Announcer:
Are you ready?

Announcer:
Let's go.

Announcer:
From AMI Central, now circling in The Neutral Zone.

Announcer:
Here's a pitch on the way, 36 yards for the win.

Announcer:
Here comes a big chance, the shot.

Announcer:
Is this the tiger.

Speaker 7:
This is The Neutral Zone.

Announcer:
Home run.

Announcer:
This is as good as it gets.

Announcer:
Now here's your host two-time Paralympian Brock Richardson.

Brock Richardson:
What's going on? It's time for another edition of The Neutral Zone. I am indeed Brock Richardson and I am the host, at least last time I checked anyway. And you're tuned in for another edition of The Neutral Zone. And I want to mention that this group has to be the most enjoyable group that I get to spend time with week in and week out. And we always say that we're friends on and off the air. And the last couple of weeks we've had guests join us on the program, at least from a behind-the-scenes perspective.
So last week we had Ryan Delehanty who's the podcast coordinator, and this week we have Jordan who is one of Marc Aflalo's technical people, video editor. And so we have a lot of people riding along behind us and we appreciate everybody. But we're the people that get to be front of camera because of all the work that they get to do. So we appreciate them and we appreciate the fact that you get to listen to our program. And joining me this week is Cam Jenkins, Cameron, how are you?

Cameron Jenkins:
I'm doing good, Brock. Yeah, it's a good shout-out to all the people behind the scenes, very good of you to do that. And I think we're front and center because we're the good-looking ones personally, so that's what I personally think. So yeah, it's been a good week. Just came back from the London Sledge Hockey Tournament and that was always fun to watch. I watch now because I can't play anymore, getting too old, so it's nice to watch and have a few drinks along the way and cheer all the teams on. So yeah, that was my weekend and it was lots of fun.

Brock Richardson:
Now I have to ask you before we bring on Claire Buchanan, did you say sledge hockey on purpose because it's always been that way and so you're sticking your heels in the sand and calling it sledge hockey? Or did you just kind of say that just because that's the first thing that come up?

Cameron Jenkins:
Well, I knew it at first as sledge hockey, so that's why I still call it sledge hockey. Should I call it a para ice hockey oh fearless leader?

Brock Richardson:
No, no. I'm always curious when names change and people will say it the old way because that's what they're used to. So I was just curious.

Cameron Jenkins:
Yeah, I'm just used to it, so that's why I say sledge hockey.

Brock Richardson:
In the mind of Cam Jenkins, I was curious what was going on in there.

Cameron Jenkins:
Not many people want to know what's going on my mind, Brock, so good for you for taking a little look into it buddy.

Brock Richardson:
I'm leaving now before I find something I don't want to find, but I'll excuse myself from your mind and I'll introduce our other crafty mind of our panel for this weekend, that is Claire Buchanan. Claire, how are you?

Claire Buchanan:
I am doing fantastic. I am wiped from the weekend of sledge hockey that Cameron was talking about. I was lucky enough to be one of the athletes in the tournament. And it was on a two-year hiatus from Covid, so it was fun to have it back. And great to see everybody and great to see also the next generation of para ice hockey players or sledge hockey players, however, you may call it. I guess the new generation will be calling it para hockey. And who knows when the phrase sledge hockey will fizzle out, but we're trying to keep it around as much as possible. And congrats to everyone in the divisions that walked away with medals and had a great weekend of hockey.

Brock Richardson:
Yeah. A little birdie told me that you were in a gold medal game, but I didn't hear how you did. So how did you do?

Claire Buchanan:
Yes, we reached another gold medal game in the tournament and unfortunately weren't able to walk away with the win. But it was a great game and I personally was there, winning is always fun, yes, but as a high-performance athlete myself, I very much focus on how I can develop individually and just get better every game and walk away with just a larger skill set at the end of the weekend.

Brock Richardson:
Love it. Something we do at this point every week is tell you what's in the headlines. Let's do it.

Announcer:
Neutral Zone headlines.

Cameron Jenkins:
We kick things off today with some good news coming out of the Para Nordic Ski World Championships taking place in Sweden. Mark Arendz took home silver in the men's standing biathlon. Silver medal was with Brittany Hudak in the women's standing biathlon. And Brittany Hudak also claimed the bronze medal in the distance classic event.

