It will never ever happen in everyone's lifetime but imagine if there's Western and Eastern conferences instead of AFC and NFC. It will also be easier to travel for visiting fans. Western Conference Pacific Division San Francisco 49ers Oakland Raiders San Diego Chargers Arizona Cardinals Northwest Division Seattle Seahawks Denver Broncos Minnesota Vikings Green Bay Packers Southwest Division Houston Texans Dallas Cowboys New Orleans Saints Tennessee Titans Midwest Division Kansas City Chiefs St. Louis Rams Chicago Bears Indianapolis Colts Eastern Conference Atlantic Division New York Giants New York Jets Philadelphia Eagles Pittsburgh Steelers Northeast Division New England Patriots Baltimore Ravens Washington Redskins Buffalo Bills Southeast Division Miami Dolphins Tampa Bay Buccaneers Jacksonville Jaguars Atlanta Falcons Central Division Detroit Lions Cleveland Browns Cincinnati Bengals Carolina Panthers
Why would anyone ever want to do this? It separates decades of rivalries all over the place. You would also lose the history behind the leagues. The AFL consisted of NFL rejects that did something that no league had ever done. It's a great story. Can't think of why you would ever want to do this.
Can't believe we're in January, and we're talking about summer time topics. How does it make it easier for traveling fans? The game is on a weekend. It's one time a week.
cant have Minnesota or GB in the "northwest" division. Also, like stated above earlier, this would DESTROY a lot of rivalries.
Silly idea. Who cares about "travel for visiting fans"? They make up like 2% of a typical NFL game's overall attendance. The AFC-NFC is fine as it currently is. The game has already been f**ked with enough in recent years.
I do think divisions are perfect the way, they are, and there certainly are enough teams (32)...a league with 40 NFL teams is overkill, but ... OP, I'm going to play devil's advocate against the general consensus that it makes no sense, destroying old rivalaries in the process. In real NFL economics and future plans, El Hijo de Odio's proposition is very rational and a bit likely. How so? If Goodell and *cough* the owners are serious about adding 2-4 new teams to the NFL, possibly 2-3 abroad. An Eastern-Western conference makes a very plausible realignment, while the divisions could still serve honorably as NFC and AFC. Though, I can see a great attempt at keeping the better rivals together. I'm guessing the London team would obviously fall into Atlantic (replacing Jacksonville or becoming 33rd or 34th NFL team). Although, some rivals may end up in different divisions, the league could still designate or mandate rivalry games in schedule, especially if they are serious about adding more regular season games. I guess you could have something, like this: Division winners, 2nd-4th place team games: 3 Divisional games: 6-8 Rivalry games: 1-3 (should be added into playoff implications, especially tie-breaker scenarios). Example. Dallas and Washington Will still play, though only once year and alternate sites, each year. Inter-conference games with scheduled division: 4 Miscellaneous: 0-2 Northeast is almost perfect, but you would have to move Philadelphia over to Northeast with Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and Washington. 4 oldest NFL franchises who all have some history together. New England falls over to the Atlantic division, while the Bills would also move to Atlantic, especially if they are in Buffalo or Toronto. You also have 3 AFL teams in the same division, possibly: Bills, Jets, and Patriots Atlantic Division: New York Giants New York Jets New England Patriots London (New NFL team)/Jaguars or Toronto-Buffalo Bills Northeast Division: Washington Redskins Baltimore Ravens Pittsburgh Steelers Philadelphia Eagles Central division, I like, but I think you could replace Carolina and Cincinnati with Green Bay and Chicago. Still all in same georgraphical area. Detroit Lions or Minnesota Vikings Cleveland Browns Green Bay Packers Chicago Bears My odd team out of the division would be Minnesota, since they are a newest franchise and are simply an odd duck in the crowd. Remember, if we are talking old pre NFL-AFL merger team, the division makes alot of sense, as well. The Southeast is where its a little more chaotic, because of Jacksonville in this scenario... I think I would go this route. Miami has to be in this to sort keep as many as the old Eastern AFL teams, together as possible (Atlantic Division). You'll notice outside of Miami, the other teams are much newer and historically weak franchises. Southeast Miami Dolphins Tampa Bay Buccaneers Carolina Panthers Jacksonville Jaguars or Cincinnati Bengals The Midwest, sounds more appropriate, as the Mid-South division is basically a newer version of the old NFC West, except no San Francisco, who was always stuck in a division of doormats, along with Carolina who really is just a stock team in NFC West/NFC South. Though, over the years, the rivals between other teams were actually entertaining, especially Saints and Falcons, also Saints and Rams. Midwest Division Atlanta Falcons New Orleans Saints Tennessee Titans St. Louis (Los Angeles) Rams The "real" Midwest division, though Kansas City is the wild card, I'll show in a second. Kansas City Chiefs*, Cincinnati Bengals, or Mexico City/Portland/Mid-US team (New Team) Indianapolis Colts Minnesota Vikings Denver Broncos Southwest Division Dallas Cowboys Houston Texans Arizona Cardinals Kansas City Chiefs or Mexico City/Portland/Mid-US team (New Team) Pacific is near perfect, but it's hard to tell if an LA team comes into the equation. On the same token, if the LA teams ends up being the Raiders, it works out fine. Though, I would move Arizona out of division back towards the southwest, because Seattle makes more sense being on the coast with other coastal teams whom they also have a good history with. Pacific Division Seattle Seahawks San Francisco 49ers Oakland/Los Angeles Raiders San Diego Chargers And for everyone who thinks the concept is silly and far-fetched take a look at the divisions over the years. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1922/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1931/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1942/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1957/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1966/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1966_AFL/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1970/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1981/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1995/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1999/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2002/ If the league adds 3 or more teams, realignment is very likely, especially if teams overseas or across borders are added. Why
As I said earlier, if the NFL adds four new teams over the next decade, and two of them are London and Mexico City, it would almost make sense to move teams, like Dallas, Houston, St. Louis, Arizona, or New Orleans to a Southwest-type division. You'd also have to figure that a team in London in some form or fashion is going to have to be in NFC East/Atlantic division/AFC East. It wouldn't make sense to throw a team in London in a central or midwest division, when it's already an insane travel as it is with the teams on the Eastern seaboard.
If there was a as-straight-as-can-be line drawn from the Minny-ND border down to the TX-LA border, you'd see that there is only 9 teams in the western side of the U.S. HOW are there not more teams in the west? There might not be that many fans in NV and UT, but I'm sure states like Nebraska and Oklahoma would love an NFL team.
To separate Dallas from NYG, Wash, and Philly is as dumb as tossing 50 years of NL history aside to create a geographic "rivalry."
Nebraska would also like a third law school, a third med school, or buildings over 3 stories west of Lincoln.
