If you could re-align your NFL division

[goober]

i wouldn't mind switching the Cardinals with San Diego to have an all pacific coast division

[hermes]

nothing, nfc north is perfect

edit: i mean i guess we could talk about switching the lions for like the colts i guess but it wouldn't feel right. too much history in the black and blue divison

[rickrolled]

AFC Atlantic
Patriots
Jets
Giants
Bills

AFC East
Steelers
Eagles
Ravens
Redskins

AFC Mid West
Packers
Bengals
Colts
Lions

AFC South
Panthers
Dolphins
Jaguars
Buccaneers


NFC Pacific
Seahawks
Broncos
49ers
Rams

NFC West
Chargers
Cardinals
Raiders
Titans

NFC Mid West
Chiefs
Bears
Browns
Vikings

NFC South
Cowboys
Texans
Saints
Falcons

[MrBaynes]

I like most of the divisional rivalries and would try not to change things around too much, however there are a couple of instances where I do not understand the divisional alignments and would switch things around:

AFC East:

New England Patriots
New York Jets
Buffalo Bills
Baltimore Ravens (New)

AFC South:

Jacksonville Jaguars
Houston Texans
Tennessee Titans
Miami Dolphins (New)

AFC North:

Pittsburgh Steelers
Cincinatti Bengals
Cleveland Browns
Indianapolis Colts (New)

The only real rivalry affected IMO is Pittsburgh-Baltimore, but that rivalry has waned recently, and Baltimore picks up a rivalry with New England. Miami and Indianapolis play in divisions now which do not require nearly as much travel, hopefully allowing regional rivalries to grow amongst two fan bases that have seen better days.

[rickrolled]

Miami and Indianapolis play in divisions now which do not require nearly as much travel, hopefully allowing regional rivalries to grow amongst two fan bases that have seen better days.

Travel is not an issue in the NFL, it's only 16 weeks and 8 are on the road. With that being said you have 8 teams in the Mid West, split between NFC and AFC like my proposal above.

Steelers, Eagles from PA. Baltimore (MD) and Washington (DC) which is basically Maryland are all in close proximity.

Atlantic division, Pats, Jets, Giants, Bills is right on the money.

Panthers belongs in the AFC along with the 3 Floridian teams (way too many for one state btw and no one close to being a playoff team).
Same should be said about California, 4 teams is way too many for one state. New York state has 3 teams with 2 being in NYC.

The only team I had to move all the way to the West Coast was the Titans, but only because the Panthers HAS to be in the AFC, and that the Falcons is a southern team so they fit right in with the Texas teams and the Saints.

[papidulo]

NFC East:
Soooo many other teams should be in the NFC East instead of the Cowboys...

Id prefer the Steelers,

Im sure its so mixed up so that teams dont overlap fanbases in the same region and can make more money, but...

At least the Panthers and Cowboys could swap, and itd make more sense

[MrBaynes]

Miami and Indianapolis play in divisions now which do not require nearly as much travel, hopefully allowing regional rivalries to grow amongst two fan bases that have seen better days.

Travel is not an issue in the NFL, it's only 16 weeks and 8 are on the road. With that being said you have 8 teams in the Mid West, split between NFC and AFC like my proposal above.

Steelers, Eagles from PA. Baltimore (MD) and Washington (DC) which is basically Maryland are all in close proximity.

Atlantic division, Pats, Jets, Giants, Bills is right on the money.

Panthers belongs in the AFC along with the 3 Floridian teams (way too many for one state btw and no one close to being a playoff team).
Same should be said about California, 4 teams is way too many for one state. New York state has 3 teams with 2 being in NYC.

The only team I had to move all the way to the West Coast was the Titans, but only because the Panthers HAS to be in the AFC, and that the Falcons is a southern team so they fit right in with the Texas teams and the Saints.

Before you dismiss travel as a non-issue, I suggest you look at some literature on the topic (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160614133619.htm), or simply look at the road records of westcoast teams traveling to the east coast or eastcoast teams traveling out west. It is not nearly the issue it is in the NBA, or how it was years ago, but it is hardly a non-issue. Thursday night games (in division) are particularly a problem, which is only exacerbated if the divisional opponent is further away.

My proposal was trying to keep many of the leagues traditional rivalries intact, while fixing the 2 glaring unusual divisions (Indy in the AFC South, and Miami in the East), which did have to move Baltimore unfortunately. Geographically it may make sense, but I would never dream of separating the Cowyboys/Giants/Redskins/Eagles rivalries as you have, or break up the NFC North and lose the Bears/Packers/Vikings rivalries that have largely defined those franchises histories. Even the AFC West, which prides itself on its AFL roots is ripped apart, eliminating Raiders-Broncos, Chargers-Raiders, Raiders-Chiefs and Chiefs-Broncos rivalries which I can tell you firsthand is ingrained inn these communities very psyche. I understand completely what your proposal is trying to do, its just not the way I would do it, which was the OP's question.

