Zerovoltz
-
Posts
1,585 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Zerovoltz
-
-
Horrible horrible idea.
1. In college, where the tradition of ALL postseason play for over 100 years was through the bowl system, which has always been nuetral sites...works for college playoffs because it's already established. College fans have been going to "post season" bowl games since football began basically.
2. The NFL makes most their money on TV deals so I can not understand how they would monetize a nuetural site confercene title game more than they do just having it played in the 1 seed stadium.
3. Most NFL stadiums have a great deal of tax payer funding involved in them, and you can bet governors, senators and congresspeople, mayors etc...wouldn't take it well that for example, if the Bills, who now have a very good team, that can expect to play home playoff games, went to Atlanta for conference title games that might otherwise be in Western NY....the folks who are funding your new stadium might be slightly PISSED off. ...as would most folks with civic concerns in their teams locations.
4. Home championship games are great for the fans, and the cities that host...extra revenue for food, hotels, all that. media attention and so on.
Also...kind of related, kind of not.
with 17 games...OR when something like a storm, or other extraordinary circumstances come up...we have some really big college venues that could host. Rose Bowl, Michigan, Notre Dame, Husker Stadium, and so on -
**** The NFL ought to consider a series of games played at college stadiums where the teams with 9 homes games can pick a venue and host a game. ****
Denver VS Seattle on the blue field at Boise State for example.....or Bears VS Colts at South Bend. Maybe Jets VS Giants at West Point. Chiefs Vikings from Huskers stadium... Bills Eagles at Happy Valley? The possibillities are there. Kind of like the NHL doing the games outside in certain stadiums.
-
Renfro is one of those dudes who is really good, that looks like he wouldn't even be first string grounds crew on a minor leauge baseball team ground crew.
-
Just now, WyoAZBillfan said:
Pull adams off the field, but no flash for helmet to helmet (that’s how it appeared to my eyes). This game is weak.
....that wasn't helmet to helmet.
-
1
-
-
Just now, ColoradoBills said:
I just have to laugh about fans still thinking that was possible.
100,000s of hotel room, plane flights and plans made for all fans of the other teams for Week #18 AND the disruption to WC weekend.
Like the whole league was going to wait on 1 football game.
That option had 0.0% chance of happening.
I agree....would have disrupted a ton of plans, people...venues may not have been available in some places teh following week and so on.
...and so here we are.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, ColoradoBills said:
On Monday night?
no, of course not. Just whenever it would have been appropriate...like today. Should have had Cincy Bills conclusion today and moved all week 18 games back 1 week..but they didn't. So given that...I don't know exactly what else they could have done.
-
@ScottLaw I can understand the agony of having to give up the control over the 1 seed becasue the game with Cincy is declared no contest. I do not unerstand the angst of the NFL making an in season rule change to try and make it a little less painful. If they followed the rules in place, and just went by win pct. KC would in the same situation they are in now AND if they were to get the 1 seed, would not be facing any of the neutral site stuff.
I would have preferred they finished the game so we could all know fair and square where everything laid out
-
Just now, ColoradoBills said:
Come on volts, you're better than that. A bad call is a bad call. If a KC player was the WR you'd be saying the same thing.
They didn't throw the PI on the Riaders on teh prior series. I don't like bad calls for or against my team. I'd like the NFL to do more to get the officiating up a few notches.
Look...KC had a W all wrapped up VS the colts when they threw a flag on Chris Jones for saying something hurtful to Matt Ryan.
KC almost lost the first radiers game when they called RTP on Jones AFTER HE HAD RECOVERD A fumble and was the runner....when we he was tackled by Derek Carr, for falling on Carr.
-
Just now, Nephilim17 said:
What are you doing on a Bills site when there's a KC Raiders game going on? Are your own people that uninteresting or ignorant that you seek the company of Bills fans right now?
Yes. This is the best message board in the NFL. Not joking.