Claire Buchanan:
The Philadelphia Flyers defenseman, Ivan Provorov, did not take the pregame skate last Tuesday evening because he refused to wear the team's LGBTQ+ Pride jersey during the warmup citing his religious beliefs. Provorov is 26, told the reporters after the Flyers game, which they won five two over the Anaheim Ducks, that his choice to quote "stay true to myself and my religion," which he has identified as Russian Orthodox. He also was quoted saying, "I respect everyone, I respect everybody's choices." The Flyers wore Pride jerseys and wrapped their sticks in Pride tape, both of which are being auctioned off in support of Flyers' charities. Which proceeds go towards the efforts to grow the game in diverse communities.
The Pride Tape Company that is in its seventh season made a statement on the situation and I quote, "the mass majority have been incredibly supportive for over seven years, love over hate. We refuse to let a few people destroy a movement that is stronger and more caring."
Tune in next week where we will dive a little bit deeper into this subject.

Brock Richardson:
The statistics are in, 1.5 billion people took in the World Cup final, which saw Argentina take home the victory in penalty kicks over France. The question now is, does this make soccer the greatest sport in the world? My response to this is quite simple. I don't know if this makes soccer the greatest sport in the world, however, I do think the World Cup is the greatest sports spectacle in the world and that's where I will land.

Cameron Jenkins:
Yeah, Brock, I think that it is probably the most popular being soccer because so many can play it. All you need is a ball and a field. So wouldn't surprise me if it is probably the best sport in the world.
Now it has been widely reported that the Phoenix Suns and the Orlando Magic are actively pursuing Toronto Raptors player Fred VanVleet ahead of the February 9th trade deadline. VanVleet will be entering free agency at the end of this season. I think it'll be very sad to see Fred go if he is indeed traded. Saying that, I think he is getting up in years and I really think that the Raptors do need to do the dreaded rebuild. And they do need to not just go ... the worst place you can be is in the middle of the pack and getting middle-of-the-pack draft picks. So I really think that it is best if the Raptors start to tear it down. And I think Scottie Barnes would be the only untouchable.

Brock Richardson:
A very good point. Those are your headlines for this week. Let's check on our Twitter poll questions. Last week's question was, did you watch this year's women's under-18 hockey tournament? It was a 50:50 tie between yes and no. And thank goodness there was no votes for, I didn't know it was on. Because if there was a vote then that was going to lead into the question of, does there need to be more advertising in women's hockey? Which I believe there does. But thank goodness nobody said they didn't know it was on. So at least TSN did a decent job in that regard.
This week's question looks into the headline Cameron just said, and that is, would you trade Toronto Raptors player Fred VanVleet at the February 9th trade deadline? Your options are simple, yes or no. You can cast your votes at our Twitter handle coming at you right now.

Announcer:
And welcome back to The Neutral Zone AMI broadcast booth. We are set to get this ballgame underway. The first pitch proxy by Brock Richards in his Twitter account @neutralzonebr. First pitch strike. And hey gang, why not strike up a Twitter chat with Claire Buchanan from The Neutral Zone? Find her @neutralzoneCB. And there's a swing and a chopper out to second base right at Claire. She picks up the ball, throws it over to first base for a routine out. And fans, there is nothing routine about connecting with Cam and Josh from The Neutral Zone, @neutralzonecamj and @jwatson200. Now that's a winning combination. And this organ interlude is brought to you by AMI Audio on Twitter, get in touch with The Neutral Zone, type in at AMI Audio.

Brock Richardson:
Our guest for today, we have had them on a little while ago about the recent 2022 Judo Pan American World Championships. During our conversation, we learned that Tony was a part of the Canadian Paralympic Committee's Athletes Council and was the chair of that board. And he's joining us again now to talk more about that. Tony, welcome to the show.

Tony Walby:
Thank you. I'm glad to be back.

Cameron Jenkins:
So Tony, I thought we can maybe start off by finding out how you did at the judo championships.

Tony Walby:
I got bronze. I did okay. I decided that I may be a little too old to compete anymore, so I'm back into retirement. But I did get bronze for Canada.

Cameron Jenkins:
And were you satisfied with that result?

Tony Walby:
Yes and no. I was satisfied in the fact that I got myself back in shape. I was able to go out there and represent Canada with good strength. And then I felt good on the mat and I felt like I could have walked away with probably silver. But I just didn't have that mental fortitude to want to fight out there. I was out there and in my mind I was going, why am I here? I have nothing left to prove. And the road to Paris just seems that much longer for me. So I've decided that I'm happy with and content with being in retirement.

Brock Richardson:
As we mentioned during our last conversation, you were a part of the Canadian Paralympic Committee's Athletes' Council and you were chair of that council. Can you first of all tell us how you became involved with this?

