NFL 2022 week 17 - Wentz the Carr crashes into the Bridge(water)

[degenerasian]

I think the whole neutral-site thing is unnecessary at best and BS at worst. Just base things on winning %. Katie Blackburn (Bengals VP) is trying to corral votes against this proposal because the Bengals, while division champs, would not host a home playoff game if they lose on Sunday.

the NFL did helpfully designate the bengals as division champs though, and confirmed Bengals get a first place schedule next year and a lower draft pick and that will be the case even if their playoff game is in Baltimore. I had to laugh, even for the NFL, that was delightfully evil.

Yeah the Bengals were the sacrificial lamb in the name of "fairness" in all of this. Buffalo absolutely came out the best from this, the Chiefs second, and the Bengals easily got the short end here. It's ridiculous that if all three teams win this weekend there's not a coin flip for homefield in that second round matchup between Buffalo and Cincy. Should have gone with void the game and determine the winner by coinflip, or Madden simulation, or rock, paper, scissors either of those would have been better than this.

[Pruitt IV]

I think the whole neutral-site thing is unnecessary at best and BS at worst. Just base things on winning %. Katie Blackburn (Bengals VP) is trying to corral votes against this proposal because the Bengals, while division champs, would not host a home playoff game if they lose on Sunday.

the NFL did helpfully designate the bengals as division champs though, and confirmed Bengals get a first place schedule next year and a lower draft pick and that will be the case even if their playoff game is in Baltimore. I had to laugh, even for the NFL, that was delightfully evil.

Yeah the Bengals were the sacrificial lamb in the name of "fairness" in all of this. Buffalo absolutely came out the best from this, the Chiefs second, and the Bengals easily got the short end here. It's ridiculous that if all three teams win this weekend there's not a coin flip for homefield in that second round matchup between Buffalo and Cincy. Should have gone with void the game and determine the winner by coinflip, or Madden simulation, or rock, paper, scissors either of those would have been better than this.

I have no idea how you can say the Bills came out the best from this. I wouldn't be the only Bills fan to point out that with no chance of winning the Bengals game, and with the Chiefs playing a 6-10 team, there was really no way the Bills would get that bye. Shit happens, and there was no way that game could be played. But they had a good shot at winning, and they will murder the Pats tomorrow.

Bengals got screwed, but the Bills did not do well out of this.


Your logic confounds me. Chiefs were the clear winners in all of this.

ETA: I wouldn't imagine that there'd be a coach in the NFL who wouldn't take the combination of bye week/NEUTRAL field Championship game over extra playoff game/NEUTRAL field championship game.

[degenerasian]

I think the whole neutral-site thing is unnecessary at best and BS at worst. Just base things on winning %. Katie Blackburn (Bengals VP) is trying to corral votes against this proposal because the Bengals, while division champs, would not host a home playoff game if they lose on Sunday.

the NFL did helpfully designate the bengals as division champs though, and confirmed Bengals get a first place schedule next year and a lower draft pick and that will be the case even if their playoff game is in Baltimore. I had to laugh, even for the NFL, that was delightfully evil.

Yeah the Bengals were the sacrificial lamb in the name of "fairness" in all of this. Buffalo absolutely came out the best from this, the Chiefs second, and the Bengals easily got the short end here. It's ridiculous that if all three teams win this weekend there's not a coin flip for homefield in that second round matchup between Buffalo and Cincy. Should have gone with void the game and determine the winner by coinflip, or Madden simulation, or rock, paper, scissors either of those would have been better than this.

I have no idea how you can say the Bills came out the best from this. I wouldn't be the only Bills fan to point out that with no chance of winning the Bengals game, and with the Chiefs playing a 6-10 team, there was really no way the Bills would get that bye. Shit happens, and there was no way that game could be played. But they had a good shot at winning, and they will murder the Pats tomorrow.

Bengals got screwed, but the Bills did not do well out of this.


Your logic confounds me. Chiefs were the clear winners in all of this.

