NFL Relocations and League Expansion

[Exe Gesis]

What may eventually happen btw is an NCAA-like stricter region conferences.

Eg, 4 Canadian teams + NFC North, Bills etc in their own conference.
All the West Coasters in one conference.
Etc

They all play predominantly in their own conferences, best two teams advance to a 'next-stage', playoffs, then Super Bowl.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Attempt 4.

I like that idea GG
Was thinking of it looking something like this if we get 4 Mexican and 4 Canadian teams.

North - Canada 1, Canada 2, Canada 3, Canada 4, New England, Buffalo, Detroit, Greeen Bay, Minnesota, Seattle
East - New York G, New York J, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago, Indianapolis
South - Missouri, Atlanta, Carolina, Tennessee, Jacksonville, Tampa Bay, Miami, New Orleans, Houston, Dallas
West - Mexico 1, Mexico 2, Mexico 3, Mexico 4, Kansas City, Denver, Arizona, San Francisco, Oakland, San Diego

Play all teams in your conference once
Play 5 games per year OOC, 2 years to clear each other conference, 6 year to clear all 3, 12 years to clear all 3 home and away.
Play the 2 teams in the 2 conferences you dont play that year OOC that finished with the same ranking the previous year, that year.

16 games schedule.

 

[Exe Gesis]

Something like that would be a more logistical vision for an NAFL (north american football league).

 

[larkis]

Didn't think there would be enough money, interest or security in Mexico to justify four teams. Don't know if I want a half a billion dollar investment in Mexico.

 

[Dirty Bird]

I am worried about the North travel though. Seattle and New England being in the same conference is a worry.

So maybe Seattle and 1 Canada go to the West. 2 Mexico go to the south. Carolina to the East. Chicago and Missouri to the North.

 

[larkis]

I am worried about the North travel though. Seattle and New England being in the same conference is a worry.

So maybe Seattle and 1 Canada go to the West. 2 Mexico go to the south. Carolina to the East. Chicago and Missouri to the North.

To be honest travel shouldn't be a major problem considering how much Seattle would of traveled. Heck look at the AFL with the Eagles and the Dockers with their travel schedule. Eventually when a team is based in London they would be doing a LOT more travel.

 

[Chadwiko]

edit : nevermind

 

[Marklar_33]

Drop 2 Mexico's, add LA and Las Vegas. Surely they'd sell out games...?

 

[Chadwiko]

Is Hawaii a realistic option? Hawaii has a team, and maybe play one pre-season game per year in Samoa or something like that.

 

[Beetlebum]

I'm not sure you'd see an NFL franchise licence in Hawaii any time soon, certainly not in my lifetime and I'm only 32. You'll see a team based in London before you see a team in Maui.

 

[Dirty Bird]

I'm not sure you'd see an NFL franchise licence in Hawaii any time soon, certainly not in my lifetime and I'm only 32. You'll see a team based in London before you see a team in Maui.

The NFL would collapse before there's a team in Maui.
Oahu, maybe, but any of the other islands? No chance in hell.

 

[Beetlebum]

The NFL would collapse before there's a team in Maui.
Oahu, maybe, but any of the other islands? No chance in hell.

If they get rid of the Pro Bowl the only way Hawaii would get any NFL football is either pre season or if a team sells a game there.

 

[Dirty Bird]

If they get rid of the Pro Bowl the only way Hawaii would get any NFL football is either pre season or if a team sells a game there.

Agree, no team can stand alone there.
No owner would put a team in Aloha Stadium, there's just shit all revenue potential in that stadium. They need a new state of the art stadium of about 60-70k seats.
It'd cost a shitload.

And the market and potential growth is so small and limited, at current rates it'd take about 300 years for it to be able to sustain an NFL franchise.

Better chances of seeing a team in Boise in my lifetime. At least it might be able to sustain an NFL team within 30 years.

 

[ashley12]

Attempt 4.

I like that idea GG
Was thinking of it looking something like this if we get 4 Mexican and 4 Canadian teams.

North - Canada 1, Canada 2, Canada 3, Canada 4, New England, Buffalo, Detroit, Greeen Bay, Minnesota, Seattle
East - New York G, New York J, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago, Indianapolis
South - Missouri, Atlanta, Carolina, Tennessee, Jacksonville, Tampa Bay, Miami, New Orleans, Houston, Dallas
West - Mexico 1, Mexico 2, Mexico 3, Mexico 4, Kansas City, Denver, Arizona, San Francisco, Oakland, San Diego

Play all teams in your conference once
Play 5 games per year OOC, 2 years to clear each other conference, 6 year to clear all 3, 12 years to clear all 3 home and away.
Play the 2 teams in the 2 conferences you dont play that year OOC that finished with the same ranking the previous year, that year.

16 games schedule.

This is obviously a long term plan, but there are a few flaws

- Divisions should be more NE, NW, SE, SW rather then North South East West. Having the Patriots travel to Seattle and Edmonton is optimistic as a geographical based split.

- Odd number of games in conference will be interesting in terms of who gets the homegame etc... Obviously flipping the games year to year is the play, but that might not fit for OOC play (haven't thought about it properly though)

- Breaking up some of the big rivalries is going to be difficult. Chicago for example lose all three of their NFC North rivalries

- 4 teams is not going to be feasible for 300 years minimum. If there was any chance in the reasonable short term (say 50 years) that 4 teams in Mexico was feasible, the would have one at least already. As well as that people have to look past numbers for attendance for one game as an indicator as potential success, because the novelty value is probably worth a lot more then anything else.

