Official: (Bengals) Game will not be resumed this week UPDATE: OFFICIALLY CANCELLED

[BigDingus]

Was it ever suggested that instead of win %, they base the Chiefs/Bengals/Bills seeding off how many losses + tiebreakers?

 

That way, Bills with 3 losses vs Chiefs with 3 losses still gets Buffalo the #1 seed, or if Chiefs & Bills both had 4 losses, Bengals would supersede the Chiefs in tiebreakers, then strength of schedule would have Bengals over us... 

 

It just would make more sense given the position all teams were in heading into that MNF game. Bengals needed both Chiefs & Bills to lose a game, Chiefs needed Bills to lose a game, and Bills just needed to win out. If they just went off total losses instead of win %, it'd line up the same way right?

[Doc Brown]

11 minutes ago, BigDingus said:

Was it ever suggested that instead of win %, they base the Chiefs/Bengals/Bills seeding off how many losses + tiebreakers?

 

That way, Bills with 3 losses vs Chiefs with 3 losses still gets Buffalo the #1 seed, or if Chiefs & Bills both had 4 losses, Bengals would supersede the Chiefs in tiebreakers, then strength of schedule would have Bengals over us... 

 

It just would make more sense given the position all teams were in heading into that MNF game. Bengals needed both Chiefs & Bills to lose a game, Chiefs needed Bills to lose a game, and Bills just needed to win out. If they just went off total losses instead of win %, it'd line up the same way right?

I don't see how you could simply take away a win from KC.  I mean one of those two overtime grudge match victories against the Texans and the Willis led Titans would've been meaningless.

[BigDingus]

45 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

I don't see how you could simply take away a win from KC.  I mean one of those two overtime grudge match victories against the Texans and the Willis led Titans would've been meaningless.

 

It's only "taking away a win" if you're basing it off win %. You're not, you're looking at how many games you lost. They didn't lose those games against the Texans of Titans, therefore it helps them in this scenario.

 

if they had lost any of those games, they'd be out of the mix, just like they would've been had none of this cancelation stuff happened.

[Doc Brown]

18 minutes ago, BigDingus said:

 

It's only "taking away a win" if you're basing it off win %. You're not, you're looking at how many games you lost. They didn't lose those games against the Texans of Titans, therefore it helps them in this scenario.

 

if they had lost any of those games, they'd be out of the mix, just like they would've been had none of this cancelation stuff happened.

They could just as easily argue that they should go by number of wins.  Unfortunately, that's why they go by winning percentage.  It sucks but I can't think of a more fair way without actually resuming the Bills/Bengals game.  KC lucked out but at least the NFL tried to make it a little fairer with the neutral site addendum.  The Bengals got shafted though with that bs coin flip thing.  

[nucci]

9 hours ago, BillsSbSoon said:

Right so basically the players canceled the game. You’re proving my point. Nfl had no choice when the players refused to play. They would’ve been happy had they just continued on

No, it was postponed on Monday. The league looked in to playing it at a different day but couldn't fit it in anywhere so the league cancelled it. If the NFL rescheduled the game the players would have played

[UKBillFan]

11 minutes ago, nucci said:

No, it was postponed on Monday. The league looked in to playing it at a different day but couldn't fit it in anywhere so the league cancelled it. If the NFL rescheduled the game the players would have played

 

It think the issue is the league wanted it played within two days and Hamlin was still in a critical condition then; neither set of players were ready as a collective to do so at that point. If the league turned round and said play it next Thursday and push the play offs back, due to Hamlin's miraculous improvement, I think both set of players would be prepared to.

Edited January 7, 2023 by UKBillFan

[stlbills13]

I don't understand why Cincy fans were so confident they were gonna win based on 9 minutes on Monday yet they are worried about losing to a Ravens team possibly on a 3rd qb and worried about going into Buffalo or KC in the playoffs. The confidence is inconsistent

[NeverOutNick]

4 minutes ago, stlbills13 said:

I don't understand why Cincy fans were so confident they were gonna win based on 9 minutes on Monday yet they are worried about losing to a Ravens team possibly on a 3rd qb and worried about going into Buffalo or KC in the playoffs. The confidence is inconsistent

Cincinnati fans do have a right to be a little annoyed because they did nothing wrong in the situation and are taking most of the burden. Before that game last week they had a chance at the number one seed, now they don’t. At the very least the NFL should’ve said if Buffalo versus Cincinnati happens in the divisional round that should be at a neutral site as well

[zow2]

2 hours ago, NeverOutNick said:

Cincinnati fans do have a right to be a little annoyed because they did nothing wrong in the situation and are taking most of the burden. Before that game last week they had a chance at the number one seed, now they don’t. At the very least the NFL should’ve said if Buffalo versus Cincinnati happens in the divisional round that should be at a neutral site as well

 

I agree. Not sure why that option wasn't on the table. And the Bengals first game should be at home, no coin flip.

