NFL Divisions Aligned Geographically

[Jughead10]

Originally Posted by broth223

I don't really think that anyone has a conference pride anymore maybe that is just me.

I think so. We've already had one Cheifs fan saying them in the NFC would be wrong. Certain teams I feel like still have AFL pride. The Chiefs being the main one. Buffalo and Oakland as well. Maybe not so much on this site as we have many younger fans, but people who have been fans for 40+ years definitely have that pride.

[JT Jag]

Originally Posted by Mr.Regular

During class today I read this and decided to make 8 divisions purely based on geography. No rivalries or conference alignments were taken into account. I got
West
Seattle
San Francisco
Oakland
San Diego

South West
Arizona
Denver
Dallas
Houston

South East
New Orleans
Jacksonville
Tampa Bay
Miami

Mid West
Green Bay
Minnesota
St. Louis
Kansas City

North
Detroit
Chicago
Cleveland
Indianapolis

North East
New York Giants
New York Jets
New England
Buffalo

East
Baltimore
Pittsburgh
Washington
Philadelphia

Central
Carolina
Cincinnati
Tennessee
Atlanta

I like it. Maybe flip Green Bay and Indianapolis.

And we could arrange the conferences NBA-style. The Central, East, Southeast and Northeast divisions in the Eastern Conference and the West, Southwest, Midwest and North in the Western Conference.

[RagingColt]

I've been messing with this same concept ever since the season started back in Sept. This is what I came up with, which differs a bit from the other two in this thread.

AFC

East
Buffalo
NY Giants
NY Jets
New England

Central
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Detroit
St. Louis

South
Indianapolis
Tennessee
Carolina
Atlanta

West
Denver
Dallas
Houston
Arizona

NFC

East
Baltimore
Washington
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh

Central
Kansas City
Chicago
Green Bay
Minnesota

South
Jacksonville
Tampa Bay
Miami
New Orleans

West
San Diego
Seattle
San Francisco
Oakland

Other than teams in the AFC South, a team would never have to travel further than two states away for divisional games.

[Bengalsrocket]

If you're going to go by region why would you split up KC and St. Louis?

[Xonraider]

Originally Posted by Lions WMD

I'm sure once Goodell is done ******* up the draft, he'll decide to screw with the divisions.

Huh? How has Goodell ****** up the draft??

[diabsoule]

Originally Posted by Bengalsrocket

If you're going to go by region why would you split up KC and St. Louis?

You have other teams to worry about so while Kansas City and St. Louis are close geographically, it makes more sense to align them with other teams than to try and keep those two together.

[Brothgar]

Originally Posted by Xonraider

Huh? How has Goodell ****** up the draft??

I'm guessing that they are talking about making the draft three days.

[diabsoule]

Originally Posted by JT Jag

I like it. Maybe flip Green Bay and Indianapolis.

And we could arrange the conferences NBA-style. The Central, East, Southeast and Northeast divisions in the Eastern Conference and the West, Southwest, Midwest and North in the Western Conference.

I really like the idea of arranging the conferences like the NBA has their set up. It helps regional pride instead of old AFL teams playing NFL teams. However the East would dominate the West. Eastern based teams based on the proposed alignment have dominated the Super Bowl in most years.

[Paul]

Dallas and Houston playing twice a year does sound pretty awesome. Lord knows Rangers/Astros isn't captivating the state.

[JFLO]

If I were to do it, it would go like this:

NFC North
Minnesota Vikings
Green Bay Packers
Detroit Lions
Chicago Bears

AFC North
Indianapolis Colts
Cincinnati Bengals
Cleveland Browns
Pittsburgh Steelers

NFC South
Dallas Cowboys
Carolina Panthers
Atlanta Falcons
New Orleans Saints

AFC South
Houston Texans
Miami Dolphins
Jacksonville Jaguars
Tennessee Titans

NFC East
New York Giants
Philadelphia Eagles
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Washington Redskins

AFC East
Baltimore Ravens
Buffalo Bills
New York Jets
New England Patriots

NFC West
St. Louis Rams
Seattle Seahawks
San Francisco 49ers
Arizona Cardinals

AFC West
San Diego Chargers
Oakland Raiders
Kansas City Chiefs
Denver Broncos

[GB12]

Originally Posted by diabsoule

4. In the end I just could not separate the teams in the NFC North. Those teams have too much history and I feel it is the perfect division based on NFL history, rivalries, and tradition.