Tony Walby:
So that has to go all the way back to 2012 when I was at the London Games, the athlete services person or our team candidate cheerleader, you might call her, she was a member of the Athlete Council and she was sort of recruiting people to run for election. And I became very good friends with her, Chelsey Gotell. And she's a current member of the IPC, International Paralympic Committee, governing board. She was the chair of the IPC Athlete Council for four years and she was the chair of the Canadian Paralympic Committee Athlete Council for four years. And she was a council member before that. So she sort of recruited me and mentored me onto that.
So in 2014, she convinced me to run, and I ran in the election for Athlete Council and I was one of the four representatives elected that year. And then in 2018, I reran because my term was up and I was elected and her term as chair ended. So I put my name in the hat for chair, and the seven-member council elected me their chair.

Claire Buchanan:
Can you expand a little bit on why it is so important to have a committee such as this one?

Tony Walby:
Well, it is the athlete voice, it's athlete representation and it's athletes elected by athletes to represent the athletes at the highest level of sport. So within Canadian sport there is the Olympic Committee, the Paralympic Committee, Sports Canada, and a number of other bodies that are filled in with other acronyms like OTP, On The Podium; CCES, Canadian Center for Ethics in Sports and other ones. And these are all organizations that do work on behalf of athletes and they run organizations for athletes.
But without the athletes' voice there and without the athletes there to give the athlete perspective and to sort of give them the boots on the ground as to what is going on and why it is happening and how it is happening, it's just a number of organizations running sports that could be way off base. So it's very, very important to have the athlete's voice there. And it's very important that it's the athletes themselves who select those voices. A number of national sport organizations or NSOs have athlete representatives that are selected by the coaches or by the high-performance directors. So it's really not selected by the athletes. Whereas in the Canadian Paralympic Committee, the Canadian Olympic Committee, our council and the Olympic Committee's Commission are elected by the athletes themselves.

Cameron Jenkins:
Now can you maybe tell us a little bit about the process in how you become chair of the council? And is it something that happens automatically or do you have to be a member?

Tony Walby:
So what happens is you get elected. So first to be elected onto the council itself, you have to be a Paralympian, so it's not just para-athletes, it's Paralympians. So you have to be a Paralympian, you have to have been a Paralympian within the past two game cycles, so within an eight year span. And then you have to be nominated by your national sports organization to be put on the ballot.
Then once you're elected by ... so all of the Paralympians that have been Paralympians within the last two cycles get a chance to vote. So once you are elected onto the council, there's seven members of the council, and then those seven members of the council choose their chair between them. So you put your name forward saying I would like to be chair of this council once you're elected. And then the other six either vote yes or no.
So I ran, and it was actually three of us, three of the seven members, when I became chair, three of the seven members put their name forward to be chair. And then all seven of us got to vote and I was the majority-elected chair.

Brock Richardson:
We're joined by judo athlete and member of the Canadian Paralympic Committee Advisory Committee and also chair of the board, Tony Walby from Ottawa, Ontario. I'm Brock Richardson alongside Claire Buchanan and Cam Jenkins. And of course, you're listening to The Neutral Zone.

Claire Buchanan:
During your time on the board, what were some of the more exciting projects and topics that you were able to be a part of?

Tony Walby:
So we keep calling it board, it's the Athlete's Council, and as chair of that Athlete's Council, I actually get a seat on the Canadian Paralympic Committee's board of directors. So it's just terminology here. But as part of the council, and since I was chair, I sat on the board of directors for Canadian Paralympic Committee. I was not chair of that board, that board has a president, a vice president. I was just a director there.
But there's two really big things that occurred during my time as chair on the council. The first was way back in 2019, the Canadian Paralympic Committee Athlete Council, the Canadian Olympic Committee Athlete Commission and Athletes CAN got together and brought forward to the sports minister at the time, Minister Duncan, our concerns on abuse and maltreatment in sport. And we pushed and pushed and pushed for an independent reporting mechanism for maltreatment in sport. And we pushed and pushed and pushed for a code of conduct.
And what came from that is a Safe Sports Summit in 2019, which was hosted by the Canadian government, but was really centred around these three bodies reporting back to all of these representatives just what we felt the state of maltreatment in sport in Canada was. And we were bolstered by a survey given to all high-performance athletes from Professor Gretchen Kerr at the University of Toronto.
And so from that we had the Safe Sport Summit in 2019, which pushed for this independent mechanism. In 2021, the Sport Dispute Resolution Center of Canada, the SDRCC, was appointed the independent mechanism for Safe Sport in Canada and the arbitrators of the UCCMS, universal code of conduct of maltreatment in sport, which is Canada's code of conduct now for athletes, coaches, anybody involved in the high performance supporting system. So they were named that independent body. We pushed for it, it's called OSIC, the Office of the Sports Integrity Commissioner.
So that was the very first big thing that the three athlete representation bodies came together and did. And it's going to have such a lasting effect, it's still got a lot of growing to do, a lot of maturity to go on, but it's such a huge step forward in Canadian sports and Canadian high-performance sport. And I'm so proud that I was part of that.
The second big thing that occurred happened in March of 2020 when the Canadian Olympic Committee Athlete Commission and the Canadian Paralympic Committee Athlete Council, my council, we got together and had a discussion and said that we would go to our boards and tell our boards that we would not go to Tokyo in the summer of 2020 because of Covid. We said they needed to withdraw Team Canada.
So in a joint effort between the two councils, our council and the commission, and between the two boards, a statement was put forward that Team Canada would not go to the 2020 Tokyo Games. And just a few weeks later the IOC postponed those games. So Canada was the first to say that. And it was not the boards that did it, it was the athletes that did it that went to the boards and said please do this on our behalf.
So I'm very proud that we took athletes first, that we took athlete safety first. And it had such a huge impact globally that it postponed the Games for a year and allowed those Games then to be run in 2021 in a much safer environment.
So those are the two big things that I'll look back on my time as chair of the council and go, I'm very proud I was part of those things.

