Anyone Want To See The Divisions Realigned ? | Page 3 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Anyone Want To See The Divisions Realigned ?

Birdmond said:
I love this idea.
Click to expand...
I knew there had to be another "rogue" fan out there. Seriously, though, it solves a lot of perceived issues you hear with fans. If teams are competing for the same playoff position, why should schedules vary so much? This would essentially give every team the same schedule.
 
SF Dolphin Fan said:
I knew there had to be another "rogue" fan out there. Seriously, though, it solves a lot of perceived issues you hear with fans. If teams are competing for the same playoff position, why should schedules vary so much? This would essentially give every team the same schedule.
Click to expand...
I like it but I'm pretty sure the NFL would hate it. Each team would play a particular team in the other conference only once every 16 years. Major league baseball went the other way when they introduced inter-league play. It could have worked with a smaller league of 25-26 teams which allows 3-4 inter-conferences games per team. Maybe if they eventually expand the schedule to 18 games.

Another problem is the imbalance due to football's strong home-field advantage.
 
SF Dolphin Fan said:
I knew there had to be another "rogue" fan out there. Seriously, though, it solves a lot of perceived issues you hear with fans. If teams are competing for the same playoff position, why should schedules vary so much? This would essentially give every team the same schedule.
Click to expand...

It makes too much sense. It would also give non Florida residents better chances of seeing the Dolphins play. Another bonus is teams in bad divisions are no longer rewarded.
 
Birdmond said:
It makes too much sense. It would also give non Florida residents better chances of seeing the Dolphins play. Another bonus is teams in bad divisions are no longer rewarded.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's a great point. It's disappointing to see a team win a division with an 8-8 record and make the playoffs, while a 10-6 team is out.
 
sunworshipper said:
I like it but I'm pretty sure the NFL would hate it. Each team would play a particular team in the other conference only once every 16 years. Major league baseball went the other way when they introduced inter-league play. It could have worked with a smaller league of 25-26 teams which allows 3-4 inter-conferences games per team. Maybe if they eventually expand the schedule to 18 games.

Another problem is the imbalance due to football's strong home-field advantage.
Click to expand...

That's one aspect I don't like about this idea as well. Would like to see more games against the NFC. Perhaps, you could rotate it a little differently so that you play against one NFC division each year with 12 games in the AFC. A little less clean as far as strength of schedule, but that could work as well.

That said, I still like it a lot better than the current format.
 
dnespins said:
if what you want is truly geographical, move the ravens to the afc east, the colts to the north and the dolphins to the south. dont see how there is any argument against this alignment.
Click to expand...


Any argument? Historical precedent?

Some of you would do anything just to get away from the Pats or the occasional late season debacle against the Bills or Jets.
 
DolfanDuBbZ~ said:
Any argument? Historical precedent?

Some of you would do anything just to get away from the Pats or the occasional late season debacle against the Bills or Jets.
Click to expand...
Also, somewhat to your point, rivalries aren't necessarily geographical in football. Dallas and San Francisco were rivalries when both teams were gunning for the super bowl in the 1990's. Denver and New England have recently been bigger rivals IMO than any other AFC East team from the Patriots standpoint. That's another reason I like the idea of playing every team in the AFC each year, or a system more like that. Rivalries change and the chance to play more teams may help other rivalries develop.
 
sunworshipper said:
I like it but I'm pretty sure the NFL would hate it. Each team would play a particular team in the other conference only once every 16 years. Major league baseball went the other way when they introduced inter-league play. It could have worked with a smaller league of 25-26 teams which allows 3-4 inter-conferences games per team. Maybe if they eventually expand the schedule to 18 games.

Another problem is the imbalance due to football's strong home-field advantage.
Click to expand...
Ok so go with 31 game schedule play every once. Then seed teams 1-32 and play double elimination playoffs football all year
 
SF Dolphin Fan said:
Also, somewhat to your point, rivalries aren't necessarily geographical in football. Dallas and San Francisco were rivalries when both teams were gunning for the super bowl in the 1990's. Denver and New England have recently been bigger rivals IMO than any other AFC East team from the Patriots standpoint. That's another reason I like the idea of playing every team in the AFC each year, or a system more like that. Rivalries change and the chance to play more teams may help other rivalries develop.
Click to expand...

Just another way to dilute the league.

You want rivalries outside your division? Win and make them in the postseason, like we USED to.
 
Miami is a little yankee colony. Nothing southern about it except for geography.
 
Realignment makes a ton of sense for all kinds of reasons but I'd be against it for selfish purposes. Brady is 40 and the Pats are going to fall back to Earth any day now so I'd like the opportunity to at least take advantage of that.

Let us beat the hell out of them for a few years while they're adjusting to life post Brady and then let's revisit this conversation.
 
Dolph N.Fan said:
Exactly. If Miami was winning the east every year no one would be thinking about realigning lol
Click to expand...

As I said in an earlier post ... at least for me and I suspect for most ... wanting realignment has nothing to do with how good the Patriots are. I want a competitive division because it makes the stakes even higher. However I do want realignment for geographical reasons. IMO this would provide for even better rivalries as the proximity of the teams to each other promotes territorial competition not only between the teams but the fans. Fan involvement would be better and more intense. Turf wars would be stronger and louder. Not to mention it puts teams on a more level playing field when they have a similar climate and travel is far less. These are just a few reasons for me. I admit the rivalries would take time to develop but they will develop. Just as we have grown to love the competition with our current East foes we would do the same with new ones.
 
Tupac Shakur said:
yes i always felt that if they are aligned by true geography, then some pretty cool and intense regional rivalries would form.

just toying around, something like:

NE, NYG, NYJ, PHI
BUF, PIT, BAL, WAS
CAR, ATL, TEN, JAX
MIA, TB, NO, HOU
DET, CLE, IND, CIN
CHI, GB, MIN, KC
SEA, DEN, SF, OAK / LV
LAR, LAC, ARI, DAL
Click to expand...

I would go like this:

AFC South:
MIA, TB, JAX, ATL

AFC East:
CAR, WAS, BAL, PIT

AFC North:
BUF, CLE, CIN, DET

AFC West:
KC, DEN, SF, SEA

NFC South:
HOU, DAL, NO, TEN

NFC East:
PHI, NYJ, NYG, NE

NFC North:
MIN, IND, CHI, GB

NFC West:
ARI, LAC, LAR, LV
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom