The one seed means significantly different things before and after they changed the rules (again, a week before the playoffs), which is something you continue to ignore conveniently.

Explaining what? You haven't made a lick of sense here and you continue to ignore the fact that the league went outside its rulebook to help one team and one team only.

I get your argument, but you can’t say “no good reason they had for not doing so” part is wild to read.

Their safety ****ing DIED in front of the team and had to have his ribs broken in front of them to save his life.

KC will get the bye and the huge advantage of Cincy and Buffalo having to play each other while winning 2 playoff games just for the right to play against KC in a neutral site.

I think that’s a fair situation, everything considered.

they didn't "come out" the best you asshat

they weren't given this

buffalo forfeited the game so the chiefs should win the #1 seed with a W Sunday

instead Buffalo came out benefitting and everyone else gets shit on.

the fact you don't see this just means you don't know shit

I don't ignore that at all. I am not saying this is a better situation that if none of this had ever happened.

I am the one who is grounded in reality knowing that the system was going to be changed. Something altered the state of play and their solution for that problem favors the Chiefs more than it does the Bills and Bengals.

And it is obvious.

oh great more ****ing idiots flocking in to defend this utterly indefensible bullshite

"something altered the state of play"

lolol

yeah a team forfeited and then didn't get an L

Everyone talking “matchups” has overlooked the fact this is setting up for Chargers/Chiefs part 3.
Not ideal…
Bolts peaking at right time and healthy. They will draw Titans or Jags. Cakewalk for them.

Your assumptions don't mean shit. Nobody knows who pawnmower is or cares about his opinion.

You guys are spinning your tires wishing something that has already been decided did not get decided.

The reality is this is the solution that will probably be used for this situation. And in this set up the Chiefs made out better than the Bills and much better than the Bengals.

No silly things you want to say about me or soccer change that.

Jaguars are not a cakewalk for anyone right now.

you are so mad

Are we boiled down to 2 groups here?

Those that think a player dying on the field and getting CPR for 9 minutes to bring him back to life should be treated the same as a torn Achilles/spinal injury, etc.

Or

Those that think this situation was outside the realm of what the rule book covers and a unique alteration was needed to compensate for this unique situation.

I hope your boyfriend gets mad at you for blowing your load too fast and corner kicks your tiny scrotum

What if we think it was OK to pause the game Monday night, but it should have been played on Tuesday or Wednesday?

For once I agree with Florio:

As Commissioner Roger Goodell acknowledged in a statement issued on Thursday, “there is no perfect solution” to the cancellation of the Bills-Bengals game. However, the NFL’s Policy Manual for Member Clubs, Game Operations 2022 Edition already has contemplated the imperfect process that will apply in the event a game is cancelled.

Playoff seeding is determined by winning percentages.

That applies to any cancellation of a game, whether in Week One or Week 18 or any week in between. The Bills-Bengals game was indeed cancelled. The league previously created a specific rule that applies to the cancellation of games.

Fair or not, that’s the rule. The NFL is now proposing to ownership an impromptu change to the rules. That’s why 24 owners must approve of this adjustment to the applicable protocol, during the season.

The Bengals, one of the teams directly affected by the proposal on which the owners will vote on Friday, have emphasized this point.

“The proper process for making rule change is in the off-season,” executive V.P. Katie Blackburn wrote in a memo obtained by ESPN.com. “It is not appropriate to put teams in a position to vote for something that may introduce bias, favor one team over another or impact their own situation when the vote takes place immediately before the playoffs.”

The mere fact that a game is canceled, whatever the reason, is highly unusual. It hasn’t happened in a non-strike year since 1935. Whether due to weather or illness or injury or any other extraordinary factor that would keep a game from being played, the league has already determined the approach that will apply.

Frankly, this should have been simple. It shouldn’t have taken multiple days to figure it out. It shouldn’t have required memos and meetings and conversations and backroom deals and efforts to drop grains of rice on the two sides of the scale in order to balance out any potential inequity. The rule is the rule. If a game is canceled, playoff seeding is determined by winning percentage, without neutral sites or coin flips or any other proposal that was discussed or raised or considered, from adding an eighth team to neutralize the benefit of a bye that was obtained unfairly to the arguably kooky notion that the Chiefs, if they beat the Raiders on Saturday, would have had to choose between taking a week off or having home-field advantage in an AFC Championship against the Bills or Bengals.

The league can now claim that the various possibilities that were discussed or raised or considered actually weren’t. The truth is that no other possibilities should have been considered, because there’s already a rule that provides the answer to the question.

Instead, the owners will consider on Friday the ultra-extraordinary step of changes the rules DURING a season. Time and again during the two-plus decades PFT has been in existence, it has been explained that rules deemed to be inappropriate or unfair would not be changed during the season. When voting tomorrow, the owners need to realize the unprecedented nature of the step they’d be taking.

