Jump to content

NFL expansion


Lost In Xanadu
 Share

Recommended Posts

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

when the 32 team realignment was done, geographical relationship was balanced with long standing rivalries. No way DAL/WAS wasn't going to happen twice a year, just like MIA/NYJ. Many examples, and simply aligning them based on location could be a bad decision. Imagine only seeing your long time rival once every 4 years?
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

when the 32 team realignment was done, geographical relationship was balanced with long standing rivalries. No way DAL/WAS wasn't going to happen twice a year, just like MIA/NYJ. Many examples, and simply aligning them based on location could be a bad decision. Imagine only seeing your long time rival once every 4 years?

Good for SOCN, bad for the NFL.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a bad idea for a lot of reasons listed here already (an already diluted talent pool, logistics of travel particularly outside the United States, etc). I think most fans who understand the game get that.

 

But the reality is there are lots of fans in non-NFL cities that think they want the NFL. I live in one of them. What most of the people of South Texas do not get is all those economic "studies" that demonstrate the fiscal benefits of building a stadium - with taxpayer dollars, of course - for a team are hogwash. There is no community financial gain. If anything, the local community gets fleeced... all for the privilege of feeling good to have a local club to root for on Thursday, Sunday, or Monday.

 

And another reality is the NFL currently does not have a team in the second largest media market in the United States. A team is going to move to LA and soon. Maybe more than one. That will create a void in St. Louis and possibly San Diego or Oakland (although the Oakland market void argument is weak given the area has a second franchise and the Raider organization is so poorly run).

 

And still another reality is the league wants to expand outside the U.S. The line on London was previously actually thought to be the Rams as Kroenke already has ties to the EPL and he's about as loyal to a community as Walmart.... oh.... wait. But with Kroenke now having the inside line on LA, I would think the move to London looks like it is more likely to come out of Jacksonville before any other city. Jax actually has a pretty committed owner these days, but he's likely to get some pressure (and money) from the league and, really, Jax is not supporting that team.

 

So, yeah, the Rams to LA.... in the next 10 years someone to London (Jax?).... and probably an interest in the league to coerce a club to Toronto (Raiders? Lions? no longer the Bills since Bon Jovi lost out on that bid) and Mexico City (Chargers?). St. Louis and San Diego would clamor for a replacement franchise (Jax and Oakland, too, but they would be less likely to get one). Second tier sports cities like San Antonio, Las Vegas (a really, really, REALLY bad idea), Salt Lake City, Oklahoma City, and even Portland will still be clamoring for a new club, too.

 

I think most of us on this board know expansion is an awful idea, but I think we are all smart enough to know it's going to happen regardless.

Edited by WorkingAllTheTime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a bad idea for a lot of reasons listed here already (an already diluted talent pool, logistics of travel particularly outside the United States, etc). I think most fans who understand the game get that.

 

But the reality is there are lots of fans in non-NFL cities that think they want the NFL. I live in one of them. What most of the people of South Texas do not get is all those economic "studies" that demonstrate the fiscal benefits of building a stadium - with taxpayer dollars, of course - for a team are hogwash. There is no community financial gain. If anything, the local community gets fleeced... all for the privilege of feeling good to have a local club to root for on Thursday, Sunday, or Monday.

 

And another reality is the NFL currently does not have a team in the second largest media market in the United States. A team is going to move to LA and soon. Maybe more than one. That will create a void in St. Louis and possibly San Diego or Oakland (although the Oakland market void argument is weak given the area has a second franchise and the Raider organization is so poorly run).

 

And still another reality is the league wants to expand outside the U.S. The line on London was previously actually thought to be the Rams as Kroenke already has ties to the EPL and he's about as loyal to a community as Walmart.... oh.... wait. But with Kroenke now having the inside line on LA, I would think the move to London looks like it is more likely to come out of Jacksonville before any other city. Jax actually has a pretty committed owner these days, but he's likely to get some pressure (and money) from the league and, really, Jax is not supporting that team.