Why would you? The NFC is set up perfectly geographically already. The only way to reduce the distance would be to replace Detroit with Indianappolis, but that wouldn't make much of a difference.

[TitanHope]

Originally Posted by Xonraider

Huh? How has Goodell ****** up the draft??

They changed it from lasting 2 Days and spread it out over 3, with the 1st RD now on primetime on Friday night. Not sure what rounds fall on Saturday and Sunday now.

I'm fine with it, personally, but others really don't like it.

[EDIT: Yeah, so Broth totally already touched on that and I'm blind...]

[SuperMcGee]

I know you mentioned keeping the rivalry game, but I love the 1-and-1 that Buffalo and Miami have in opposite conditions every year (with the Buffalo game usually being late in the season). One of the better things in a depressed rivalry.

[Beans]

can we get some of these in map form

[diabsoule]

Originally Posted by BeansDooma

can we get some of these in map form

tell me how to do that and I'd be glad to do it.

[Bengalsrocket]

Originally Posted by BeansDooma

can we get some of these in map form

I'll make Diabsoule's map in MSpaint if you give me 15 minutes.

I'll try to do it by memory lol.

Alright, I made a map based on Diabsoule's geographic realignment, which you can see here:

Originally Posted by diabsoule

Based purely on geographic location and the shortest distance for four teams to travel then this is what the divisions would look like:

AFC East
Baltimore Ravens
Buffalo Bills
Pittsburgh Steelers
Washington Redskins

AFC North
Chicago Bears
Cleveland Browns
Detroit Lions
Indianapolis Colts

AFC South
Atlanta Falcons
Carolina Panthers
Cincinnati Bengals
Tennessee Titans

AFC West
Oakland Raiders
San Diego Chargers
San Francisco 49ers
Seattle Seahawks

NFC East
New England Patriots
New York Jets
New York Giants
Philadelphia Eagles

NFC North
Green Bay Packers
Kansas City Chiefs
Minnesota Vikings
St. Louis Rams

NFC South
Jacksonville Jaguars
Miami Dolphins
New Orleans Saints
Tampa Bay Buccaneers

NFC West
Arizona Cardinals
Dallas Cowboys
Denver Broncos
Houston Texans

Link the map: http://i399.photobucket.com/albums/p...esoulesmap.jpg

a few notes: It got messy after I added team names, which I would have saved it without team names, but oh well. Secondly, I tried to do it off memory, so there may be a few mistakes. For example, I have no idea where carolina's stadium is, so I just put the dot on the border between North and South Carolina. New England's dot went on Boston, and Tennessee's dot went on Nashville - those could all be incorrect, because again, I have no idea where their stadiums are. Anyways, if I could start over again I would have made it a bit more clean, but oh well.

[Mr.Regular]

Originally Posted by Rosebud

How are Minnesota and GB not in the North? When Indianapolis, cleveland and chicago, three cities that are south of Minny and GB, are?

Oh, the names didn't matter. I tried to just make 8 divisions based on geography. You could rename each division whatever you wanted.

[diabsoule]

Originally Posted by Bengalsrocket

I'll make Diabsoule's map in MSpaint if you give me 15 minutes.

I'll try to do it by memory lol.

