Peter King reveals the results for last week's playoff vote

[BleedNOrange]

(01-09-2023, 04:50 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Maybe, they never got a W or L from the Bills game.

Irrelevant.  The game was cancelled.  The rules state that when a game is cancelled, seeding is determined by winning percentage.  That means even if the Bengals lose to the Ravens, we would have ended with a better winning percentage.

If Ravens won:
Bengals: 11 wins/16 games = 68.8%
Ravens: 11 wins/17 games = 64.7%

This is why the team was pissed.  The NFL essentially gave them a loss from the cancellation since they said the rules no longer matter.  They also got the AFCN title in name only with possible no home field in playoffs, a 2023 1st place schedule, and possible worse draft position.  Bengals basically got no upside of "if they won" but got all the downside of "if they lost".

[Weazzel80]

(01-09-2023, 02:09 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Yet, they couldn't get it done on the field, and take advantage of a possible coin toss.

Their only goal was to take our starters 4 quarters until someone got injured (Alex Cappa)

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

Flying home that night was still a bit iffy, but I am glad Buffalo didn't vote for. Now I don't have to hate them. Lol

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Pretty fun that the three teams most impacted declined to vote yes.

[SouthernFan]

(01-09-2023, 04:55 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Most feel that abstaining is the proper way to do it for teams involved in the playoffs, to avoid any question of bias. 

The Ravens clearly don't care about bias. 

Again, agree to disagree. You have no basis to claim what most feel, it is simply your opinion.

[*bfine32*]

This vote affected 4 teams. 3 of them didn't vote for it. Kinda tells you all you need to know.

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-09-2023, 05:25 PM)SouthernFan Wrote: Again, agree to disagree. You have no basis to claim what most feel, it is simply your opinion.

Tell it to Katie, my man. She's the one that runs an actual NFL team and is on the competition committee.

“The proper process for making rule change is in the off-season,” executive V.P. Katie Blackburn wrote in a memo obtained by ESPN.com. “It is not appropriate to put teams in a position to vote for something that may introduce bias, favor one team over another or impact their own situation when the vote takes place immediately before the playoffs.”

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

[Nicomo Cosca]

Shame on the Ravens. I’m starting to hate them almost as much as the Steelers. Almost.

[SouthernFan]

(01-09-2023, 07:13 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Tell it to Katie, my man. She's the one that runs an actual NFL team and is on the competition committee.

“The proper process for making rule change is in the off-season,” executive V.P. Katie Blackburn wrote in a memo obtained by ESPN.com. “It is not appropriate to put teams in a position to vote for something that may introduce bias, favor one team over another or impact their own situation when the vote takes place immediately before the playoffs.”

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

I fail to see your point. I’m advocating for Katie’s position on the matter and the article you linked reinforces that position.

[George Cantstandya]

Looks like the Browns voted yes also. To be fair though, they are a team run by idiots. So they probably thought the were voting yes to getting all the draft picks back they traded for Watson.

[Bengalitis]

(01-09-2023, 01:37 PM)Speedy Thomas Wrote: Just another reason to hate Baltimore and Pittsburgh.

As rivals, I don't hold it against them, but the rest who voted yes.. i hope we beat them all in playoffs and next season.. Keeping a black list now. hehehehe.

[Sled21]

(01-09-2023, 04:55 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Most feel that abstaining is the proper way to do it for teams involved in the playoffs, to avoid any question of bias. 

The Ravens clearly don't care about bias. 

Yeah, I tried explaining that. If you are part of a vote, be it NFL owners, City Council, whatever... if you have stakes in the game, you abstain.

[BengalsBong]

(01-09-2023, 01:37 PM)Speedy Thomas Wrote: Just another reason to hate Baltimore and Pittsburgh.

And Browns.

[Sled21]

(01-09-2023, 07:44 PM)SouthernFan Wrote: I fail to see your point. I’m advocating for Katie’s position on the matter and the article you linked reinforces that position.

Everybody agrees the rules should not have been changed. Did you not read the rest of her quote about voting?

[SouthernFan]

(01-09-2023, 09:26 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Everybody agrees the rules should not have been changed. Did you not read the rest of her quote about voting?

Did you not read the rest of her memo in which she urged the owners to vote no? Once again you are projecting your opinions onto “ everybody” or “most” apparently in order to somehow appear altruistic. Human nature is to act in one’s own self interest. And it is quite apparent that not everyone agrees the rule should not have been changed as 25 owners voted to do exactly that.

In any event, it’s a done deal and precedent has been set.

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-09-2023, 07:44 PM)SouthernFan Wrote: I fail to see your point. I’m advocating for Katie’s position on the matter and the article you linked reinforces that position.

So why did you disagree with me when i am as well?

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-09-2023, 09:24 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Yeah, I tried explaining that. If you are part of a vote, be it NFL owners, City Council, whatever... if you have stakes in the game, you abstain.

Right. Then you hope the rest of the teams that aren't immediately and directly involved do the right thing and vote it down, avoiding a big can of worms that could be opened. 

[WildCat]

i'm just hoping that the bengals are motivated by getting screwed and use that motivation to destroy ev1 all the way to a lombardi.

[SouthernFan]

(01-09-2023, 11:38 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: So why did you disagree with me when i am as well?

I disagreed with your assertion that “most” feel abstaining was the proper thing to do for some teams involved. Once again you have no way to know what most feel, that is simply your opinion. My whole point is that, in this case, Buffalo should have done the right thing and joined us in voting no to changing the established rule. Had they done so, it might have persuaded others to vote no as well.  But that’s just my opinion. And as I said, it’s a done deal. Water under the bridge, spilled milk and all that. Time to let it go.

[*rfaulk34*]

(01-10-2023, 12:08 AM)SouthernFan Wrote: I disagreed with your assertion that “most” feel abstaining was the proper thing to do for some teams involved. Once again you have no way to know what most feel, that is simply your opinion. My whole point is that, in this case, Buffalo should have done the right thing and joined us in voting no to changing the established rule. Had they done so, it might have persuaded others to vote no as well.  But that’s just my opinion. And as I said, it’s a done deal. Water under the bridge, spilled milk and all that. Time to let it go.

It's all of the other teams that should have voted no, because it affects the entire league. Semantics aside, as Katie said, teams should not be put in a position to vote because it raises the question of bias, if you have the most to gain or lose. 

She was saying what i'm saying AND she was saying what you're saying. It should have been voted down because it sets a bad precedent and it could possibly put affected teams in a bad light. 

I agree. Done deal, time to move on and get ready for Sunday.