ETA: I wouldn't imagine that there'd be a coach in the NFL who wouldn't take the combination of bye week/NEUTRAL field Championship game over extra playoff game/NEUTRAL field championship game.

At the time the game was stopped every WP% model had the Bengals as 60% favorites, which would rise to 70% if they scored a TD on the drive they were on, which seemed like a good bet with how easy they were moving the ball. Long way to go in the game and all that, but the Bengals are arguably the best team in the AFC right now. The Bills were not playing an automatic W here, it would have been a tough win for them.

So the Bills are the winners in all of this, without question. They get the second hardest game of their season voided to a neutral result, avoid going on the road in the division round to Cincinnati, and if they play the Chiefs at a "neutral site" in the AFC Championship, it will probably be somewhere close with 80% Bills fans. At the time the MNF game was stopped the Chiefs were favorites to have homefield, now they don't.

[degenerasian]

I think the whole neutral-site thing is unnecessary at best and BS at worst. Just base things on winning %. Katie Blackburn (Bengals VP) is trying to corral votes against this proposal because the Bengals, while division champs, would not host a home playoff game if they lose on Sunday.

the NFL did helpfully designate the bengals as division champs though, and confirmed Bengals get a first place schedule next year and a lower draft pick and that will be the case even if their playoff game is in Baltimore. I had to laugh, even for the NFL, that was delightfully evil.

Yeah the Bengals were the sacrificial lamb in the name of "fairness" in all of this. Buffalo absolutely came out the best from this, the Chiefs second, and the Bengals easily got the short end here. It's ridiculous that if all three teams win this weekend there's not a coin flip for homefield in that second round matchup between Buffalo and Cincy. Should have gone with void the game and determine the winner by coinflip, or Madden simulation, or rock, paper, scissors either of those would have been better than this.

I have no idea how you can say the Bills came out the best from this. I wouldn't be the only Bills fan to point out that with no chance of winning the Bengals game, and with the Chiefs playing a 6-10 team, there was really no way the Bills would get that bye. Shit happens, and there was no way that game could be played. But they had a good shot at winning, and they will murder the Pats tomorrow.

Bengals got screwed, but the Bills did not do well out of this.


Your logic confounds me. Chiefs were the clear winners in all of this.

ETA: I wouldn't imagine that there'd be a coach in the NFL who wouldn't take the combination of bye week/NEUTRAL field Championship game over extra playoff game/NEUTRAL field championship game.

At the time the game was stopped every WP% model had the Bengals as 60% favorites, which would rise to 70% if they scored a TD on the drive they were on, which seemed like a good bet with how easy they were moving the ball. Long way to go in the game and all that, but the Bengals are arguably the best team in the AFC right now. The Bills were not playing an automatic W here, it would have been a tough win for them.

So the Bills are the winners in all of this, without question. They get the second hardest game of their season voided to a neutral result, avoid going on the road in the division round to Cincinnati, and if they play the Chiefs at a "neutral site" in the AFC Championship, it will probably be somewhere close with 80% Bills fans. At the time the MNF game was stopped the Chiefs were favorites to have homefield, now they don't. The Chiefs don't lose as badly as the Bengals here, but they aren't some big time winner out of this.

[Pruitt IV]

I think the whole neutral-site thing is unnecessary at best and BS at worst. Just base things on winning %. Katie Blackburn (Bengals VP) is trying to corral votes against this proposal because the Bengals, while division champs, would not host a home playoff game if they lose on Sunday.

the NFL did helpfully designate the bengals as division champs though, and confirmed Bengals get a first place schedule next year and a lower draft pick and that will be the case even if their playoff game is in Baltimore. I had to laugh, even for the NFL, that was delightfully evil.

Yeah the Bengals were the sacrificial lamb in the name of "fairness" in all of this. Buffalo absolutely came out the best from this, the Chiefs second, and the Bengals easily got the short end here. It's ridiculous that if all three teams win this weekend there's not a coin flip for homefield in that second round matchup between Buffalo and Cincy. Should have gone with void the game and determine the winner by coinflip, or Madden simulation, or rock, paper, scissors either of those would have been better than this.

