(01-06-2023, 07:53 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Didn't Mike Zimmer have to coach the Bengals defense like 3 days after his wife died?

He didn't have to, but he did.

(01-06-2023, 08:17 PM)casear2727 Wrote: I have no idea who your inside source is, but as you know I have some inside the building and I can tell you that no one was happy today.

Never said they were happy at all. Zac was pissed last night because he knew where it was headed. I was referring to the NFL trying to pay them back for not playing the game. Not the case

(01-06-2023, 07:31 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: What should they have done?

If only they had a system in place for a canceled game? Wow, they did? You mean they warped the rules for this one game, nullifying a rule that was in place (winning percentage determines seeding?)

IMHO, the NFL has opened a really stinky can of worms. Rules may now be changed at midseason. I can picture an egregious call of pass interference that riles the masses and the NFL immediately creating a new replay rule. Stick with the damned rules you pass at the beginning of each season. This looks strictly like a vindictive new rule against the Bengals.

(01-06-2023, 08:17 PM)casear2727 Wrote: I have no idea who your inside source is, but as you know I have some inside the building and I can tell you that no one was happy today.

Never said they were happy at all. I said Zac was pissed last night because he knew where it was headed.

(01-06-2023, 08:29 PM)MTBengalsFan Wrote: If only they had a system in place for a canceled game? Wow, they did? You mean they warped the rules for this one game, nullifying a rule that was in place (winning percentage determines seeding?)

IMHO, the NFL has opened a really stinky can of worms. Rules may now be changed at midseason. I can picture an egregious call of pass interference that riles the masses and the NFL immediately creating a new replay rule. Stick with the damned rules you pass at the beginning of each season. This looks strictly like a vindictive new rule against the Bengals.

To me they disregarded the injuries to Cincy. One guy pointed out the Bengals because of the one less game have a 1/2 game lead over the Ravens but have to flip a coin for home field advantage. But if KC loses and the Bengals at 12-4 vs KC at 13-4 get no flip on home field and we would own the tiebreaker

Zac did the right thing on Monday night and I applaud him for doing so.

Yet it does feel like the League screwed us over with this decision though.

(01-06-2023, 07:59 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: Moving everything would have been a nightmare. If KC wins I’d have simply had a Buffalo/Cincy coin flip for home field if they played. Nobody else matters. We should not have to flip with the Ravens for any reason

This is a logistical nightmare.

If it were any team other than mine, I'd be rooting for chaos, especially if I were a fan of a NFC contender.  I'd be dying to see home field decided by a coin flip.  Tom Brady is probably having a good chuckle after getting home field in the WC round on his sub-mediocre team.  

It opens the door to a botched postseason.  The games should have been played.  It was the only way to make it right.

Rich McKay said people weren’t logistically comfortable with having a potential Bills-Bengals divisional game at a neutral site. Said it was discussed at length.

— Ben Baby (@Ben_Baby) January 6, 2023

I also want to know if Buffalo voted yes or not on the changes.

(01-06-2023, 07:31 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: What should they have done?

Followed the rules and went by winning percentage like our owners have stated all over the news. Try to pay attention.

(01-06-2023, 08:56 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote:

Rich McKay said people weren’t logistically comfortable with having a potential Bills-Bengals divisional game at a neutral site. Said it was discussed at length.

— Ben Baby (@Ben_Baby) January 6, 2023

I also want to know if Buffalo voted yes or not on the changes.

I want to know how every team voted.

(01-06-2023, 07:15 PM)Soonerpeace Wrote: I can certainly understand that thought process. But my inside info says no. It was unprecedented so frankly there was some chaos. Normally they do resume in 5 minutes but the officials and head coaches all deemed it better to go to their locker rooms. The NFL office then got in contact all parties agreed to cancel the game. There was never any pressure from the NFL to finish the game.

I don’t know how else they could have done it. I know forfeit was on the table But I’m not a buyer let’s punish the Bengals for not playing the game. Do I think all the other teams that would be involved in all the scenarios are more favored? Yes

I keep hearing that this was unprecedented... It was horrid but definitely precedented. The OP listed examples, and if that's not good enough there was old dude from the Lions in the 70s. The NFL wanted that game finished, and they're fully in CYA mode (per usual).

