by John McG, December 27, 2007
This week in the NFL:
-
The Titans play the Colts this week. If the Titans win, they make the playoffs; if they lose, the Browns go instead. But the Colts are already locked into the #2 seed in the AFC, and are thus unlikely to play Peyton Manning and their other regulars.
- The Patriots are going for an undefeated season on Saturday night against the Giants. But the Giants clinched a playoff spot with their win over the Bills last week, and may not play their regulars.
- The Redskins renew their rivalry with the Cowboys, and need a win to make the playoffs. But with the Packers losing last week, the Cowboys have already clinched home field advantage throughout the playoffs, and may not play their regulars.
- Almost every other game is considered "meaningless" since they do not impact the playoff race.
"Meaningless" to whom? The number next to the dollar sign on the front of the tickets is the same as it was for the other 15 meaningful games. I'm pretty sure the numbers on the coaches' and players' paychecks for this game are the same as they have been for all the other games. Their job is to win football games, isn't it? So how do teams get away with not going all-out to win?
Blame our sports culture's obsession with championships and postseason success.
To pick one example, before they won the Super Bowl last year, there were many voices who discounted Peyton Manning and Tony Dungy's success because it had not carried over to the postseason. Manning's TD record, Dungy's streak of bringing team to the playoffs, all that didn't matter. They hadn't won a championship, so they were "chokers," and did not deserve to be considered among the best in their professions. Never mind that coaches like Barry Switzer and quarterbacks like Trent Dilfer had won Super Bowls. Manning and Dungy didn't get it done in the playoffs.
Given that, can you blame the Colts for trading some regular season success for a better chance at success in the playoffs?
The Colts are not alone. Joe Torre was just nudged out the door because the Yankees have been losing in the first round of the playoffs the last several years. Steve Young pulled a proverbial monkey off his back in the closing moment of his Super Bowl win. Players like Charles Barkley and Karl Malone aren't considered great because they never won a championship. Others like Gary Payton spend the end of their careers hooking on with successful teams in hopes of winning a championship. There are few reputations worse for a team, coach, or player than successful in the regular season but faltering in the playoffs. Ask Barry Bonds or Alex Rodriguez. Ask Mart Schottenheimer. Ask Dirk Nowitzki.
So the regular season becomes an exercise in positioning for the playoffs. Last year, the Cardinals were one game ahead of the Astros going into the final game. Rather than starting their ace Chris Carpenter, they started Anthony Reyes and lost. But the Astros lost, too, and the Cardinals went on to win the World Series. The Padres did the same thing this year with Jake Peavy, but the Rockies won their final game, then beat Peavy and Trevor Hoffman in the one game playoff.
And once a team is effectively eliminated from championship contention, their own fans root against them so they will be better positioned in next year's draft (where they can get a player who can lead them to a championship). The most egregious result was the tank-fest at the end of the 2006-2007 NBA season.
This attitude continues with the annual lamentations about the lack of a playoff system in college football.
There's obvious reasons to favor postseason performance. It's when most people are paying attention. The level of competition is higher, and it is plausible that a player or team could thrive against inferior competition but falter when pressed. And there is the moralizing about team play. Something in us wants to believe that Bill Russell was a better player than Wilt Chamberlain, because we admire his style of play. So we point to the Celtics' playoff record against Wilt's teams.
But as the leagues have expanded, a lower percentage of teams and players will win championships, or have a legitimate opportunity to do so. Does that make their games "meaningless?" The impact to the fan's pocketbook sure isn't.
It's time to free ourselves from this fetishization of championships and post-season performance. If the Patriots win on Saturday night, it will be an historically remarkable accomplishment, regardless of how they perform in the playoffs. If the Colts and Giants and Cowboys don't play to win this weekend, then they are not doing their jobs, pure and simple.
People are paying money to watch competitive games. Teams have a responsibility to deliver that, regardless of the impact on the championship.
John McG. is a father and software engineer living in St. Louis, MO. He blogs at Man Bites Blog.