Here’s a realignment challenge for you all. Add 4 teams to the NFL and realign it into 6 divisions of 6. This is particularly difficult because it will result in disbanding at least 2 of the existing divisions. I’m curious how you determine which to eliminate and your reasons for picking them.

AFC North: Baltimore, New England, NY Giants, NY Jets, Philadelphia, Washington
AFC South: Atlanta, Carolina, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa Bay, Tennessee
AFC West: Buffalo, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh

NFC North: Chicago, Denver, Green Bay, Kansas City, Minnesota, St. Louis*
NFC South: Arizona, Dallas, Houston, Las Vegas, New Orleans, San Antonio*
NFC West: LA Chargers, LA Rams, Portland*, San Diego*, San Francisco, Seattle

I eliminated the AFC East and NFC East because it worked out better to call the divisions North/South/West.

I assume you were expecting us to retain the traditional AFC/NFC structure, so here's an alignment for that:

AFC East: Baltimore, Buffalo, Jacksonville, Miami, New England, NY Jets
AFC Central: Cincinnati, Cleveland, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Pittsburgh, Tennessee
AFC West: Denver, Houston, Las Vegas, LA Chargers, San Antonio*, San Diego*

NFC East: Atlanta, Carolina, NY Giants, Philadelphia, Tampa Bay, Washington
NFC Central: Chicago, Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota, New Orleans, St. Louis*
NFC West: Arizona, Dallas, LA Rams, Portland*, San Francisco, Seattle

I eliminated the North and South Divisions in favor of Central Divisions simply because it was logical to do so. In terms of which old divisions the new ones most represent:

New AFC East: Old AFC East (all 4 teams)
New AFC Central: Old AFC North (3 of 4 teams)
New AFC West: Old AFC West (3 of 4 teams)

New NFC East: Split between old NFC East (3 of 4 teams) and old NFC South (3 of 4 teams)
New NFC Central: Old NFC North (all 4 teams)
New NFC West: Old NFC West (all 4 teams)

So the old AFC South was the most scattered, with teams in all 3 of the new AFC divisions. As for the NFC, I suppose you could say the old South was eliminated given that the East Division's name was retained.

AFC East: NE, NYJ, BUF, MIA, JAX, TB
AFC Central: BAL, PIT, CLE, CIN, IND, TEN
AFC West: KC, HOU, SA*, DEN, SEA, LV, LAC

NFC East: NYG, PHI, WAS, CAR, ATL, DAL
NFC Central: DET, CHI, GB, MIN, STL*, NO
NFC West: LAR, ARZ, SEA, SF, SD*, SLC*

I broke up the AFC South & NFC South. I tried to ease the destruction of the Buc’s and Jag’s divisions by uniting all 3 FL teams in the AFC East. To pacify Houston for being pushed West I gave them an expansion team in SA. the only move I’m really not happy about is the Saints but there simply wasn’t a better place to put them.

What does your geographic realignment look like?

Also, with the larger divisions, does the schedule continue to include 2 games vs each division mate?

(09-01-2025 01:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  What does your geographic realignment look like?

Also, with the larger divisions, does the schedule continue to include 2 games vs each division mate?

The NFL will NEVER consider a geographic realignment. There’s too much money lost by breaking up historical rivalries. That’s part of the reason why I left Dallas in the NFC East—they’ll never part with their rivals.

NFC West - San Diego*, San Francisco, LA Rams, Arizona, Seattle, Saint Louis*
NFC Central - Minnesota, Green Bay, Chicago, Detroit, New Orleans, Atlanta
NFC East - Tampa Bay, Carolina, Dallas, Washington, Philadelphia, NY Giants

AFC West - Denver, Las Vegas, LA Chargers, Utah*, Houston, San Antonio*
AFC Central - Indianapolis, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Tennessee, Kansas City
AFC East - Jacksonville, Miami, NY Jets, Buffalo, New England, Baltimore

(09-01-2025 04:12 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(09-01-2025 01:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  What does your geographic realignment look like?

Also, with the larger divisions, does the schedule continue to include 2 games vs each division mate?

The NFL will NEVER consider a geographic realignment. There’s too much money lost by breaking up historical rivalries. That’s part of the reason why I left Dallas in the NFC East—they’ll never part with their rivals.

You didn't answer either question.