Frankly, the currently proposed approach falls squarely into the category of “making it up as we go.” If the league wanted to have the flexibility to fashion an outcome based on the specific facts of a given case (as it’s doing here), the rules would provide for that. They don’t.

It doesn’t matter whether it’s the right decision or the best of various bad options. There’s a rule on the books. The owners will be considering a change to that rule, during a season.

They have the power to do it, obviously. But everyone needs to understand what this means. Settled, codified rules don’t matter during a given season, if 24 owners suddenly decide they no longer matter. The owners need to be prepared to cross that Rubicon when voting on the proposals they’ll consider on Friday.

It doesn’t matter that the Competition Committee voted in favor of the proposed change. The owners can, and do, reject proposals made by the Competition Committee in the offseason.

It also doesn’t matter that some teams harbor resentment (and they do) toward Bengals owner Mike Brown, who has a habit of voting against proposals on which the vast majority of other clubs agree. Some may be tempted to “stick it” to Brown by approving a rule that, even if the Bengals have a better winning percentage than the Ravens, a head-to-head sweep by Baltimore would result in a coin toss to determine home field, if the two teams are set to play each other in the wild-card round.

The league often justifies the imposition of punishment by explaining that the actions of a team or a person undermine the integrity of the game, and public confidence in professional football. Before ignoring previously-crafted rules in favor of something that seems to better address a given set of facts, the owners need to ask themselves whether that action, in and of itself, undermines the integrity of the game, and/or public confidence in professional football.

Again, they can do whatever at least 24 of them want to do. But they need to realize the broader impact of what they’d be doing.

Once this starts, where does it end? Would the owners change the rules regarding roughing the passer during a season? Would they make pass inference a 15-yard penalty and not a spot foul during a season? Would they alter the overtime rules during a season?

This isn’t about fairness or unfairness to the Chiefs, Bills, Ravens, or Bengals. It’s about whether the rules on the books will remain on the books until a given season ends. If the rules are going to change during a given season, that potentially changes everything.

OMG DONT YOU CARE A GUY DIED AND WAS BROUGHT BACK FROM THE DEAD

HE DIIIIIEDDDDDD

stay mad LMAO

HOW DARE YOU SUGGEST HAMLIN'S HEALTH DIDNT MATTER

The rule book already contemplated a cancelled game (for any reason). I can guarantee they will further amend the rule book in the off-season to say that whatever score exists (even if it is 0-0 or the game doesn’t start) when play is suspended will count as the final score if the game ends prematurely and can’t be made up. And everyone will be okay with that outcome.

I agree with florio too. I mean that is actually generous to allow them a no contest. I think buff should've been given the option to forfeit or play the game by Wed.

Not to sound callous, but exceptions to a billion dollar league's sports rules shouldn't be made a week before the playoffs just because players on one team got upset by a very unfortunate medical situation. There's no point in having rules at all if you're going to abandon them at the first sign of adversity just because one team wants you to.

Fair would have been playing by the actual rules. The Chiefs may have gotten less ****ed than many other teams, but they still got ****ed and changing course like this still sets an absolutely brutal precedent going forward.

This X 1000

The Bills/Bengals game was probably 50/50, and if the Bills win it then they are the 1 seed. Not finishing the game or replaying the game took the best outcome off the table for the Bills.

Yes, the league gave the Bills concessions that made getting the 2 or 3 seed hurt less out of sympathy, which they shouldn't have done. But if anything, the Chiefs' chance of being the 1 seed is now more or less assured whereas it was 50/50 before.

It isn't outside of what the rulebook covers. Cancelled/unfinished games (for whatever reason) are literally what the rulebook covers. It was also specifically updated during the pandemic in this regard.

Florio making it seem like the owners might actually block this.

I'd love to know who the weasels on the comp com are that approved a neutral site for no ****ing reason other than feelings.

Probably a bunch of Chief-hating bitches.

Yep.

I think these guys are just really hung up by what they think should have happened from the beginning.

Which is fine. It just makes it weird they are so mad at something that is so clear.

No matter how you think it should have been handled the solution they are proposing favors the Chiefs out of the 3 teams.

There are plenty of owners in playoff contention who have good reason to bitch about this, seeing as their teams all had to play 17 games to get in and get their seed and the Bills didn't.

I think tomorrow could be very interesting.

I’m really tired of this “Wah Buffalo lost 4 straight SBs in the 90s so now they deserve the whole world BS.”

For the record, that’s the minority I align with.

I believe the game should have been forfeited after it couldn’t be resumed by Wednesday night, but I also understand “the nfl is a business” and they have to keep their customers in mind when making decisions that transcend the sport itself and travel to all media.

Like I said. With everything taken into account, I’m not mad if that’s what passes tomorrow.

