Bills/ Bengals [cancelled - process in OP]

[cmh6476]

In case anyone needs it spelled out, we would play at a neutral site if the AFCCG ends up being Chiefs vs. Bills. All other scenarios abide by the usual rules (so any other game the Chiefs play will be at home).

Old posts:

Spoiler!

The NFL will consider a neutral site for the AFC Championship Game. Full details: pic.twitter.com/oi3fItUWIj

— Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) January 6, 2023

Breaking News: Of course the game is secondary to #DamarHamlin’s health, but #Bills insider @viccarucci just reported on @wgrz Daybreak that NFL commissioner Roger Goodell will make the call on rescheduling the Bills/Bengals game and it would have to be played within 2 days.

— Melissa Holmes (@2MelissaHolmes) January 3, 2023

There is another option according to @viccarucci - the league can add a 19th week so the Bills/Bengals can get in all their games. @wgrz https://t.co/1X1hCHVN8c

— Melissa Holmes (@2MelissaHolmes) January 3, 2023

I assume we'll hear something soon

After speaking with both teams and NFLPA leadership, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell informed the clubs today that the Bills-Bengals game will not be resumed this week.

The NFL has made no decision regarding the possible resumption of the game at a later date.

— Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) January 3, 2023

[WilliamTheIrish]

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

The best is gonna be when we lose to the Raiders and the Bills lose to the Patriots and the Bengals steamroll the Ravens and we're gifted the AFCCG at a neutral site instead of in Cincy.

Haha

Can we get ARROW2 and petegeegzz to calculate these odds?

[ArrowHeader]

Neutral site proposal? What a ****ing joke. Play it in Dallas if that’s the case.

[KC_Connection]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

Would you rather the Bills and Bengals actually playing again to get all three, but risk losing all three?

Because I think we come out a lot better on average w/o them playing again.

I'd just rather they actually follow their own rules without changing them a week before the playoffs, regardless of what we were given.

And actually, yeah, I really wanted to watch that Bills/Bengals game too.

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

He said the rule change was to accommodate the Bills.

It doesn’t do that for them more than it does for any other NFL team.

I think it's pretty obvious what he meant though dude. I'm pretty sure he understands that it doesn't benefit any particular team.

You're just getting caught up in the semantics, because you're too busy simping for the Bills.

[DRM08]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

Bye week: HUGE
Not having to play Bills AND Bengals in the playoffs: HUGE
AFCCG at a neutral site: kinda sucks but nothing compared to those other two

People need to stop whining. The Bills could have easily come back and won that game. We could be looking at Cincy in the divisional round and at Buffalo in the AFCCG.

Neutral site is similar to college conference title games, not too bad. Bye week & setting up Buffalo/Cincy to beat each other is pretty huge. But KC has to beat the Raiders first. That won’t be easy.

[|Zach|]

Originally Posted by Frazod

Yep. They're a bunch of whining ****ing emo toddlers. In the past I didn't like them but at least respected them. That's gone forever.

Lets look live at the NFL locker room as a guy nobody has ever heard of on the internet has declared boldly he has lost respect for the team.

The shock waves from this devastating turn will be heard for a while.

[mr. tegu]

So it sounds like the Bengals are now locked in at the 3 seed. They cannot get the 1 seed, which of the three teams, are the only ones with that limit. I don't see a path to the 2 seed for them either. If we lose and they win they still have one less victory so we are still ahead.

For the Bills to get the 1 seed they need us to lose and they win, now no longer having to worry about the Bengals outcome which would have been the case had they lost (and same as forfeiting) which is something I posted about earlier. The Bills actually had better potential outcomes by not playing the game with more to lose by playing it and I believe that motivated them to not try getting the game in.

[TwistedChief]

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla

I wonder what their rationale is on changing their position on the vote?

I would imagine it has something to do with 1/ Tom Brady; 2/ the fact it had happened 2 times in 4 seasons; and 3/ the greatest playoff game/ending ever seen in large part decided by a coin toss*.

*I am aware the Chiefs/Patriots playoff game was pretty great too but it wasn’t the same clash of titans and there was Tom Brady

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by DRM08

Neutral site is similar to college conference title games, not too bad. Bye week & setting up Buffalo/Cincy to beat each other is pretty huge. But KC has to beat the Raiders first. That won’t be easy.

Raiders always check out in the last week when they have nothing to play for. We just need to get up a couple scores and they'll pack it in.

[Discuss Thrower]

Originally Posted by RINGLEADER

Why didn’t they just play OT rules for one quarter to determine a winner. They’d play a quarter of football Monday night and all this could have been avoided.

Undermines the entire point of playing 68 quarters of football for a full season for the rest of the league.

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

I would imagine it has something to do with 1/ Tom Brady; 2/ the fact it had happened 2 times in 4 seasons; and 3/ the greatest playoff game/ending ever seen in large part decided by a coin toss*.

*I am aware the Chiefs/Patriots playoff game was pretty great too but it wasn’t the same clash of titans and there was Tom Brady

You're such a ****ing simp.

It's because it happened to the Bills against the Chiefs. Nobody gave a single **** about it when it happened to the Chiefs. When it happened to the Bills, people acted like it was the first time they even heard of the rule. There was an entire movement through the media and fans to change it. That's why something got done.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

Bye week: HUGE
Not having to play Bills AND Bengals in the playoffs: HUGE
AFCCG at a neutral site: kinda sucks but nothing compared to those other two

People need to stop whining. The Bills could have easily come back and won that game. We could be looking at Cincy in the divisional round and at Buffalo in the AFCCG.

The Chiefs haven’t been hurt here as much as the Bengals have, but it’s still nonsense that the Bills refusing to resume the game under any circumstances could get a road AFCCG for them moved to a neutral site.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Is there a coalition of 9 teams to block this proposal?

Clark Hunt
Mike Brown
Jerry Jones

Those three are definitely on board.

Andy has pull in Jacksonville and Philadelphia.

Add Shahid Khan and Jeffrey Lurie.

Clark is PROBABLY in tight with Janice McNair (Texas ties) and Stephen Ross in Houston and Miami, especially after we dealt them Tyreek. Ross hates Buffalo. So does Woody Johnson in New York with the Jets.

That's eight.

Who's left? Snyder hates the league, the Hunts and Rooneys go way back. The Bucs, the 49ers? They owe us for 31-9 and...Joe Montana? Dunno.

The question is if they WANT to block it. If they want to, they can.

[TwistedChief]

Originally Posted by staylor26

I think it's pretty obvious what he meant though dude. I'm pretty sure he understands that it doesn't benefit any particular team.

You're just getting caught up in the semantics, because you're too busy simping for the Bills.

Yup, that’s exactly what I’m doing.

He’s saying the NFL is changing things to accommodate the Bills and points to today’s ruling in conjunction with the change to the OT rules as proof.

I’m making that up.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by Superturtle

If Reid is cool with it I doubt Clark votes against it. We'll see what happens.

There's no competitive reason for Clark to not vote against it. Mights as well. Nothing to lose only potential gain.