False.
The Bengals were manhandling them. That game needed to be resumed from the point it was stopped. With the Bengals headed to a 14-3 lead, and playing at home. The NFL basically gifted Buffalo the 2 seed.
Help me understand - Cincinnati-Buffalo
- Thread starter UKUGA
- Start date
The Bengals were manhandling them. That game needed to be resumed from the point it was stopped. With the Bengals headed to a 14-3 lead, and playing at home. The NFL basically gifted Buffalo the 2 seed.
Cool.
No one in this thread has provided a link to an article.
Perhaps that could have been the first response: “Here is a link to an article explaining exactly why the Bills-Bengals potential divisional round match-up will not and should not be played at a neutral site.”
Please provide it.
Because that scenario doesn’t exist. A potential KC-Buffalo game will be the neutral site game. The right thing to do, would have been to resume the game that was stopped. The NFL screwed the Bengals.
Do you read the Bengals message board? I do. Every day. Trust me, amongst Bengals fans, it’s been discussed constantly.
The Lions Chuck Hughes collapsed and died on the field against the Bears in the early 70's.
It should be noted that the Bengals’ organization was fine with calling it a no contest and leaving the rules in place. That took the 2 seed out of their hands, but those were the rules.
The Bengals’ frustration is that the league changed the rules before the last week of the season and included scenarios that benefited everyone but them. The league told the Bengals that in order to guarantee a home playoff game they needed to win their division by a game and a half despite playing 1 less game.
The league took into consideration the fact the Bills were stripped of having control of the 1 seed but didn’t consider the Bengals losing control of the 2 seed at all with their new rules.
Canceling the game was the right call, but I don’t understand why people can’t see why the Bengals were upset. You may not agree, but at least understand they were upset about the league changing the rules 1 week before the playoffs and added new rules that benefited everyone but them.
The Bengals’ frustration is that the league changed the rules before the last week of the season and included scenarios that benefited everyone but them. The league told the Bengals that in order to guarantee a home playoff game they needed to win their division by a game and a half despite playing 1 less game.
The league took into consideration the fact the Bills were stripped of having control of the 1 seed but didn’t consider the Bengals losing control of the 2 seed at all with their new rules.
Canceling the game was the right call, but I don’t understand why people can’t see why the Bengals were upset. You may not agree, but at least understand they were upset about the league changing the rules 1 week before the playoffs and added new rules that benefited everyone but them.
No, I have never been on a Bengals message board in my life.
Since you are on there so much, why don’t you find and provide a link to an article where the media discusses the rationale for why next weekend’s game will not be played on a neutral site.
Read the OP.
Great post.
And thank you for understanding the context of what the ACTUAL issues are.
That was awful. I remember Dick Butkus was the one shouting at the sidelines for them to get somebody out there, and Butkus later said he was wondering if people were going to think he killed Hughes. In (IIRC) 2009, a local high school had a kid collapse and die from heart failure during a game. The TV station even had his collapse on their highlight show. I couldn't believe they showed that.
The Bengals were ahead with possession of the ball when the game was called. They should have been declared the game winner. Same thing should have happened if Buffalo had the lead and the ball. IF a tornado had come through town and the game was called in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th quarter with time still remaining on the game clock, whoever was ahead at that time would and should be declared the winner.
I don't see where the confusion lies. The only thing that's absolute in the world of pro football is that NFL officials/admin could screw up just about anything, and make it more complicated than it should be.
I don't see where the confusion lies. The only thing that's absolute in the world of pro football is that NFL officials/admin could screw up just about anything, and make it more complicated than it should be.
I don't see how the two teams will ever play again. This game and what happened are just going to keep coming up, and the Bills players will be too emotional to finish playing. How can the league even finish this season and play meaningless playoff games considering what happened?
I think the bottom line here is that the NFL botched this. Once the decision was made to cancel the game, they actually didn’t need to do anything other than use the rules they already have in place.
Under those tiebreaker rules, KC is #1, BUF is #2 and CIN is #3. KC wins home field throughout the AFC playoffs by virtue of having a better winning percentage (0.824) for their 17 games played versus BUF (0.813 for 16 games).
The NFL botched the ruling at least in part because of concern for Damar Hamlin’s health. With him in the ICU, sedated and on a ventilator, the NFL didn’t want to be perceived as if they were punishing the Bills for not completing the game with Cincinnati.
And since Hamlin plays for the Bills and not the Bengals, the NFL did not concern themselves with the localized public outcry they would get from Cincinnati fans who recognized that they were deprived of an opportunity to claim the number 2 seed when the game was cancelled.
It’s a clear double-standard, without any doubt, but it was a decision that was made to remove any concerns the Bills would have about cancelling the game. Cincinnati’s concerns weren’t as important to the NFL, because Hamlin was a Bill.
