- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Someone explain the "neutral site" reasoning for me.
Posted on 1/23/23 at 9:36 am to H-Town Tiger
Posted on 1/23/23 at 9:36 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Buffalo had a better record in the same amount of games as Cincinnati. You can’t just assume they would have won if the game was not canceled (and no you can’t use yesterday as “proof” that’s 20/20 hindsight). Buffalo beat KC head to head and had the same amount of loses.
You can't assume anything, that is my point. There is no difference here except the Bengals/Bills game was the one canceled. A game that was in Cincinnati. You make a decision based on a ceding change if one team had won but not based on the ceding change if another team had won?
quote:
If they beat Cincinnati in the canceled game they would have been the 2 seed, that’s why they “compromised” with the neutral site.
If they lose to Cincinnati, Buffalo would have been the three seed and Cincinnati the 2 seed. Again, why one and not the other? Pick a method and stick with that.
But as I said, a moot point.
2
Posted on 1/23/23 at 9:45 am to mdomingue
quote:
You can't assume anything, that is my point.
And they did not, KC was the 1 seed and got the bye plus an easier opponent in the division round because they had the best record.
quote:
Again, why one and not the other?
They went by the record for the seeds. The only difference was the neutral site for the CCG and that’s because Buffalo had the tie breaker on KC if both finished with the same record.
I’m not saying I agree with it, KC should just have been the 1 seed and host It wasn’t that big of a deal but I understand why they “compromised”.
This post was edited on 1/23/23 at 10:20 am
Posted on 1/23/23 at 11:16 am to mdomingue
quote:
If they lose to Cincinnati, Buffalo would have been the three seed and Cincinnati the 2 seed.
Right but Cincy was 3 and stayed 3 because the game wasn't played. Buffalo was 1 and finished 2 because the game wasn't played. Buffalo had the record and H2H over KC, but because they played one less game ended up with a lower win %. Your hypothetical is that Cincy lost the opportunity to do XYZ, Buffalo lost what they already had. It really isn't a hard concept to understand.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News