With the playoffs, the natural tendency is to assume the top seeds will probably win it. Seattle and New England. They’re the No. 1 seeds on each side; they’ll probably be in it. If one of them is to slip up, then probably one of the No. 2 seeds, Denver or New England.
But that’s rarely how it turns out.
Of the last 14 Super Bowls, only two have featured a matchup of two No. 1 seed.
Only five of the last 14 have featured a game between two teams that had byes in the first round.
About two third of the time, in other words, one of those teams that plays on Wild Card weekend goes on to play in the big game.
Half of the last 14 Super Bowls have been won by teams that did not have a bye in the first round.
For No. 1 seeds, 13 of 28 in this century have made it to the Super Bowl, but they’re then just 3-10 in those games. Setting aside the two one-v.-one games, No. 1 seeds are 1-8 in Super Bowls against lower-seeded teams, which seems weird.
With that in mind, who’s the lesser, off-the-radar team that might make a run. On the AFC side, the Colts, Ravens, Steelers or Bengals. In the NFC, the Panthers, Cowboys, Cardinals or Lions.
I’m ready to dismiss the Lions and Cardinals as having no chance.
For me, the sleeper-type playoff teams are the Panthers and Cowboys.
| SUPER BOWLS IN THIS CENTURY | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Year | Winner | Loser | Score |
| 2000 | 4 Baltimore | 1 NY Giants | 34-7 |
| 2001 | 2 New England | 1 St. Louis | 20-17 |
| 2002 | 2 Tampa Bay | 1 Oakland | 48-21 |
| 2003 | 1 New England | 3 Carolina | 32-29 |
| 2004 | 2 New England | 1 Philadelphia | 24-21 |
| 2005 | 6 Pittsburgh | 1 Seattle | 21-10 |
| 2006 | 3 Indianapolis | 1 Chicago | 29-17 |
| 2007 | 5 NY Giants | 1 New England | 17-14 |
| 2008 | 2 Pittsburgh | 4 Arizona | 27-23 |
| 2009 | 1 New Orleans | 1 Indianapolis | 31-17 |
| 2010 | 6 Green Bay | 2 Pittsburgh | 31-25 |
| 2011 | 4 NY Giants | 1 New England | 21-17 |
| 2012 | 4 Baltimore | 2 San Francisco | 34-31 |
| 2013 | 1 Seattle | 1 Denver | 43-8 |
—Ian Allan