Rochesterfan
-
Posts
4,587 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Rochesterfan
-
-
13 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:
Here’s an idea. (Not saying I like it)
NFL would like it. More $$$
Add an 8th team.
Division winners all get a Bye.
1, 2, 3, 4: BYE
5 vs 8
6 vs 7
1 vs 6 or 7 or 8
2 vs 5 or 6 or 7
3 vs 4 or 5
4 vs 3 or 5
Doesn’t work out - after week 1 you are at 6 teams then 3.
If you have 8 teams you have to have 0 byes.
To give 4 byes - you would have to expand to 12 teams in each conference.
-
1
-
-
Now I will say - if you get a big lead being fired up early - sure pull guys out and get some rest, but you need to win this game and then let the chips fall where they may.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Casey D said:
I am wrong, thank you. It would come to SOV. That will change depending on outcome of lots of games. Right now it goes to Cincy, but it could change.
It could change, but most likely it favors Cincinnati getting stronger by Beating the Ravens for a better SOV.
-
16 minutes ago, Casey D said:
I believe it is record against common opponents. We would have one more win and the same # of losses. But I could be wrong.
We currently do, but factoring in the Pat loss for us and the Ravens win for Cincinnati- we become tied.
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, Motorin' said:
Make it 8 teams, top 2 get a bye. And if the Bills and Chiefs play it should be on a neutral field in the AFCCG.
Doesn’t work out.
8 teams means no byes.
All 8 have to play.
To have 2 bye - you actually have to eliminate a team and go back to 6 teams in the playoffs and now you have really potentially screwed the Bengals.
-
42 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:
Here's my latest thought:
Assuming Bills KC, Bengals all win this week, that clinches division for Bengals
Week "19" No NFC playoffs, all have bye. In AFC, Bengals Bills play game, plus 4 v 7 and 5 v 6 playoff games in AFC. That then eliminates two teams in AFC and finalizes seedings. Following NFC playoffs start and in AFC week #1 seed has bye and the 2 and 3 seed plays the winners from prior week.
Only draw backs to this KC could have two weeks off in a row if they get the #1 seed, but they would next play the lowest seeded team left, so oh well. Plus two weeks off could even hurt them. Only other unfair advantage would be if Bills win out and earn the #1 seed, then KC had a bye before their first playoff game. But overall keeps most teams playing regularly.
Doesn’t work out then you would have 3 AFC teams left.
4/7 - winner
5/6 - winner
Bills, Cincinnati, and KC - now you have 5 teams after week 1 - so in your listed scenario KC got a second bye
Bills / 4/7 winner - Team 1
Cincinnati/ 5/6 winner - Tesm 2
KC Team 3
So does KC get a 3rd bye?
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Patrick Fitzryan said:
This is the Goodell way. Indecisive about any choice needed to be made before arbitrarily pulling a decision out of his ass on the fly.
That being said, it is still truly insane that they don't have some concrete rule regarding a game that cannot be played or made-up. An injury like we saw on Monday is extremely rare, but something like lightning taking out power in a stadium wouldn't be a wild occurrence. An event like that happening in the last week of the season would put them in a similar predicament.
JHC - once again - they have a rule - it has been posted several times across multiple threads.
The rule gives the commissioner in the case of a game that can not be played as scheduled 2 options:
1) find an available time and reschedule the game - per the rule - the preferred method if the outcome will impact other games.
2) Declare the game a no contest if due to circumstances and/or availability the game cannot be made up.
It grants the commissioner in consultation with league and teams the ability to determine which method is appropriate and grants discretion to make additional decisions as needed.
The league also has rules in place for unbalanced scheduled that were implemented for Covid of using win % to determine seeding in the event all games could not be completed.
Once again - the NFL has handled an unprecedented situation properly and has made the proper steps all along and people with no knowledge or understanding crap on the league and Goodell for no reason.
Just because they have not told you what is going on does not mean they are not actively working with the teams on a solution to fit this situation.
People complained about Monday night and we find out the league office was in contact with the teams and actively working with them and then decided nearly 30 minutes before the TV announcement that they needed to suspend the game completely. This was noted by players showering and guys like Diggs leaving to head to the hospital.
In this case - they have options and the ideal one would b be to complete the game, but they realize that has major negative impact on the 2 teams and neither team is keen to relive the moment yet - so they are looking at the impact of call it a no contest and how can they balance out the impact it has on the teams.