Alright, I made a map based on Diabsoule's geographic realignment, which you can see here:



Link the map: http://i399.photobucket.com/albums/p...esoulesmap.jpg

a few notes: It got messy after I added team names, which I would have saved it without team names, but oh well. Secondly, I tried to do it off memory, so there may be a few mistakes. For example, I have no idea where carolina's stadium is, so I just put the dot on the border between North and South Carolina. New England's dot went on Boston, and Tennessee's dot went on Nashville - those could all be incorrect, because again, I have no idea where their stadiums are. Anyways, if I could start over again I would have made it a bit more clean, but oh well.

I appreciate the work. Just a few mistakes to point out:

1. You put the Oakland Raiders in Portland, Oregon.
2. You put the Lions in Chicago and the Bears in Detroit.
3. The Jets and Giants play in the same stadium. You put the Giants somewhere around Lake Pleasant, NY.

[Bengalsrocket]

Originally Posted by diabsoule

I appreciate the work. Just a few mistakes to point out:

1. You put the Oakland Raiders in Portland, Oregon.
2. You put the Lions in Chicago and the Bears in Detroit.
3. The Jets and Giants play in the same stadium. You put the Giants somewhere around Lake Pleasant, NY.

haha you're right, it was late. oh well - people get the basic gist of whats going on there. I was mostly just trying to test my own geography memory, which obviously fails.

[Calvin & Kevin]

All right let's break this down because this is something I've thought about for a long time.



Here's a map of NFL cities. It always seemed to me like the crucial decisions would be made in how you break up the north/eastern cities, since they're the closest together.
There are several groups of teams which just make sense to me - GB/Chi/Minn in the north, the four West Coast teams, and the three Florida teams plus New Orleans. Atlanta is needed to match up with other Southern teams.



But ahead of all those, it seems like the one group that would be together no matter what would be New England, the two New York teams and Philly. Philly instead of Buffalo because you can't just take the Giants and throw them into the AFC East. But then what do you do with Buffalo? In this alignment, Buffalo goes with Washington, Baltimore and Pittsburgh.



And in this one, Buffalo goes with Cinci, Cleveland and Detroit. This would make a good division with the Ralph Wilson/Detroit ties and the two Ohio teams. But that messes things up with the other northern teams as you will see.



The more prevalent instinct is to keep existing rivalries when possible. In this alignment, Cleveland stays with Pittsburgh and Baltimore, adding Buffalo, but Cinci and Washington get broken off of their traditional divisions to go with
Carolina and Indianapolis. Also Washington and Baltimore are split up (not that they'd really care, but they are very close together).



Want to keep Washington and Baltimore together so Washington is not forced to play all Midwestern teams? The result is, Detroit has to go with the Ohio teams and Indy, and then who do you put with Chicago/Green Bay/Minn? It has to be Kansas City in this scenario and that just doesn't seem right to me. I think I like the previous one the best.



Ah, you say, but what of Jacksonville? They seem doomed and probably will move sometime soon, and that could be that catalyst for another realignment in the first place. Let's say they move to L.A. as most of us expect. If that happens everything kind of falls into place. Atlanta and New Orleans can be with the remaining Florida teams, Washington and Baltimore can pair with the two Mid-South teams, the AFC North teams can get Buffalo for Baltimore, the NFC North can remain intact, the Midwest Plains teams can all be together, and finally, as a concession to Jerry Jones, the LA Jaguars can go in with the Southwest teams so Dallas can get that market twice a year. This is by far my favorite scenario.

NFC North
Detroit
Chicago
Minnesota
Green Bay

NFC East
Philadelphia
NY Giants
NY Jets
New England

NFC West
Dallas
Houston
Arizona
Los Angeles

NFC South
Atlanta
New Orleans
Tampa
Miami


AFC North
Pittsburgh
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Buffalo

AFC East
Washington
Baltimore
Carolina
Tennessee

AFC West
San Francisco
Oakland
Seattle
San Diego

AFC South
Indianapolis
Kansas City
Denver
St. Louis

[Saints 4 Lyfe]

lol Saints win the South every year.