AFC East: Buffalo Bills, Indianapolis Colts, Jacksonville Jaguars, Miami Dolphins, New England Patriots, New York Jets

AFC Central: Baltimore Ravens, Cincinnati Bengals, Cleveland Browns, Houston Texans, Pittsburgh Steelers, Tennessee Titans

AFC West: Denver Broncos, Kansas City Chiefs, Los Angeles Chargers, Las Vegas Raiders, San Antonio, San Diego

NFC East: Atlanta Falcons, Carolina Panthers, Dallas Cowboys, New York Giants, Philadelphia Eagles, Washington Commanders

NFC Central: Chicago Bears, Detroit Lions, Green Bay Packers, Minnesota Vikings, Orlando, Tampa Bay Buccaneers

NFC West: Arizona Cardinals, Los Angeles Rams, New Orleans Saints, San Francisco 49ers, Seattle Seahawks, St. Louis

(09-02-2025 06:31 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(09-01-2025 04:12 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(09-01-2025 01:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  What does your geographic realignment look like?

Also, with the larger divisions, does the schedule continue to include 2 games vs each division mate?

The NFL will NEVER consider a geographic realignment. There’s too much money lost by breaking up historical rivalries. That’s part of the reason why I left Dallas in the NFC East—they’ll never part with their rivals.

You didn't answer either question.

My response to the first was that I wouldn’t entertain a truly geographical realignment because the NFL would never go for because it would kill too many marketable rivalries.

As for the 2nd, I would still play division mates twice (10 games) plus each year divisions would be paired on a 5 yr rotation for an additional 6 games.

That leaves 1 game in the 17 game schedule that I’d leave at the discretion of the league to determine. They could pair teams to a nearby opponent in years they weren’t scheduled to play or maybe it’s purely by standing finish (you finish 1st out of 6, you get paired with a fellow division winner)

(09-02-2025 07:06 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  AFC East: Buffalo Bills, Indianapolis Colts, Jacksonville Jaguars, Miami Dolphins, New England Patriots, New York Jets

AFC Central: Baltimore Ravens, Cincinnati Bengals, Cleveland Browns, Houston Texans, Pittsburgh Steelers, Tennessee Titans

AFC West: Denver Broncos, Kansas City Chiefs, Los Angeles Chargers, Las Vegas Raiders, San Antonio, San Diego

NFC East: Atlanta Falcons, Carolina Panthers, Dallas Cowboys, New York Giants, Philadelphia Eagles, Washington Commanders

NFC Central: Chicago Bears, Detroit Lions, Green Bay Packers, Minnesota Vikings, Orlando, Tampa Bay Buccaneers

NFC West: Arizona Cardinals, Los Angeles Rams, New Orleans Saints, San Francisco 49ers, Seattle Seahawks, St. Louis

I like your AFC solution, but I think I’d offer the Colts and Buccaneers the option to swap conferences/divisions. That would give both teams a better geographic fit. While Houston is odd geographic fit for the AFC Central, historically the Houston team played the bengals, Browns, and Steelers.

On the NFC side, the only tweaks I’d make would be the aforementioned swap of the Colts/Buccaneers and I’d put the 4th expansion team in SLC, not Orlando, which would bump St Louis to the NFC Central.

If I'm the NFL Czar, I'm also relocating. I don't like duplicative markets - even if there's enough fans and interest.

Jacksonville Jaguars > Toronto
Los Angeles Chargers > San Diego
New York Jets > St. Louis
New Franchises: Portland, Salt Lake City (Utah), San Antonio (Texas), Vancouver

I'm maintaining the AFC/NFC until the Commissioner says otherwise.

---------------------------------------

AMERICAN FOOTBALL CONFERENCE

CENTRAL: Cincinnati, Cleveland, Houston, Indianapolis, St. Louis, Tennessee
EAST: Baltimore, Buffalo, Miami, New England, Pittsburgh, Toronto
WEST: Denver, Kansas City, Las Vegas, San Diego, Texas, Utah

NATIONAL FOOTBALL CONFERENCE

CENTRAL: Carolina, Chicago, Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota, Tampa Bay
EAST: Atlanta, Dallas, New Orleans, New York, Philadelphia, Washington
WEST: Arizona, Los Angeles, Portland, San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver

> Tampa Bay was historically a NFC CENTRAL team before the 8x4 alignment. Slotting them with Carolina (the newest of the NFC SOUTH) in the NFC CENTRAL. New Orleans is close to Dallas and Atlanta is both a major metropolitan area and the Saints' biggest rival.
> Baltimore is definitely an Eastern city and the Ravens and Steelers are the Eastern-most AFC NORTH teams so placing them in the AFC EAST was the more logical decision.
> Slotting 2 new franchises in both WEST divisions is not ideal but that's where the geographic lies.

