Playoff Scenarios & This Week's Game

[Mitch]

Update following Chicago's win over Minnesota

Scenario A: Minnesota beats New York, Philadelphia beats Dallas. (MIN-W, PHI-W, ARZ-W/L)

1. New Orleans (13-3---I think they lose to the red hot Panthers)
2. Philadelphia (12-4)
3. Minnesota (12-4)
4. Arizona (11-5 or 10-6)
5. Green Bay (11-5 or 10-6)
6. Dallas (10-6)

Round 1: Minnesota hosts Dallas, the Cardinals host the Packers.

Round 2: With win: Cardinals play the Saints.

_______________________________________________________

Scenario B: Minnesota beats New York, Dallas beats Philadelphia, the Cardinals beat the Packers. (MIN-W, DAL-W, ARZ-W)

1. New Orleans (13-3)
2. Minnesota (12-4)
3. Arizona (11-5)
4. Dallas (11-5)
5. Philadelphia (11-5)
6. Green Bay (10-6)

Round 1: The Cardinals host the Packers, Dallas hosts Philadelphia (repeat games of Week 17, same teams, same sites).

Round 2: With win: Cardinals play the Vikings.

_______________________________________________________________

Scenario C: Minnesota beats New York, Dallas beats Philadelphia, the Cardinals lose to the Packers. (MIN-W, DAL-W, ARZ-L)

1. New Orleans (13-3)
2. Minnesota (12-4)
3. Dallas (11-5)
4. Arizona (10-6)
5. Green Bay (11-5)
6. Philadelphia (11-5)

Round 1: Dallas hosts Phildelphia and the Cardinals host the Packers (same as Scenario B...same teams, same sites).

Round 2: With win: Cardinals play the Saints.

________________________________________________________

Scenario D: Minnesota loses to New York, Philadelphia beats Dallas, the Cardinals beat the Packers. (MIN-W, PHI-W, ARZ-W)

1. New Orleans (13-3)
2. Philadelphia (12-4)
3. Arizona (11-5)
4. Minnesota (11-5)
5. Green Bay (10-6)
6. Dallas (10-6)

Round 1: The Cardinals host the Cowboys and Minnesota hosts Green Bay.

Round 2: With win: the Cardinals play the Eagles.

________________________________________________________

Scenario E: Minnesota loses to New York, Philadelphia beats Dallas, the Cardinals lose to the Packers. (MIN-L, PHI-W, ARZ-L)

1. New Orleans (13-3)
2. Philadelphia (12-4)
3. Minnesota (11-5)
4. Arizona (10-6)
5. Green Bay (11-5)
6. Dallas (10-5)

Round 1: Minnesota hosts Dallas and the Cardinals host the Packers.

Round 2: With win: the Cardinals play the Saints.

_________________________________________________________

Scenario F: Minnesota loses to New York, Dallas beats Philadelphia and the Cardinals lose to the Packers. (MIN-L, DAL-W, ARZ-L)

1. New Orleans (13-3)
2. Dallas (11-5)
3. Minnesota (11-5)
4. Arizona (10-6)
5. Green Bay (11-5)
6. Philadelphia (11-5)

Round 1: Minnesota hosts Philadelphia and the Cardinals host the Packers.

Round 2: With win: the Cardinals play the Saints.

________________________________________________________

Scenario G: Minnesota loses to New York, Dallas beats Philadelphia and the Cardinals beat the Packers. (MIN-L, DAL-W, ARZ-W)

1. New Orleans (13-3)
2. Arizona (11-5)
3. Dallas (11-5)
4. Minnesota (11-5)
5. Philadelphia (11-5)
6. Green Bay (10-6)

Dallas hosts Green Bay and Minnesota hosts Philadelphia.

Round 1: Cardinals get a BYE.

Round 2: The Cardinals would play the highest seed to win in Round 1. If the Cowboys win, they would be the Cardinals' opponent, no matter what. If the Cowboys lose and the Vikings win, the Cardinals would host the Vikings. If both Wild card teams win, the Cardinals would host the Eagles.

________________________________________________________

What MOST scenarios point to:

Round 1: Cardinals host Packers (if the Cardinals win...)

Round 2: Cardinals play at Saints

 

[RedRob]

I hate to say it, as this means giving up the #2 seed; at this time I want to see Minnesota win. Under this scenario there's no chance of us having to go to Philly in the 2nd round which scares me to death.

I'd MUCH rather see us playing in Minn. or NO than in Philly.

Preferred scenario, Minny, Dallas, Cards win. IF we win against GB, If we win at NO, NFC championship game back in AZ.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

Thanks for the update, Mitch! That is exactly what I wanted to know.

 

[sportznutt]

We need to cheer for th Cowboys to win that division.

 

[PACardsFan]

We need to cheer for th Cowboys to win that division.

I really think that the Cowboys will beat the Eagles @ home next week. The Eagles not only embarrassed them last year, but they rubbed their face in it also. The Eagles D is overrated & the Cowboys D will neutralize the Eagles O.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Vikings are dead in the water. Cards will know at game time if there is a possibility of stealing the #2 seed. If Vikings win rest everybody. If they lose go all out.

My money is on Dallas at home against the Eagles.

Agreed.

 

[NuttinButTDs]

A simpler update

With Minnesota's loss, the Saints have the No. 1 position.

The Eagles control their destiny in this regard; if they beat the Cowboys on Sunday, the Eagles finish at No. 2 in the NFC.

The Vikings earn the bye with a win over the Giants and a loss or tie by the Eagles.

The Cardinals can swipe the bye if both the Vikings and the Eagles lose.

If they Vikings lose and the Cardinals lose (or tie), then the Cowboys get a week off and a home game in the divisional round by beating the Eagles.

 

[daves]

Implications

Before the Cardinals take the field, the Vikings - Giants game will be over or nearly over. If the Vikings win, the Cardinals will play the Packers again in the Wild Card round, so both the Cardinals and Packers have every reason to play vanilla schemes and rest their starting players.

But if the Giants win, with the Cowboys - Eagles game taking place at the same time as the Cardinals - Packers game, how should the Cardinals play the Packers? I believe it's in the Cardinals' interest to play all out to win regardless of the outcome of the Cowboys - Eagles game.

If the Cowboys and Cardinals win, the Cardinals will get a bye week, and could only face the Packers in the playoffs if Packers pull an upset in the Wild Card game AND win in New Orleans the following week, and come to Arizona again in the NFC Championship game - not a scenario to worry about, given the value of getting the #2 seed.

If the Eagles and Cardinals win, the Cardinala will get the #3 seed, and as above, the Cardinals could not face the Packers again until the NFC Championship game.

So regardless of the outcome of the Cowboys - Eagles game, if the Cardinals play all-out and win, they don't have to worry about "showing their hand" vs. the Packers, then facing them again. And by winning, the Cardinals stand to gain possibly the #2 seed, but at worst the #3 seed, which could be of benefit in the event of upsets in other games, as happened last year.

The only concern would be playing all out to win, and still losing, then having to face the Packers again in the Wild Card game. If the Cardinals lose, regardless of the Cowboys - Eagles outcome, they WILL play the Packers again. But what will be the Packers' strategy if the Giants win? Should they play all out to win, or play vanilla and rest starters?

From the Packers' perspective, if they beat the Cardinals, regardless of the Cowboys - Eagles outcome, they'd travel to Arizona again the following week. Since (according to my reasoning above) the Cardinals should be going all out to win, the Packers would presumably have to do the same. But why? They could play vanilla schemes, rest their starters, and the only downside for them would be to play at either the Vikings (who, in this scenario, would be reeling from losing 4 of the last 5 games, and 3 in a row) or Cowboys (who have a reputation for flaming out in December and January for the last dozen or so years). I don't see the incentive for them to play all-out to beat the Cardinals, with the only reward being to face them again the following week.

The bottom line is that if the Giants beat the Vikings, the Packers will have very little to play for, while the Cardinals will have every reason to want to win. They might even be able to rack up a big lead in the first half, then rest some guys in the second half. But if the Vikings win on Sunday, the Cardinals - Packers game will be a meaningless preview of their Wild Card matchup.

...dave

 

[AntSports Steve]

I would like to point out that after round one, the NFL reseeds the playoffs. That means, after round one is over, they take the lowest seeded team and put them against the #1 seed. The other team plays against the #2 seed.

That means if the Cards win in Round one, who they play is unknown until the other NFC round one game is over.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Giants win
Cards win
Cowboys win

Saints upset in first playoff game, and then the road to the Super Bowl goes through Glendale.

 

[D-Dogg]

I would like to point out that after round one, the NFL reseeds the playoffs. That means, after round one is over, they take the lowest seeded team and put them against the #1 seed. The other team plays against the #2 seed.

That means if the Cards win in Round one, who they play is unknown until the other NFC round one game is over.

Not exactly true. If the Cards are the 3 seed and win, they will automatically play the 2 seed in the second round without caring about the other wild card matchup, because they would be the highest remaining seed regardless of the other game's matchup. If they were the 4 seed, however, then they could play the 2 seed instead of the 1 seed ONLY IF the 6 seed upset the 3 seed.

A successful three seed, however, will always face the awaiting 2 seed.

It's not really "re-seeded." It's more like there isn't a set bracket.

 

[NuttinButTDs]

There are 8 possible scenarios. 6 of them we play Packers at home. One of them we will play Cowboys at home and the final and best option - we get a bye.

 

[earthsci]

There are 8 possible scenarios. 6 of them we play Packers at home. One of them we will play Cowboys at home and the final and best option - we get a bye.

Yes

 

[Vermont Maverick]

Before the Cardinals take the field, the Vikings - Giants game will be over or nearly over. If the Vikings win, the Cardinals will play the Packers again in the Wild Card round, so both the Cardinals and Packers have every reason to play vanilla schemes and rest their starting players.

But if the Giants win, with the Cowboys - Eagles game taking place at the same time as the Cardinals - Packers game, how should the Cardinals play the Packers? I believe it's in the Cardinals' interest to play all out to win regardless of the outcome of the Cowboys - Eagles game.

If the Cowboys and Cardinals win, the Cardinals will get a bye week, and could only face the Packers in the playoffs if Packers pull an upset in the Wild Card game AND win in New Orleans the following week, and come to Arizona again in the NFC Championship game - not a scenario to worry about, given the value of getting the #2 seed.

If the Eagles and Cardinals win, the Cardinala will get the #3 seed, and as above, the Cardinals could not face the Packers again until the NFC Championship game.

So regardless of the outcome of the Cowboys - Eagles game, if the Cardinals play all-out and win, they don't have to worry about "showing their hand" vs. the Packers, then facing them again. And by winning, the Cardinals stand to gain possibly the #2 seed, but at worst the #3 seed, which could be of benefit in the event of upsets in other games, as happened last year.

The only concern would be playing all out to win, and still losing, then having to face the Packers again in the Wild Card game. If the Cardinals lose, regardless of the Cowboys - Eagles outcome, they WILL play the Packers again. But what will be the Packers' strategy if the Giants win? Should they play all out to win, or play vanilla and rest starters?

From the Packers' perspective, if they beat the Cardinals, regardless of the Cowboys - Eagles outcome, they'd travel to Arizona again the following week. Since (according to my reasoning above) the Cardinals should be going all out to win, the Packers would presumably have to do the same. But why? They could play vanilla schemes, rest their starters, and the only downside for them would be to play at either the Vikings (who, in this scenario, would be reeling from losing 4 of the last 5 games, and 3 in a row) or Cowboys (who have a reputation for flaming out in December and January for the last dozen or so years). I don't see the incentive for them to play all-out to beat the Cardinals, with the only reward being to face them again the following week.

The bottom line is that if the Giants beat the Vikings, the Packers will have very little to play for, while the Cardinals will have every reason to want to win. They might even be able to rack up a big lead in the first half, then rest some guys in the second half. But if the Vikings win on Sunday, the Cardinals - Packers game will be a meaningless preview of their Wild Card matchup.

...dave

Fantastic post, and right on. I had the same thoughts, but there was no way I was going to take the time to do it. Thanks.

The Minnesota game time sets up perfectly for us. Too bad the G-Men got pounded last week, because they would also need that game to make it, making things more interesting.

 

[Vermont Maverick]

Giants win
Cards win
Cowboys win

Saints upset in first playoff game, and then the road to the Super Bowl goes through Glendale.

...again

 

[Arizona's Finest]

I would like to point out that after round one, the NFL reseeds the playoffs. That means, after round one is over, they take the lowest seeded team and put them against the #1 seed. The other team plays against the #2 seed.

That means if the Cards win in Round one, who they play is unknown until the other NFC round one game is over.

For someone with "Future Cardinals GM" in their avatar this is the second biggie I have seen you miss (and said quite definitively in fact) in the past couple days. I think the other one was about the projected seedings and Cardinals matchup in another thread.

Ahh no worries though....couldn't be worse then Rod Graves I guess. He's probably excited for the Giants/Cards playoff match up in a couple weeks

 

[Arizona's Finest]

Before the Cardinals take the field, the Vikings - Giants game will be over or nearly over. If the Vikings win, the Cardinals will play the Packers again in the Wild Card round, so both the Cardinals and Packers have every reason to play vanilla schemes and rest their starting players.

But if the Giants win, with the Cowboys - Eagles game taking place at the same time as the Cardinals - Packers game, how should the Cardinals play the Packers? I believe it's in the Cardinals' interest to play all out to win regardless of the outcome of the Cowboys - Eagles game.

