Playoff scenarios

[cincyhokie]

Let’s leverage it then. Put’s the Bengals mentality back in the underdog state they were last year in the playoffs.

Good.

[HoosierCat]

13 minutes ago, Stripes said:

Fair gripe from Mixon. Whatever one’s philosophy of “fairness”, this is inconsistent with that doctrine.

Yeah, that’s Katie’s point too. There are already rules in place, now isn’t the time to change them. We’ll see how it plays out.

[cincyhokie]

Beat the Bills in Buffalo. Check. Beat the Chiefs again this season. Check. Leave no doubt which team is the best in the AFC.

[Stripes]

It is also true that if the Bengals/Ravens rationale is accepted, then it must applied the same way to Bengals/Chiefs and Bengals/Bills. That is a glaring omission.

I’m reconsidering. While I think there’s an argument from a philosophical and probabilistic perspective, that argument is not being applied consistently. And the inconsistency is strictly anti-Bengals.

I see the problem.

[membengal]

8 minutes ago, Stripes said:

It is also true that if the Bengals/Ravens rationale is accepted, then it must applied the same way to Bengals/Chiefs and Bengals/Bills. That is a glaring omission.

I’m reconsidering. While I think there’s an argument from a philosophical and probabilistic perspective, that argument is not being applied consistently. And the inconsistency is strictly anti-Bengals.

I see the problem.

Welcome to the team. It’s only being applied against the bengals. It’s wholly unfair. Inequitable. Etc. 

[Stripes]

I hope it gets voted down tomorrow. All else aside, if Katie isn’t on board then neither am I.

[ArmyBengal]

Katie is no old man Mike Brown voting NO for shits and giggles. She’s smart and like Stripes, I’m with her !!

[ArmyBengal]

THIS…

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/01/06/proposed-afc-seeding-plan-raises-important-issues-about-rule-changes-precedent/

[AMPHAR]

I think the Ravens/Bengals situation is fair and I think its better than trying to squeeze in a Bills/Bengals game.

The fault in the proposal as far as I can tell is they created a loophole by using 1 logic across the board.

Consideration needs to be given to the divisional rounds among the 2/3 seed potential match up.   Bengals lost an opportunity to even the records with the Bills and win the first tie breaker.   With a KC loss this Saturday the Bengals then also lost an opportunity to match their record.

If KC wins as expected then the drama is between the Bills.

This is why I'm shocked a proposal was done prior to week 18 results.   More than likely they only need to address Bills/Bengals which most fans way before this proposal saw a neutral sight game as the solution.   Shouldn't be this hard, IMO.

 

[HoosierCat]

One clarification this morning, which I was wondering about but didn’t have the energy to try and work through the tiebreakers on: Bengals can indeed get the second seed with a win plus a Buffalo loss.

https://www.nfl.com/news/proposed-afc-playoff-contingencies-what-you-need-to-know

[AMPHAR]

It seems like Goodell and thus an extension of owners manage their policies while reading twitter.

It just simply isn't very hard to say - Bills/Bengals no make up week 17, prepare for Week 18 as if the game will be made up; once results are know the impact of the canceled game will be assessed and action going forward.

That's a pretty fair stance.   I don't buy professional football teams should know before hand in order to compete. 

[ArmyBengal]

3 minutes ago, AMPHAR said:

It just simply isn't very hard to say - Bills/Bengals no make up week 17, prepare for Week 18 as if the game will be made up; once results are know the impact of the canceled game will be assessed and action going forward.

This is what I was saying from jump when I was firmly in wait and see mode.  Making things up on the fly before the games are played week 18 is just overkill.
They are proposing making adjustments that might not need to be made.

However, I am also FIRMLY in agreement with Katie in that the rules are in place for this season and the time to make changes is in the off season.
If the owners don't like how things shake out with the rules that are currently in place, address that in the upcoming off season as it has ALWAYS been done.
Those rules which were established take the bias out of this decision.  Changing on the fly only introduces more bias.

