Worst ONE-AND-DONE playoff teams ever

[74_75_78_79_]

Some of what are considered the 'worst-ever' playoff teams actually won their first game. The '98 Cards, '04 Rams, '10 Hawks are examples as I just quoted in one of the threads from The Football Outsiders via wiki. Other examples are the '83 Rams, '94 Bears, '04 Vikes, and my very own '89 Steelers. IYOs, what are the worst playoff teams ever that lost right-off-the-bat as they "should have"? '82 season, of course, doesn't count.

'68, '78, and '80 Vikes, '70 Bengals, '95 Falcons good starting points.

[Kermit McManus]

1983 Lions.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/t ... t/1983.htm

Beat one team with a winning record all season long, and lost to a 2-14 Oilers squad. Somehow gave the 49ers a game in the divisional round and weren't heard from in the postseason for eight years.

[74_75_78_79_]

1983 Lions.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/t ... t/1983.htm

Beat one team with a winning record all season long, and lost to a 2-14 Oilers squad. Somehow gave the 49ers a game in the divisional round and weren't heard from in the postseason for eight years.

True; and point well made. What prevented me from using them as an example in the thread's OP isn't as much they giving the Niners a game at the Stick, but the respect I personally have for the Lions squad just two years prior. As I mentioned before on this site, through the years I've been one who would, up until recently, periodically forget that they didn't make the playoffs in '81. They did beat both participants in 'The Catch' game that year. Yes, the win over SF was opening day and Dallas was the '12th man' game, but still. They pummeled Oakland, 16-0. Yes, it was the '81 installment, but they could have just barely won (or lost like 8-5 at the time Pitt did or playoff-bound Miami did). Instead, they shut them out just like above-500-to-be Denver and KC did. The Lions beat one of those teams (KC), gave the other (Den) a good game, gave the Chargers a good game at the Murph Week #2, split with a better-than-their-(8-8)-record Packers team. All they had to do was beat TB at least once, and the division/playoff berth would have been theirs. And deservingly so.

As for the '81 Bucs...better than their record was as well. May have very well been better than they were in '79. Very stout defense, did underachieve/shoot themselves in feet at times. That is the reason why I didn't bother including them either in this thread's OP, blowout exit at Dallas (0-38) notwithstanding. When looking back at 'all-time' division races, the '81 NFC Central seems to get lost. Mediocre win-loss records aside, that was one stout division to get out of! Even their weakest link, Chicago, was a team to be respected.

[7DnBrnc53]

1986 Chiefs: Had a solid defense, but the mediocre Bill Kenney at QB, and practically no running game whatsoever. Were blasted by the Jets in the WC round.

At the time, I was happy for KC, but I believe to this day that if the Seahawks were there instead of KC, they beat the Jets and Browns, and they may have defeated the Broncos in the AFC Title Game.

[Evan]

'68, '78, and '80 Vikes, '70 Bengals, '95 Falcons good starting points.

I would personally put the 1978 Eagles on there instead of the 1978 Vikings.

1978 regular season, these are just random notes I pulled out, they're not conclusive evidence of anything, just some observations:
1978 Eagles were 1-5 vs. 1978 playoff teams, scored 20 or more points only 4 times, had the bizarre Mike Michel kicking issue, got just a bit of luck with the Miracle in the Meadowlands.
1978 Vikings were 3-1 vs. 1978 playoff teams (and had a 4th qtr lead on LA before falling apart), scored 20 or more points 8 times, had a few close losses with FGs and tipped passes playing major parts.

Oh, and the Vikings beat Philly 28-27, that must count for something, no?

I think the difference is in perception. In 1978 Philly had a number of young players on the way up or players in their prime, and were on their way to a nice run from 1979 through halfway into 1981.
The 1978 Vikings were old, tired, slow and small, with most of their veteran players on their last gasps, about to fall into a rut of mediocrity through 1985.