Cameron Jenkins:
So let me ask you another question. Do you believe the Canadian Paralympic Committee is in a good place as a whole? And where do you think maybe there's still some work that needs to be done?

Tony Walby:
So I think the Canadian Paralympic Committee is really in a good spot. Their CEO, Karen O'Neill, is a very strong voice for high-performance sport in Canada and for fair sport in Canada. The president of the board, Marc-Andre Fabien, is very athlete-centric. He says this at pretty much every press conference that he's there for the athletes and he backs up those words. So they're in a very good place.
I think where they need some improvement, and they are moving more towards this, is having a board of directors that is more diversified, and more diversified towards people with a disability since that's the segment that they're representing. They do now have a few more people on the board of directors with disabilities. They do now have more athletes on the board than they've ever had before. And I think their commitment to having a diversified board of directors and having a strategic plan moving forward that has that diversification in that board and has that accommodation set in place is really good, really strong for them. And the more that they listen to their athletes and move towards an athlete partnership role, I think the stronger they'll become.

Claire Buchanan:
Our understanding is that there is a new board or council put in place right now. Can you describe and let us know how the transition period is between those two councils and kind of what the process is?

Tony Walby:
You're half right. There's half a new council in place. So there are four-year terms, and those four-year terms are staggered, so every two years there's turnover. So just more than half the council was replaced this past December, four of the seven seats were up for election, and there's four new people in place. There's three people on that council that have two years left under term. And in 2024 after the Paris Games there will be another election and there will be three spots available at that time. So that's how the fact that there's never a brand new 100% seven new members of the council, there's always a stagger so there's that knowledge transfer in case somebody doesn't rerun or there are new people put on that council. So the strategic plan is built in such a way that there's never seven new players in play. There's always time to learn from the people that were there before.

Brock Richardson:
I've been a part of boards and I've got two questions here. I've been a part of boards in different capacities both through sport and otherwise. And from time to time when you are a council, you sometimes feel like you are not listened to as well as you should be. Based on what you said, it sounds to me like the Canadian Paralympic Committee listened well to the council. Would you agree on that? And not that I'm centring you and asking you to pick a specific topic, but just generally would you agree on that? And was there ever a time where you really felt like you and the council had to push for one thing or another that wasn't necessarily heard?

Tony Walby:
Well, those are two separate questions. But to your first question, you're right. Historically, athlete councils and athlete commissions, historically they did not work because the boards of directors that were in play at the time really didn't feel that the athlete boards was important. That sort of changed in 2015, 2016 when the RUSADA, so the Russian doping scandal took place, and it was athlete whistleblowers and athletes started to get a little more recognition as to, oh my God, maybe we need to listen to them. And the athlete voice became a bit stronger.
My predecessor, Chelsey Gotell, pushed and pushed and pushed for the athlete voice within the Paralympic Committee to be more relevant. And she did that at IPC, the International Paralympic Committee, level as well to the point where we've seen in the last couple years the athlete voice is the strongest thing in sport right now. We see that at the professional level, but we're now seeing it more and more at the high performance amateur level. At the Olympic and Paralympic level, we see athletes speaking out on social justice and getting noticed. We see athletes speaking out.
We saw this journey the summer of 2020 and 2021 when the Olympic Committee started to look at rule 50 and the Paralympic Committee started to look at their equivalent to rule 50 and the athletes' freedom of expression and voice at games time. And the athletes were able to put their opinion forward as to what those rules should look like and how they should change. More and more high-performance sport at the Olympic and Paralympic level is becoming a sponsorship and a money base for a lot of companies. And these companies want athletes that are well versed on the social justice level and they want that voice to be strong and important. And it really is.
So there has been a time in the past when athlete councils, and athletes commissions were sort of token, and now that's not the case. They have full-fledged voting rights on boards of directors. They're looked to. As I said, in March of 2020, it was the Athlete's Council and the Athlete's Commission that made the decision or the recommendation to the boards to say, hey, let's not go to Tokyo, it's not safe for us. And they backed us up and they listened to us. So that's huge.
On your second question, I'm sorry I've forgotten exactly the point of ... what was the second question again?