@BePcr07: If you move the Jags and Jets to two of your expansion sites, then you can reduce how many expansion teams end up in the West Divisions. Also, how about Carolina and Tampa Bay to the NFC East and Atlanta and New Orleans to the NFC Central? That way even though Dallas stays in the East, you're not making it worse by adding New Orleans.

It's unfortunate that the new San Antonio team couldn't be in the same division as one of the existing Texas teams. While this doesn't exactly respect geography, would placing San Antonio in the AFC Central with Houston and placing St. Louis in the AFC West with Kansas City make sense? I'd prefer the Missouri teams in the Central and the Texas teams in the West, but I must admit that Texas isn't that much farther west than Missouri, and I understand that KC staying in the West is due to existing rivalries (Broncos, Chargers, Raiders).

(09-03-2025 10:51 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(09-02-2025 07:06 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  AFC East: Buffalo Bills, Indianapolis Colts, Jacksonville Jaguars, Miami Dolphins, New England Patriots, New York Jets

AFC Central: Baltimore Ravens, Cincinnati Bengals, Cleveland Browns, Houston Texans, Pittsburgh Steelers, Tennessee Titans

AFC West: Denver Broncos, Kansas City Chiefs, Los Angeles Chargers, Las Vegas Raiders, San Antonio, San Diego

NFC East: Atlanta Falcons, Carolina Panthers, Dallas Cowboys, New York Giants, Philadelphia Eagles, Washington Commanders

NFC Central: Chicago Bears, Detroit Lions, Green Bay Packers, Minnesota Vikings, Orlando, Tampa Bay Buccaneers

NFC West: Arizona Cardinals, Los Angeles Rams, New Orleans Saints, San Francisco 49ers, Seattle Seahawks, St. Louis

I like your AFC solution, but I think I’d offer the Colts and Buccaneers the option to swap conferences/divisions. That would give both teams a better geographic fit. While Houston is odd geographic fit for the AFC Central, historically the Houston team played the bengals, Browns, and Steelers.

On the NFC side, the only tweaks I’d make would be the aforementioned swap of the Colts/Buccaneers and I’d put the 4th expansion team in SLC, not Orlando, which would bump St Louis to the NFC Central.

Here's the new version:

AFC East: Buffalo Bills, Jacksonville Jaguars, Miami Dolphins, New England Patriots, New York Jets, Tampa Bay Buccaneers

AFC Central: Baltimore Ravens, Cincinnati Bengals, Cleveland Browns, Houston Texans, Pittsburgh Steelers, Tennessee Titans

AFC West: Denver Broncos, Kansas City Chiefs, Los Angeles Chargers, Las Vegas Raiders, San Antonio, San Diego

NFC East: Atlanta Falcons, Carolina Panthers, Dallas Cowboys, New York Giants, Philadelphia Eagles, Washington Commanders

NFC Central: Chicago Bears, Detroit Lions, Green Bay Packers, Indianapolis Colts, Minnesota Vikings, St. Louis

NFC West: Arizona Cardinals, Los Angeles Rams, New Orleans Saints, Salt Lake City, San Francisco 49ers, Seattle Seahawks

So here's how I think the NFL might actually bungle/implement a 6x6 expansion and realignment:

AFC East: Buffalo, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, Miami, New England, NY Jets
AFC Central: Baltimore, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Houston, Pittsburgh, Tennessee
AFC West: Denver, Kansas City, Las Vegas, LA Chargers, Portland*, San Diego*

NFC East: Carolina, Dallas, NY Giants, Philadelphia, Tampa Bay, Washington
NFC Central: Atlanta, Chicago, Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota, New Orleans
NFC West: Arizona, LA Rams, San Francisco, Seattle, St. Louis*, Utah*

(09-03-2025 05:32 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  @BePcr07: If you move the Jags and Jets to two of your expansion sites, then you can reduce how many expansion teams end up in the West Divisions. Also, how about Carolina and Tampa Bay to the NFC East and Atlanta and New Orleans to the NFC Central? That way even though Dallas stays in the East, you're not making it worse by adding New Orleans.

It's unfortunate that the new San Antonio team couldn't be in the same division as one of the existing Texas teams. While this doesn't exactly respect geography, would placing San Antonio in the AFC Central with Houston and placing St. Louis in the AFC West with Kansas City make sense? I'd prefer the Missouri teams in the Central and the Texas teams in the West, but I must admit that Texas isn't that much farther west than Missouri, and I understand that KC staying in the West is due to existing rivalries (Broncos, Chargers, Raiders).

Tampa Bay to NFC CENTRAL is a historical move (1977 to 2001). Atlanta and New Orleans - to me - “feel” like better fits with Dallas, New York, Philadelphia, and Washington plus they are each other's primary rival.