Some Cincinnati fans have had a meltdown over this whole new arrangement but they do have the benefit of not playing the Chiefs at Arrowhead if they get to the AFCCG,,, and that's very possible.  

 

Also, they make a big deal out of past tragedies and/or people dying not canceling games, etc.  But none of those happened in-game.  This really was unprecedented and it happened in week 17 so there is really no fair way to flex the game back in the schedule unless the entire playoff dates were re-organized.

 

In the future, if a player is paralyzed in a game (hopefully never)...but if it does happen, who knows, the game might be postponed.  Mental health is a much bigger deal now than even 10-15 years ago and the players mindset will be considered before continuing a game with a real life emergency happening if front of them.

[chongli]

Not sure if this was posted elsewhere, but:

 

 

From the article:

 

"As the Bengals prepared to continue to play, it eventually became obvious that would not happen. At least one player heard Bills coach Sean McDermott say that the Bills would not continue, even if it meant forfeiting the game.

 

The Bengals were willing to accommodate the Bills. One player heard Bengals coach Zac Taylor offer to resume the game on Tuesday. Bengals players generally accepted the prospect of a one-day delay.

 

But then the Bills left Cincinnati. Multiple Bengals players were confused by that development as it occurred. On one hand, they were sensitive to the situation involving Damar Hamlin. On the other hand, they fully realized the stakes of the game. They wanted to get it played.

 

[...]

 

Regardless, the truth is that the Bengals initially were told play would indeed resume by the officials responsible for the game. The truth also seems to be that, if the Bengals had known the game wouldn’t be finished at all and that the rules would later change to make it harder for them to realize a favorable playoff seed, they wouldn’t have been quite as accommodating of the Bills."

[Boatdrinks]

17 hours ago, stlbills13 said:

I don't understand why Cincy fans were so confident they were gonna win based on 9 minutes on Monday yet they are worried about losing to a Ravens team possibly on a 3rd qb and worried about going into Buffalo or KC in the playoffs. The confidence is inconsistent

I think the Bengals want a self made bye this week by resting starters and don’t want Sundays result to have any bearing. I don’t think they’re worried about the opponent. 

[Boatdrinks]

34 minutes ago, chongli said:

Not sure if this was posted elsewhere, but:

 

 

From the article:

 

"As the Bengals prepared to continue to play, it eventually became obvious that would not happen. At least one player heard Bills coach Sean McDermott say that the Bills would not continue, even if it meant forfeiting the game.

 

The Bengals were willing to accommodate the Bills. One player heard Bengals coach Zac Taylor offer to resume the game on Tuesday. Bengals players generally accepted the prospect of a one-day delay.

 

But then the Bills left Cincinnati. Multiple Bengals players were confused by that development as it occurred. On one hand, they were sensitive to the situation involving Damar Hamlin. On the other hand, they fully realized the stakes of the game. They wanted to get it played.

 

[...]

 

Regardless, the truth is that the Bengals initially were told play would indeed resume by the officials responsible for the game. The truth also seems to be that, if the Bengals had known the game wouldn’t be finished at all and that the rules would later change to make it harder for them to realize a favorable playoff seed, they wouldn’t have been quite as accommodating of the Bills."

Of course they’d say “ if we knew this or that .” The fact is nobody knew at the time. The league decided that the game would not be resumed as it would require an entire rework of the playoff schedule. In the end they decide to do the least disruptive thing: change a few parameters in the AFC if certain situations came about. The Bengals or Bills didn’t have too much say either way. If the league had went with the other option they’d be making the game up next Sunday as the NFC playoffs got under way. They decided that resuming the game had “ bad mojo” and wanted to move on. Rescheduling for Tuesday and the Bills forfeiting would have been terrible optics for the NFL and they went to great lengths to avoid that situation. It wasn’t up to the teams: they were told what to do after the postponement. 

