Had the Bengals beaten the Bills in Week 17, the four-loss team would have been on track to secure the AFC’s No. 2 seed. The results of Week 18 — Chiefs, Bengals and Bills wins — would have finalized that scenario. But only the Buffalo side of the “what if?” equation ended up factoring into the NFL’s neutral-site proposal.
The Bills controlled their own destiny for the AFC’s top seed, which would have been the franchise’s first since 1993, but the frightening Damar Hamlin scene leading to a cancelled game ended up nixing that path. While the Chiefs have drawn the 9-8 Jaguars in Round 2, despite losing to both the Bills and Bengals in the regular season, the latter two teams will face off Sunday. A third straight year featuring a Bills-Chiefs playoff matchup would take that game to Atlanta, and while the NFL discussed a second neutral site for a Bengals-Bills tilt, that game will be played in Buffalo.
“There was some discussion,” NFL executive VP Troy Vincent said (via the Buffalo News’ Clevis Murray) of Bengals-Bills being played in a neutral location, “but membership thought it was best for [only] the championship game to be at a neutral site.”
The Bengals’ main objection amid a swift push to shoot down the NFL’s compromise came as a result of the coin-toss scenario involving the Ravens, but they would have been part of the neutral-site scenario had the Chiefs lost to the Raiders in Week 18 and a rematch of last year’s AFC championship game ended up occurring. The team obviously voted against the proposal, with the Chiefs abstaining and the Bills being one of the 25 teams to submit a “yes” vote, Jonathan Jones of CBS Sports notes. Barring a Jaguars upset of the Chiefs on Saturday, the Bengals will need their road whites for the remainder of the AFC playoffs.
Should the Chiefs hold seed and the favored Bills prevail in the teams’ first playoff matchup since the 1988 AFC championship game, the teams will head to Georgia for a game that has already seen 50,000 tickets sold — per ESPN.com’s Adam Schefter (on Twitter) — to Bills and Chiefs season-ticket holders. One (or two) team’s fans would collect some sobering refunds depending on this weekend’s results, but should the league’s Atlanta contingency come into play, Bills and Chiefs fans would be seated on opposite sides at Mercedes-Benz Stadium.
The Chiefs wanted an outdoor venue on grass, Jones adds, while it is not clear what the Bills preferred. Although both the Colts and Lions’ venues were floated as options, neither Lucas Oil Stadium nor Ford Field ended up being in play. The NFL selected Atlanta because of its fairly equal distance (893 miles from Buffalo, 801 from Kansas City) between the two cities, per Jones, while the NFC South stadium has been an in-case-of-emergency site for a bit now.
Speculation about the NFL using a Bills-Chiefs matchup as a test run for conference championship games to be played at neutral sites has emerged, and sources outside the league office floated to Jones that theory. Despite the draft and combine now rotating venues, the conference championships — played at the site of the team with the better record since 1975 — being held at neutral locations would mean the No. 1 seed would only come with a bye and one home game. The No. 2 seed having a path to host two games might be a nonstarter for the league. But the NFL has moved a wild-card game to Monday, despite the Monday game’s winner guaranteed a short week. The Atlanta scenario being a prelude to a drastic format change should not be entirely dismissed, though we are not there yet.
The Bengals and Bills had the exact same amount of games and the Bills have a better record by a full game, plus they have a better conference record. Playing that game at a neutral site would be ridiculous. I’ve even heard Bengal fans suggesting that the Sunday playoff game should start with the Bengals leading 7-3 and having the ball at midfield. They were serious too
Think of it this way, why is the potential Bills and Chiefs game going to be a neutral site game? Because had the Bills played the Bengals and won, they’d be the 1 seed. So now look at it in the Bengals eyes. Had they won against the Bills, they’d have been the 2 seed, therefore this game on Sunday would be in Cincinnati. One team is getting the benefit of “possibly” winning a game, while the other team isn’t. The fans suggesting the game start 7-3 are clowns, they shouldn’t be taken seriously.