Brock Richardson:
That's okay, I threw a lot in there at once. The second part of that was, without putting you on the spot per se, was there ever an issue where you thought you had to push a little bit harder to be heard on an issue? Or would you say more often than not you were heard and everything was pretty well good?

Tony Walby:
Well, I mean, I think we always have to push to be heard because there are still going to be those attitudes that, you're just the athlete. But I guess every time I'm in a boardroom, and I was there as the athlete director, every time I spoke up and was voted against, I guess, I sort of thought, well, they're not listening to me. But that's not the case. They did listen and they just thought there was a different way to go and I respect that.
But I think there's still a long way to go in the athlete voice. And I think athletes are starting to get recognition now. But there's still a lot of national sports organizations, NSOs, that do not have athlete representation on their board. They may have athlete reps, but they don't have representation with full director voting rights on their boards and that needs to change.
The athlete governance model where we have athlete representation at all levels needs to change. It's only been a couple of years where now athletes have a position on the CCES board of directors, and that's the Canadian Center for Ethics in Sports. And we've pushed and pushed and pushed to get a seat on that board. I currently sit on that board of directors, not as the athlete rep, I sit there in a different capacity. But it took some pushing to get an athlete representative written into their terms of reference just because that athlete perspective, that athlete voice is new. And it's something that, yes, it's been around for a long time, but it hasn't had that respect and that power. Now it has the respect and the power so you have more and more organizations wanting that voice. So I think we have a long way to go, but I think in the last six to eight years we've come so far.

Brock Richardson:
I couldn't agree with you more. Tony, thank you so much for joining us today and coming back on our program, we really appreciate it. And I knew this would be a great conversation when we had you on the first time. And I'm glad we carved out some time to separate it from your athletics and then this role. So thank you very much and we appreciate it.

Tony Walby:
My pleasure. Anytime.

Brock Richardson:
That was Tony Walby who was the chair of the Athletes Council and he was talking to us about his role on that council. If you liked this interview or any others you hear on the program, here's how you can get ahold of us by voicemail.

Announcer:
Hey, if you want to leave a message for The Neutral Zone, call now, 1-866-509-4545, and don't forget to give us permission to use your message on the air. Let's get ready to leave a voicemail.

Brock Richardson:
One of the great things about doing programs in general, but I'm going to be a little bit biased and tell you about this program, one of the great things about this program is when you do an interview and you send off the person and they start talking about their passions in different things. And that sort of happened with Tony Walby who joined us. And he was talking about his involvement on the Athletes Council and then being on the board of directors as a seat, but not necessarily the chair.
And he then brought up the point of being involved in the Center for Ethics in Sports, which is CES, which is the anti-doping side of things. And he said, I'd love to come back and be on the program and talk about that as well. So in two to three weeks time, as I put on my producer hat of this program, we're going to have Tony on yet again. Because I think all angles that Tony has been able to deliver us, both in his own sport of judo and then with the role he just talked about there now and then CES moving forward, he's just been a wealth of knowledge to our program. And we appreciate Tony.
Before we talk about the NFL, I'm just curious, any sort of reaction from either of you to the interview with Tony or just the general conversation we had with him post-hitting record about his involvement with CES? Cameron, start with you.

Cameron Jenkins:
I just think he has such a wealth of knowledge with all that he has done both as an athlete and on the council and boards. And just by talking to him after we got off, he's really passionate about doping as well and being on a board for that. So I'm really looking forward to having him back on the show in the near future to talk about doping and everything that encompasses. And yeah, he's just a wealth of knowledge, so it's great to have him on.

Claire Buchanan:
Yeah, it's always nice to see that athletes are staying in sport in different ways once they retire from being an athlete themselves. And like he touched on quite a bit, the voice of the athlete is very powerful and that voice in itself should be the driving force of where change comes from. And any sport doesn't exist without the athletes. And so it's very important to remind people that the center of sport revolves around the athletes and change comes from having those conversations from athletes' voices.