The NFL wants to build its customer base through this younger generation…

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The proposed plan for AFC playoff seeding raises important questions about the process for changing established rules during a season, and the precedent that would establish. <a href="https://t.co/obigGBPWJx">https://t.co/obigGBPWJx</a></p>&mdash; ProFootballTalk (@ProFootballTalk) <a href="https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/status/1611249702594379776?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 6, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

But yeah, nobody should be upset about what the league is doing here.

Nobody is thinking like that....nobody is making decisions off of this.

You are just another user in this thread who is making up absurd things to prop up their bad takes.

I’m pretty sure Andy is on the competition committee

The whole nation is thinking that maybe not you personally.

I already walked you through this. You get to be as upset and bitch as much as you want on here.

Nobody is taking away your ability to be a drama queen. You are not a victim. LMAO

my brother's gonna kill us .

my brother's gonna shit

"well which is it dude"?

first he's gonna shit

then he's gonna kill us

What the **** are you talking about?

He's not.

Rich McKay (Chairman) – president and CEO, Atlanta Falcons
Katie Blackburn – executive vice president, Cincinnati Bengals
Chris Grier – general manager, Miami Dolphins
Stephen Jones – executive vice president, Dallas Cowboys
John Mara – owner, NY Giants
Ozzie Newsome – executive vice president, Baltimore Ravens
Frank Reich – head coach, Indianapolis Colts
Ron Rivera – head coach, Washington Commanders
Mike Tomlin – head coach, Pittsburgh Steelers
Mike Vrabel – head coach, Tennessee Titans

I'm just glad some of the more insane anti-KC ideas are not happening. Make no mistake, those ideas were floated through major media reporters for a reason. Someone came up with them, most likely the people in Buffalo. In the context of those floated ideas, a bye week and neutral site game is not terrible for KC.

The Bengals are the team getting screwed in a major way here, both in terms of their situation with Buffalo and their situation with Baltimore. Screwed on both ends of it for Cincy. They played the "nice guy" on Monday night and they're getting screwed big time for it.

You think the WHOLE NATION cares about the Bills losing Super Bowls 30 years ago?



<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/lkdH8FmImcGoylv3t3" width="480" height="358" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe>

Buffalo was going to lose to the Bengals before the incident happened

7-3. resume and finish it or accept it or take two ties

quit ****ing with the rules because people are in their feelings.

National Feelings League

if this was KC you know they would just **** us over and make us take a loss

It's absolute bullshit.

When the Bills finally play the Bengals they will regret this. There will be no hand-holding and singing kumbayah.

The Bengals extended an olive branch and the Bills took it and spit on it.

At least somebody in the media sees the enormous problem with the league changing the rules midstream from a competitive fairness perspective. Just a horrible precedent. Where does it end exactly?

Yes, that’s why they all want them to win so bad NOW.

Yeah, it generally helps the Chiefs in the sense that it all but assures us the 1 seed, but it makes the 1 seed less valuable because it moves a game against the 2 seed to a neutral site.

It's still far better to have a bye week than not, and to play the lowest seeded team left in the divisional round. But we did lose something important that we had an even chance of earning otherwise.

You can't really say we got hosed, but if you are irrationally convinced that Buffalo was definitely going to lose on Monday you'd feel we got a raw deal. Bengals still have a lot more to complain about.

You guys should probably get used to the idea that the NFL is going to try to continue to build its fan base through the younger generation that emphasize empathy over other factors. I’m not mad that we won’t get to host a 5th AFCCG in a row, Pat is better on the road, anyway.

Florio is a lawyer, so he looks at everything through a legal & contractual angle. If nothing else comes out of this, the Bengals are learning a hard lesson that nice guys finish last. They will not be so nice the next time another team has an emergency situation. Buffalo has been playing hardball politics the entire week behind the scenes.

If Buffalo won, we would have to play both team (and a third game) to make the Super Bowl

Now, KC just needs to win a home playoff game against a low seed team (after a bye) and then beat the winner of Buffalo/Cincy at a neutral location to go to the superbowl.

I’m not mad if that’s how it ends up.

If you told me that 3 weeks ago, I’d take that in a heartbeat.

this

can't wait for the whole country to root against the Bills and this bullshit

They ****ed their karma up so bad

**** the bills

You say this now but it's a long offseason.

I completely understand why they didn’t want to play after the injury. I also understand that it may not have been feasible to make it up. And given some of the truly stupid ideas floating around this one doesn’t impact the Chiefs as much as others.

That said, the rules already exist for how to address this. It’s not any more complicated than that.

I won’t be shocked if Buffalo gets blown out in their first playoff game.

The only fans that don’t seem to have a problem with this arrangement are the Bills fans.

LOL

participation trophy generation

Personally, I hope they lose this week and the Chiefs/Bengals win and this insanity never sees the light of day.