-
1
-
-
I agree with so many of these comments.
With the weight this took off my spirits - I can only imagine how the team feels.
Just the boost they need right now.
Love you guys!
💙♥️🏈
-
8
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, BillsFanSD said:
This is one of about a dozen solutions that are perfectly reasonable. At this point, the league needs to just pick one and be done with it. This is one of those times when it's much better to make a good-enough decision quickly than make a perfect decision later. It's stupid and unprofessional to let this hang out there.
Terrible - the league should not rush a decision when there is no need.
They are in contact with the Bills and Bengals and are looking at options, but until they have some indication of the Hamlin outcome as we are starting to hear - they need to wait.
What happens if they made a decision and then Hamlin had gotten worse and the Bills and Bengals didn’t or could play this weekend - now they have to go back and make adjustments and everyone gives them crap.
Give it time - the info will come out - the league has handled this very well so far - let them continue.
This is not a time to rush a decision- as news comes out - it will impact the Bills and Bengals mental outlook and will impact what they are willing and able to do.
Getting a decision out impacts nothing for the league at the moment as they are working many different angles - it might make you feel better, but it is not impacting the league.
With todays info you will probably get follow-up later today or tomorrow on the plan.
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:
So just Dawkins has spoken so far?
I believe Eric Wood did a talk on Jim Rome and offered himself up to speak so other players do not have to until they have processed and are ready to talk.
At this point - I have not heard of any others besides those 2.
-
Just now, WotAGuy said:
I’m pretty sure the two options stated in the rule are:1) The Chiefs get #1 seed
2) The Pats get a comp pick.
Apparently that is in bold starting every rule.
😂
-
1 hour ago, Motorin' said:
I believe the rule book says that the NFL Commissioner can do as he sees fit during emergencies.
Meaning nothing is off the table in terms of how to deal with this uncharted territory.
You are correct, but the rule really lists 2 options for the Commissioner in case of unplayable games: Find a way to complete the game or cancel the game.
It gives the Commissioner leeway to decide and of course the Commissioner has the ability to act in the best interests of football at all times, but since the specific rule gives 2 options and the game was so close to the beginning and since canceling games was discussed during Covid and how the league would handle unplayed games. I believe the safe bet is that they will follow the established guidelines they had previously discussed.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, WotAGuy said:
I thought I read in one of these threads that they can just settle the Bengals game with “a coin flip”. Or “lottery”. Let’s do one of those too.
Those are not options in the NFL rule book.
Only options are complete the game or call it a no contest and move to winning percentage.
It will be one of those 2 options and my guess is even though it lessens their overall chances - I think both the Bills and Bengals want that game gone.
4 hours ago, Herc11 said:Oh man, didn't see that Rhodes got cut. But still curious how the roster situation would play out. It definitely benefits us if we don't have to carry the same active roster since it will allow us to bring up Marlowe and/or an extra DB.
I think for this reason alone they would have to restart the game and treat it as a fully new game.
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, sven233 said:
If the NFL is going to wait until the games are played this week before making a decision on what to do with Bills/Bengals, they should honestly hope that both the Chiefs and Bengals lose while the Bills win. This cements the standings and the outcome of that game would mean nothing.
But also knowing the league, they probably have wanted the Chiefs to be the #1 seed all season. So, who knows. In the end, I fully expect the Chiefs to someway, somehow benefit from all this and get the bye. Just feels like that is the way this is all headed.
Regardless, with everything that has gone on, and will continue to be going on all week or even longer, I am honestly not sure how we as a team prepare the way we need to in order to win a football game this week. As bad a team as the Pats* are most of the time, it is a fine line in the NFL in who wins games. In a normal week, I wouldn't think twice about winning this game. But this week, I honestly have no idea what is going to happen. We could come out on fire and win by 30 or we could come out completely disinterested and lose by double digits. What I fear most, though, are more injuries. This game is violent enough when playing 100% focused. I can't imagine trying to play the game with so many thoughts elsewhere. It's a real tough spot for us for sure.
Terrible.
The league has stated they are working through scenarios, but are more concerned with Hamlin at this time - they have also been in discussion with the Bills about the mental health of the team and how they want to proceed.
There is absolutely no scenario that the Bills/Bengals game doesn’t have impact. The one you suggested then impacts both the Ravens and Bengals for the division.
