If the NFL really wants this (like it seems they do)
by stlfan on Oct 26, 2009 9:18 PM CDT
31 comments
Since the NFL seems dead set on expanding and making the league more global, I thought I would give my take on how to do it right. I think that, for a long time now, the league has needed to redo their divisions and leagues. It’s not like baseball in which there is a DH and non-DH league which you could not mess with. Any of the 32 teams could be NFC teams or AFC teams. They are all NFL now, there is no chance of the two leagues splitting up. My suggestion would be to expand out to 36 teams, adding teams in Mexico City, Las Vegas, Los Angeles (because they’re already building a new stadium there), and London (since this is the direction it’s all going.)
See Divisions at Bottom
I know that some teams (Dallas and Kansas City for sure) will ultimately be quite upset about some of the decisions made here because of rivalries lost, but some things had to be done. You will see that I try to address these as best I can.
There are now 9 teams per division, so each team could play 2 games a season against each division foe and have a 16 games schedule. If that is the case, the way I would remedy the rivals situation would be to (in the final week of the season) each team play a rival (it could be different each year, for example: Dallas could play Washington and NY Giants in alternating seasons.) Another option would be to play two rival games per year. This would be a 17 or 18-game schedule, but I think that the NFL will be expanding schedules sometime in the near future anyway. Football is the shortest season out of every professional sport in any case, and they play way less games.
The other option would be to play each team in your division once, play every team in one other division each year, with those games rotating year in and year out, once every three years (at home once, then away the next time.) I would add a similar "rival game" in the last game of the year in that case, to make it an 18-game schedule once again. (I like even numbers.)
I would say that the top three teams in each division make the playoffs, thus leaving 12 playoff teams; however, that would take away from the wild card concept. It might be more practical to let the top 2 teams in each division into the playoffs; and then allow the wild card to come down to the best 4 teams in the entire league that aren’t already in the top two in their division.
I do not know if the players’ association would go for it, but with such an expansive expansion (11% of the league as new teams) I would love to see all the players go into a draft. That wouldn’t happen, however, so I wouldn’t mind seeing the four expansion teams going through the same process as the other expansion teams, but then giving those 4 teams first shot at all the free agents (say, a week to discuss deals with them before any other team is allowed to make contact.)
My New Divisions
West
Las Vegas _____
Los Angeles _____
Mexico City _____
East
London _____
New York Jets
North
South
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Arrowhead Pride's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Arrowhead Pride writers or editors.
0 recs |
31 comments
Email
Print
Comments
i hope this never happens and think it never will
by dwill_pittst on Oct 26, 2009 9:22 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Mexico City?!? you're kidding ... please tell me you're kidding ... Mexico City?
first, they have a totally different kind of football down there – in fact it’s so different that WE call it Soccer
secondly, Mexico City would have to be the most hellish place to get around in with all the people … and certainly if any tourists were to head down there, given the current climate of drugs and murders and kidnappings, I think the vast majority of US citizens would NOT want to follow their team there
I can ALMOST imagine London …
I can NOT imagine a 4 division realignment like this … nope, just can’t see it … I mean, good work and you’ve obviously put a lot of thought and effort into it, but I just can … not … see … it … ever
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Oct 26, 2009 9:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Everytime I see you post its like this...
You have problems, Who cares if it never happens, He is just writing a post. Who are you to say it wouldnt? Mexican are actually the fastest growing fans of the NFL. Its doubled in the last 2 years. Also, Mexico City is not that bad, They have police all over. Ive been their before and I swear I couldnt drink a beer without police all over me. Also, They have tons of people to go to the games and trust me they would go to the games. They love sports of any kind.
by darwithabar on Oct 26, 2009 10:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The game in 2005
in Mexico City between the Cardinals & 49ers had over 103,000 thousand in attendance. Thats a lot of tickets & a lot of concessions.
by ttownmikey on Oct 26, 2009 10:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's what I was thinking...
fans showed up in droves last time a game was there.
by stlfan on Oct 27, 2009 7:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
hey, I complimented the guy on his (obviously) hard work putting it together ...
… and when I said “I can’t see it” I mean that it just, TO ME, looks “wrong” (as the poster himself said it would look odd to many people) … that is not a knock or a slam on the poster, or his work or his effort or to say specifically that it WON’T happen … it’s ME saying that I personally don’t care for those particular alignments of teams
I’m sorry you don’t like what I like or vice versa … you’re more than entitled to your opinions just as I’m entitled to mine … you don’t have to LIKE or AGREE with mine, but dude, respect the fact that I have my own mind and form my own opinions about things, just as you do
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Oct 26, 2009 10:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mexico City
is not a border town.
The drug cartel / police corruption / military law infested area’s of Mexico are near and on the US border..
The problem is not Mexico, it’s the unabashed drug problem in the US that is fueling the drug warfare in an economically challenge Mexico. The money to be made from illegally moving a high dollar product across the border into the US to the larget drug taking market on the planet is what’s fuxxoring up the border towns.
All of that has almost no impact on Mexico City, or the majority of the country of Mexico. Texas and California are the issue, not Mexico.