I have no idea how you can say the Bills came out the best from this. I wouldn't be the only Bills fan to point out that with no chance of winning the Bengals game, and with the Chiefs playing a 6-10 team, there was really no way the Bills would get that bye. Shit happens, and there was no way that game could be played. But they had a good shot at winning, and they will murder the Pats tomorrow.

Bengals got screwed, but the Bills did not do well out of this.


Your logic confounds me. Chiefs were the clear winners in all of this.

ETA: I wouldn't imagine that there'd be a coach in the NFL who wouldn't take the combination of bye week/NEUTRAL field Championship game over extra playoff game/NEUTRAL field championship game.

At the time the game was stopped every WP% model had the Bengals as 60% favorites, which would rise to 70% if they scored a TD on the drive they were on, which seemed like a good bet with how easy they were moving the ball. Long way to go in the game and all that, but the Bengals are arguably the best team in the AFC right now. The Bills were not playing an automatic W here, it would have been a tough win for them.

So the Bills are the winners in all of this, without question. They get the second hardest game of their season voided to a neutral result, avoid going on the road in the division round to Cincinnati, and if they play the Chiefs at a "neutral site" in the AFC Championship, it will probably be somewhere close with 80% Bills fans. At the time the MNF game was stopped the Chiefs were favorites to have homefield, now they don't. The Chiefs don't lose as badly as the Bengals here, but they aren't some big time winner out of this.

That game was 9 minutes old.

You're basing your theory on an algorithim or something that gave the Bengals a 60% chance of winning.

The Chiefs were put in a position where they merely had to beat a bad team to get the bye while the other two teams did not even get the chance to win 2.

Basic question - do you think being pretty much handed a bye week doesn't make the Chiefs the winners in all of this? It's an extra week to rest players.

And also - I'll quote myself -

ETA: I wouldn't imagine that there'd be a coach in the NFL who wouldn't take the combination of bye week/NEUTRAL field Championship game over extra playoff game/NEUTRAL field championship game.

The Chiefs ARE NOT playing next week. The Bills and the Bengals are.

[DSafetyGuy]

Ray Ratto in today's Defector newsletter:

Don't Trust The Shield

ESPN told us Monday what we knew a week ago. The NFL got out in front of the Damar Hamlin game-resumption story, because it's the one thing it is always best at doing—waiting out developments and then jumping to the head of the line to take credit for them.

But that's not really the story. The NFL's historical disingenuousness is part of the overall business plan. Taking credit for stopping a game the Bengals and Bills refused to play, claiming a victory for protocol when the honor goes to the people who kept Hamlin alive, coating every moving thing and the 16 fields that don't with Hamlin's jersey number: It's all part of the service of making the NFL all things to all people when it is actually one thing to 32 people. It is the real reason why Roger Goodell is not a trustworthy person, and why when reporters claim he isn't accessible enough one wonders how badly they want to be lied to.

Maybe the next advancement in the coverage of the league would be in not asking them what happened with anything involving them, unless the reporter is willing to punctuate every answer they provide with a tart, "No you didn't," or "That's wrong"—or, for those whose bosses don't luxuriate in NFL-themed sheets and pillowcases through their financial connections, a hearty "Oh, bullshit"—then walk away before they can stammer out a rebuttal. It's isn't traditional reporting, but the NFL isn't a traditional company, in that it creates problems with greed it then claims to solve with compassion and superior brainpower.

I mean, it's good that Don Van Natta puts in the legwork to explain the number of ways the league didn't do what it claimed to do, and that the players and coaches did the work the league is taking credit for. But frankly, that's an old and oft-told tale. The NFL, after all, is best at second-level reacting—waiting for the initial response to an issue and then apportioning blame elsewhere or, depending on the outcome, absorbing credit. It may not be admirable, but it is a skill.