 

So, yeah, the Rams to LA.... in the next 10 years someone to London (Jax?).... and probably an interest in the league to coerce a club to Toronto (Raiders? Lions? no longer the Bills since Bon Jovi lost out on that bid) and Mexico City (Chargers?). St. Louis and San Diego would clamor for a replacement franchise (Jax and Oakland, too, but they would be less likely to get one). Second tier sports cities like San Antonio, Las Vegas (a really, really, REALLY bad idea), Salt Lake City, Oklahoma City, and even Portland will still be clamoring for a new club, too.

 

I think most of us on this board know expansion is an awful idea, but I think we are all smart enough to know it's going to happen regardless.

Yep, all the serious studies done show it's economically harmful. But one thing I've noticed in the stadium debate here is that the local media will never get that news out, but actually suppress it; they seem to think that their role is to be a civic booster, consequences to the residents of the city be damned.

 

Even here where sentiment was clearly against it, our local politicians used machinations like I've never seen (other than during the passage of Obamacare) to circumvent what was a pretty clear requirement to actually take the issue for the voters. Goodell eve came up here with various carrots and sticks to make sure it got through. They finally came up with a way to "pay for it" without increasing taxes through "pulltabs" in bars. Revenues came in at 10% of projections. Not 10% short, 10% of the total. :facepalm:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PS If I were a gambling man, I would bet the league is trying to get to 36 teams..... again, with a specific target of franchises in Los Angeles, London, Toronto, and Mexico City. If they lose clubs in St. Louis and San Diego, they will back fill (as they did in St. Louis already once, Baltimore, Cleveland and Houston) and frame it as "the NFL cares about its communities." That means two additional clubs to add (where is really about which city offers the sweetest deal, but I suspect Portland and Salt Lake would be the odds on favorite due to geography - human, not physical - and the fact Jerry Jones will draw a line in the sand regarding his grip on San Antonio).

 

The league will also then push for an 18 game regular season format and a 3 six-team divisions in 2 conferences. The playoff format would likely be a bye for the best conference record with a first round that gives home field for the 2 remaining division champions and the highest ranked of 4 Wild Card teams (7 playoff clubs per conference, 14 playoff teams - or 39% of the league). Wild Card weekend becomes 6 games instead of 4.... lord help us that's going to mean some really bad teams make the post season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone is curious as to how an 18 game schedule works in the 36 team, 6 division format....

  • 10 division games (home and away)
  • 6 games against one division in the other conference (3 year rotation with secondary home/away rotation every other cycle to make sure the fans see the other club once every 6 years)
  • 2 intra-conference divisional games against the team who ended up in the same place the previous year (meaning last year's first place division champs play each other, second place against each other, third place against each other, etc.) with preset home and away rotation in the calendar. This last piece is key to the format as it, theoretically, forces record parity by including a strength of schedule component.

See how easy that is? It's going to happen. The NFLPA will really only be able to fight to reduce the number of preseason games, which will only dilute the talent pool more, but is necessary because 18 regular season games and 4 preseason games is barbaric.

Edited by WorkingAllTheTime
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Dallas Cowboys make Oklahoma City unrealistic for a franchise. I never understood why any city should or want to pay for a stadium when the NFL is so fat with cash.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

when the 32 team realignment was done, geographical relationship was balanced with long standing rivalries. No way DAL/WAS wasn't going to happen twice a year, just like MIA/NYJ. Many examples, and simply aligning them based on location could be a bad decision. Imagine only seeing your long time rival once every 4 years?

We had long term rivalries (since 1977-2002) with Chicago, Detroit, Minnesota, Green Bay and they went away. New ones have been established more on geography. The main difference is we used to get a ton of visiting fans during November/December bringing money from up north into economy. The nfc south teams don't bring as much money since they aren't fleeing the cold and staying longer.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

when the 32 team realignment was done, geographical relationship was balanced with long standing rivalries. No way DAL/WAS wasn't going to happen twice a year, just like MIA/NYJ. Many examples, and simply aligning them based on location could be a bad decision. Imagine only seeing your long time rival once every 4 years?