I can be on board with switching San Antonio and St. Louis.

AFC EAST: NEW ENGLAND, NYJ, BALTIMORE, PITTSBURGH, MIAMI, JACKSONVILLE
AFC CENTRAL: CINCY, CLEVELAND, TENNESSEE, KC, HOUSTON, INDY
AFC WEST: DENVER, LAS VEGAS, LAC, SAN DIEGO, PORTLAND, SAN ANTONIO

NFC EAST: WASHINGTON, PHILLY, NYG, CAROLINA, ATLANTA, TAMPA
NFC CENTRAL: DETROIT, CHICAGO, GREEN BAY, MINNESOTA, ST LOUIS, NEW ORLEANS
NFC WEST: ARIZONA, SF, LAR, SEATTLE, HONOLULU, DALLAS

Here's a quasi-geographic alignment that keeps 6 of the 8 existing divisions intact while splitting the other 2 into pairs. The accuracy of most of the division names is stretched somewhat.

AFC East: Buffalo, Miami, New England, NY Jets; Carolina, Tampa Bay
AFC South: Dallas, NY Giants, Philadelphia, Washington; Atlanta, New Orleans
AFC West: Baltimore, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburgh; Indianapolis, Jacksonville

NFC East: Chicago, Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota; San Antonio*, St. Louis*
NFC South: Denver, Kansas City, Las Vegas, LA Chargers; Houston, Tennessee
NFC West: Arizona, LA Rams, San Francisco, Seattle; Portland/Utah*, San Diego*

But with an arrangement this compromised, the advantages of a geographic realignment are largely negated, making it fairly pointless.

(08-31-2025 06:43 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  AFC North: Baltimore, New England, NY Giants, NY Jets, Philadelphia, Washington
AFC South: Atlanta, Carolina, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa Bay, Tennessee
AFC West: Buffalo, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh

NFC North: Chicago, Denver, Green Bay, Kansas City, Minnesota, St. Louis*
NFC South: Arizona, Dallas, Houston, Las Vegas, New Orleans, San Antonio*
NFC West: LA Chargers, LA Rams, Portland*, San Diego*, San Francisco, Seattle

Here's a modification to the geographic alignment I originally posted (quoted above) that makes some modest compromises for the sake of rivalries, but not so many as in my previous post.

AFC North: Buffalo, New England, NY Jets; NY Giants, Philadelphia, Washington
AFC South: Atlanta, Carolina, New Orleans, Tampa Bay; Jacksonville; Miami
AFC West: Baltimore, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburgh; Indianapolis; St. Louis*

NFC North: Chicago, Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota; Denver, Kansas City
NFC South: Arizona; Dallas; Houston, Tennessee; San Antonio*, Utah*
NFC West: Las Vegas, LA Chargers; LA Rams, San Francisco, Seattle; Portland/San Diego*

I swapped Buffalo and Baltimore so as to keep them with most or all of their current division mates. Detroit goes back to the NFC North for the same reason. Denver and Kansas City remain together, as do Las Vegas and the Chargers, albeit in separate divisions. Tennessee goes to the NFC South to stick with Houston while New Orleans takes its place in the AFC South to be with all of its current division mates.

And yes, I've retained the unthinkable in separating Dallas from the rest of the current NFC East in a western division. But the Cowboys are back with former division mates the Cardinals, as well as Houston and a new regional rival in expansion San Antonio.

This is true of both alignments in this post, but I've also finally put all 3 Florida teams in the same division; none of them have ever shared a division with either of the other two.

There are only 5 teams in this most recent alignment that do not share a division with any of their current division mates (Arizona, Dallas, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, and Miami), which is not too shabby. That's just one more than the NFL accomplished with the 2002 realignment compared to 2001 (4: Arizona, Indianapolis, Seattle, Tampa Bay).

So while I still prefer the original geographic alignment I posted, this new one is not awful.

(08-31-2025 06:43 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  AFC North: Baltimore, New England, NY Giants, NY Jets, Philadelphia, Washington
AFC South: Atlanta, Carolina, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa Bay, Tennessee
AFC West: Buffalo, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh

NFC North: Chicago, Denver, Green Bay, Kansas City, Minnesota, St. Louis*
NFC South: Arizona, Dallas, Houston, Las Vegas, New Orleans, San Antonio*
NFC West: LA Chargers, LA Rams, Portland*, San Diego*, San Francisco, Seattle

I eliminated the AFC East and NFC East because it worked out better to call the divisions North/South/West.

That is absolutely terrible, you destroyed most of the NFL's most legendary divisional rivals.

Historic divisional rivalries are much more important than perfecting the geography.