Brock Richardson:
I took a really big deep breath, and we got into Cameron's mind early on in the program and I left before I got myself in trouble. But I'll let you in on my brain a little bit in the sense of I took a big sigh relief when he said that when they postponed or they said that Canada wasn't going before it was postponed altogether, I took a really big sigh of relief in the sense that it was like, oh, good, we heard from the athletes. And I think that that really made me step back and realize maybe the athletes are getting more of a voice, Claire. And I think this was sort of maybe another one of those stepping stones where people realize, hey, if we don't have our athletes backing going to games, we're not sending them, Claire.

Claire Buchanan:
Absolutely. And honestly, that's just one of the main reasons why I like being a part of this show specifically, is that we are giving athletes and staff members and everyone involved in sport a platform to have those conversations. And to make sure that we're moving in the right direction to have sport be a safe and fun and entertaining atmosphere for not only the athletes, but fans and family and just everyone involved.

Brock Richardson:
Yeah. Cameron, any comment there?

Cameron Jenkins:
No, not really. I think Claire said it beautifully. And it's just nice, like Claire said, that people or boards, Olympic committees are taking the athletes more serious and listening to them, which is the most important thing to do. But also taking action to be able to bring their voices so everything can be safer, everything can be a little bit better when competing. So I think it's moving in the right direction. Like a lot of things, it sometimes moves at a snail's pace and you'd wish that it was quicker. Unfortunately, that's not what reality is. And I guess as long as it keeps moving forward, that's a positive.

Brock Richardson:
Yeah, I agree. And I again reiterate the sentiment that if you don't have your athletes backing, you don't have a lot. You can't be forcing people in society or anywhere else to be doing things that's unsafe, let me be clear, that's unsafe to their wellbeing. And I think that the Canadian Paralympic Committee took the right direction alongside the Athletes Council to not go to those games. So it was cool to get the inside track on that as well.
Anyways, this is our mainstream sports part of the show, so let's get into that. Let's talk about the NFL playoffs. Let's go in chronological order of the weekend. Let's go with the Jacksonville Jaguars being defeated by the Kansas City Chiefs 27-20. Thoughts on this, Cameron?

Cameron Jenkins:
That was a tight game. How many people thought that KC was going to blow the Jaguars, raise your hand? Yeah.

Brock Richardson:
That would be me.

Claire Buchanan:
I did not. I did not.

Cameron Jenkins:
Wow.

Claire Buchanan:
Yeah, I guess I had a little more faith in Trevor Lawrence than you guys did.

Cameron Jenkins:
I think you and maybe just the fans of the Jaguars were the only ones that had faith in him to be quite honest with you.

Claire Buchanan:
Yeah, definitely, I saw them still as the underdog, but I expected a tight game.

Cameron Jenkins:
See, and that's where I didn't, because with Mahomes and just the offence that they have, I thought it was going to be a blow. And Mahomes, he was injured, and he got pulled and he wanted to go back in reading the reports, he was like, put me back in, I don't care. And I believe they took him to the hospital, got him an x-ray and found out that nothing was broken, maybe just a high ankle sprain. So he went back in and he ended up with 195 yards passing and two touchdowns. And the second one capped a 75-yard drive late in the fourth quarter. And that ended up the winner because it ended up being 27 to 20. So by no shape or form was this a blowout. And it took until the last quarter for KC to win it, and it's Mahomes doing Mahomes things.

Claire Buchanan:
I think the general public still sees Mahomes as a bit untouchable, and I think that the last couple of seasons have proved that he is not undefeatable. So, he's going to go into a hard game with the Cincinnati Bengals and Joe Burrows because Joe Burrows is three and 0 against Mahomes. So hopefully the ankle can still feel good for that game. And we'll see if he can get past Joe Burrows this year.

Brock Richardson:
It's funny, you guys talk about this high ankle sprain, and I sort of get a kick out of the way that the broadcasters sort of talked about it. And then Kansas City following Monday as well as it came out, and they said, oh yeah, he was in better shape than we anticipated. And I got to be honest and tell you guys, I am obviously a big baby because if I had a high ankle sprain, I would not be doing football. I would probably still be doing The Neutral Zone because I'm sitting. But I mean, if I was doing any kind of activity where you needed the ankle, wow, good on you, Patrick Mahomes. So good for you for wanting to go back and play. I respect that. We'll see what shape you're in next week. But this isn't the first time you've had an injury going into the championship game in the AFC, when you had a concussion a couple of seasons ago against the Bills and everybody thought you shouldn't have played, and then you blew out the Bills, so whatever.
Then we went on to see what was sort of a blowout. I think this one was expected, the New York Giants versus Philadelphia Eagles. Philadelphia was the number-one seed in the NFC. The final score was 38-7. Claire, thoughts?