[Boatdrinks]

17 hours ago, NeverOutNick said:

Cincinnati fans do have a right to be a little annoyed because they did nothing wrong in the situation and are taking most of the burden. Before that game last week they had a chance at the number one seed, now they don’t. At the very least the NFL should’ve said if Buffalo versus Cincinnati happens in the divisional round that should be at a neutral site as well

They had a small chance at the #1 seed : I believe it was in the 15% range even if they had won on Monday night. They still would have needed a KC loss. So they had a chance at 2 , but the Bills had a chance at #1 on their own if they won their games. The MNF game was cancelled : it officially never happened. A potential BUF / CIN playoff matchup wouldn’t be on a neutral field as the teams played the same amount of games and had different records. KC made out the best getting the bye. The neutral field compensates for some of the lost opportunity. 

[Caesar]

On 1/6/2023 at 6:45 AM, UKBillFan said:

Remind me what happened to the Bengals against the Pats after they looked hot in the first half?

 

On 1/6/2023 at 6:59 AM, UKBillFan said:

The Bills are still better than the Pats, and they came within a stupid fumble of taking the lead against the Bengals with very little time left, albeit I appreciate playing away from the Jungle is different for them.

 

The probability is that the Bengals would have beaten the Bills but no one can say that for certain.

You keep going on about the Bengals-Patriots game, in which you obviously did not watch.  The Bengals had everything go wrong that could and the Pats still only had ONE scoring drive.  2 INT's on the WRs, fumble, missed FG, Missed XP, TD called back, fumble TD called back, dropped bomb, 2 dropped TD passes, Pat's scored on pick 6 screw up and tipped Hail Mary.

The Bengals sure didnt seem like they were taking the Bills lightly.  But keep thinking the Bills will destroy the Bengals, you may end up like a whole bunch of Chiefs fans. Lose to the Patriots tomorrow I'll be here to say hi to you personally.

2 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

They had a small chance at the #1 seed : I believe it was in the 15% range even if they had won on Monday night. They still would have needed a KC loss. So they had a chance at 2 , but the Bills had a chance at #1 on their own if they won their games. The MNF game was cancelled : it officially never happened. A potential BUF / CIN playoff matchup wouldn’t be on a neutral field as the teams played the same amount of games and had different records. KC made out the best getting the bye. The neutral field compensates for some of the lost opportunity. 

 

The Bengals were taking the Bills chance at a #1 seed and would have the #2 seed.  But Bills get the #2 and the Bills get a championship game on a neutral field.  How you do you not go to the Super Bowl?

[Caesar]

On 1/6/2023 at 7:40 AM, FrenchConnection said:

How did I not watch either game? I live in Cincinnati. It’s the game on my TV every week. Your arrogance is exactly the point of my post that you quoted. The entire city of Cincinnati feels like the regular season and playoffs is an insignificant preamble to a return trip to the SB where they can right a wrong.  They’ve already asked for the Wednesday after the SB off from their job at Kroger or P&G to go to the parade.It’s a confidence that I wish Bills fans had. We, on the other hand, dissect double-digit wins to the point where they feel like losses and want to fire our coach. Gotta run. I have to take my car into Fairfield VW to see if they’ll finally fix it.

 

My arrogance?  Lol, everyone on this site treats the Bengals like 2nd class citizens as if last year was a fluke and luck.... I'm sorry you are so fanboyed that you couldn't see the Bengals offensive power vs the Bills defense.  No doubt Josh would get his, but with the Bills not having over half their secondary the Bengals D would most likely get a couple more stops, a couple more FGs instead of TDs. 

You guys now have the home game and the neutral championship game, you almost have to go to the SB with all that.

On 1/6/2023 at 8:37 AM, Casey D said:

If Bengals can't beat a Jackson-less Ravens team, your assumption that they would have beat Buffalo is a joke.

 

Why do you think we cant beat the Ravens?  And I can easily tell you how Buffalo was most likely beat on Monday.

[MRW]

38 minutes ago, Caesar said:

 

My arrogance?  Lol, everyone on this site treats the Bengals like 2nd class citizens as if last year was a fluke and luck.... I'm sorry you are so fanboyed that you couldn't see the Bengals offensive power vs the Bills defense.  No doubt Josh would get his, but with the Bills not having over half their secondary the Bengals D would most likely get a couple more stops, a couple more FGs instead of TDs. 

You guys now have the home game and the neutral championship game, you almost have to go to the SB with all that.

 

 

I don't see how, since you just got done saying the Bills D can't stop the Bengals. Or does it only work that way on the Bengals' field?