We had long term rivalries (since 1977-2002) with Chicago, Detroit, Minnesota, Green Bay and they went away. New ones have been established more on geography. The main difference is we used to get a ton of visiting fans during November/December bringing money from up north into economy. The nfc south teams don't bring as much money since they aren't fleeing the cold and staying longer.

yeah, not all could be kept, but it obviously was considered seeing Dallas is in the East
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

when the 32 team realignment was done, geographical relationship was balanced with long standing rivalries. No way DAL/WAS wasn't going to happen twice a year, just like MIA/NYJ. Many examples, and simply aligning them based on location could be a bad decision. Imagine only seeing your long time rival once every 4 years?

We had long term rivalries (since 1977-2002) with Chicago, Detroit, Minnesota, Green Bay and they went away. New ones have been established more on geography. The main difference is we used to get a ton of visiting fans during November/December bringing money from up north into economy. The nfc south teams don't bring as much money since they aren't fleeing the cold and staying longer.

yeah, not all could be kept, but it obviously was considered seeing Dallas is in the East

I do miss seeing the Lions and Bucs play twice a year.

Edited by laughedatbytime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

when the 32 team realignment was done, geographical relationship was balanced with long standing rivalries. No way DAL/WAS wasn't going to happen twice a year, just like MIA/NYJ. Many examples, and simply aligning them based on location could be a bad decision. Imagine only seeing your long time rival once every 4 years?

We had long term rivalries (since 1977-2002) with Chicago, Detroit, Minnesota, Green Bay and they went away. New ones have been established more on geography. The main difference is we used to get a ton of visiting fans during November/December bringing money from up north into economy. The nfc south teams don't bring as much money since they aren't fleeing the cold and staying longer.

yeah, not all could be kept, but it obviously was considered seeing Dallas is in the East

I do miss seeing the Lions and Bucs play twice a year.

Not sure if sarcasm....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

when the 32 team realignment was done, geographical relationship was balanced with long standing rivalries. No way DAL/WAS wasn't going to happen twice a year, just like MIA/NYJ. Many examples, and simply aligning them based on location could be a bad decision. Imagine only seeing your long time rival once every 4 years?

We had long term rivalries (since 1977-2002) with Chicago, Detroit, Minnesota, Green Bay and they went away. New ones have been established more on geography. The main difference is we used to get a ton of visiting fans during November/December bringing money from up north into economy. The nfc south teams don't bring as much money since they aren't fleeing the cold and staying longer.

yeah, not all could be kept, but it obviously was considered seeing Dallas is in the East

I do miss seeing the Lions and Bucs play twice a year.

Not sure if sarcasm....

You are looking live at the Pontiac Silverdome where Eric Hipple and the 4-7 Detroit Lions take on Steve DeBerg and the 2-9 Tampa Bay Bucs. This is John Dockery and Elijah Pitts with the call...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

when the 32 team realignment was done, geographical relationship was balanced with long standing rivalries. No way DAL/WAS wasn't going to happen twice a year, just like MIA/NYJ. Many examples, and simply aligning them based on location could be a bad decision. Imagine only seeing your long time rival once every 4 years?

We had long term rivalries (since 1977-2002) with Chicago, Detroit, Minnesota, Green Bay and they went away. New ones have been established more on geography. The main difference is we used to get a ton of visiting fans during November/December bringing money from up north into economy. The nfc south teams don't bring as much money since they aren't fleeing the cold and staying longer.

yeah, not all could be kept, but it obviously was considered seeing Dallas is in the East

I do miss seeing the Lions and Bucs play twice a year.

Not sure if sarcasm....

You are looking live at the Pontiac Silverdome where Eric Hipple and the 4-7 Detroit Lions take on Steve DeBerg and the 2-9 Tampa Bay Bucs. This is John Dockery and Elijah Pitts with the call...