Claire Buchanan:
I mean, roll tide for Jalen Hurts. He is just, I don't know how he won't get MVP because he just single-handedly has brought them this far. And he just showed this past weekend just how good he is and how good this team is. And it's going to be an exciting weekend of football to come up. And I am rooting for him as an Alabama fan.

Cameron Jenkins:
And with Hurts, you want to give him credit obviously because he got a couple of touchdowns and he had 154 passing yards, but I really think that it was the rushing that really took over the game. You have Gainwell and you have Sanders doing 112 yards and 90 yards each. So with Gainwell, that's an average of 9.3 yards. So I think with the Eagles, they ended up running the ball quite a bit, and it was the running game. Because if you look at the receiving yards, the most a person had was 61 yards and that was Smith. So I think that at the end of the day, if you can stop the running game of the Eagles, you may be able to stop them. But they absolutely destroyed the Giants.

Brock Richardson:
Agreed. I don't really have much to say other than look out for the Philadelphia Eagles because they are coming in hot and they have just been playing really well all styles of football, offense, defense, running game, a little bit of passing game. They're coming at you in all different angles and look out for the Philadelphia Eagles. This is one, the next one, where I'm going to start things because I am-

Cameron Jenkins:
Why do you get to start Brock?

Brock Richardson:
Because that's what being the host and producer of the show allows me to do. And I am also a fan of the Buffalo Bills. And the Buffalo Bills lost 27 to 10 in what was a snowy blizzard day. Joe Burrow and the Cincinnati Bengals went down the first drive of the game and ran it down for a touchdown. I was on the phone with one Josh Watson during that first drive and I said, I don't have a good feeling about this. And I didn't have a good feeling about this all game. And to be honest with you, the better team won.
The Cincinnati Bengals were just all in all better than the Buffalo Bills, there's no doubt about that whatsoever. And good on Joe Burrow for basically just saying, we're going to do this and we're going to do this properly.
I think shame on Buffalo, in my opinion, for not being prepared to play in the snow. I think that they had trouble with that all game long. For a team that plays in Buffalo, you should be more prepared for that. And newsflash, there will be snow again next year. And so the Buffalo Bills need to really have a hard look at themselves and realize who they are. Because yes, Josh Allen is young, Josh Allen is young, that's fine, that's all well and good, but eventually people get older and I think the window is slowly, it's not closed yet, but it's slowly closing on the Buffalo Bills. Claire, help me a little bit because I'm a little bit ...

Claire Buchanan:
You're still licking your wounds over there? Yeah. Well, I mean, Buffalo usually feeds off of a good snowy football game day, and they just weren't able to adapt to the conditions I guess. And yeah, Joe Burrows was just on it. And it was like you said, the first drive, you kind of had that feeling of oh oh, that drive looked a little too easy. And we were hoping that it would turn around, but it didn't. And yeah, Buffalo needs to figure out what they need to either add or take away from this team and come back stronger because the same result two years in a row for a team that good is just disappointing as probably as fans and as obviously in the locker room for the Buffalo Bills.
So yeah, I hope that they don't repeat the same situation next season because as a Buffalo Bill, we definitely wanted to see them go further. And they had the potential to do so. And I think they have a good core there that they can build around and come back and have a more successful season next year.

Cameron Jenkins:
With the Bills, you look at Josh Allen, he had 265 passing yards, that's more than the Eagles' quarterback had, and he ended up winning. The problem is he couldn't throw any touchdowns, had one interception.
And when you're looking at the Bengals, their offensive line and their defensive line, they just manhandled the Bills. And usually the defence of the Bills is very good and they couldn't handle them. And that's why they were able to get to Josh Allen quite a bit, kind of make him throw maybe before he wanted to. And I don't think the snow had anything to do with it because they've been playing in the snow and, what was it, 17 and three this year the Buffalo Bills record I think or very close to that, so they know how to play in the snow, Brock. So I kind of disagree with you there.
Where I think the worst part of the Buffalo Bills is is the rushing yards. There is something significantly wrong when you're leading rusher had 26 yards and it was your quarterback Josh Allen. That's where it's wrong. The Buffalo team isn't very good at rushing and they need to be able to get some players in there that can rush. And that was the problem against the Bengals. So it wasn't because Josh Allen didn't throw enough, it wasn't because of the passing, because there were some other guys that had some passing. When your top rusher only does 26 yards in a game, you have problems.