Your theory is wrong. You are asking the NFL to assume a victor instead of just looking at the facts. You can’t judge the Chiefs and Bills equal because they played unequal amount of games. The Bengals and Bills played the exact amount of games and they had one less win and one more loss. KC and Buffalo had the same amount of losses but Buffalo had one less victory. If anything, Buffalo is getting screwed. They were the 1st seed, KC was the 2nd seed and Cincinnati was the 3rd seed. None of those teams lost but only Buffalo looses it’s seed.
But then aren’t you assuming the bills would have one more victory had they played one more game? If we are going by “facts”, then the potential chiefs and bills game shouldn’t be a neutral site game, it should be in Kansas City based on the win percentage.
Buffalo beat KC which in most people’s mind is a half game advantage. The bottom line is Buffalo and Cincinnati both played the same amount of games and Buffalo has a one game lead. There’s not much more to say. Both are judged on the same level playing field. Buffalo even has the better conference record. To make Buffalo play away from home is giving the Bengals an opportunity they didn’t deserve. As for KC and Buffalo, that’s the only one up for debate. Like I mentioned before, Cincinnati was the 3rd seed before the Monday night game and none of the 3 teams lost and they were a full game behind KC and Buffalo. Rewarding them is something they didn’t earn
Then Buffalo shouldn’t be rewarded either.
Buffalo was the #1 seed and they never lost. Not sure forcing them to play at a neutral site is a reward. KC is the team that made out on the whole thing
how’s that? Because KC had a better record and winning percentage. Buffalo made out like a bandit
I don’t know why you think that. If you think having home field advantage and not losing another game but losing home field advantage is making our like a bandit, you have a different meaning of making out like a bandit than most people
If Buffalo beats Bengals Sunday, they should host AFC title game. They beat KC earlier this year. Neutral field screws season ticket fans and others who want to attend without paying travel and room charges. It’s been about 30 years for Bills fans to see an AFC title game and now NFL considering neutral field for future years. Hope Bills whip Bungles and Chiefs/Jags for SB spot and bring home the Lombardi trophy.
dougdeb yes they beat the Chiefs earlier in the season but Chiefs finished with a better record and winning percentage. Why in the world should Buffalo get a home game between them. Buffalo should have finished that game but they were losing. So there’s that
Calling them the bungles is so lame. After last season that nickname should be forever retired.
dougdeb
This whole thing is a joke. KC got screwed. Cincinnati got screwed. Buffalo made out like a bandit. KC which played all thier games finished with the best record and winning percentage gets screwed out of a possible home game because the commissioner didn’t follow the rules already in place. Cincinnati got screwed out of a possible home game and the number 2 seed. Buffalo got handed that seed because they refused to finish that game. What does Buffalo have on the commissioner? Is it all rigged for Buffalo to go to the Superbowl? Inquiring minds want to know.
How come you say the Bengals got screwed out of a 2 seed but Buffalo didn’t get screwed out of the top seed? If Buffalo beats the Bengals, they have the top seed. The only way the Bengals get the 2nd seed is if they won. You seem to give the Bengals the win
I heard the Bengals wanted to finish that game in the 48 hour time frame but Buffalo refused. Cincinnati was winning that game. Not sure how it would of turned out. Should have finished that game then there wouldn’t be any questions.
They didn’t finish it. If they finished it, maybe the Bengals lose and Baltimore doesn’t rest their starters the following week and they beat the Bengals and play the playoffs in Baltimore and win that game. See what I did? You can’t play what ifs. You can only go on what you know and have. Buffalo has a better record than the Bengals. That means home field advantage
Going into the canceled game, the Bills were in the driver seat. Whole all three needed to win out, Kansas City needed a Buffalo loss to get the #1 seed. Cincinnati a KC loss. All Buffalo had to do was win, they didn’t need anything from anyone else. And that’s the difference.
I do think the game should have been played. Certainly doesn’t seem like Hamlin would have been offended. “Did we win?”
Is what it is.
Honestly my biggest complaint was the lack of leadership from the NFL. Plan should have been in place. Whatever the plan was, they should have ran with it. Not play the “how is Twitter gonna react game”