-
1
-
-
the officials are universally terrible. I can give tons of examples of bad calls vs KC...bad calls vs Buffalo...plenty to go around.
-
1
-
-
I'd love to hear a reasoned response about why the NFL would ever want tiny market, flyoever country KC to ever win anything. You'd think they'd do more to help out the Giants and Jets, Bears, Chargers and Rams wouldn't you?
-
That wasn't PI. He got his arm in there without grabbing etc.
-
2
-
2
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:
Agree, but the Bills didn't get their chance to prove they will have a 14-3 record too and the tie breaker win over the chiefs but nevertheless the Chiefs get the 1st seed benefit of a bye week.
...and again..I agree, KC got a GOOD DEAL on this, even if some fans might not think so. We'll never know what MIGHT have happened, but essentially, instead of playing the game, which mathematically, probably was a 55% chance the Bills would lose at the time the game stopped, KC now has a 100% go for the 1 seed by simply winning Saturday. You take that every time.
Essentially, KC gets a "win" in the WC round, and can't play BOTH of the Bills and Bengals, It can only be one or the other at worst, and still possible they play neither one, or if they play Cincy, still host if the Chiefs make it that far of course. It's a good deal for KC.....the cost being simply having to play the Bills at a nuetral site ONLY if both KC and the Bills win this weekend.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Jauronimo said:
Why is ChiefsPlanet such a consistent collection of scum? What's the latest on methhead XFactor and the bank robber?
I don't post there. I do agree it's a cesspool. Arrowhead Stadium crows >>>>>>> Chiefs Planet crowd.
3 minutes ago, What a Tuel said:Yes. Absolutely. I'll certainly remind Chiefs fans that they certainly shouldnt have had the bye.
In a prior post, I acknowledge, this isn't a bad deal for the Chiefs as it turned out. The only thing I would say is that the whole problem with the no contest is that you can not definiteively say KC didn't deserve the bye. We can't say they did because the Bills and Bengals game didn't happen.
2 minutes ago, Johnnycage46 said:And if the Chiefs win the Super Bowl their fans literally won't care how it happened.
This is correct. IF KC does somehow go on to win the SB....the talking heads will drone on about it for a week or so and that's it. KC gets to keep the trophy, the record books show KC won the title. in a few years now one will remember or care at all. Sad but true.
-
1
-
2
-
-
Just now, BillyBilliams said:
I'm simply not going to agree that Cincy has the biggest gripe. They were a full game behind KC and Buffalo at the time of week 17 starting. If you want to say they have the biggest gripe, I'd argue Baltimore has an even more gripe. They would have beat Cincy TWICE and would still need a coin flip in order to get a home game.
Cincy does because without the outcome of the Bill / Cincy game, they are going to no matter what, be the AFC North Champ but predisposed to a coin toss for hosting or going on the road to open the wild card round IF they lose to the Ravens.
Either the rules and winning the division matter or they don't.
It's important to note in all of this that the proposal for all of this is to CHANGE rules that are already in place. Cincy has every right to be upset that they have as of today - No chance at the 1. They also may be subject to opening their playoffs on the road even if they win the division. A lot potentially taken off the table for them through no fault of their own, and in opposition to existing rules.
-
I'd like to clarify at least the point of view I have as a Chiefs fan about the proposed solution -
If you had offered the me/Chiefs the 1 seed, with the condition that a BUF/KC AFCCG is played at a nuetral site. ...and the only condition is KC beats the Raiders? I take that 100% of the time. That's a great trade off for KC.
As the 1 - KC gets:
1st round bye.
CAN NOT play BOTH of Cincy and Buf in playoffs. It's impossible.
Cincy is the team that has the biggest gripe
Buf is the team with the 2nd biggest gripe as they had control of their destiny to the 1 seed and lost that by having the game be declared a no contest.