So it is sarcasm. Were the Vikings much better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

when the 32 team realignment was done, geographical relationship was balanced with long standing rivalries. No way DAL/WAS wasn't going to happen twice a year, just like MIA/NYJ. Many examples, and simply aligning them based on location could be a bad decision. Imagine only seeing your long time rival once every 4 years?

We had long term rivalries (since 1977-2002) with Chicago, Detroit, Minnesota, Green Bay and they went away. New ones have been established more on geography. The main difference is we used to get a ton of visiting fans during November/December bringing money from up north into economy. The nfc south teams don't bring as much money since they aren't fleeing the cold and staying longer.

yeah, not all could be kept, but it obviously was considered seeing Dallas is in the East

I do miss seeing the Lions and Bucs play twice a year.

Not sure if sarcasm....

You are looking live at the Pontiac Silverdome where Eric Hipple and the 4-7 Detroit Lions take on Steve DeBerg and the 2-9 Tampa Bay Bucs. This is John Dockery and Elijah Pitts with the call...

So it is sarcasm. Were the Vikings much better?

Only during the Les Steckel era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

Lions aren't doing beans until the Ford family sells them, and that ain't happening. (Wish, wish).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

 

Miami probably belongs in the SEC. They wouldn't win it, but they'd be a solid .500 in conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

 

Miami probably belongs in the SEC. They wouldn't win it, but they'd be a solid .500 in conference.

New England belongs in the SEC because everyone (well, maybe not Vanderbilt) breaks the rules in that conference.

 

And most of the fans wouldn't have it any other way...at least it immunizes them against charges of hypocrisy which in their minds everyone else is because they don't know how to think any other way.

Edited by laughedatbytime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

 

Miami probably belongs in the SEC. They wouldn't win it, but they'd be a solid .500 in conference.

New England belongs in the SEC because everyone (well, maybe not Vanderbilt) breaks the rules in that conference.

 

And most of the fans wouldn't have it any other way...at least it immunizes them against charges of hypocrisy which in their minds everyone else is because they don't know how to think any other way.

Brady will pay someone to get surgery to attend classes for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

 

Miami probably belongs in the SEC. They wouldn't win it, but they'd be a solid .500 in conference.

New England belongs in the SEC because everyone (well, maybe not Vanderbilt) breaks the rules in that conference.

 

New England isn't in the Southeast: And in a few minutes they'll be 8-0 against 7 pro teams and one SEC caliber team. Miami might actually finish .500 in the SEC. Think it over.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

 

Miami probably belongs in the SEC. They wouldn't win it, but they'd be a solid .500 in conference.

New England belongs in the SEC because everyone (well, maybe not Vanderbilt) breaks the rules in that conference.

 

And most of the fans wouldn't have it any other way...at least it immunizes them against charges of hypocrisy which in their minds everyone else is because they don't know how to think any other way.

Brady will pay someone to get surgery to attend classes for him.

 

I'm pretty sure Michigan is a decent academic school. If he could stay eligible at Michigan I'm sure he could handle the SEC's rigorous academic standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a team in Goatnut, TN. We got game!

Move the Lions there...please, please, please. Seriously, no need for additional teams but move at least one to LA. When you look at the divisions, they are seriously misaligned geographically. By shuffling the divisions, you may create more regional interest. For example, WTF is Miami in the East when the division should be Tampa, Jacksonville, Miami and Atl (and maybe New Orleans)? Same thing with Dallas...WTF are they in the east?

 

Miami probably belongs in the SEC. They wouldn't win it, but they'd be a solid .500 in conference.

New England belongs in the SEC because everyone (well, maybe not Vanderbilt) breaks the rules in that conference.

 

New England isn't in the Southeast: And in a few minutes they'll be 8-0 against 7 pro teams and one SEC caliber team. Miami might actually finish .500 in the SEC. Think it over.

I know they don't have college football in the Northeast but if you think any NFL team couldn't blow out anyone in the SEC you'd probably believe Brady knew nothing about his inflated balls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...