Now let me add a very important caveat, there is no reason to think the season would have gone the same way if the call had been made the other way (not here to debate the correctness of the call). I doubt the real officials would have been brought in so quickly and different officials could have meant different results throughout. Nonetheless, let’s just see what it would have meant, all other things being equal.
First of all it would have meant that the Packers would have clinched the #2 spot but I am not sure if they would still have a chance at the #1 spot due to the common opponents (Packers lost to the Giants and the Falcons beat them). The Niners would have locked up the AFC West. After that I am not sure. The Seahwaks, Bears, Vikings and Redskins all have 9-6 records, while the Cowboys and Giants are at 8-7. You can remove the Cowboys from the equation because if they win they win the division and if they lose they are out. I don’t really know all the permutations, but it looks to me like maybe the Bears are the most affected. Because they would get in with a Minnesota loss OR a Seahawks loss. Right now they only get in with a Vikings loss (and of course a Bears victory). So the Bears may be the team getting the most screwed by the Packers loss, which is delicious.
I’d been wondering about this myself. Everyone was talking about how it might affect the Packers, and it may mean the difference of a bye-week. However, I’ve less concerned with the seeding, since I was pretty sure Greenbay would make the playoffs, than I was with how it might affect the Seahawks’ record and their playoff chances and who else might not get in if it means they get in. I’m just not completely sure how the tie-breakers would work out.
Here’s an interesting blog on ESPN by a guy who has been tracking it as if it had gone the other way the whole time:
The Packers have to win to be assured of a bye. SF losing to AZ is unimaginable, so Green Bay has the bye right there in their gloves, to win or to lose.
Meanwhile, the Vikings pretty much have to win to get a wild card. If Minnesota wins and Washington wins and SF and Sea win, this is kind of interesting: the way it looks to me, SF would get the bye, Seattle would go to Washington, and the Vikings would go to Lambeau for an immediate rematch. Has that happened before, the same teams two weeks in a row?
Yes; the Bengals and Jets played in a regular game, then in the playoffs the next week 3 years ago (the Jets won both), as well as the Cowboys and Eagles that same year (the Cowboys won both).
Actually, I think that it benefits the Bears in a way. The way it works out, the Packers have something to play for this week so they’re more likely to put in a big effort against the Vikings. If they already had the bye wrapped up, they may rest a few guys.
The Vikings have something to play for as well. If they lose, there is a fair chance they could miss the playoffs: does anyone really expect to Bears to lose to Detroit? The pressure is really on Minnesota to prove their color is not purple because they choke all the time.
I found this video earlier today. Jennings jumps and has his hands apart waiting for the ball to come in to his body. Just before it does, Tate’s left hand comes up in front of the ball, he touches it first, and then Jennings’s hands come in from either side a split second later. The ball strikes Tate’s open palm and stops; he doesn’t appear to be bobbling or fumbling it in any way. If you accept that a ball can be caught and controlled with one hand, which does happen, you can make a case that Tate has the catch (or simultaneous possession at worst).
Yeah, but if the Pack had the two seed wrapped up and nothing to gain, they might well have a lot of their backups in for most or all of the game. And I don’t expect the Bears to lose to the Lions, but it wouldn’t be the most shocking thing I’ve ever seen.