I would like to see your support for California having too many teams. I would understand an argument based on the lack of public financing for new stadiums as evidence that Californians do not wish to support that many teams, but it is hard to argue that from a demographics and population basis that San Diego, Oakland, San Francisco and Los Angeles are all NFL sized markets, regardless of how many their are in the state. There is a reason why there are also 5 MLB teams and 4 NBA teams in the state, it simply has that many viable markets.

[JaxMagic]

I remember the Jags previous owner pressing hard to get Miami in the AFC South. For whatever reason they put Indy in instead. Can you get any more far South than Miami? Lol

[rickrolled]

Miami and Indianapolis play in divisions now which do not require nearly as much travel, hopefully allowing regional rivalries to grow amongst two fan bases that have seen better days.

Travel is not an issue in the NFL, it's only 16 weeks and 8 are on the road. With that being said you have 8 teams in the Mid West, split between NFC and AFC like my proposal above.

Steelers, Eagles from PA. Baltimore (MD) and Washington (DC) which is basically Maryland are all in close proximity.

Atlantic division, Pats, Jets, Giants, Bills is right on the money.

Panthers belongs in the AFC along with the 3 Floridian teams (way too many for one state btw and no one close to being a playoff team).
Same should be said about California, 4 teams is way too many for one state. New York state has 3 teams with 2 being in NYC.

The only team I had to move all the way to the West Coast was the Titans, but only because the Panthers HAS to be in the AFC, and that the Falcons is a southern team so they fit right in with the Texas teams and the Saints.

Before you dismiss travel as a non-issue, I suggest you look at some literature on the topic (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160614133619.htm), or simply look at the road records of westcoast teams traveling to the east coast or eastcoast teams traveling out west. It is not nearly the issue it is in the NBA, or how it was years ago, but it is hardly a non-issue. Thursday night games (in division) are particularly a problem, which is only exacerbated if the divisional opponent is further away.

My proposal was trying to keep many of the leagues traditional rivalries intact, while fixing the 2 glaring unusual divisions (Indy in the AFC South, and Miami in the East), which did have to move Baltimore unfortunately. Geographically it may make sense, but I would never dream of separating the Cowyboys/Giants/Redskins/Eagles rivalries as you have, or break up the NFC North and lose the Bears/Packers/Vikings rivalries that have largely defined those franchises histories. Even the AFC West, which prides itself on its AFL roots is ripped apart, eliminating Raiders-Broncos, Chargers-Raiders, Raiders-Chiefs and Chiefs-Broncos rivalries which I can tell you firsthand is ingrained inn these communities very psyche. I understand completely what your proposal is trying to do, its just not the way I would do it, which was the OP's question.

I would like to see your support for California having too many teams. I would understand an argument based on the lack of public financing for new stadiums as evidence that Californians do not wish to support that many teams, but it is hard to argue that from a demographics and population basis that San Diego, Oakland, San Francisco and Los Angeles are all NFL sized markets, regardless of how many their are in the state. There is a reason why there are also 5 MLB teams and 4 NBA teams in the state, it simply has that many viable markets.

I'm not going to click that link, because bottom line is it's 16 weeks not months. And there are 28 teams this season out of 32 that play Thursday night football, once this season!


Whether that effects in division seeding or not I don't know but out of 16 weeks that is one week.

You're contradicting yourself in that teams shouldn't travel on thursday nights if it's in-division and far away, but yet you're OK with Cowboys playing the Giants, Redskins and Eagles ? It's a long travel from Dallas to NY, Philly and Washington afaik.

About the other rivalries such as the Raiders, that team might move to Las Vegas, I dont know how many fans in Oakland would follow that team, they might become 49er fans or just stay at home. The other teams like Broncos might care more about that rivalry than Raiders fans, if there will be any.

Raiders had the 2nd lowest attendance in the NFL last season.

As for the Viking, Packers rivalries etc. There will be new rivalries, I had the 8 Mid West team split between NFC and AFC so they won't have to be in a division with a team from another part of the country.

And I didn't do it because of travel, but based on geography. Patriots shouldn't be playing the Dolphins just like the Cowboys shouldn't be playimg the Giants (within their divisions) but if they play them out of division or conference that ain't a problem.

I already said what I said about California, they have alot of markets but that doesn't mean they should have so many teams.

[bluejerseyjinx]

32 teams in the NFL. 8 Divisions with 4 each. It all works out well.

But man, some of these divisions do not feel natural at all! Indianapolis in the AFC South...Dallas in the NFC East...

So if you could re-align the conference your team plays in with any three teams of your choice, what would they be? Why would you choose those teams?

For my Texans I would want my division to be:

Houston
Dallas
New Orleans
Denver

Houston & Dallas because the Texas teams. New Orleans because they are close and there are a lot of ties to the city here. Denver because I've heard that people in Colorado love it when Texans come to visit, so this gives them not one, but two fanbases to travel there from the Lone Star State every year!

How about Tennessee instead of Denver? A lot closer and travel friendly for all fan bases.

[Papi_swav]

Wish my Ravens could of been in the same division with Giants Jets and Bills but instead we have to go to war with the Steelers and Bengals every year.