That's getting quite clear judging by the bullshit memo Goodell and the competition committee put out today. So much for not them caring about the football.

They'll need to sharpen the rules in the off-season. Something like the game needs to be played within 2-3 days or there is a forfeit.

I kind of like the idea someone else mentioned to have a bye week for the entire league heading into the playoffs. College football has a pretty long break between regular season and bowl games. An extra bye week at the end of NFL regular season would buy some time for bizarre emergency games to be played.

Agree with this 100%. Especially the part about games that are postponed being played or a forfeit issued. If the Bills and/or Bengals just couldn’t go then they get a no L/T/incomplete. Which, BTW, is already in the rule book:

“Emergencies and Unfair Acts” and the specific rule entitled “Competitive Policy for Cancelled Games”: “If a game is cancelled, a team’s standing in its division or in its conference (e.g., qualification as a Wild Card in the playoffs or position in playoff seeding) shall be determined on the basis of its final record. When necessary, playoff tiebreakers shall be calculated according to per game average for all teams.”

So to summarize, the league has rules for cancelled games that result in the standings being decided by win percentage. The Chiefs (likely) end up first seed by win percentage. The league decides they can't allow such a finish for sympathy/optics reasons, all because the Bills didn't play a game (a game they willingly chose not to play that was also the toughest game of their season on the road) and instead decides to make an unpreceded rule change to limit the value of the #1 seed and benefit Buffalo in a potential AFC Championship game instead.

In doing so, the NFL absolutely screws over the Bengals (who would have likely been the #2 seed had their game been played and may very well have been the #1 seed) and Ravens (who could have won the AFC North and now don't have the opportunity).

This is how a billion dollar sports league conducts itself a week before the playoffs start? Yeah the Chiefs might have made out the best of this shit sandwich of a situation the NFL created for itself but how is any of it OK?

I think it was clear before the official decision was handed down. Credible media people were floating stuff out there that seemed illogical & extremely favorable to Buffalo. I'm just glad some of those ideas apparently got shit-canned.

I really hope Damar Hamlin comes out and calls everybody stupid for canceling the game. Will he, I don’t know, but I know that I would do that and hope he does. Just announce why would you guys stop the game? Should have kept playing. That would be so epic to shut up the woke AF pussies saying the season should be canceled and supporting this crap.

The craziest thing about this whole madness:

Hamlin himself EXPECTED Buffalo to finish the game.

His first question was did they win.

Wild we posted that at the same time.

Reading some Cincy forums & blogs. They are HUGELY PISSED and rightfully so. Bengals getting screwed pretty hard in terms of the home field advantage situation with Buffalo & Baltimore. I noticed some of the Cincy fans mentioned that they used to like Buffalo, but not anymore.

ROFL

What's this garbage I'm reading about a neutral site for the AFCCG? Bills were about to get waxed by the Bengals. Now they're wanting to finagle us out of the 5th Annual Mahomes Invitational due to the bleeding hearts in Buffalo? Needless to say I hope they vote that trash down.

The loathing for Buffalo is reaching NE Patriot levels ...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/profoot...cy-manual/amp/

Honestly cant understand why they didn't just hand the Bills a loss but still made the AFC final neutral. Bengals should not have been screwed in any way.

LMAO Well, if anything maybe the huge swing perception wise against the Bills will make the Owners reconsider whether this really is a good idea or not.

Hamlin finding out the game was cancelled due to his heart ironically wasn't good for his heart. (Too soon?)

But seriously, it's not a joke but the league is certainly turning this into a circus.

I will be disappointed if the owners vote for this, but will know tomorrow.

Nfl just didn't want to play around with their precious schedule

they didnt have to - why put the AFCCG on a neutral field though?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="qme" dir="ltr"> <a href="https://t.co/FO10mZRv1O">pic.twitter.com/FO10mZRv1O</a></p>&mdash; Football Flowchart (@FbFlowchart) <a href="https://twitter.com/FbFlowchart/status/1611229112986750979?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 6, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

So why wouldn't Bills Bengals be on a neutral field too?

Watched Eisens show....Says you can't reward the Chiefs for having a better winning percentage then talks about how it wouldn't be fair to change the NFC around because it might hurt the Eagles in some way because they had more wins all year. LMAO

Oh and the Chiefs lost to both the B's so even having a better record shouldn't afford them the 1 seed. LMAO ok guy

Vote this shit down

Now everybody sees why this shit doesn't sit well with me. They are trying to change the rules in season FOR Buffalo.

The neutral site will probably be held in Bob Krafts stadium/New England


Pure Bullshit. ****ing WWNFLE

They already changed the OT rules for Jawwwsh and Buffalo but that was in the ****ing OFFSEASON!

For not caring about the game that night, they sure care now. BUF and CIN deserve no reward for their decision to not retake the field. They chose what they chose knowing the ramifications of the game.