Thursday, December 30, 2010

Bears-Packers Should Never Be Played In Week 17

November 18, 2006. The Ohio State Buckeyes, ranked number one in the nation, host the number two Michigan Wolverines in the last game of the college football season. Each team enters the game with a perfect 11-0 record. What's at stake is simple: winner plays for the National Championship, and the loser accepts a trip to the Rose Bowl.
Ohio State comes out firing, leading Michigan 28-14 at halftime. Michigan would bounce back in the second half, outscoring Ohio State by eleven points. It wouldn't be enough however, as Ohio State secured a three point victory and went on lose to Florida in the 2007 BCS Championship Game.
This would have been a classic game regardless, but its importance was heightened because of the historical Ohio State-Michigan rivalry. An integral part of this rivalry is the timing -- they play each other the last game of the season every year. This game was dubbed "Game of the Century" for a reason, this match-up never carries the type of implications it did in 2006. A rivalry game played the last game of the season is great when it works out to perfection like it did in 2006. The problem of course, is that it rarely works out that way.
Now consider the Bears-Packers rivalry, the NFL equivalent to Ohio-State Michigan. This Sunday will mark the third time in the last ten years that the NFL rivals have squared off in the last game of the season.
I have just one simple request: don't play this game game in Week 17, ever again.
The last time the Bears and Packers played in Week 17 of the season was in 2006. The Bears were 13-2, had already clinched the number one seed in the NFC playoffs and played their back-ups the majority of the game. The Packers were 7-8, had already been eliminated from playoff contention, and were basically playing for pride. The Packers went on to win 26-7, and the Bears went on to the Super Bowl.
Two years earlier, the Bears and Packers also met in the last game of the season. The Bears' season was already over, as they were 5-10 coming into the game. The Packers were 9-6 and needed the win to hold off the Vikings for the NFC North crown. Not surprisingly, the Packers won in convincing fashion to advance to the playoffs.
The common denominator is that the 2004 and 2006 games didn't decide the fate of both teams. In that respect, the timing of the game was a failure.
Now let's jump to this year's offering, which could possibly mean much more than the previous two meetings. The playoff scenario is simple for the Packers: win and they're in. If they lose, they'll need both the Giants and Bucs to lose to get in.
The Bears' priorities are a little more tricky. They've already clinched at least the second seed in the NFC and a first round bye. There's a slim possibility that they still could secure the top seed. In order for that to happen, the Bears need to win and the Falcons need to lose at home to the 2-13 Carolina Panthers. A Falcons loss is not very likely, especially considering they could drop to the fifth seed if the Saints win at home against Tampa Bay.
Fortunately for the Bears, they'll know where they stand come game time. The Falcons play at 12:00 CT and the Bears game was moved to 3:15 CT. By the time the Bears kickoff, they will know whether it's possible to grab the one seed. If they can't, it's unclear how the Bears will plan on playing this game.
Lovie Smith and his players are saying all the right things:
"We can clinch home field advantage through out the playoffs."
"We have a chance to be the first undefeated team within the division."
"We want to be the one's to end our rival's season." 
It all sounds good, but what if the Bears are already locked into the two seed? Is "ending our rival's season" really a strong enough motivation to risk a key injury in a meaningless game? I would say no.
This is exactly why the second game of this rivalry should never be played on the last week of the season -- to avoid situations where it isn't beneficial for one of the teams to play their starters the entire game. Imagine if this game was played last week, or two weeks ago. Both teams would have everything in the world to play for and football fans could enjoy the best rivalry in the NFL the way it's meant to be played.
As it stands, the Bears will likely play their starters sparingly, if at all. This could have been avoided. Rivalries like the Bears-Packers are spirited regardless of which players are playing, but deserve the best players on the field. The NFL schedule-makers can't hope for a miracle like 2006 Ohio State-Michigan. They need to play it safe and make sure the last game is always played before Week 17.

No comments:

Post a Comment