Crazy/not so crazy idea for NFL Expansion | Page 3

Oct 9, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Dr_Bill_Walsh
Veteran
Posts: 20,126

Already posted this in my "Bring back the LA Rams?" thread:

What would be ideal (IMHO) for the NFL is not to expand, but rather to realign the above 3 teams as such, namely:

1) Stan Kroenke moves the Rams back to LA and new Farmers Field (Rams remain in the NFC West & renew CA rivalry w/ Niners)

2) Shahid Khan moves the Jags to vacated St. Louis (Florida doesn't need 3 teams, Jacksonville/N. Florida = Falcons territory)...Khan had wanted to purchase the Rams, and having ties to St. Louis he'd probably have been the best owner to have kept the Rams in STL...Kroenke with his flirtatious ties to LA doesn't bode well currently for the long-term tenure of the Rams in the Gateway City...

3) Khan and Cards owner Bill Bidwill come to monetary agreement to switch team names/histories and divisions (St Louis Jags become St Louis (Football) Cardinals and "transfer" or rather, remain, in NFCW / Arizona Cardinals become Arizona Jaguars)

4) Arizona Jaguars move to AFC South (to become Houston's rival)

So the NFC West would be:

SF 49ers

LA Rams

Seattle Seahawks

St Louis Cardinals

The AFC South would be:

Arizona Jaguars

Houston Texans

Indianapolis Colts

Tennessee Titans

Oct 9, 2012 at 5:40 PM

#32

AUniner
Veteran
Posts: 1,940

Originally posted by CityKing415:
The Mexico City Cartel Members announce Mark Sanchez as their starting qb..

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by sspiker:
I'm opposed to expansion.

But a team in Mexico City would thrive.

yeah all the good players would be kidnapped for ransom

So you're saying Sanchez would be safe?

Oct 9, 2012 at 5:54 PM

#33

jreff22
Veteran
Posts: 65,482

Originally posted by AUniner:

Originally posted by CityKing415:
The Mexico City Cartel Members announce Mark Sanchez as their starting qb..

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by sspiker:
I'm opposed to expansion.

But a team in Mexico City would thrive.

yeah all the good players would be kidnapped for ransom

So you're saying Sanchez would be safe?

he would be orchestrating it to be the best guy left

Oct 10, 2012 at 10:39 AM

#34

ads_2006
Veteran
Posts: 56,510

Originally posted by PA9erFaithful:
Originally posted by ads_2006:
san francisco could use a team in a couple years

the stadium will be empty when the 49ers move, why not have/bring another team

Oct 10, 2012 at 10:43 AM

#35

Jcool
Veteran
Posts: 43,467

Originally posted by ads_2006:
the stadium will be empty when the 49ers move, why not have/bring another team

Because the stadium is bad. No owner is going to want to play there.

Oct 10, 2012 at 12:39 PM

#36

paulk205
Veteran
Posts: 824

As a Londoner and a massive NFL fan of 25 years who regularly travels to the US for games I must say that a London franchise wouldn't work. There are three main reasons:

1. Time difference as everybody knows. 5 hours with the East Coast, 8 with the West. This doesn't only affect the players and their jetlags, but also messes with TV viewership. Sunday and Monday Night games are 1:30 am here; only nutters like myself sit up to watch them. Our hypothetical team (London Redcoats?

) would always need to play on the Sunday 1pm US slot which is 6 pm for us: fine for home games obviously, and not a problem for away trips to the East Coast. But if they have to play in say Candlestick, they need to start at 9.30 pm our time and finish past midnight. You can't make young fans like this, since they'll all be in bed by then. And what happens if the Redcoats make the Superbowl? It starts at 11:30 at night here.

2. Too many local teams. I'm first and foremost an Arsenal fan as a Londoner. I'm an equally rabid 9ers fan, but that doesn't mess with my local allegiances, what with SF being an 11 hour flight away. London has 6 (out of 20) teams this year in the first division and another 4 in the second. That's 10 major professional teams, just for (our) football. OK, we also have 8 million people, but not even New York can support that many teams.