[AMPHAR]

14 minutes ago, ArmyBengal said:

This is what I was saying from jump when I was firmly in wait and see mode.  Making things up on the fly before the games are played week 18 is just overkill.
They are proposing making adjustments that might not need to be made.

However, I am also FIRMLY in agreement with Katie in that the rules are in place for this season and the time to make changes is in the off season.
If the owners don't like how things shake out with the rules that are currently in place, address that in the upcoming off season as it has ALWAYS been done.
Those rules which were established take the bias out of this decision.  Changing on the fly only introduces more bias.

Yep.   But I think these owners get to reading twitter and think they have to address something.    Should have just let it sit.  Tell teams to prepare as if the game is going to be made up.    Reassess the impact of that game afterward. 

Now on top of the emotional tragedy all week, the end of the week they insert this level of confusion.  There's going to be only 1 valid scenario that needs to be addressed come Sunday night. 

I have a high degree of confidence ZT has one clear message to his team - Win and it is the easiest path to normal. 

[ArmyBengal]

The rules are in place.
If the Bengals finish with the better win percentage, per those rules, they are the division champs and get the home field advantage.
Don't like the rules ??  Great, I won't argue.  However, they should be changed in the offseason, as they have been for the history of the league.
You don't adhoc shit simply because, well, you feel bad for another team and wah wah wah, coin toss...

It would be no different if we were on the outside looking in.  Deal with the rules as they stand.
Those rules were in place at the start of the season and now they are considering changing the standard.
Unreal to me...

[ShulaSteakhouse]

This whole situation is garbage.  The Bills' should have forfeited, period.  Bengals' are really the only team penalized by this, and I knew it would be that way.  But whatever.

 

 

 

 

[membengal]

 

[ShulaSteakhouse]

 

[AMPHAR]

2 hours ago, ArmyBengal said:

The rules are in place.
If the Bengals finish with the better win percentage, per those rules, they are the division champs and get the home field advantage.
Don't like the rules ??  Great, I won't argue.  However, they should be changed in the offseason, as they have been for the history of the league.
You don't adhoc shit simply because, well, you feel bad for another team and wah wah wah, coin toss...

It would be no different if we were on the outside looking in.  Deal with the rules as they stand.
Those rules were in place at the start of the season and now they are considering changing the standard.
Unreal to me...

I'm not totally on board with Katie's stance.   There are rules in place governing resuming stopped games and it can be argued they did not follow those rules.     I think rules state two days or something AND the league did get every game in during the COVID year and there were quite a few crazy adjustments during that season.   It can be done.    Whether or not it should be done when a player was fighting for his life is a different a story.  They got it right, IMO.

So saying rules are rules doesn't fly, IMO.   I don't really want to see them try to squeeze that game in.     They just need to add the extra step to cover the divisional round. 

I don't know why they didn't wait til after week 18 were they could address the actual scenario with direct logic. 

 

[AMPHAR]

1 hour ago, ShulaSteakhouse said:

 

What's his point?    Should they have played when everyone in that stadium and watching on TV thought a player died or was going to die?    Should they have played the game this week, while everyone was monitoring a player in critical condition?

Should they squeeze it in after Week 18 making Bengals/Bills play 3 games in 11 days?  Should they move back the schedule?

Any of the above was plausible.

The coin flip with the Ravens IF THE BENGALS LOSE is the best remedy, IMO. 

 Just stupid to keep harping on the Baltimore scenario.   

[ArmyBengal]

The current rule also states that if the commissioner chooses to terminate the game due to emergency conditions, he's empowered to do that.
The league did not make a new rule which allowed for the cancelation of the Bengals Bills game, the commissioner acted within the rule.
Now all the other rules should follow in suit.  Again, that's not what's happening here.  They are wanting to create a new rule a week prior to playoffs.
Katie's point is that the time to change any rule that may be subject to review, is during the offseason.
I agree wholeheartedly simply because that's the correct approach.  Never before has this happened, so you live and die with what exists.
If the owners and league want to review what happens when someone almost dies on the field THEN, have at it.  No concerns on my part.
JUST NOT NOW.

