OT…possible permanent neutral site AFC and NFC Championship Games

[SCBills]

12 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

The NFL created a problem with their stupid expansion of the playoffs : only one team earns a bye and that is just too big an advantage to be fair. Two byes was a just reward to the top teams. A neutral site championship game could remedy that. If it’s being considered they know it’s a problem. Also , one of the leagues best young QBs is in Buffalo. The NFL is probably concerned about an AFC title game in Buffalo with 35 mph winds and no passing offense. 

Only one bye per conference is honestly ridiculous.  
 

It’s such a massive advantage.  

[ticketssince61]

Neutral sites are very difficult for fan bases to travel especially on short notice

 

The Rose Bowl is a neutral site game and by game time ticket prices are generally half of face value and that is with

a) the game scheduled during an easy time to take off from work

b) the team's fan knowing weeks in advance when/where the game is

The college football championship is monday in LA and tickets prices are also around half of face value

 

It is not fair for loyal fans to have to travel to see their team in the championship games and if it is a neutral site, not everyone would get a ticket

5 hours ago, RyanC883 said:

Syracuse really needs to update the Dome so it can host NFL games.  Could have hosted 2 this year (Bills moved game and the AFC Champ game.  could also host preseason games.)  

 

Since Indy and Det are out, Pgh would be a good area to host the game.  Short drive from Buffalo Very short drive for Bills fans in Pgh (there are quite a few!) 

 

I don't think the NFL wants to put games into non- NFL citites

[ArtVandalay]

5 hours ago, CSBill said:

 

Interesting idea. Got me to thinking, where? I'm trying to think of bigger cities . . .

• San Diego
• St Louis
• San Antonio
• Austin
• Louisville
• Orlando
• Columbus
• Hartford
• Birmingham
• ?

I think Austin ticks all the right boxes.

Hartford???? LMAO

 

Hey I'm in CT and we still love the Whalers but are you for real? 120k people live there lol

Edited January 8, 2023 by ArtVandalay

[ticketssince61]

My guess is that the neutral site for this year would be Indianapolis

 

A domed stadium and not too far from either Buff, KC or Cinn

 

Hopefully KC and Cinn both lose and we host the championship game!

[RiotAct]

42 minutes ago, ticketssince61 said:

My guess is that the neutral site for this year would be Indianapolis

 

A domed stadium and not too far from either Buff, KC or Cinn

 

Hopefully KC and Cinn both lose and we host the championship game!

I think Indy is out for some reason, same with Detroit (who’s replacing their turf)

[Motor26]

I'd prefer an outdoor stadium...Tennessee or North Carolina would be my top choices.

[SCBills]

If they can’t find a mid-point location.. Atlanta would make sense given how easy it is to fly into for fans. 
 

Likely has hotel rooms, somewhere, given the size of the city. 

[CircleTheWagons99]

7 hours ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

I have wondered why the nfl doesn’t build a neural site stadium that is just the NFLs. Build it in a city that doesn’t already have a team so you can give that area something. You can host games incase of weather emergencies, or if a team was misplaced, you can have neutral site championship games, super bowls, combine, the draft etc. Obviously you can use the venue for other things year round but I feel like the NFL would just have a stadium that doesn’t belong to a team. The 17th game gives every team a different number of home and away games, you could use it to play the 17th game for everyone so it’s even. There are endless possibilities but I feel like it’d make sense for the league to have their own venue 

I like this idea, most wont but it evens things out alot. 

[TheFunPolice]

Hate the neutral site idea going forward.

 

Terrible idea

[Boatdrinks]

16 minutes ago, Motor26 said:

I'd prefer an outdoor stadium...Tennessee or North Carolina would be my top choices.

Charlotte please. Nonstop flights and not expensive from BUF. Nashville an expensive flight from Buffalo and further than I’d like to drive. 

2 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said:

Hate the neutral site idea going forward.

 

Terrible idea

I’d say restore bye to top 2 teams or go with neutral site title game. 

23 minutes ago, RiotAct said:

I think Indy is out for some reason, same with Detroit (who’s replacing their turf)

Yes, Indy turned down offer to host. 