3. British NFL fans are rabid and there are a lot of us, but we already have teams. We're all mad about the 9ers, Bears, Patriots, Dolphins, Broncos, Steelers and Giants (these are the most popular teams here). Oh, and the Cowboys

. We couldn't care less about the hypothetical Redcoats.

Even the annual Wembley match which is fun, is more fun as a festival occasion. We wear our own team colours and laugh around in the stands. The silence during the game is eerie and the crowd only gets into it if it's an exciting see-saw contest (we only had one of those ever over here).

The NFL is if anything overexpanded. The next move has to be moving the Jaguars to LA and re-align divisions; it's ridiculous that the second largest TV market hasn't got a team. All the other options discussed (Buffalo, Minnesota) would mess with historic franchises with deserving fan bases. Jacksonville has had a team for fewer than 20 years, have done squat with it and cannot sell their stadium out. That's it. Canada have their own league. Mexico is interesting, but disposable income there is sadly much lower than in the US, Canada or Britain so I doubt that it would make economic sense for the NFL to open a franchise there.

[ Edited by paulk205 on Oct 10, 2012 at 12:41 PM ]

Oct 11, 2012 at 4:43 AM

#37

Gore_21
Veteran
Posts: 12,684

Put me down for everything is fine the way it is. If they want a team in LA move either St Louis, Jacksonville or San Diego. If it's the Rams or Chargers to LA everything would be perfectly fine the way it is. No re-aligning of AFCW if it's the Chargers and only difference if it's the Rams is they would be closer to the rest of the NFCW.

If it's Jacksonville make them a part of the NFC West (SF, LA, AZ, SEA) and move the Rams to AFC South (STL, Tenn, Houston, Indy). That would work out really well and the distances would all be close for both divisions. Worst thing they can do is add a team and make it 33 with one division having 5. That would totally f everything.

[ Edited by Gore_21 on Oct 11, 2012 at 4:58 AM ]

Oct 11, 2012 at 8:31 AM

#38

NeeJ49er
Veteran
Posts: 9,580

Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
No need to expand when multiple teams are not selling out games. 32 teams is the perfect amount. Why mess with something that works?

THIS

Oct 11, 2012 at 11:35 AM

#39

communist
Veteran
Posts: 12,141

Originally posted by Dr_Bill_Walsh:

So the NFC West would be:

SF 49ers

LA Rams

Seattle Seahawks

St Louis Cardinals

The AFC South would be:

Arizona Jaguars

Houston Texans

Indianapolis Colts

Tennessee Titans

Nice idea but geographically following would be a better solution imo:
NFC West:
SF 49ers
LA Rams
Seattle Seahawks
Arizona Cardinals

AFC South:
St. Louis Jaguars
Houston Texans
Indianapolis Colts
Tennessee Titans

Explanation: St. Louis, Indy and Nashville are neighbor cities, practically. And you don't need any big history switches and so on...just two relatively logical moves.

[ Edited by communist on Oct 11, 2012 at 11:36 AM ]

Oct 12, 2012 at 8:04 AM

#40

swayze
Veteran
Posts: 4,198

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by Dr_Bill_Walsh:

So the NFC West would be:

SF 49ers

LA Rams

Seattle Seahawks

St Louis Cardinals

The AFC South would be:

Arizona Jaguars

Houston Texans

Indianapolis Colts

Tennessee Titans

Nice idea but geographically following would be a better solution imo:
NFC West:
SF 49ers
LA Rams
Seattle Seahawks
Arizona Cardinals

AFC South:
St. Louis Jaguars
Houston Texans
Indianapolis Colts
Tennessee Titans

Explanation: St. Louis, Indy and Nashville are neighbor cities, practically. And you don't need any big history switches and so on...just two relatively logical moves.

endorse. endorse