I'm all in on NO coin tosses and no neutral fields.  Let the winning percentage determine finality and move on.
I understand that is an arguable take, but it's mine.

[AMPHAR]

1 minute ago, ArmyBengal said:

The current rule also states that if the commissioner chooses to terminate the game due to emergency conditions, he's empowered to do that.
The league did not make a new rule which allowed for the cancelation of the Bengals Bills game, the commissioner acted within the rule.
Now all the other rules should follow in suit.  Again, that's not what's happening here.  They are wanting to create a new rule a week prior to playoffs.
Katie's point is that the time to change any rule that may be subject to review, is during the offseason.
I agree wholeheartedly simply because that's the correct approach.  Never before has this happened, so you live and die with that exists.
If the owners and league want to review what happens when someone almost dies on the field THEN, have at it.  No concerns on my part.
JUST NOT NOW.

 Yeah, but I doubt Katie would have as gun-ho about "rules are rules" IF they would have forced them to play the game with in the stated rules....that's my point.     Every fucking media outlet would have cried about that too.

There is no perfect outcome here and everyone knew that in short order almost immediately after the game being stopped. 

The Baltimore/Bengals scenario is fair.    The potential Bengals/Bills/Chiefs meet up prior to the AFC Champ Game is not.

Its hilarious how Goodell lawyers himself into these pickles constantly.   Can never let common sense take over.

Should have completed Week 18.  Then when results are in; evaluate the effect of not playing Bills/Bengals and move forward.   There's still chances that the Bengals/Bills/Chiefs don't even meet in the playoffs.    Just amazing.

[Stripes]

I think there’s a reasonable argument for giving the Ravens a window, from a philosophy of fairness perspective. However, the fine print is really weird. If the coin flip rationale is accepted, then it shouldn’t be designed to determine who hosts the possible playoff game.

1.) BAL beats CIN, BAL wins coin flip, CIN vs. BAL in WC = Bengals division champions, Ravens home team, Bengals first place 2023 schedule —> Dumb and hard to justify

2.) BAL beats CIN, DEN beats LAC, Bengals vs. LAC in WC = Bengals division champions, Bengals home team, Bengals first 2023 place schedule —> Sure, whatever

3.) BAL beats CIN, CIN wins coin flip, BAL vs. CIN in WC = Bengals division champions, Bengals home team, Bengals first place 2023 schedule —> neener neener

4.) CIN beats BAL —> obviously optimal

Option 1 is easily improved by option 5 below. Options 2-4 alleviate the frustration if they come to pass, but that’s not really relevant to “fairness”.

~~~

That’s all to say that the coin flip would need to decide who wins the division instead of who hosts a playoff game:

5.) BAL beats CIN, coin flip decides division champion, BAL wins coin flip = Ravens division champs, Ravens home team, Ravens first place 2023 schedule —> Certainly makes more sense than the first possibility.

Being named “division champion” is essentially meaningless without the security of a home game. Nobody collects those trophies on the mantle.

[Stripes]

And that all leaves aside the additional issue that any coin flip rationale needs to be applied consistently to the other playoff rounds.

[ArmyBengal]

47 minutes ago, Stripes said:

That’s all to say that the coin flip would need to decide who wins the division instead of who hosts a playoff game:

5.) BAL beats CIN, coin flip decides division champion, BAL wins coin flip = Ravens division champs, Ravens home team, Ravens first place 2023 schedule —> Certainly makes more sense than the first possibility.

I like that approach as well.  It seems more logical.
Count me in with that being an option...

[HoosierCat]

Well, multiple reports say that Katie did not win the day and the proposal passed. On to Sunday…