UKBillFan

Draft Kings is saying it will be based on SOV so the Bengals could overtake the Bills on Sunday: https://dknation.draftkings.com/nfl/2023/1/4/23538979/bills-vs-bengals-playoff-picture-standings-implications-seeding-tie-vacated-home-field-advantage New York Post agrees: https://nypost.com/2023/01/05/how-potential-bills-bengals-cancellation-could-change-afc-playoffs/ AS is saying the Bengals could claim second seed too: https://en.as.com/nfl/how-does-the-bills-vs-bengals-postponement-affect-nfl-playoff-scenarios-n/ In terms of common opponents tiebreaker, I think both sides have the same winning percentage of 70%, should the Bengals win and Bills lose on Sunday?

Apologies, should have made it clearer.

Asked above, but what tiebreaker do the Bills have over the Bengals?

Which tiebreaker would it be? Record would be the same, division record would be the same, conference record would be the same, no head to head to determine and, on strength of schedule, it's currently 0.496 for the Bills and 0.508 for the Bengals, but the Bengals are facing the sixth seed Ravens, who cannot fall any lower, and the Bills are facing the seventh seed Patriots, who cannot make up any places.

It's an either/or option. They'll either split HFA and the bye OR ask for the AFCCG to be played on a neutral field if circumstances dictate. Not both.

True, though the most common consesus, albeit not officially announced is that Bills-Bengals will be deemed a no contest. If so, the Chiefs will take the number one seed with a win over the Raiders. The Bills will take the number two seed should they beat the Pats. If they lose, the Bengals will take number two should they defeat the Ravens on strength of schedule. As per Adam Schefter the NFL is looking at two possibilities: 1) Number one seed gets to choose either home field advantage or a bye. Whatever they choose, the number two seed gets the other. Lose to the Pats with the Bengals beating the Ravens, and the Bills lose out on this. 2) AFCCG to be played at a neutral venue if the seedings of the competitors involved have been affected by the no contest. Lose to the Pats and the Bills would not have claimed the number one seed even with a win over the Bengals, so no reason for them not to go to Arrowhead instead.

Because the Bills would drop to third seed if Chiefs and Bengals win and they lose. Edit: On basis of strength of schedule when it comes to the Bengals. Also, the rumoured neutral AFCCG field would only be on the basis that Monday's abandoned game could have otherwise affected the seedings. If the Chiefs win and the Bills lose then Monday's game wouldn't have any impact, even if the Bills had beaten the Bengals. We would have still finished second to them as we lost to the Pats.

The Bengals were 22-0 up against the Patriots in week 16. Remind me what happened in the second half? Was it a blow out?

Bearing in mind too that one of the rumours is home field advantage will be negated if it involves teams whose seed placing has been affected by Monday's events. If the Chiefs win (14-3) and the Bills lose (12-4), then Monday's game wouldn't matter - we'd still finish below them in the placings even if the game had been played and we had beaten the Bengals. Which would possibly mean a trip to Arrowhead? Obviously, if the Bengals win and we lose they'd jump us to second seed (12-4) though the home field advantage could be waived in that scenario.

And taking away some of the strength of the first seed as well. The second rumour is they will either ask the first seed to choose between a bye or home field advantage, and the second seed will get the other. This is obviously if they stick to a seven team play off process. The final rumour is should two teams meet where Monday's potential no contest has an impact on seedings, then that game will be played on a neutral field.

I think journalists reported that the NFL were considering this earlier. I responded I felt smug after suggesting it before.

He remembers the game. How much weight a simple question carries.

Would it? It was still being played at the same time as Patriots-Bills earlier in the week, even when the outcome of Bills-Bengals wasn't clear.

I guess Patriots-Bills is the attraction for Sky now it looks like Bengals-Ravens won't be for the division.

The concern with Josh is his ankle. We've seen him be limited with this elbow for a few weeks of the season. Not overly concerned about the rest from a physical viewpoint at this stage, but we'll see what tomorrow's update is like.

I forgot Tua's fencing posture was at the Jungle. It's seen two frightening events this year.

In other words, despite the bye, the number one seed bailed out before then.

So valuable eight of the teams got the bye in the last four years and none of them won the Super Bowl. Mind you, guess the same could be said about Home Advantage! Due to the complex nature of the AFC this year, extending to eight and dropping the bye makes sense. Dare I say it, the NFL will probably see how it pans out before confirming they're returning to seven next year.

I only want number one seed for home field advantage (which might be negated this year in the AFC anyway). I'm not fussed about the bye; the last two years we came out of the regular season bye cold.

Rumoured to be eighth seed added to both conferences.

That's very true. Think Cincy would be pleased to host us. Of course, they may be in the round themselves which could rule it out.

Indy. Don't like the idea of the Bills going back to Cincy quite yet.

I will be slightly smug if they add an eighth seed.

As said, for all intents and purposes we have lost at the Bengals. We have no control over the number one seed through no fault of our own and the benefits which go with it. (Well, I guess it is our fault to an extent; if we hadn't lost to the Jets or Vikings...)

Sorry, misread your original post!