| Authored by Matthew Gordon - 31st December, 2007 - 2:27 pm
 Do you have field hunger?
That’s a question that many playoff-bound teams, especially the favorites, should be asking themselves before they lace up for their big games.
Week 17 was allegedly a bore, with only five of the sixteen contests having playoff implications, but there was more to it than that. Teams were out there trying to gain momentum, to remind everyone who’s boss or even just to prove that they could come around next year. Some other teams were in what announcer Cris Collinsworth, among many others, termed to be “meaningless”. Can a professional football game at the highest level really be meaningless, though? This is a question that plagues NFL coaches who face criticism from both sides, whether to rest starters out of caution or to play them in hopes of keeping them mentally prepared for the greater conflicts to follow. Then, of course, there’s that little caveat that when you take the field, you want to win.
I’ve always been of the belief that every time you play a game, you do everything in your power to win. If a player’s healthy, play him; if the other team is a threat, get rid of that threat. Even if you’re the best team in the league playing against the worst team in the league, remember that no team goes 0-16 (not even this year’s pathetic Dolphins' squad) so that every team wins sometime. If you’re good, you don’t want that to happen against you.
The last few years have been proof of teams taking momentum into the playoffs. Last season was an anomaly in this regard, as the Superbowl-winning Colts won only two of their last five games, and the Bears ended an otherwise great season with a humiliating home loss to the Green Bay Packers. The 14-2 Chargers, winners of their last ten, lost their first playoff game; however, it was to the equally impressive New England Patriots, and the Chargers had not beaten a single team better than 9-7 that season.
The trend says otherwise. In 2005, the Pittsburgh Steelers posted four consecutive double-digit victories before also winning three more in the playoffs with their only close win coming against a seemingly ferocious 14-2 Colts' team that had lost two of its past three. The Seahawks of that same year finished the season 11-1, their Week 17 loss coming in Lambeau Field where teams are expected to lose that time of year (and the preceding few performances were impressive). The 2004 Patriots, arguably their best squad before this season’s undefeated one, won back-to-back blowouts en route to winning all of their playoff games. Going back a little farther, the 2000 Baltimore Ravens won seven straight before trouncing the opposition in the playoffs and winning their Superbowl.
Conversely, those same Colts that won the Superbowl hadn’t won before that, their losing ways near the end of the season carrying over into playoff games in which Peyton Manning didn’t look such a Hall-of-Famer in the making. The 2003 Kansas City Chiefs lost two of their last four, allowing 45 points in each of those games, and then lost their first playoff game to Manning’s Colts. There’s no set formula, and it is true that most playoff teams had to be hot to get their gaudy records so there are bound to be occasions of barreling forces colliding, but there is a pattern in the attitudes these teams take.
Looking at this year’s playoff teams, some are in each camp. The Packers, eager to re-establish themselves after their rival Bears took revenge on them for last season’s ender, routed the Lions. They only played their backups after they had taken a double-digit lead and were firmly in control of the game. The Patriots, playing for a statistical record but not for any difference in seeding, hung on to the very end and then beat a team to which they could have submitted at any time. The Cowboys failed to put together a competent performance against the Redskins, falling 27-6. The Colts, having the ability to put a division rival out of the playoffs entirely, didn’t even let Manning touch the field and lost 16-10.
Of the league’s supposed top four teams, the Packers and Patriots are the two that showed determination and grit. They know whichever team they host in the playoffs won’t be as good as them, especially in the case of Green Bay, and they know they can’t change their seeding. What they can uphold is the feelings in their locker rooms. For the Patriots, this season is about getting back to dynasty status after two years of heartbreak, along with becoming the first 19-0 team in NFL history. For the Packers, it’s Favre’s ultimate retirement party. Against teams other than the Bears, for whom the only champagne being uncorked will be the cheap faux-stuff of New Year’s parties, the Packers are a blistering 13-1.
Something encouraging about these end-of-season performances is that the two teams couldn’t be any more different. The Patriots are a veteran, star-studded team, featuring the likes of Tom Brady, Randy Moss, Richard Seymour and Rodney Harrison. The Packers, aside from their graying leader, have exciting young players like the emergent Ryan Grant. What both teams do, though, is play every game with the same winning mentality. If Packers versus Patriots is the Superbowl matchup in a month’s time, it won’t be difficult to guess why. (Although Foxboro and Lambeau might have something to do with it.)
These Cowboys, once 11-1 and looking virtually invincible, haven’t played so well since their epic clash with the Pack. They’ve gone 2-2, and the prevailing sentiment is that the Lions' game should’ve been a loss, as well. Worse yet, the Washington game that was billed as meaningless might have more playoff implications for the Cowboys than they’d like; if Washington beats Seattle next week, and I’d have a tough time betting on any team that just surrendered 44 points to the Falcons, Washington goes to Dallas. That includes a defense that literally didn’t give the Cowboys rushing yards and could force Tony Romo into testing out that Pro Bowl arm much more than the typically conservative Wade Phillips would like.
The Cowboys would have done well to look over at Dallas’s other blue-and-silver juggernaut the NBA’s Mavericks and see what happened when they considered a game near the end of the 2006/2007 season against the Golden State Warriors meaningless. The Washington Redskins are one of the hottest teams in the NFL now, and they believe beyond all doubt that they can beat the 13-3 Cowboys. There’s still a very good chance that the Cowboys will beat the Redskins if it comes to that, but the matchup may suddenly be a touch more trying than it otherwise could’ve been.
Setting aside the Colts for a moment, who will be interesting to watch against their first opponent (likely the Chargers, if the Titans’ performance this week amounts to much), the Steelers and Jaguars both ended the season in a disappointing way. The Steelers dropped a game to the Baltimore Ravens, a team that had lost nine in a row and was starting a rookie quarterback. Pittsburgh made no effort to match the Ravens’ intensity early on, and it led to a situation where a two-touchdown comeback wasn’t enough. Once 9-3, as I touted in my infamous prediction of nearly a month ago, the Steelers are now 10-6, tied for worst record of any AFC playoff team. The Jaguars, looking so confident in their 49-11 mutilation of the hapless Oakland Raiders, forgot to play defense against a Texans team that likes to put up points. Both teams looked formidable not too long ago. If either team plays like it did this week against the Patriots, it’s toast.
As with anything in the NFL, there are no guarantees. Surprises happen all the time. When making your bets, just don’t jump to the team with the better record, the glitzier roster or even the greater wealth of playoff experience. In one game, the team that comes out with its head screwed on better usually wins. Building momentum and maintaining competitive fire are the best ways to do that. |