- 40 teams is way to much spreading of thin resources. 36 seems more reasonable.

Nice ideas, but going to be a very long time before such change happens in the NFL, and its going to be a slow grind before it all changes.

 

[Starburns_]

34 teams (One in LA, the other either London or Canada), 2 conferences of 17, play the other 16 teams in the season, whole conference table leads to play-offs, and SB. Only major downside is no out of conference games.

36 teams (LA, London, Canada, perhaps Mexico), 2 conferences, 3 divisions in each. Schedule H&A in division for 10 games, then play one other other divison once (rotating over 5 years). Top two from each division make a similar play-offs system to the current one (final 12), knockout right through to SB.

Divisions:

AFC East- Pats, Bills, Dolphins, Jets, Colts, Jags

AFC Central- Steelers, Ravens, Browns, Bengals, Titans, Canada

AFC West- Broncos, Chargers, Chiefs, Raiders, Texans, Mexico?

NFC East- Giants, Eagles, Cowboys, Redskins, Panthers, London

NFC Central- Packers, Bears, Lions, Vikings, Falcons, Bucs

NFC West- Seahawks, Rams, 49ers, Cardinals, Saints, LA


NFC East would be a bit difficult with London to Dallas, so perhaps a reshuffle would be needed there.

 

[Exe Gesis]

I'm 'liking' your post for your thoughtful contribution, but i disagree with the set up you've done.

I'd have only regional conferences, not divisions.

 

[Starburns_]

I'm 'liking' your post for your thoughtful contribution, but i disagree with the set up you've done.

I'd have only regional conferences, not divisions.

So something like 4x9? How would you schedule it?

 

[Exe Gesis]

Just a quick hashing here...

Either all the Canadian cities together to foster CFL-like rivalry

Toronto, Montreal, Winnipeg, Calgary-Edmonton, Vancouver + Buffalo, New England, etc

Or

Split off the Canadian cities so there's one/two in each region...


Vancouver, Calgary-Edmonton, Seattle, Oakland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, San Diego, Denver, Arizona

Winnipeg, Minnesota, Detroit, Green Bay, Chicago, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati

Montreal, Toronto, Buffalo, New England, New York, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, Baltimore, London

Kansas City, St Louis, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Mexico City, New Orleans, Tennessee

Atlanta, Birmingham, Carolina, Jacksonville, Tampa Bay, Miami


Just still trying to organize the above list better.

 

[Dirty Bird]

Divisions:

AFC East- Pats, Bills, Dolphins, Jets, Colts, Jags

AFC Central- Steelers, Ravens, Browns, Bengals, Titans, Canada

AFC West- Broncos, Chargers, Chiefs, Raiders, Texans, Mexico?

NFC East- Giants, Eagles, Cowboys, Redskins, Panthers, London

NFC Central- Packers, Bears, Lions, Vikings, Falcons, Bucs

NFC West- Seahawks, Rams, 49ers, Cardinals, Saints, LA


NFC East would be a bit difficult with London to Dallas, so perhaps a reshuffle would be needed there.

Can we move some nuff nuff team from AFC West, lets say San Diego over to the NFC West. Then introduce 3 teams into the AFC?
I love what you've done in theory, but taking the Saints away from Atlanta?
They're the most entertaining divisional rivalry at the moment among all 8 divisions!
Nothing comes up to it in level of standard and passion among rival fans.

 

[ashley12]

Lol at most heated rivalry

Wouldn't be to dissimilar to calling west coast vs Sydney the biggest rivalry because of some short term close results and big games.

It would be nice to keep them together but really making one sacrifice to save arguably dozens of others is well worth it and the north divisions have far longer rivalries then the souths

 

[Dirty Bird]

Have you seen the vitriol between Saint and Falcon fans?

Falcons-Saints would be like Adelaide-Port Adelaide. Absolute hatred between the fans, games always 50/50, but always playing 2nd fiddle to a few pointless rivalries that no one has cared about since the 80s from the more traditional teams (NFC East + North in NFL, VFL teams in AFL)

 

[ashley12]

If it is such a storied rivalry with huge long term implications for revenue if the teams were split up then maybe the NFL would have already given them some prime time big money games.

If I asked an independent group of people to this argument list the top 10 rivalries that need to be kept if the league ever realigned I doubt saints vs falcons cracks top 10. In fact I'll ask that now.

 

[Dirty Bird]

If it is such a storied rivalry with huge long term implications for revenue if the teams were split up then maybe the NFL would have already given them some prime time big money games.

You mean like in the last 8 seasons of 2005-2012, only 2008 didn't have a prime time big money game between the 2?

Including games such as 2006 which at the time was the 2nd most viewed cable show of all time, while the 2010 game was the most watched cable show of 2010...

 

[Exe Gesis]

Relatively young rivalry as both teams recently good but shit for so long from their inception. Atlanta also used to be in a different division. The old nfc west and saints in central

 

[ashley12]

The programs were most watched mainly because of hurricane Katerina and the fact the falcons and saints have had good teams the last 4 years plus playoff implications in 2010.