The fact that the NFL is considering allowing the game to be a potential no contest tells me exactly how shaken up both the Bills and Bengals are. I don’t think the league has the least bit of care whether KC is the #1 seed and I doubt that factors in at all - as a matter of fact I would 100% bet the NFL would prefer the Bills/Bengals game get played, but they recognize that logistically and mentally that can not happen at this time so they are choosing the other alternative.
No decision was perfect and someone got the short end and someone got a slight benefit in EVERY scenario- so I will be fine when this part of the saga is over and hopefully we get some good news on Hamlin and everything can return to some semblance of normal for these guys.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, BLeonard said:
Really sucks that the Chiefs would benefit here, especially since they lost to both the Bills and Bengals, but it's also most likely the easiest solution.
Not really - I think 100% it is what both the Bills and Bengals would prefer over having to shoehorn the game in.
This fits well within the NFL rules that are established and logistically makes the most sense.
Yep KC gets a small benefit potentially and Baltimore gets slightly screwed, but it does not change the playoff teams and I imagine both the Bills and Bengals would sign off on this in a minute to prevent every other scenario presented - where they have to make up the game.
There is not an option/rule that allows for or makes any sense to award a victory in a game in the 1st quarter that can not be completed. The NFL was not and should not consider coin toss/lottery ball or any other method of creating a false victor in the game.
There has always been exactly 2 choices in the outcome: complete the game or declare it a no contest as those are the options in the NFL rulebook for this situation.
If they go no contest - then it was always going to move to winning percentage as that is what they established and what was talked about and agreed to during Covid if any games were cancelled.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, BLeonard said:
So, if the Chiefs get the #1 seed, they'd get two weeks off (week 19 & 20) and the Bills and Bengals have to play a playoff game the next week, while their opponent had a bye.
Seems unfair to the Bills and Bengals, while rewarding every other AFC team.
Yep - it is one of the worst ideas and I do not seen Buffalo or Cincinnati going for it.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Turk71 said:
Damar's survival is obviously the paramount concern right now.
Venturing a guess on how the NFL deals with this situation re: playoff seeding.
I think the Bills Bengals game will be considered a no contest and will not be made up. I don't see any chance of a win or loss being assigned to either team from that game.
Win % will be used for playoff seeding and the playoffs will happen as scheduled. I don't see any chance of them moving the established playoff dates or inventing new ways of seeding the playoffs. Any other solution would be too complicated imo.
Plus that fits with the established rules and would be repeatable in the future for other unseen issues of this nature.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, boyst said:
For the fan it's about rest. The players talk every year of the bonus of two weeks at home to chill, recover, be home.
I don’t know - I was listening to one of the national radio shows this morning talking to some former Super Bowl Champ linemen and one of the questions was would you prefer home field or getting a bye week as part of a suggested KC gets #1 seed and the bye, but would have to go to Buffalo and both players said they would take the bye.
The rest and pass to the next round was better and allowed more of the team to be healthy and playing one less game to get to the Super Bowl was a huge advantage in their mind.
Although they did concede that they got byes and home games which ultimately is what got them the win, but they both felt rest and recouping was key to a 3 game streak.
I am sure that other would like home field also - resting in your bed etc.
-
23 minutes ago, BillsFanSD said:
The thing that's irritating about this is that it's completely predictable to the point of total certainty that something like this would happen eventually. For the life of me, I do not understand why the NFL is so consistently myopic and reactionary and can't think ahead to how to handle this kind of situation. It really isn't hard to come up with some general policy parameters for this.
First of all, you need to make sure that it's a system that can't be gamed. For the MNF game, we were only halfway through the first quarter, so the game had barely even started and this isn't a concern. But you don't want to create an incentive for a team to exaggerate an injury in the fourth quarter of a 47-3 blowout as a way of generating a no-contest or something. So make it a call from New York based on some well-publicized guidelines for when play stops and when play continues. It could be as simple as "spinal injury or on-field resuscitation = stop; anything else = go." Just enough to stop gamesmanship.
Second, you need a plan for how you deal with the game that got cancelled. "Score at the time of cancellation" is fine. "Tie" is fine. "Coin flip" is fine. "No contest" is fine. "The injured player's team loses" is fine. It could depend on how much time is left in the game -- that's fine. Just have a rule and stick to it. This making-it-up-as-you-go-along business is bush league. Even a suboptimal rule is better than what the league is doing now, because the suboptimal rule will at least be transparent and known to all parties in advance.