The following linked article was written before the week 18 games were played, but it does describe what the NFL executives were thinking. They claimed that the logistics of having a neutral site host the Bill-Bengals divisional game was problematic and therefore dismissed as a possibility.
Under those tiebreaker rules, KC is #1, BUF is #2 and CIN is #3. KC wins home field throughout the AFC playoffs by virtue of having a better winning percentage (0.824) for their 17 games played versus BUF (0.813 for 16 games).
The NFL botched the ruling at least in part because of concern for Damar Hamlin’s health. With him in the ICU, sedated and on a ventilator, the NFL didn’t want to be perceived as if they were punishing the Bills for not completing the game with Cincinnati.
And since Hamlin plays for the Bills and not the Bengals, the NFL did not concern themselves with the localized public outcry they would get from Cincinnati fans who recognized that they were deprived of an opportunity to claim the number 2 seed when the game was cancelled.
It’s a clear double-standard, without any doubt, but it was a decision that was made to remove any concerns the Bills would have about cancelling the game. Cincinnati’s concerns weren’t as important to the NFL, because Hamlin was a Bill.
The following linked article was written before the week 18 games were played, but it does describe what the NFL executives were thinking. They claimed that the logistics of having a neutral site host the Bill-Bengals divisional game was problematic and therefore dismissed as a possibility.
Why doesn't NFL have playoff scenario putting potential Bills-Bengals rematch at neutral site?
League executives explained Friday why no special contingencies were implemented should Buffalo and Cincinnati meet again in the divisional round.
www.usatoday.com
It's nothing but Bullshit that there was no cindideration to the Bengals. This comming game against Buffalo should be played at a neutral site. Why does Buffalo get special consideration but the Bengals get none!!!!!@
It is a joke the game isn't being played at a neutral site this coming weekend.
Again, the game should have been played Tuesday or Wednesday that week. Bengals win it IMO and the game is in Cincy this weekend. Then the Chiefs don't get screwed out of hosting the AFC championship either.
Again, the game should have been played Tuesday or Wednesday that week. Bengals win it IMO and the game is in Cincy this weekend. Then the Chiefs don't get screwed out of hosting the AFC championship either.
Yep.
I am curious, now, if the fact that the game is actually coming to fruition, will generate a little more public dialogue on the topic.
I think the bottom line here is that the NFL botched this. Once the decision was made to cancel the game, they actually didn’t need to do anything other than use the rules they already have in place.
Under those tiebreaker rules, KC is #1, BUF is #2 and CIN is #3. KC wins home field throughout the AFC playoffs by virtue of having a better winning percentage (0.824) for their 17 games played versus BUF (0.813 for 16 games).
The NFL botched the ruling at least in part because of concern for Damar Hamlin’s health. With him in the ICU, sedated and on a ventilator, the NFL didn’t want to be perceived as if they were punishing the Bills for not completing the game with Cincinnati.
And since Hamlin plays for the Bills and not the Bengals, the NFL did not concern themselves with the localized public outcry they would get from Cincinnati fans who recognized that they were deprived of an opportunity to claim the number 2 seed when the game was cancelled.
It’s a clear double-standard, without any doubt, but it was a decision that was made to remove any concerns the Bills would have about cancelling the game. Cincinnati’s concerns weren’t as important to the NFL, because Hamlin was a Bill.
The following linked article was written before the week 18 games were played, but it does describe what the NFL executives were thinking. They claimed that the logistics of having a neutral site host the Bill-Bengals divisional game was problematic and therefore dismissed as a possibility.
Why doesn't NFL have playoff scenario putting potential Bills-Bengals rematch at neutral site?
League executives explained Friday why no special contingencies were implemented should Buffalo and Cincinnati meet again in the divisional round.www.usatoday.com
Thank you for posting that article.
Ultimately, I understand, I just disagree with the rationale.
It looks like the NFL wants the Bills in the Super Bowl the way this was rigged in their favor.
Anybody who thinks Cincinnati didn't get the short end of the stick is abdolutely crazy. If your going to give Buffalo the benefit of the doubt in the championship game then the Bills and Bengals game should be played at a neutral site!!!!!!
@UKUGA
You make some good points. I didn't read the entire thread but as a Bengals fan here is my take...
First and foremost the health of the player was number one. Thank God he made it out and hopefully he recovers fully.
Regarding the actual football:
The Bengals were royally hosed.
Burrow was on a whole different level that night. I could see it. He was out to make a statement, beat Allen just like he has 3 straight times, put up gaudy numbers and cement his name as MVP, all while securing at minimum the #2 seed.
I get that making up the game would have been a massive challenge. Eliminating bye week between Conference Finals and SB would have been the only option.