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

As I saw someone else post here on a separate topic regarding the NFL, this is a terrible idea so likely the NFL will adopt it full time.

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

8 hours ago, Brianmoorman4jesus said:

I have wondered why the nfl doesn’t build a neural site stadium that is just the NFLs. Build it in a city that doesn’t already have a team so you can give that area something. You can host games incase of weather emergencies, or if a team was misplaced, you can have neutral site championship games, super bowls, combine, the draft etc. Obviously you can use the venue for other things year round but I feel like the NFL would just have a stadium that doesn’t belong to a team. The 17th game gives every team a different number of home and away games, you could use it to play the 17th game for everyone so it’s even. There are endless possibilities but I feel like it’d make sense for the league to have their own venue 

you forgot the most important thing. They can hold other cities hostage by threatening to move their team to this city with a ready to play NFL stadium if they don’t build their new stadium because the one built in the 90’s is now way too old.

[TheFunPolice]

28 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

As I saw someone else post here on a separate topic regarding the NFL, this is a terrible idea so likely the NFL will adopt it full time.

 

I can't see the owners going for it. 

 

Imagine Jerry Jones voting to take the title game out of his stadium. Not that they're going anywhere! 

[Taro Nimbus]

My question is, how does this affect LeBrons legacy?

[djp14150]

10 hours ago, 78thealltimegreat said:

They where discussing on Sirius XM and I see profootballtalk picked it up. Seeing this year how successful neutral site semi finals are having in college. The league is watching closely how successful a neutral site AFC championship game would be.
  Would it be so far off for them to have a.Super Bowl Junior and have neutral site AFC and NFC championship games in the future? I could see it… shortens the off season…moves the draft to probably middle of May…etc…keeping football on peoples  minds pretty much the whole year. 

Here are the major problems….

1 arena scheduling

 

2. nobody will want it as a “neutral site” and be a de facto home game.

 

3. If it’s going to be a neutral site then getting the bye doesn’t mean as much. That affects competition.

 

 

[reddogblitz]

9 hours ago, stevestojan said:

This is actually a really solid idea. I saw Simon mentioned Canton but I could see a stadium in somewhere like (and I have no idea if those places have college stadiums so if one is already there, my apologies): Austin, Memphis, St Louis, San Diego, or OKC. Bring in revenue for concerts and whatnot and have a place when ***** hits the fan. I think each of those cities could support this. 

 

And then they could build a new one every 15 years and have cities bid for it and pay for it.

 

I hate this nuetral field for conference championship games idea. Not sure ownership would be up for it. A conference championship is a big payday with outrageous ticket prices.

[LeGOATski]

This is the worst idea in the history of the world and I'm being totally serious.

[Saxum]

Moving games and playoffs to neutral sites decreases incentive to buy PSLs.

We know PSLs are very important to league with pressure on teams to get new stadiums financed by PSLs and government money whether it is grants, loans, services (such as land acquisitions) or tax money.

Taking away games decreases incentives for fans and communities to support teams and takes away money allocated to pay for those stadiums.

 

For an emergency - i.e. snow preventing access to stadium and services (Bills), snow collapsing d0mes (Vikings), hurricane induced flooding (Saints), wildfires (Chargers), unplayable surfaces (Eagles) and ,more - moving a game is understandable although consumers are impacted the most by cost.

[BobbyC81]

9 hours ago, BearNorth said:

San Antonio and San Diego are the two largest cities without an NFL team.  San Antonio has hosted both Men's and Women's final four.  Alamodome may not have enough skyboxes etc.

And Saints played there after Katrina.

[Boatdrinks]

2 hours ago, djp14150 said:

Here are the major problems….

1 arena scheduling

 

2. nobody will want it as a “neutral site” and be a de facto home game.

 

3. If it’s going to be a neutral site then getting the bye doesn’t mean as much. That affects competition.

 

 

The bye is still the bye - a “ free” win and pass to the next round. That’s bigger than the home field and the #1 seed is now too big an advantage with only one bye available. It actually is excessively beneficial and something should be done to change that. 

1 hour ago, LeGOATski said:

This is the worst idea in the history of the world and I'm being totally serious.

Almost as bad as one bye per conference…