(01-06-2023, 09:23 PM)jason Wrote: I keep hearing that this was unprecedented... It was horrid but definitely precedented. The OP listed examples, and if that's not good enough there was old dude from the Lions in the 70s. The NFL wanted that game finished, and they're fully in CYA mode (per usual).

Any need to apply the rules agreed upon by the competition committee before the change would stem from an unprecedented situation.  Of course it's unprecedented, that's why they had the rule in the first place.  Rules should only be changed in the offseason.  This is league protocol.

(01-06-2023, 06:48 PM)samhain Wrote: 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.

Who are you calling a Hic bro? In thread title. lol

(01-06-2023, 09:44 PM)BengalsBong Wrote: Who are you calling a Hic bro? In thread title. lol

I know.  I tried to change it.  Slop.

(01-06-2023, 09:14 PM)BengalsBong Wrote: Followed the rules and went by winning percentage like our owners have stated all over the news. Try to pay attention.

I’ll try harder

McKay's logic on the 'coin flip' aspect is a bit of a head scratcher. He stated that if the Ravens beat the Bengals twice, the equitable thing to do is to have the coin flip so the Ravens have a chance at a home playoff game...even though the Bengals won the division and would still have the better record.

Even under regular circumstances, it doesn't matter if you beat a division rival twice if they finish with a better record. You don't get a bonus opportunity at a home playoff game for sweeping them during the season. 

(01-06-2023, 10:08 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: McKay's logic on the 'coin flip' aspect is a bit of a head scratcher. He stated that if the Ravens beat the Bengals twice, the equitable thing to do is to have the coin flip so the Ravens have a chance at a home playoff game...even though the Bengals won the division and would still have the better record.

Even under regular circumstances, it doesn't matter if you beat a division rival twice if they finish with a better record. You don't get a bonus opportunity at a home playoff game for sweeping them during the season. 

Maybe the Browns should have gotten a coin flip for the division last year.  They beat us twice.

(01-06-2023, 10:26 PM)samhain Wrote: Maybe the Browns should have gotten a coin flip for the division last year.  They beat us twice.

I wouldn't even have an issue with the coin flip thing if it didn't just apply to one situation. Why doesn't it apply to the AFCCG if the Bengals play the Bills or Chiefs...since the cancellation took away any opportunity for the Bengals to get the #1 seed? McKay said that idea wasn't considered in the final talks. If the idea of the coin flip was to be equitable to a team who lost out on an opportunity because of the cancellation...it seems that scenario should qualify as well.

I think if we play the Chiefs or Bills, we should have to go on the road because they have the better record. The same should apply to the Ravens with us. That's the fairest way to handle an unfair situation, IMO. The records are what they are now. Opportunities have been lost. It is what it is. These new 'solution' just made the situation far more convoluted than it ever needed to be.

(01-06-2023, 10:36 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: I wouldn't even have an issue with the coin flip thing if it didn't just apply to one situation. Why doesn't it apply to the AFCCG if the Bengals play the Bills or Chiefs...since the cancellation took away any opportunity for the #1 seed? McKay that idea wasn't considered in the final talks. If the idea of the coin flip was to be equitable to a team who lost out on an opportunity because of the cancellation...it seems that scenario should qualify as well.

I think if we play the Chiefs or Bills, we should have to go on the road because they have the better record. The same should apply to the Ravens. That's the fairest way to handle an unfair situation, IMO. The records are what they are now. Opportunities have been lost. It is what is is. These new 'solution' just made the situation far more convoluted than it ever needed to be.

Not gonna lie, I hate this most due to seeding.  

I am a ST holder.  Best outcome for me is watching the Bengals win a conference title at Paycor.  Now we get screwed out of it.  It sucks.

“I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.”

- Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, 8 December 1941


“I fear all the NFL has done is to awaken a playoff team and fill them with a terrible resolve.”

- FiK, 6 January 2023