I am sure you'll see plenty of KC fans complaining about this on Twitter and on boards. Considering there was no fair way to do it, KC isn't getting the shaft on this.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, KDIGGZ said:
So your argument is there were teams not trying to win? I'm sure the NFL would love to hear that. Not a valid excuse. Adding an extra team is good for everyone and takes away the bye which nobody rightfully earned
YES, that is my argument. Once they thought they were done or their position couldn't change based on the outcome of week 17 games....the TITANS for example, before the Bills/Bengals game, had a situation where week 17 was meaningless because their week 18 matchup was a win and in, no matter what happend in week 17. IF they had known the 8th spot was possible, then week 17 isn't meaningless to them.
The Raiders might not have been inclined to pull the plug on Carr IF they thought the 8th playoff spot was possible. Not that Stidham did bad...he did well, but with the season still alive for them, they might not have made the change....maybe they go on more 4th downs knowing they weren't dead yet....lots of things could have been different.
-
One positive for KC...Mahomes is better AWAY from Arrowhead. So there is that.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:
That's overall win percentage if I'm reading it correctly. The last thing NFL owners want is to vote against a new rule proposal that would be viewed as unfair to a team whose player almost died on the field. Not great optics.
I don't disagree with your sentiment. I am sure all this is moving forward because there is momentum among the vast majority of owners to make rule changes in season due to these circumstances.
Again....the best solution would have been to play the games on the field....I understand they are trying to make this as fair as they can even as there is no 100 pct fair way to do it.
-
Just now, Doc Brown said:
I guess they should just put up a vote for AFC winning percentage to determine the seeding then.
https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/status/1611216418233614336?s=20&t=Mj3hkyrx6NP2LEqHxzB5Lg
....they wouldn't need a vote at all. that's already the rule that's in place.
-
Something of note...the NFL does have rules in place for this. In a no contest, you go with win pct and the chips fall where they fall. That is the current rule.
The owners are now going to get together on Friday and vote to CHANGE the rules in season. That is the reason for the vote. If they were just using the rules in place, you'd have no contest, win pct, and that's it.
I am NOT arguing that is fair, right, what should or shouldn't happen, but I am pointing out that the NFL is considering a rule change on the fly for this.
Obviously, I think all of us wish the Bengals/Bills game could be concluded so there would be no question of who should or shouldn't get what. No one wants an asterik next to their team name in the event they win a super bowl.
At any rate, it will require 24 votes from the owners to pass any rule change on Friday. My guess is they probably have the votes to pass it or they wouln't be putting the options forward...but I would imagine KC, Cincy, may or may not resist and try and find 7 other teams to vote along with them.
-
1 minute ago, KDIGGZ said:
Right, the Chiefs were not ahead of us. And now they are. They are the only ones that win in this scenario and it's punishing the 2 teams that had to go through this terrible ordeal. Just add 1 playoff team, I'm not sure why that would not be the ideal solution
Adding an extra team screws teams that made some IR choices, QB choices etc, thinking they were done...if 8 was on the table last week, the Raiders, Jets, Titans, Ravens ALL may well have done A WHOLE lot of things differently.
-
1
-
-
Some points:
1. Someone here pointed out there are rules in place for this and those simply point to no contest and let the chips fall. That is the easiest.
2. Several point out KC lost to Cincy and Buffalo. That is true no matter what. And if KC finished the season still with a better record/win pct then it still wouldn’t matter. If KC would have finished with the better records it doesn’t matter. Unfortunately the inherent nature of a no contest means Buffalo now has no chance to earn the better record. You don’t get points for this. KC has had seasons where they beat both super bowl participants in the regular season. It doesn’t matter.
3. If they do the plan where KC would choose bye Or homefield, that 10000% ought to be “bye” because math. But……if you tell me I’m forced into that choice AND I know my opponent is NE. I’d at least consider playing the game and taking homefield. I’d also consider it for a Miami team if I knows no Tua or Bridgewater.
