NFL owners approved a plan Friday that could result in the AFC Championship being played on a neutral field. A three-fourths majority (24 of 32) of the owners was required to approve the changes — stemming from the cancellation of the Week 17 Bills–Bengals game — and only go into effect this year.
No neutral site will be needed if the Bills defeat the Patriots and the Chiefs lose to the Raiders this weekend. Buffalo would ensure the No. 1 seed and a first-round bye.
Week 18 results that will lead to a neutral site AFC Championship
- If Buffalo and Kansas City both win or tie, a Bills-Chiefs championship game would be at a neutral site.
- If Buffalo and Kansas City both lose and Baltimore wins or ties, a Bills-Chiefs championship game would be at a neutral site.
- If Buffalo and Kansas City both lose and Cincinnati wins, a Bills or Bengals vs. Chiefs championship game would be at a neutral site.
Is a neutral site the fairest option?
Not according to those who argue the league should have just abided by the rule book that states playoff seeding goes by winning percentage in the event of a canceled game creating an uneven number of games played. The Bengals voted against the resolution, although that is largely due to its opposition to a coin flip determining where a potential wild-card game against the Ravens would be played.
NFL competition committee chairman Rich McKay didn’t exactly paint the three teams as excited by the decision, saying they were “okay” with it. So is it fair? If the Bills and Chiefs win this weekend and the Bills finish a half game behind the Chiefs, who they beat this year, the thinking goes it is unfair Buffalo would have to play an away AFC Championship game in Kansas City. As McKay and NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said, no solution is perfect, and not every team was happy with the schedule juggling that occurred during the 2020 pandemic season. So it is probably the wrong question. Rather, is a neutral site championship game the least imperfect solution?
Did the league consider any other options?
There was a brief discussion of determining which teams get the first-round bye based on winning percentage, McKay said, and that could have obviated the need for a neutral-site championship. But the competition committee never went far with that concept, and chose instead to present the owners with the neutral-site championship game proposal.
Has this been done before?
Games have been relocated to neutral sites during the regular season due to weather issues in the scheduled home team market. After Hurricane Katrina, the New Orleans Saints played a “home” game at MetLife Stadium against the New York Giants. In 2003, the NFL moved a San Diego Chargers-Miami Dolphins game to Arizona because of wildfires around San Diego. But playing a conference championship game at a neutral site is unprecedented.
Occasionally there has been talk that the conference championships could be like the Super Bowl and played at a neutral site, creating another big platform the league could market against. But it is highly unlikely that this year’s AFC title tilt, if it is on neutral ground, will be anything more than a one-off.
Where would the game be played?
That is unknown right now, and if the prospect of a neutral-site championship game is still in play Sunday night, the league expects to choose a location in the following days. While the Bengals, Bills and Chiefs all play home games outdoors — and all in cold weather cities — the location could still be indoors, according to Michael North, NFL vice president of broadcast planning. North is working with the events group, overseen by NFL executive vice president Peter O’Reilly, to manage the selection process.
Asked about Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis and Ford Field in Detroit, North said those sites are under consideration (Ford Field is undergoing a turf replacement this month, so that could be a complicating factor). Proximity to the AFC Championship contenders’ home cities is also a criteria, as North referred to ease of access for the teams’ fans. But the main attribute is the availability of the venue. While he did not explicitly say a non-NFL venue could be in play, North’s comments were geared towards NFL team venues. It is hard to see the NFL giving the business of the AFC Championship game to a non-NFL stadium unless it has no other choice.
Who has the advantage?
The three teams this affects each have only a single loss at home this season, so it seems unlikely there would be a great advantage to one team not playing at home. Kansas City has one of the loudest stadiums in the country, but then again, the Bengals won the AFC crown there last year. And as already pointed out, all three teams are fine playing in the cold, so it’s not as if a warm-weather team gets to play indoors instead of outdoors.
(Photo: Denny Medley / USA Today)
.