Third, you need leeway for the commissioner to handle unforeseen contingencies. All this needs is a clause like "The commissioner has the authority the adjust any of these procedures when he or she determines that doing so is in the best interests of the league" or somesuch. If the commissioner abuses that authority, you have the wrong commissioner and that's not a problem that can be solved with policy.
I think that's really about it. This policy doesn't have to be complicated. It just needs to exist.
As I keep saying there is a rule and it has been discussed. It gives the commissioner the leeway, but the first part of the rule is if possible to try every way to reschedule- especially if it has an impact on other teams (positive or negative).
The rule also states that the alternative if it can not be played for whatever reason is a no contest. There are no rules for coin toss or tie or assigning a victory, but does give the commission leeway - so my guess is in you example of 47-3 - he could rule the game official and give the team with 47 the victory.
I do not think he would do that in the middle of the first quarter.
-
Just now, RyanC883 said:
how do the Bengals get screwed?
Because if they can not get the #1 seed (and the Bills win) they would be the only playoff team that did not get a bye.
All of the other teams they are playing would get a bye and if the Bills won and got the #1 seed we would get a bye, but Cincinnati the team that was looking out for us - would be forced to play the extra game and would miss the bye hence risking injury and not getting the rest like heir opponents.
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, fergie's ire said:
The conference championships are scheduled for Jan. 29th. The Super Bowl is Feb. 12th. That's two weeks. The only thing scheduled for Feb. 5th is the Pro Bowl Skills competition in Vegas.
That does not work out though.
Week 19 1/15 Bills Bengals and NFC wild card (AFC Bye)
Week 20 1/22 AFC wild card and NFC Bye
Week 21 1/29 AFC and NFC divisional rounds
Week 22 2/5 AFC/NFC championship games (Maybe ProBowl also)
Week 23 2/12 SuperBowl
So the bye week is eliminated before the SB and the Bengals/Bills (one or maybe both) are the only teams to not get a bye. Rest of the AFC gets a bye while we play - NFC gets a bye elsewhere. And based upon the original question which was would there still be a week before the SuperBowl- that is gone which is what I am referring to.
Additionally potentially KC ends up with 2 straight weeks off if the Bills lose, but it really screws the Bills and the Bengals as they get no break at all and are both emotionally invested and will be forced to talk about the Hamlin play a ton leading up to the game.
-
39 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:
Not if they win… your not playing anyone if they win.
Even then Cincinnati gets screwed just because they understood what we were going through and decided to postpone.
Would it be good for the Bills maybe, but I can not see the Bills accepting seeing the Bengals get screwed over after being so accommodating.
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, Success said:
Ah - I read it wrong. Oops. They'd just have the NFC take their bye the following week, so by the time the SB rolled around, both champs would get the extra week.
Not terrible, now that I understand it. I suppose at least we'd get a shot at the 1 seed.
Nope the bye weeks eliminate the extra week before the SB.
So now either the Bills or the Bengals or both get totally screwed as their opponents get rest and time to prepare with limited outcomes - while they play a huge and emotional game.
It is the absolute worst thing the NFL could do to screw both of these teams, but if they must get the game in - they might try this.
🤮
6 minutes ago, ngbills said:Limping how? We are either playing cin week 19 or the ravens or chargers. Not getting a bye that week. I play cin, win and we get our week off. Lose and we are playing the ravens or chargers. I take that over not playing then in a one and done game.
Yes but you are playing the Ravens Chargers after they played week 18 or after they get a weeks rest and healed up while you are playing and emotional game and then playing those same teams.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, JayBaller10 said:
Even though Rhodes has never played safety, I’d have to believe he’d be better at that position than an undrafted journeyman on his 3rd or 4th team but hey, I’m just a guy sitting on a couch 😅
Or it could be they know Rhodes isn’t going to sign anywhere and can be available and they want to get in to get a look and talk to him for a potential signing for next year.
Beane is always looking at bottom end roster guys.
Tank the Pats game?
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
There is very little change at this point, but a Bengals win over the Ravens helps by giving them another strong win, but the added loss the Ravens get hurts.
The Pats win over the Bills (whom we beat earlier) would improve their record and help. Then it comes down to the slate of games being played.
I think that the SOV in the end would still favor Cincinnati, but without inputting every scenario I do not know for sure.