[UKBillFan]

57 minutes ago, Caesar said:

 

My arrogance?  Lol, everyone on this site treats the Bengals like 2nd class citizens as if last year was a fluke and luck.... I'm sorry you are so fanboyed that you couldn't see the Bengals offensive power vs the Bills defense.  No doubt Josh would get his, but with the Bills not having over half their secondary the Bengals D would most likely get a couple more stops, a couple more FGs instead of TDs. 

You guys now have the home game and the neutral championship game, you almost have to go to the SB with all that.

 

Why do you think we cant beat the Ravens?  And I can easily tell you how Buffalo was most likely beat on Monday.

 

Because all you're doing is whining about how unfair it all is. How do you know Burrow wasn't about to go down with a (not so serious as Hamlin) injury on the very next play? How do you know that, had the game played, that the Bills wouldn't have rallied round and played lights out, above the standards expected? Or wouldn't have adjusted? Or nerves set in and similar errors the Bengals made against the Pats could have happened again.

 

My gut says you're right. The Bengals would have beaten the Bills on Monday night, even if the Hamlin situation hadn't occured. But no one can be sure. You seem to be acting as though we're over the moon this happened. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

Zac Taylor claimed he wanted the rules to be followed. When it comes to the seeding placement for the Bills and Bengals they actually have been. Personally, I think the Bengals should get automatic home field against the Ravens albeit you should beat them today, and any Bengals-Bills game should be on a neutral field. When it comes to the Ravens set up it is a fudge, but when it comes to the Bills? It is actually following what is there.

 

[Casey D]

3 hours ago, Caesar said:

 

My arrogance?  Lol, everyone on this site treats the Bengals like 2nd class citizens as if last year was a fluke and luck.... I'm sorry you are so fanboyed that you couldn't see the Bengals offensive power vs the Bills defense.  No doubt Josh would get his, but with the Bills not having over half their secondary the Bengals D would most likely get a couple more stops, a couple more FGs instead of TDs. 

You guys now have the home game and the neutral championship game, you almost have to go to the SB with all that.

 

Why do you think we cant beat the Ravens?  And I can easily tell you how Buffalo was most likely beat on Monday.

I think the Bengals will, that was my point.  And with KC winning, you have lost nothing.  You would not be the #1 seed in any event.  Rest is details for such a great team, right.  Stop whining.

[NoHuddleKelly12]

Not sure if covered elsewhere, but since the game was officially a no contest, what happens to the player stats generated from it? Also as if they didn’t happen? 

[Boatdrinks]

1 hour ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

Not sure if covered elsewhere, but since the game was officially a no contest, what happens to the player stats generated from it? Also as if they didn’t happen? 

Yes, the game officially never took place. 

[Punch]

6 hours ago, Caesar said:

 

My arrogance?  Lol, everyone on this site treats the Bengals like 2nd class citizens as if last year was a fluke and luck.... I'm sorry you are so fanboyed that you couldn't see the Bengals offensive power vs the Bills defense.  No doubt Josh would get his, but with the Bills not having over half their secondary the Bengals D would most likely get a couple more stops, a couple more FGs instead of TDs. 

You guys now have the home game and the neutral championship game, you almost have to go to the SB with all that.

 

Why do you think we cant beat the Ravens?  And I can easily tell you how Buffalo was most likely beat on Monday.

It’s a Buffalo Bills message board.

[Einstein]

They sound upset. Or at least that’s my interpretation from their anonymous leaking of info to Florio. Here is a portion of the text: 

 

”At least one player heard Bills coach Sean McDermott say that the Bills would not continue, even if it meant forfeiting the game… One player heard Bengals coach Zac Taylor offer to resume the game on Tuesday. Bengals players generally accepted the prospect of a one-day delay.

But then the Bills left Cincinnati.

 

Multiple Bengals players were confused by that development as it occurred.

 

On one hand, they were sensitive to the situation involving Damar Hamlin. On the other hand, they fully realized the stakes of the game. They wanted to get it played.

 

The truth also seems to be that, if the Bengals had known the game wouldn’t be finished at all and that the rules would later change to make it harder for them to realize a favorable playoff seed, they wouldn’t have been quite as accommodating of the Bills.“

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/01/07/on-monday-night-bengals-were-told-game-will-resume-in-10-minutes/

Edited January 8, 2023 by Einstein

[Doc]

Oh well.  The Bills gave up the chance at the #1 seed.

[chongli]

This was also being discussed yesterday here:

 

 

[Einstein]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

Oh well.  The Bills gave up the chance at the #1 seed.

