Tweet
Ugh, no. We don't need to geographically re-align, teams fly where they are going. There is really no advantage to a re-alignment and 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' is enough of a reason not to change it.
The problem is rivalries get split up. Take the NFC.
It's good that the North has no change, but the East shouldn't either. It would not be good to split up those rivalries, as they are all pretty big.
That leaves the West and South. The rivalries in these divisions have been short, but they have already developed. The division rivalries in the South have become very good, and has become one of those divisions where divisional games are usually unpredictable. Plus, they are geographically aligned well so even the geography alignment makes no sense after that. AZ, SEA and SF are all in the far West. St. Louis is in the South, but which South team do you move to the West? They are all on the far East, it makes no sense.
Now there's the AFC. It's good not to want to split up the AFC West, those rivalries are big. Splitting up the other 3 wouldn't be as bad as the NFC, but still not good. Take the North first. Pit and Bal would not want to split up, and Pit/Cle has stood for a long time as well. In the East, Jets/Bills/Fins has been long standing as well, and those rivalries are pretty good as well, especially Jets/Fins. Wouldn't want to split those 3 up either.
So, remaining you have the AFC South, Bengals and New England. NE's rivalry isn't as strong as the other 3 in the East, but they have been there a long time, and the rivalry with the Jets is pretty good. Boston versus New York. I guess you could re-align them and figure out how to move NE the best way, but why put in all the work, there's no real advantage other than perhaps for fun lol.
MAYBE you could move JAX or TN to the North, perhaps TN since they are the former Oilers, but the Bengals are just as long standing. I wouldn't want to move them.
Keep it as is, is my take.
The problem is rivalries get split up. Take the NFC.
It's good that the North has no change, but the East shouldn't either. It would not be good to split up those rivalries, as they are all pretty big.
That leaves the West and South. The rivalries in these divisions have been short, but they have already developed. The division rivalries in the South have become very good, and has become one of those divisions where divisional games are usually unpredictable. Plus, they are geographically aligned well so even the geography alignment makes no sense after that. AZ, SEA and SF are all in the far West. St. Louis is in the South, but which South team do you move to the West? They are all on the far East, it makes no sense.
Now there's the AFC. It's good not to want to split up the AFC West, those rivalries are big. Splitting up the other 3 wouldn't be as bad as the NFC, but still not good. Take the North first. Pit and Bal would not want to split up, and Pit/Cle has stood for a long time as well. In the East, Jets/Bills/Fins has been long standing as well, and those rivalries are pretty good as well, especially Jets/Fins. Wouldn't want to split those 3 up either.
So, remaining you have the AFC South, Bengals and New England. NE's rivalry isn't as strong as the other 3 in the East, but they have been there a long time, and the rivalry with the Jets is pretty good. Boston versus New York. I guess you could re-align them and figure out how to move NE the best way, but why put in all the work, there's no real advantage other than perhaps for fun lol.
MAYBE you could move JAX or TN to the North, perhaps TN since they are the former Oilers, but the Bengals are just as long standing. I wouldn't want to move them.
Keep it as is, is my take.
Comment