gray@hound.UUCP (B.GRAY) (01/03/85)
I recall some talk about reorganizing the baseball leagues so that all teams in a league would be closer together. The same idea could be applied to the NFL (perhaps more easily, since it is only one league). How about some comments on the "fantasy league" below: EASTERN CONFERENCE NORTHERN DIVISION SOUTHERN DIVISION WESTERN DIVISION New England Atlanta Cincinnati Buffalo Miami Cleveland New York Giants Tampa Bay Detroit New York Jets Washington Indianapolis Philadelphia Pittsburgh WESTERN CONFERENCE NORTHERN DIVISION SOUTHERN DIVISION WESTERN DIVISION Chicago Dallas L.A. Raiders Green Bay Denver L.A. Rams Kansas City Houston San Francisco Minnesota New Orleans San Diego St. Louis Seattle This puts all teams in the Eastern Time Zone in the same conference, and all the teams in each division in the same time zone (except Denver). Also, all the teams in each division are within 1,000 miles of each other (except Denver) and all teams that play in the same state are in the same division (except PA). While it breaks up some traditional rivals, it could create a lot of new ones (especially between the two NY and LA teams). Barry Gray AT&T Bell Labs Holmdel, NJ
jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) (01/04/85)
I'm in favor of divisional realignment in the NFL, but Barry Gray's scheme
has one major flaw: Washington does not belong with the teams from the
Southeast. It should be in with the New York teams and Philadelphia. Also,
there wouldn't be much of a state rivalry with Buffalo, because it's so far
away from NYC. Buffalo belongs more with Pittsburgh and Cleveland, so here's
my suggestion:
NORTHERN CONFERENCE
Atlantic Division Central Division Midwest Division
New England Buffalo Minnesota
New York Jets Cleveland Green Bay
New York Giants Cincinnati Chicago
Philadelphia Pittsburgh Detroit
Washington Indianapolis
SOUTHERN CONFERENCE
South Division Central Division Pacific Division
Atlanta Dallas LA Raiders
Miami Denver LA Rams
New Orleans Houston San Diego
Tampa Bay Kansas City San Francisco
St. Louis Seattle
Denver doesn't seem as out of place with the Texas teams if Kansas City and
St. Louis are also included. I think this scheme is the best you can get as
far as geographical proximity of teams in the same division is concerned, and
no team seems out of place in its division. The Northern Conference covers
the "industrial northeast" part of the country, while the Southern Conference
covers the rest of the country, so there is a good meaningful division
between the conferences. The problem of breaking up old rivalries can be
solved by having teams play some of their out-of-division games against their
traditional rivals, i.e. Dallas and Washington will always play once per
season even though they're not in the same division.
--
Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073
{linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsrgv!dciem!jeff
{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jefferik@ssc-vax.UUCP (Erik Strom) (01/08/85)
> > SOUTHERN CONFERENCE > South Division Central Division Pacific Division > Atlanta Dallas LA Raiders > Miami Denver LA Rams > New Orleans Houston San Diego > Tampa Bay Kansas City San Francisco > St. Louis Seattle > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ EEYYOOWW!! Thanks a lot!! The Hawks have it tough enough now without sticking us with the Rams and the 49'ers!! From the lair of the Big E uw-beaver!ssc-vax!erik Erik
pellegri@ittral.UUCP (Dan Pellegrino) (01/08/85)
This idea makes alot of sense but may need a bit of fine tuning. Even with the oft-mentioned parity of the NFL, the Western Conference's Western Division looks like the American League East of baseball. Some redistribution might help, but, then again, one never knows anymore.
gray@hound.UUCP (B.GRAY) (01/10/85)
It's interesting to see the comments (well, two of them, anyway) about how strong the Western Conference West looks, with the 4 Cal. teams plus Seattle. Yes, I noticed right away what a strong Division this would be, but doesn't it make more sense to pit the good teams against each other during the regular season, rather than letting them beat up on 1 or 2 patsies? With the wild card system, you'd still get 3 out of the 5 teams in the division into the playoffs (witness the AFC West this year). BTW, someone pointed out that Seattle is probably more than 1,000 miles from San Diego.
jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) (01/22/85)
> It's interesting to see the comments (well, two of them, anyway) > about how strong the Western Conference West looks, with the 4 > Cal. teams plus Seattle. True. It would be a strong division now, but that doesn't really matter. Any realignment they do has to be looked at as a long-term thing, (look at how long the current, meaningless alignment has lasted), and the teams that are strong five years from now may be completely different. It wasn't too many years ago that the Chargers were great while the 49ers and the Seahawks were both lousy. Besides, they're certainly far from a balance in the strength of the divisions now. > BTW, someone pointed out that Seattle is probably more than > 1,000 miles from San Diego. That may be true, but I doubt that you could come up with a division where Seattle wasn't almost that far away from somebody in it, and if you did somebody in another division would be a lot further away from some of his divisional rivals. Seattle's a lot closer to San Diego than to Kansas City anyway. -- Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073 {linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsrgv!dciem!jeff {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeff