Best Teams To Miss The Playoffs

[JohnTurney]

1981 Broncos, 10-6, lost tiebreaker to Chargers. Lost on final Sunday, wrecked by Alan Page.

[Bob Gill]

Oh, and if we're just talking about teams from after the merger in 1970, I might vote for the 1979 Redskins. I think they would have been the NFC's top seed for the playoffs if not for that one-point to Dallas in the final game.

[SeahawkFever]

I love to cite teams from the old days, but in this case I don't think teams from 1965 and earlier should be considered, because "making the playoffs" back then meant playing in the championship game, and that's not the same thing.

I do think the 1967 Colts belong on this list, and almost certainly at the top, because by then the NFL had broken into four divisions and all four division winners made the playoffs, so it's a reasonably comparable system.

I totally get why you wouldn't mention teams that couldn't have gotten a wild card in their time in this discussion.

That said, 65 Bears were in my opinion a good non-playoff team that could've easily been a wild card if one existed. They had the fourth best record in the NFL that season, though given that two of the teams in their own western division were the Packers and Colts, they were third in their division so if the top two from both divisions hypothetically went, they still wouldn't qualify.

Considering them the equivalent of a caliber of team you see losing in the divisional round is fair to argue as well.

[sheajets]

Not among the best but still angry the 2015 Jets at 10-6 didn't make the playoffs.

2004 Bills I remember being terrified as they charged late in the season...they were on an 8-1 run going into Week 17 playing Pittsburgh at home in a game the Steelers didn't need. Jets were 10-5 and were in with either a Bills loss or a Jets win. Jets were in a back and forth nail-biter and found out late in regulation that Buffalo had lost and the Jets were in and the game they were playing with such desperation suddenly meant nothing. That game ended up going pretty late into OT too and Herm Edwards iirc still had his starters in

[GameBeforeTheMoney]

Oh, and if we're just talking about teams from after the merger in 1970, I might vote for the 1979 Redskins. I think they would have been the NFC's top seed for the playoffs if not for that one-point to Dallas in the final game.

I thought that also until a few years ago when I really dug in and researched the 1979 season for an Oilers documentary and book. They blew a big lead against Houston at home in Week One besides the famous Dallas fallout. Both Houston and Dallas were very good teams, but Washington also lost to the Saints and Giants, two teams they really should have defeated, and they narrowly beat the Lions.

The 79 Redskins were a good team, but for some reason they just didn't have it all together that year like they later did in the 80s. They had really good defensive players but other than Theismann and Riggins, they didn't have the offensive players we think of when we think of their Super Bowl team in 82. The 79 team seemed to be simply an above-average team in the NFL in that season.

[Bob Gill]

Oh, and if we're just talking about teams from after the merger in 1970, I might vote for the 1979 Redskins. I think they would have been the NFC's top seed for the playoffs if not for that one-point to Dallas in the final game.

I thought that also until a few years ago when I really dug in and researched the 1979 season for an Oilers documentary and book. They blew a big lead against Houston at home in Week One besides the famous Dallas fallout. Both Houston and Dallas were very good teams, but Washington also lost to the Saints and Giants, two teams they really should have defeated, and they narrowly beat the Lions.

The 79 Redskins were a good team, but for some reason they just didn't have it all together that year like they later did in the 80s. They had really good defensive players but other than Theismann and Riggins, they didn't have the offensive players we think of when we think of their Super Bowl team in 82. The 79 team seemed to be simply an above-average team in the NFL in that season.

That could be true, especially about the offense outside of Theismann and Riggins. And I do remember that Houston game -- couldn't give you any details these days, but I remember it was a tough one.

[GameBeforeTheMoney]

Oh, and if we're just talking about teams from after the merger in 1970, I might vote for the 1979 Redskins. I think they would have been the NFC's top seed for the playoffs if not for that one-point to Dallas in the final game.

I thought that also until a few years ago when I really dug in and researched the 1979 season for an Oilers documentary and book. They blew a big lead against Houston at home in Week One besides the famous Dallas fallout. Both Houston and Dallas were very good teams, but Washington also lost to the Saints and Giants, two teams they really should have defeated, and they narrowly beat the Lions.

The 79 Redskins were a good team, but for some reason they just didn't have it all together that year like they later did in the 80s. They had really good defensive players but other than Theismann and Riggins, they didn't have the offensive players we think of when we think of their Super Bowl team in 82. The 79 team seemed to be simply an above-average team in the NFL in that season.

That could be true, especially about the offense outside of Theismann and Riggins. And I do remember that Houston game -- couldn't give you any details these days, but I remember it was a tough one.

If I remember right, they had a two-possession lead late in the game at home and lost. Had controlled the game into the fourth quarter. It's been a couple of years since I went over that game, but I want to say there was a fumble late that gave Houston the ball back. That's another thing to ponder also though, they might just have had 5-8 bad minutes in that game and maybe 2-4 bad minutes in the Dallas game that blew the entire season. Interesting how football is in that way.