So personally I think the 1978 Vikings were better than the 1978 Eagles, but I understand a contrary perception.

[74_75_78_79_]

1986 Chiefs: Had a solid defense, but the mediocre Bill Kenney at QB, and practically no running game whatsoever. Were blasted by the Jets in the WC round.

At the time, I was happy for KC, but I believe to this day that if the Seahawks were there instead of KC, they beat the Jets and Browns, and they may have defeated the Broncos in the AFC Title Game.

Seahawks and Bengals were to '86 what the Niners and Eagles would be five years later, two 10-6ers coming up just short. That four-game mid-season skid hurt Seattle; even more-so the teams they lost to (Broncos, Jets, Chiefs, Cincy), putting them on the wrong side of tie-breakers. In either event, the '86 Hawks were a better regular season team than '83 (clearly a better squad than either of the actual qualifiers of '87 & '88) and had they won just ONE-MORE game, would have been riding on greater momentum than they did when they 'backed-in' as a 12-4 wild card in '84. Perhaps Knox's better opportunity to make a Bowl while in the Emerald City. No reason to think they wouldn't have roweled things up once at the dance, especially if that 'extra' win came against Denver in Week #8 hence earning them a 2ND seed! Still, the Dawg Pound would have been tough. Doable, but tough. Actually, come to think of it, assuming Denver rested their starters in the finale (not totally sure if they did or not), does Seattle in this scenario win 'again' against full-strength Denver Week #16 in the Kingdome?

[74_75_78_79_]

'68, '78, and '80 Vikes, '70 Bengals, '95 Falcons good starting points.

I would personally put the 1978 Eagles on there instead of the 1978 Vikings.

1978 regular season, these are just random notes I pulled out, they're not conclusive evidence of anything, just some observations:
1978 Eagles were 1-5 vs. 1978 playoff teams, scored 20 or more points only 4 times, had the bizarre Mike Michel kicking issue, got just a bit of luck with the Miracle in the Meadowlands.
1978 Vikings were 3-1 vs. 1978 playoff teams (and had a 4th qtr lead on LA before falling apart), scored 20 or more points 8 times, had a few close losses with FGs and tipped passes playing major parts.

Oh, and the Vikings beat Philly 28-27, that must count for something, no?

I think the difference is in perception. In 1978 Philly had a number of young players on the way up or players in their prime, and were on their way to a nice run from 1979 through halfway into 1981.
The 1978 Vikings were old, tired, slow and small, with most of their veteran players on their last gasps, about to fall into a rut of mediocrity through 1985.

So personally I think the 1978 Vikings were better than the 1978 Eagles, but I understand a contrary perception.

Very valid points. I'm easily sold. If not exclude the Vikes, at the very least I should have mentioned this Eagles squad OP. Perhaps the 'perception' is what got me; they being up-and-comers and all. Barely losing at AtL may have added to that as well (9-7 vs 8-7-1 too). Eagles still weren't able to at least split with Dallas yet, and without 'Miracle' which all-but shouldn't have happened, they're not even in this convo at all.

[BD Sullivan]

1967 Browns
1969 Oilers
1971 Browns
1974 Bills

[Jay Z]

1970 Bengals. Trounced easily by the Colts

[74_75_78_79_]

1967 Browns
1969 Oilers
1971 Browns
1974 Bills

'74 Bills? Why? Not asking this in an implied "I disagree" way, but seriously in an "enlighten me" way. I know the early-'70s Bills as a complete team were never anything special. They could never beat Miami even once. Only made the playoffs that one year. However, though not a great team, at least good with their D and obvious OJ (and a not too bad at all QB in Fergie). Didn't they beat Oakland in the (MNF) opener? Again, I'm no 'expert' on this team, but explain why they're one of the 'worst' to go one-and-out? The competition in the AFC was not too generous in that era (Mia, Pitt, Oak). Heck, Paul Brown didn't win a playoff game for Cincy either.