4. KC still has to win this week or a lot of this won’t matter.
5. The 8th playoff team is pure crap! The Jets Titans and Ravens Raiders may have opted to play differently, start or sit injured players differently last week IF they knew they were still in it. Screwing more and more teams trying to balance out the unfairness by sharing it with even more teams isn’t the way to go
-
Other than actually playing out the Bill/Bengals game AND allowing for all teams to play on equal rest etc....no solution is going to be fair.
Some thoughts:
Alot of this fixes itself if the Raiders upset KC. Could happen. But if not then......
My first idea (and sorry if it was mentioned earlier, I haven't read the entire thread) just move ALL the week 18 games back to week 19 and let only the Bengals and Bills play this sunday. Then you just move the playoffs back one week and lose the super bowl bye week. Too late for this. They've announced week 18 is going ahead on schedule.
Second idea. Considering it's looking like Bill/Bengals is on the way to being declare a no contest....which is going to benefit Kc the most, and keep Cincy from any shot at the 2 seed....maybe you could allow an 8th AFC playoff team, give no first round bye's so that AT LEAST KC has to play in round 1 with Cincy an Buffalo. KC still has the 1 seed, but loses the benefit of the bye. KC would draw Miami/pitt/ or NE or NYJ. depending on how the other games all go.
Third idea. It's a no contest. Life isn't fair. KC catches a huge break, gets the 1. Cincy is bitter because they can't get 1 or 2. Bills bitter becasue they can't get the 1. Baltimore bitter because they can't win division and get home playoff game. I know this isn't exactly an idea....but it's the defacto option at present. I want KC to have the 1 seed. I don't want a big fat asterisk next to it indicating KC would benefit by a man nearly dying on a football field.
The only thing that I can think of in the "life isn't fair" case.... Back in the post merger NFL, Home playoff games were not determined by record. They had a rotation of which division winner would host from year to year. Specifically, I can remember the old St. Louis Cardinals, having won the NFC east in 1974...had to go on teh road in the divisional round and lost to the Vikings. The next year, they won the NFC east again, 11-3 record. Had to go on teh road and lost to the Rams. As it would turn out, the City of St Louis NEVER hosted an NFL playoff game the entire time the Cardinals were in St Louis from 1960 to 1988. I don't bring it up to compare any of that to a player dying and being revived on the field...only that there are many instances when things just are not fair for one reason or another. Unfortunately, as things are headed, it would appear that we are headed to a conclusion that isn't gonig to be fair.
-
21 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
Orlando Brown does not suck. He isn't as good as Tunsil. But he does not suck.
To me it makes no sense for a team not paying a Quarterback to let a prime age asset at a premium position leave because they don't want to pay him.
Orlando Brown is a below average LT. He made the pro bowl because of his name and the team he plays on.
He ranks WAY WAY WAY down the list in pass blocking. He's ok at run blocking, and I would add that he is a low motor player. Once he either makes he block or misses it..he's done..no hustle to keep trying to block, to get downfield and block, etc.
Now..let me be clear. If The Chiefs could sign that guy for 10 mil per...FINE. That's his market value. He's a guy who has been able to stay on the field at least...and is capable. he struggles with speed rushers, badly. You CAN live with that ...but he wants to be paid like Tunsil. Tunsil is worthe that money. Brown is ABSOLUTELY not.
We are a long way from the draft, and this isn't supposed to be an especially great OT year....there are a couple good prospects, but they'll go way up high. If KC doesn't pull a trade for Tunsil...I'd not be surprised to see KC expend serious draft captial to try and move up for the Northwestern OT or the Ohio State guy. If KC stays put, I'm kind of intrigued by Bergeron...the Syracuse OT....with that in mind..any of you folks up there have a first hand scouting report? We don't exactly get a lot of Orange football on TV down here in DFW.
-
1
-
Tank the Pats game?
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
IF the Bills tank the Pats game, and lose....and then if KC and BIlls in AFCG, that game would NOT be at nuetral site. It would be in KC.