PromoTheRobot Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 5 hours ago, reddogblitz said: If there is so much interest in football in London, why don't they have their own league? As I recall, the London Monarchs were one of the first teams in the WAFL to fold. The WAFL? The West Australia Football League? I think you mean WLAF, and later NFL Europe. The Monarchs lasted all 8 seasons and was probably the most successful franchise along with the Frankfurt Galaxy.
dave mcbride Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 I am all for a team in London. The Chargers and Jags both make sense. 1
GunnerBill Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 1 minute ago, dave mcbride said: I am all for a team in London. The Chargers and Jags both make sense. They do - for slightly different reasons. The Chargers currently have no roots and there is no funding to take them back to San Diego so they are basically homeless with no existing stadium tie that they can't get out of. The Jags because Jacksonville has always felt like a bit of a meh NFL city and they have already done a lot of work in building the brand and fanbase over here.
Gordio Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 1 hour ago, JohnnyGold said: Four divisions, each with 8 teams. The Pacific Division Seahawks, Raiders, 49ers, Rams, Cardinals, Broncos, Chiefs, Bengals (not a great fit) The Gulf Bay Division Cowboys, Texans, Dolphins, Jaguars, Buccaneers, Saints, Falcons, Titans (not a great fit) The Great Lakes Division Vikings, Packers, Bears, Lions, Bills, Steelers, Browns, Colts (not a great fit) The Atlantic Division Patriots, Jets, Giants, Ravens, Redskins, Eagles, London, Panthers Scheduling: All scheduling based on the previous years standings: you play half of your division twice (top four finishers play a home and away vs each other, bottom four finishers play a home and away vs each other) for 6 games; you play the other half of your division 1 time (bottom finisher plays top 4 teams once) for 4 games; interdivisionally, all first and second place finishers play one another, all 3rd and 4th place finishers play one another, all 5th and 6th place finishers play one another, all 7th and 8th place finishers play one another--for an additional 6 games. Playoffs: No separation of conferences, as there are no conferences. 12 teams make the playoffs. Each division winner gets a bye. 8 wild card teams are seeded based on record, then re-seeded for the second round. Reseeding again for the 3rd round of the playoffs, and the Super Bowl should then theoretically feature the two best teams. Your dreaming, they are never getting rid of the conferences. Plus the way you have it schedule, too much of a schedule imbalance, top 4 teams play each other twice & bottom 4 play each other twice, I mean come on that is not fair. Penalizing a team like that because they are good. I will chalk this one up as another boneheaded idea. ?
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 7 hours ago, YoloinOhio said: Should the Chargers pursue the move, the NFL could help build the team’s bridge to London by transferring the $650 million relocation fee it still must pay for the L.A. move to a London relocation. The Chargers also could switch divisions with the Houston Texans — the Chargers to the AFC South and the Texans to the AFC West — or perhaps the league could move the Chargers to the AFC East, Miami Dolphins to the AFC South and Texans to the AFC West. Well, Miami IS in the South. Maybe they can toss the Patriots out too. LOL North - Keep the same ? * Baltimore is more east than north / central. East - Buff, Jets, Putz*** and Chargers? South - Miami, Jax, Tenny and Houston Mid West / Mountain - Colts, Denver, KC and Raiders
PromoTheRobot Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, May Day 10 said: Dolphins "rivalry" is dead It's been a corpse for decades. 1
MikeSpeed Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 58 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: Simplest solution would to move us to AFC North, Texans to AFC West, and the Ravens to AFC South. East: Pats, Fins, Jets, Chargers West: Chiefs, Texans, Raiders, Broncos South: Colts, Titans, Ravens, Jaguars North: Bills, Steelers, Browns, Bengals This ^^^ except switch Fins and Ravens. 3
Chicharito Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 Only if means the nfl finally realigns the division(s) and we end up in a division with Pittsburgh, Cleveland and Detroit. This is what makes sense.
JinxedBill Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 Move back to St. Louis. I live and hour away now, would be nice to head down for a game
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 Buffalo belongs in the east not the Rust belt North / Central / Mid West .
DCBongo Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 In this brave new world, I'd move the Bills to the AFC North. The geographic location of Buffalo in regards to Cleveland and Pittsburg could create a fantastic regional rivalry. If the NFL is going to screw around with a permanent team in England, then why not try new things? 1
NoSaint Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 8 hours ago, Virgil said: Would the Pats leave the division? If so, sign me up. It’s only a 6 hour flight. They can suck it up. we’d be the least coastal team. Might be us.
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 4 minutes ago, Cripple Creek said: How does Shocker Khan feel about this? The Chargers get 8 games Jax gets 8 games. When in the states these teams share the Jax stadium the London team will have to have a schedule of 4 Home, 4 Away rinse repeat. weekly back and forth won't cut it
Bob Chandler's Hands Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 1 hour ago, SoTier said: Agreed. LA couldn't support 2 teams the first time around, so I'm not sure why the NFL suits thought it would work again except that stadium boosters/developers sold owners a bill of goods. I don't think that the cities you mentioned are viable options because they aren't big enough metros, population wise, to support an NFL franchise in this era. I think that San Diego and St Louis are both viable, and probably Oakland as well. Those cities didn't lose their franchises because the fans didn't support their teams but because the owners couldn't strong arm the local governments into building them new stadiums. Agree with this except Portland is probably large enough (25th largest Metro area in the US)
Ridgewaycynic2013 Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 1 hour ago, dave mcbride said: What rivalries? I never knew the First Galactic Empire vs. the Rebel Alliance was a ‘rivalry’. ?
dpberr Posted November 5, 2019 Posted November 5, 2019 The NFL needs to sit the owners of the Jags, Titans and Chargers and figure something out or buy out two of these franchises and dissolve them. I think a big assumption on the part of the NFL and its owners is that greener pastures remain for the NFL. What if there aren't any? I don't think the NFL is willing to subsidize a full time NFL franchise in London. Any owner who jumps into the deep end of that unknown will want financial subsidies and guarantees that will equal or exceed just buying out the franchise and dissolving it. Mexico and Mexico City have a very unsettled security situation. St. Louis has failed twice with NFL franchises.
Recommended Posts