 

Sounds like the Bengals organization were okay with suspending the game but did not expect the Bills to get on a plane that night and not play at all.

Just now, chongli said:

This was also being discussed yesterday here:

 

 

 

Darn. Sorry. One issue with 5 billion page threads is articles get lost within all those pages. Thanks for letting me know.

[chongli]

3 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

Sounds like the Bengals organization were okay with suspending the game but did not expect the Bills to get on a plane that night and not play at all.

 

Darn. Sorry. One issue with 5 billion page threads is articles get lost within all those pages. Thanks for letting me know.

 

You know, I've done the same thing too. No need to apologize. I also don't think you can search for tweets in the search function, which I posted. Plus, there are so many posts and threads about this.

Edited January 8, 2023 by chongli

[jkeerie]

Joe Burrow said in one of his interviews that a number of players did NOT want to play the game.  I suspect there were mixed emotions and that now with the rules changed a lot of second-guessing.

Edited January 8, 2023 by jkeerie

[KDIGGZ]

They wanted them to stay overnight and play the next day when their guy was intubated and nobody knew if he was going to make it? That seems hard to believe 

[phypon]

I look at it this way.  A player literally died on the field.  Heart stopped, stopped breathing...  Thankfully, he survived.  Whatever the seeding becomes, who cares.  Football is back and everyone gets to watch and play if they so choose to.  The seeding is a small price to pay considering what happened on that day.  Now is the time to use the cliche "man up".  It is what it is, go play the game and win, don't sweat the small stuff.  If the worst case with Damar occurred no one would be second guessing the seeding.

[boyst]

7 minutes ago, jkeerie said:

Joe Burrow said in one of his interviews that a number of players did NOT want to play the game.  I suspect there were mixed emotions and that now with the rules changed a lot of second-guessing.

This revisionist history of the game and events after are amazing. I appreciate @Caesar trying to bend the mind that the game could have leaned one way or another. I appreciate both sides trying to fit the game to their narrative but no one knows what would have happened. If the game was determined by stats we would never see half of what we do on Sundays.

 

all I can guess is Buffalo gets better during the game at a ridiculously high exponential rate. Cincinnati was being chewed up by TOP on defense. The Bills have underrated depth on defense but the DBs were weakened. The Bengals have potential for a death by 1000 cuts by all their weapons and the trashy ass bum Mixon.

11 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

Sounds like the Bengals organization were okay with suspending the game but did not expect the Bills to get on a plane that night and not play at all.

 

Darn. Sorry. One issue with 5 billion page threads is articles get lost within all those pages. Thanks for letting me know.

What were the Bills to do? Securing a hotel in an hour and suspending all logistics for travel to get a hotel at 1am would have been a huge task. A hotel for roughly 100 people, I think it's 130 people travel with the team that are needed. That doesn't include the prefab people and the others that are equipment tasked.

 

There was almost no way the Bills could have done this without a LOT of stress. 

[mikemac2001]

5 minutes ago, phypon said:

I look at it this way.  A player literally died on the field.  Heart stopped, stopped breathing...  Thankfully, he survived.  Whatever the seeding becomes, who cares.  Football is back and everyone gets to watch and play if they so choose to.  The seeding is a small price to pay considering what happened on that day.  Now is the time to use the cliche "man up".  It is what it is, go play the game and win, don't sweat the small stuff.  If the worst case with Damar occurred no one would be second guessing the seeding.

First thing that matters - damar 

second thing - go out and win 

[RunTheBall]

7 hours ago, Caesar said:

 

My arrogance?  Lol, everyone on this site treats the Bengals like 2nd class citizens as if last year was a fluke and luck.... I'm sorry you are so fanboyed that you couldn't see the Bengals offensive power vs the Bills defense.  No doubt Josh would get his, but with the Bills not having over half their secondary the Bengals D would most likely get a couple more stops, a couple more FGs instead of TDs. 

You guys now have the home game and the neutral championship game, you almost have to go to the SB with all that.

 

Why do you think we cant beat the Ravens?  And I can easily tell you how Buffalo was most likely beat on Monday.

#1) Bengals got screwed by the league, Buffalo had nothing to do with that. I would have been fine with a forfeit or coin flip considering the circumstances 

#2) There’s a lot of respect on this board for Cinci even before the events of Monday

#3) You have very thin skin and come across kind of douchey on an opponents message board

[transplantbillsfan]

Can someone explain something to me.