Brock Richardson:
And again, I want to reiterate your point, when your top rusher is Josh Allen, that's a problem.
The other thing that I want to say here is I've seen on social media at the time of recording, we're doing this on Monday, and I've seen on social media, Vonn Miller would've made the difference, Vonn Miller would've made the difference. Yep, ifs and buts were chips and nuts, we'd all be having a party, friends. And that's just the way I look at it. Vonn Miller wasn't there, and we could all, if that's how you choose to lick your wounds, I guess that's fine, but I don't know that Vonn Miller would've made the biggest difference here at all in any way shape, form. But we'll never know.
This is a situation where Buffalo just needs to be better moving forward. But I need to move off the Buffalo Bills because I'm just going to get angrier and angrier as we have this discussion.
Dallas Cowboys and San Francisco 49ers, the 49ers win 19-12 in what was a fairly close game, some questionable decisions which I'll get into in a minute. But Cameron, let's start with you.

Cameron Jenkins:
Yeah, I think it was a close game, it was a tight game. You might question some of the referees' or umpires' decisions, a couple of the plays that they made. But overall, I think that it was a good game.
I think for San Francisco, you're looking at Kittle and had 95 yards receiving, which was awesome. And Purdy, I think Purdy did pretty well, 214 yards passing, unfortunately, no touchdowns or no interceptions. So I think you've got to maybe do a little bit better when it comes to that. But when you have Prescott, who is a well-known quarterback, that was 206 yards with one touchdown, but there were two interceptions, and I think that kind of made the difference. There were those couple of interceptions with Prescott.
And then once again with Dallas, you're not going to do it when you have three players doing between 20 and 26 yards for rushing each. That's only a total of 90 to maybe a 100 yards between three players. So you're not going to win too many games if you don't establish the rushing game in my opinion. So a close game, but I think the right team came out on top of that.

Claire Buchanan:
Yeah, I agree with you, Cameron. San Francisco has an incredible defence. And so much that they have enough faith in their defence and their offensive line to put their faith in their third-string rookie quarterback, Purdy. He's only got six games under his belt and he is going into the championship game. So I mean, what a year for him?
And yes, he had a couple of questionable decision-making calls that definitely showed his youth in the league and also a kind of end of game just kind of bad decisions of not being able to run the clock out and getting out of bounds and stuff. And luckily they were able to pull it through despite that. But yeah, San Francisco's defence is what's bringing them through.

Brock Richardson:
Yeah, for sure. The questionable decision that I wrote down here wasn't so much one that was done by a player, it was one that was done by a coaching staff. I don't understand why you decided to punt the ball with just over two minutes left. I understood the theory, but you didn't even execute that as well as you could have. What you did was you wasted 15 seconds off the clock just arranging yourselves. I understand it was fourth and a country mile, but you at least had the ball in your hands and you weren't relying on the other team to not do their job, and you were putting a lot of pressure on your own defense. Do you guys agree with the decision that was made there, disagree? What say you, Cameron, start with you?

Cameron Jenkins:
In that situation, I don't necessarily disagree with the punt with the time that was left because you might be able to get the ball back. But I don't think there's any wrong answer because lots of times I'm thinking, oh, go for it at fourth and two or fourth and three, depending on when the game is and how late it is in the game. So I don't know, in that particular case, I think they thought they were going to get the ball back and they didn't.

Claire Buchanan:
Yeah, I think again that they were putting their kind of trust in their defence, and they definitely came away with the win despite that decision. And like you said, it could have gone either way. But I think with the experience that Prescott has, despite having two interceptions that game, you don't want the ball in his hands with that much time left. He has 20 comeback touchdown drives in his career, including the playoffs. So it was a risky move.
And I agree with you, Brock, that in any sport if the ball or puck or whatever you're holding is in your hands as much as possible, that's better than anything. So I truly thought that they shouldn't have punted, but again it worked out for them in the end.

Brock Richardson:
And it's just things you learn as you're Dallas and what to do and what not to do. And I just think I would've left it in Dallas's hands and said, do your best, even if it was fourth and a country mile as I said earlier.
Well, the thing is is that the AFC and NFC Championship games will be very good, you have the Cincinnati Bengals versus the Kansas City Chiefs, and then you have the Philadelphia Eagles versus the 49ers, which will get going next Sunday at 3:00 PM for the NFC, Eastern Time, and then 6:30 Eastern Time for the AFC. So lots of good stuff happening in the world of football. And of course, we'll talk all about that next week.
And as Claire mentioned earlier, we're going to delve deep into a conversation of what is right versus wrong, whether it's your employer or your own beliefs. That will be all next week when the whole panel commences for that conversation. So stay tuned for that conversation next week.
That is the end of our show for this week. I would like to thank Claire Buchanan, Cam Jenkins. I'd also like to thank our technical producer, Mark Aflalo. Our editor is Jordan, we thank him for riding alongside us today as well. And our podcast coordinator is Ryan Delehanty.
Tune in next week because you just never know what happens when you enter The Neutral Zone. Have a great weekend. We'll talk to you next week. Be safe, be well.