Jump to content

NFL General Discussion


candyman93

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

I’m 100% rooting for the Bengals over the Ravens.  Bengals fans are much better imo.


Yeah they are insufferable. 

Silver lining if the ravens did win last night was that it would have been a major upset, and I wouldn’t have thought they would go any further in the playoffs. Now I still need to root against the Bengals. Mostly because of jealousy and me not wanting other people around me to be happy.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JDD said:

Im still confused by why the Bengals are going to Buffalo though 

Well you see, in this scenario the NFL rule says you go by win percentage. Sure they changed the rule if the Ravens would have beat the Bengals in week 18 and they met in the playoffs, they also changed the rule for the Bills/Chiefs matchup but not this scenario.

Probably because they want it known that you shouldn't agree to not play and they couldn't attack the Bills because they were too sympathetic at the time.

Or they are all idiots.

One of those two.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Thomas5737 said:

Well you see, in this scenario the NFL rule says you go by win percentage. Sure they changed the rule if the Ravens would have beat the Bengals in week 18 and they met in the playoffs, they also changed the rule for the Bills/Chiefs matchup but not this scenario.

Probably because they want it known that you shouldn't agree to not play and they couldn't attack the Bills because they were too sympathetic at the time.

Or they are all idiots.

One of those two.

I’m not being insensitive to the situation but since the teams decided not to continue playing shouldn’t the Bills just have agreed to take the loss since it was their player? Like we aren’t lining up again so we will take the L. 
 

Of course both teams were locked into the playoffs and the Bills clinched the division so it wouldn’t have mattered for that.  Because if one of them was fighting for the last spot they wouldn’t have demanded to either play or a forfeit 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, JDD said:

I’m not being insensitive to the situation but since the teams decided not to continue playing shouldn’t the Bills just have agreed to take the loss since it was their player? Like we aren’t lining up again so we will take the L. 
 

Of course both teams were locked into the playoffs and the Bills clinched the division so it wouldn’t have mattered for that.  Because if one of them was fighting for the last spot they wouldn’t have demanded to either play or a forfeit 

I think the NFL may have preferred the Bengals ask for the game to continue or have the Bills forfeit, in which case Buffalo may have opted to play. The Bengals played nice, they too were affected so it may have just been circumstances but I don't think the NFL liked that the game didn't go on.

Anyway, none of that matters in the debate as to why the game would be played in Buffalo. The rule that they changed was that if the outcome would have went either way and it would have changed home field then it would be played at a neutral site. Well, except for the scenario that if the Bengals were to match up against Buffalo, for a reason that makes zero sense it would be assumed that Buffalo won or tied the week 17 game. In all other scenarios the rule was changed for this season.

There was a reason Cincinnati was unhappy. A valid reason.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...