 

If Buffalo meets Cincy in the Divisional round is it in Buffalo or a neutral site? In the spirit of what the league was doing with the "what ifs" for the AFC Championship game in terms of neutral site I guess I just figured if Buffalo and Cincy won in week 18 and both won in WC weekend the game would be played on a neutral site since Cincy might have been the 2 seed if they beat Buffalo on Monday.

 

Is that what's happening? Neutral game in the Divisional round if the 2 teams meet? All the talking heads on TV make it sound like it's in Buffalo.

 

If it's not a neutral site, I can definitely understand the Bengals being upset.

[Warriorspikes51]

9 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

Can someone explain something to me.

 

If Buffalo meets Cincy in the Divisional round is it in Buffalo or a neutral site? In the spirit of what the league was doing with the "what ifs" for the AFC Championship game in terms of neutral site I guess I just figured if Buffalo and Cincy won in week 18 and both won in WC weekend the game would be played on a neutral site since Cincy might have been the 2 seed if they beat Buffalo on Monday.

 

Is that what's happening? Neutral game in the Divisional round if the 2 teams meet? All the talking heads on TV make it sound like it's in Buffalo.

 

If it's not a neutral site, I can definitely understand the Bengals being upset.

we are the 2, so yes it would be here and I understand Bengals frustration if that happens…but they lost 4 games we lost 3

[Just Jack]

12 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

Can someone explain something to me.

 

If Buffalo meets Cincy in the Divisional round is it in Buffalo or a neutral site? In the spirit of what the league was doing with the "what ifs" for the AFC Championship game in terms of neutral site I guess I just figured if Buffalo and Cincy won in week 18 and both won in WC weekend the game would be played on a neutral site since Cincy might have been the 2 seed if they beat Buffalo on Monday.

 

Is that what's happening? Neutral game in the Divisional round if the 2 teams meet? All the talking heads on TV make it sound like it's in Buffalo.

 

If it's not a neutral site, I can definitely understand the Bengals being upset.

 

Bills and Bengals both played the same number of games, so neutral site does not come into play.  

[transplantbillsfan]

27 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

we are the 2, so yes it would be here and I understand Bengals frustration if that happens…but they lost 4 games we lost 3

 

23 minutes ago, Just Jack said:

 

Bills and Bengals both played the same number of games, so neutral site does not come into play.  

 

Thanks for the clarification. Interesting. Can definitely see why they would be upset. 

 

Okay... can anyone tell me then why it would've been a coin toss for the Ravens and Bengals for next week if the Ravens won today but there's not something similar for Bills and Bengals if both win on Saturday? 

 

Just trying to understand 

[The Wiz]

1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

 

Thanks for the clarification. Interesting. Can definitely see why they would be upset. 

 

Okay... can anyone tell me then why it would've been a coin toss for the Ravens and Bengals for next week if the Ravens won today but there's not something similar for Bills and Bengals if both win on Saturday? 

 

Just trying to understand 

Because the Ravens could have won the division of Cincy lost both games.

 

Since they didn't finish the bills game that was the fairest way they could figure to decide who would be host.

[Cheektowaga Chad]

9 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

 

Thanks for the clarification. Interesting. Can definitely see why they would be upset. 

 

Okay... can anyone tell me then why it would've been a coin toss for the Ravens and Bengals for next week if the Ravens won today but there's not something similar for Bills and Bengals if both win on Saturday? 

 

Just trying to understand 

It's about the number of games played 16 vs 16 is the same, acting like the game was never scheduled

 

Any tie break between 16 and 17 became a neutral site 

 

The Bengals ravens had a coin toss because if the ravens won they would have swept the division winner and the league wanted to make that "fair" but honestly probably just wanted to make sure both teams played as many starters as possible today

[CorkScrewHill]

Per Peter King:

"The vote to approve the proposal was 25 in favor (24 were needed for a three-quarters approval), four abstentions, three no votes. Kansas City, Buffalo, Las Vegas and the Chargers abstained. Cincinnati, Miami and Chicago voted no—all, presumably, on the basis of being against changing a rule eight days before the playoffs begin."

 

The proposal was all good for Buffalo, and abstaining had the same effect as a no vote. I think it was pretty classy of Buffalo to basically say, this helps us so we are not going to be part of the number needed to make it happen. It potentially hurts the Chiefs since if they used the old rules where it is based on percentage .. they would have hosted us if we meet in the AFC Campionship.