The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw
by Texas Chief on Oct 27, 2009 5:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
103 thousand
Not 103,000 thousand — that’d be a lot of thousands of people.
by ttownmikey on Oct 26, 2009 10:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
that WOULD be a lot of people
but then if the NFL could sell a jersey to that many people all at one time they would – and Goodell would have one HELLUA party
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Oct 26, 2009 10:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
London already has a team
The Silly Nannies, I saw it on TV.
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
by Big Chief on Oct 26, 2009 10:58 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Family Guy? Anyone? Anyone?
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
by Big Chief on Oct 27, 2009 9:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hillarious
They have a QB that’s pretty good I hear.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Oct 27, 2009 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dan Patrick interviewed a Limey today...
and the Limey pretty much said that London likes having one game, and that two games would be good. But having their own team is very unlikely. He also said that a Super Bowl there was unlikely because there would be much more demand because of the stage, therefor making it harder for Brits to get tickets.
Basically having one game was good, but the demand is not there for their own team, not to mention the logistics of a cross atlantic flight every week is pretty expensive.
Desperately hoping for Desperate Measures
by averagegatsby on Oct 26, 2009 11:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Brits are too polite for American Football anyway ...
interesting thing on Discovery about the Titanic, someone did stats on the % or Brits vs % of Americans who survived because the Brits were all in nice little lines patiently waiting for lifeboats, while Americans were pushing others out of the way in panic mode
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Oct 26, 2009 11:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is offensive on so many levels
I had relatives on the Titanic.
by AngryJesus on Oct 27, 2009 1:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
how is stating a fact offensive?
Desperately hoping for Desperate Measures
by averagegatsby on Oct 27, 2009 9:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I find that question offensive!
jk – I think AJ was too.
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
by Big Chief on Oct 27, 2009 9:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
actually
the FACT you stated was not very specific.
Basically you said that compared to the overall ratio of Brits to Yanks on the Titanic the % of Americans that survived was out of balance with the overall make up of the passengers on the ship.
If you had stopped there it would be “just stating a fact”
But… You went on to draw the conclusion that too polite limey’s stood around waiting for the next boat and paniced selfish American pushed others around to get in the life boats first.. THAT is the part that is offensive. You managed to paint a negative picture of everyone without offering ANY support to back your conclusions in any way.
Maybe people got into lifeboats and naturaly gathered with people they knew? Which would suggest that maybe more “American filled” lifeboats survived the undertow resulting from the ship sinking than “Brit filled” lifeboats?
Maybe ther Brits were not just allowing for women and children to load fist and there was a higher ration of American women and children?
Maybe the crew filling the boats unconciously or conciously selected more Americans?
I coulod do this all day. - Your comment was, and is offensive; not because you said it but because you drew a conclusion without making any attemprt to back it up with any kind of facts, links, or proof of any kind.
Maybe it was just supposed to be a joke making fun of stereotypes? In wich case you shoud not be at all shocked if someone finds it offensive, yet alone should to defend your joke by calling on the “I was just stating a fact” line.
Try this: It was a joke. If you don’t like it, don’t laugh =P "
The Powers Of Astute Observation Are Often Mistaken As Cynacism By Those That Do Not Posses Them -- G.B. Shaw
by Texas Chief on Oct 27, 2009 6:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
english sports fans are pretty violent from what i have heard.
i dont think that moving a team to europe would be a good plan. logistics is going to be a huge pain in the ass + most players would prefer playing in the us. its also called the national football league and not the international!
if you move a team move it to canada…
by pmwz on Oct 27, 2009 7:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wait, you mean Canda is NOT the 51st state???
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Oct 27, 2009 12:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A good concept...
for London would be a schedule with blocks of 3 straight home or away games. They could build a practice facility that they could HQ in while they are on the road. I like the idea of a London team, but to me that is the only room for expansion. St. Louis will move to LA and Jacksonville to Orlando, even Buffalo to Toronto which has the largest population in Canada. 33 teams would be a scheduling nightmare though. I don’t know how that would work. Maybe they could make London like the Notre Dame of the NFL. Where they are independent of every division. They play all 32 teams every two years. The first three weeks would all be thursday games. Their opponents will be on short weeks, London on the road including all of preseason. Then the next three games at home they host a team prior to a team entering their bye week. So basically London doesn’t get a bye or a chance at a division title, but would have other advantages. They should get home field if they have a better record and they always get the tie breaker after the head to head record is examined if they even played at all.
by I_Bleed_Red. on Oct 27, 2009 11:39 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
My math is bad...
I meant 4 straight weeks of home or away games.
by I_Bleed_Red. on Oct 27, 2009 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
One thing wrong here is
putting St. Louis and Kansas City in the “north”. Neither are in the northern United States.
by G.L. on Oct 27, 2009 1:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Well, If I wanted 5 divisions
they would have been in the central…but I didn’t. :)
by stlfan on Oct 27, 2009 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
nor in the South or the East or the West
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisiton!
by upamtn on Oct 27, 2009 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you want to be precise, we are
located in the south central united states.
by G.L. on Oct 28, 2009 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i love u idea
denver wouild win that divson for the next 3 years
okay i have cereal palsy arhrtis and chronic fatiue as well i have a grea life loveing folks some days are better that other days i got a make a wish in 2001 saw my favorive team the broncos was the trip of the lifetime i wish everyone couild gotten to enjoy that with me i know some of u hate the broncos and that ok but i bleed organ and bule
by j-man on Oct 27, 2009 4:02 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
