: As pointed out in #40, Sunday night is the highlight game of the week and has been since NBC got the Sunday night game and ESPN got the Monday night game. At that point, Sunday night simply became the new Monday night, and vice versa. Just look at the games over the past few years - Monday night has had some real dogs compared to Sunday night (and not just because some teams were unexpectedly bad and not just because Sunday has the flex schedule now - I'm talking about how attractive games look in April when the schedule comes out).

Just look at the Patriots-Colts game. In the recent past, that has been the most anticipated/hyped regular season game every year. In the past, that meant it would be on Monday night. Now, that means it is on Sunday night (which it is on November 2).

Someone at the NFL schedule making office must be mixing RaiderJoe's drinks for him. The 49ers and Cardinals on Monday night in week 10? Are they serious?

Whoa...somebody needs to tell Goodell that they forgot to schedule Washington at Tampa Bay, the recurring non-rivalry. These two teams have met, what, 12 times in the last 3 seasons?

28:
On top of all the other strength of schedule effects, unlike the other AFC division winners, the Patriots don't have to play...

...the Patriots!

Actually, I don't think it's as bad as you make it out to be. In part, the Jets, Bills, and Dolphins look weak because they had a tough schedule in 2007. It's a near certainty that they will combine for more than twelve wins in 2008.

27, 43: I really can't believe what the league did to the Saints. They already had one recent season with only seven "real" home games; making them do it again is just ridiculous. On top of that, their trip to London comes in the middle of a FIVE-week stretch between games in New Orleans! Admittedly, one of those weeks is a bye (it would've been absolutely indefensible to not at least give them a rest after the London trip) . . . but still, I'm a little peeved about it. And I'm not even a Saints fan.

48: When they announced teams' opponents a while back, I looked through the Redskins' list three times; I wanted to see if the WAS-TB game would be in Tampa, which could possibly open up the opportunity of getting tickets. It was only the third time through that I realized that they might not be playing at all!