01-06-2023, 06:48 PM
With the disaster of a playoff seeding countermeasure that was approved today, it's my opinion that the league had a message to deliver.
I was at the game Monday. After the injury, both Buffalo and Cincinnati were warming up to resume play. This is indisputable. Joe Buck stated, in the MNF broadcast, that play would resume in 5 minutes per the league. Also indisputable.
Was this an accident? Did players just take it upon themselves to start getting ready to play with no instruction from on high? Was Buck just winging it and taking a stab at what he thought was most likely? 5 minutes is a specific amount of time, not an estimate. The situation was relatively unprecedented, so there's not much previous experience to base a guess on. Buck is one of my least favorite sports personalities, but I doubt he was just making shit up out of boredom.
The league wanted this game played after the injury, and they wanted it played on Monday night. I have zero doubt.
There is clear precedent for the NFL compelling teams to play after literal player deaths close to scheduled games.
Chris Henry died 4 days before the Bengals played San Diego. They flew to his funeral in Louisiana almost immediately after.
Jovan Belcher, a Chiefs linebacker suffering from neuropathic encephalitis, killed his girlfriend. He then drove to the team facility and shot himself in front of Romeo Crennel and Scott Pioli. This was on a Saturday before they were scheduled to play the Panthers. The league made them play and they did.
The issue here isn't that we are dealing with a kinder, gentler NFL. It's situational. Taylor and McDermott called the game. The league did not. The teams walked out, more or less, and the league couldn't do a thing about it on Monday. Buffalo left town. Taylor doubled down in support. The league backed off due to PR concerns.
Then we get to today. The Bengals run a small but very real risk of losing home playoff games. They lose the chance to control their own destiny. Out of all teams affected, the Bengals got the most impactful disadvantages as a result of the changes.
I believe this was a subtle way of letting Zac and other coaches know that insubordination will not be tolerated in the future. You can act on instinct and try to do the right thing, but it will have consequences to the team that you lead. When they say play, you play or you pay a price.
Zac Taylor got a lot of good publicity this week, but he also got his hand slapped by the competition committee.
I feel like what happened here was the league finding a way to strongly discourage coaches from going against orders in the future. The got their message across without being too harsh to the Bills, which would have caught a lot of flack. They picked the easiest target that was close to the situation and made a decision.
I was at the game Monday. After the injury, both Buffalo and Cincinnati were warming up to resume play. This is indisputable. Joe Buck stated, in the MNF broadcast, that play would resume in 5 minutes per the league. Also indisputable.
Was this an accident? Did players just take it upon themselves to start getting ready to play with no instruction from on high? Was Buck just winging it and taking a stab at what he thought was most likely? 5 minutes is a specific amount of time, not an estimate. The situation was relatively unprecedented, so there's not much previous experience to base a guess on. Buck is one of my least favorite sports personalities, but I doubt he was just making shit up out of boredom.
The league wanted this game played after the injury, and they wanted it played on Monday night. I have zero doubt.
There is clear precedent for the NFL compelling teams to play after literal player deaths close to scheduled games.
Chris Henry died 4 days before the Bengals played San Diego. They flew to his funeral in Louisiana almost immediately after.
Jovan Belcher, a Chiefs linebacker suffering from neuropathic encephalitis, killed his girlfriend. He then drove to the team facility and shot himself in front of Romeo Crennel and Scott Pioli. This was on a Saturday before they were scheduled to play the Panthers. The league made them play and they did.
The issue here isn't that we are dealing with a kinder, gentler NFL. It's situational. Taylor and McDermott called the game. The league did not. The teams walked out, more or less, and the league couldn't do a thing about it on Monday. Buffalo left town. Taylor doubled down in support. The league backed off due to PR concerns.
Then we get to today. The Bengals run a small but very real risk of losing home playoff games. They lose the chance to control their own destiny. Out of all teams affected, the Bengals got the most impactful disadvantages as a result of the changes.
I believe this was a subtle way of letting Zac and other coaches know that insubordination will not be tolerated in the future. You can act on instinct and try to do the right thing, but it will have consequences to the team that you lead. When they say play, you play or you pay a price.
Zac Taylor got a lot of good publicity this week, but he also got his hand slapped by the competition committee.
I feel like what happened here was the league finding a way to strongly discourage coaches from going against orders in the future. The got their message across without being too harsh to the Bills, which would have caught a lot of flack. They picked the easiest target that was close to the situation and made a decision.