If the Cowboys and Cardinals win, the Cardinals will get a bye week, and could only face the Packers in the playoffs if Packers pull an upset in the Wild Card game AND win in New Orleans the following week, and come to Arizona again in the NFC Championship game - not a scenario to worry about, given the value of getting the #2 seed.

If the Eagles and Cardinals win, the Cardinala will get the #3 seed, and as above, the Cardinals could not face the Packers again until the NFC Championship game.

So regardless of the outcome of the Cowboys - Eagles game, if the Cardinals play all-out and win, they don't have to worry about "showing their hand" vs. the Packers, then facing them again. And by winning, the Cardinals stand to gain possibly the #2 seed, but at worst the #3 seed, which could be of benefit in the event of upsets in other games, as happened last year.

The only concern would be playing all out to win, and still losing, then having to face the Packers again in the Wild Card game. If the Cardinals lose, regardless of the Cowboys - Eagles outcome, they WILL play the Packers again. But what will be the Packers' strategy if the Giants win? Should they play all out to win, or play vanilla and rest starters?

From the Packers' perspective, if they beat the Cardinals, regardless of the Cowboys - Eagles outcome, they'd travel to Arizona again the following week. Since (according to my reasoning above) the Cardinals should be going all out to win, the Packers would presumably have to do the same. But why? They could play vanilla schemes, rest their starters, and the only downside for them would be to play at either the Vikings (who, in this scenario, would be reeling from losing 4 of the last 5 games, and 3 in a row) or Cowboys (who have a reputation for flaming out in December and January for the last dozen or so years). I don't see the incentive for them to play all-out to beat the Cardinals, with the only reward being to face them again the following week.

The bottom line is that if the Giants beat the Vikings, the Packers will have very little to play for, while the Cardinals will have every reason to want to win. They might even be able to rack up a big lead in the first half, then rest some guys in the second half. But if the Vikings win on Sunday, the Cardinals - Packers game will be a meaningless preview of their Wild Card matchup.

...dave

Excellent Post

 

[az1965]

Why is everyone scared to death on playing in Philly? Last couple of games they did look pretty beatable even in Philly. The only reason I can think of are idiotic and moronic fans throwing a barage of snowballs.

 

[Buckybird]

I think the NFC is pretty much a toss up & could see any of the 6 teams in Miami. All have strengths & weaknesses and I give the edge to the best defense. So in that case the team I want to avoid & no one is talking about...Dallas!!! Their defense is playing better than any I have seen recently & they are using the us against the world approach because nobody is mentioning them as a threat. Sounds like some other team I remember from last year.

 

[lauraw]

I'd like to knock the CowTurds back to the stonage, myself..

 

[Buckybird]

I'd like to knock the CowTurds back to the stonage, myself..

me too Laura, but for some strange reason they scare me because of that defense!!! Trust me I have lived there my whole life & been a Big Red fan for 35 years & couldn't imagine what it would be like losing to them in the playoffs. I would have to drive my car off a bridge going to work that Monday.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

i think it's simple.If the Vikings win, the starters sit. We'd be playing GB no matter what. The problem that may arise is, let's say the Vikes /Giants is undecided by time the Cards game kicks off. I guess Whiz has to go into the game planning on the starters playing a meaningful game.If the Vikes win, you can always pull back.

 

[Duckjake]

me too Laura, but for some strange reason they scare me because of that defense!!! Trust me I have lived there my whole life & been a Big Red fan for 35 years & couldn't imagine what it would be like losing to them in the playoffs. I would have to drive my car off a bridge going to work that Monday.

That's because they all remember the ribbing they had to take from you in '98.

That must have been a great weekend for you.

 

[Buckybird]

i think it's simple.If the Vikings win, the starters sit. We'd be playing GB no matter what. The problem that may arise is, let's say the Vikes /Giants is undecided by time the Cards game kicks off. I guess Whiz has to go into the game planning on the starters playing a meaningful game.If the Vikes win, you can always pull back.

Can you imagine Warner being 3-3 for 50 yards with the Cards on the Pack 20 & the announcer says the Vikes win in OT & Wiz calls timeout to insert Leinart & Co.?

 

[Buckybird]

That's because they all remember the ribbing they had to take from you in '98.

That must have been a great weekend for you.

Greatest day of my life up until the January 19th, 2009 & February 1, 2009. And I hope there is no chance I have to give '98 back either. I have never been drunker in my life than after that '98 playoff game.