What I don't get is:
1. The Ravens coin flip situation was totally unprecedented and ridiculous.
2. If the AFC is going to have a neutral site btwn KC and Buffalo, why wouldn't Cinci being involved in that scenario? They were in the race for the one seed.
3. The Bengals were set up to win that game. Buffalo was in an extremely difficult situation even before the Hamlin injury. On the road, a Monday night, raucous environment and Bengals had EVERYTHING to play for. Despite the Vegas line the Bengals were more likely than not winning that game. They were about to score again on the drive when injury occured.
4. The Bengals ended up playing an unbalanced schedule with one less home game than road game.
5. At the VERY least I feel like tomorrow's game should have been a coin flip to see if the game would be at Cinci or Buffalo if we are introducing coin flips.
You make some good points. I didn't read the entire thread but as a Bengals fan here is my take...
First and foremost the health of the player was number one. Thank God he made it out and hopefully he recovers fully.
Regarding the actual football:
The Bengals were royally hosed.
Burrow was on a whole different level that night. I could see it. He was out to make a statement, beat Allen just like he has 3 straight times, put up gaudy numbers and cement his name as MVP, all while securing at minimum the #2 seed.
I get that making up the game would have been a massive challenge. Eliminating bye week between Conference Finals and SB would have been the only option.
What I don't get is:
1. The Ravens coin flip situation was totally unprecedented and ridiculous.
2. If the AFC is going to have a neutral site btwn KC and Buffalo, why wouldn't Cinci being involved in that scenario? They were in the race for the one seed.
3. The Bengals were set up to win that game. Buffalo was in an extremely difficult situation even before the Hamlin injury. On the road, a Monday night, raucous environment and Bengals had EVERYTHING to play for. Despite the Vegas line the Bengals were more likely than not winning that game. They were about to score again on the drive when injury occured.
4. The Bengals ended up playing an unbalanced schedule with one less home game than road game.
5. At the VERY least I feel like tomorrow's game should have been a coin flip to see if the game would be at Cinci or Buffalo if we are introducing coin flips.
If Bengals would have taken care of games earlier in the season it would have been a moot point. Now who knows if they would have still gone on crazy streak to end year but the 3 losses are all questionable:
° Steelers debacle on opening day with missed extra points and field goals, long snapper hurt.
° Dallas loss without Dak
° Ravens loss early in year
Literally should have won all of those games. Three losses by nine points. Not to mention getting boat raced by Cleveland which was bizarre.
Win just one of those games and it changes everything. Taylor didn't play anyone in pre-season and Burrow was coming off appendectomy which I am sure slowed them down.
It is what it is....time to make another point tomorrow.
Buffalo played one more home game than Cinci because of the cancellation.
Cinci was playing for home field advantage. Had they beat Buffalo they were in the same exact situation Buffalo was in for final week of regular season. Need a win and a KC loss to get home field advantage. Cinci had tie breaker over KC too.
Assuming Buffalo had beat Cinci in the scenario is the exact same as assuming Cinci beat Buffalo in regards to outcome with KC and home field advantage.
I’m glad this got resolved on the field.
Full disclosure: I don’t believe I have ever pulled for the Bengals in a single game before the last two weeks.
Glad they overcame the odds and took out the Bills in Orchard Park.
Full disclosure: I don’t believe I have ever pulled for the Bengals in a single game before the last two weeks.
Glad they overcame the odds and took out the Bills in Orchard Park.
When in doubt just whip their ass!
The game should’ve been played on a neutral field. The “we had a better record while playing the same amount of games” argument only holds if the Bengals/Bills weren’t scheduled to actually play each other. Not hard to understand.
Do you like getting screwed up the butt? Neither do Bengals fans.
Nah, nobody crying but Bills nation which was to be expected.
Pretty pathetic that they tried to use an injured player to prop up their fans at a convenient time.
ssakcaj
Regarding your #2, KC finished at 14-3, and the best Cincy could do even with a win over Buffalo was 13-4. Since that was the case, giving Cincy a neutral site game if both they and KC made the AFCCG wouldn’t have been appropriate.
Buffalo’s situation was different: beat Cincinnati in the game that was eventually cancelled and they could have tied KC at 14-3, and also won the tiebreaker with their head-to-head win during the regular season.
IMO, a Buffalo-KC AFCCG at a neutral site made sense. What never made sense to me was not to have a Buffalo-Cincy divisional round matchup at a neutral site. That should have been easy to set up, and Cleveland is almost exactly halfway between each city.
They made the decision to have a potential KC vs Buffalo game be at an alternate location prior to WK 18 games though.
KC could have finished 13-4, they didn't but iirc that was after the fact.
I wasn't as bothered by the championship not being on a neutral site as the Buffalo game being at one. That's for sure.
Last edited:
Similar threads
