What are your thoughts on divisional alignment if the following teams relocate to LA:

a. Jaguars
b. Vikings
c. Bills
d. Rams

Obviously no changes would be necessary if a Califonia team moved there.

I did a whole post on the scenarios some time ago in the NFL Realignment thread. Just made it a "sticky" topic at the top of the forum index.



If it's the Raiders, Chargers or Rams...there are no changes.

I don't think the Bills are an option since their owner Ralph Wilson said he would never sell or move the team while her is alive. In fact, the team will be sold out of his family so that they are not connected with a move, since Wilson was so hurt by the way Modell was treated when the Browns left Cleveland.

So that leaves the Jaguars...

The easiest move would be to swap KC in the west with the LA Jaguars, putting KC in the south with Tennessee, Indianapolis, and Houston.


AFC

East
New England
Buffalo
NYJets
Miami

North
Cleveland
Pittsburgh
Cincinnati
Baltimore

South
~ Kansas City
Houston
Tennessee
Indianapolis

West
Oakland
San Diego
Denver
* LA Jaguars







Ideally, I'd like to see this:



AFC

East
New England
Buffalo
NYJets
~ Baltimore

North
Cleveland
Pittsburgh
Cincinnati
~ Indianapolis

South
~ Kansas City
Houston
Tennessee
~ Miami

West
Oakland
San Diego
Denver
* LA Jaguars

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Another post-Jags move scenario is:

LA Jags to NFC West
St. Louis to AFC South, where Tennesee would be a rival
That would tilt the TV package even more in favor of Fox


If it's the Vikes:

LA Vikes (or whatever) to NFC West
St. Louis to NFC North, where at least they'd have a rivalry with Chicago

As it is now, St. Louis has no natural rival.

I don't think there is so much of a push to make moves based on "rivalries". The NFL switched to the 8 division format and did what it thought was right to maintain existing rivalries (Old browns in Balt with Pitt, Miami in the northeast, etc). Tennessee has it's "rivalry" with Houston, it's former home.

I think the less moves, the happier the NFL would be. Which is why in some scenarios, no realignment is necessary (Chargers, Raiders). in others, it's minimal moves (Jax to LA COULD put KC in South). Rams to LA would require minimal moves as well since the Rams in St. Louis as already in the west.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

The NFL does pay attention to travel costs, however. Just this month it altered the 8 year old schedule format for 2010 so that non-divisional teams do not have to travel to both SF and Seattle or to Oakland and SD. Basically they did that by having KC and Oakland swap sites and the same with St. Louis and SF. It wasn't much publicized, but it happened.

It did indeed happen. However, if travel were more of a priority, you would have...

NEng
Buf
NYJ
*Baltimore

Pitt
Clev
Cin
* Indy

Ten
Hou
Jax
* Miami

But that's not the case...you have Baltimore in the north, Miami in the east, and Indy in the south.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

As a St. Louisan (but a transplanted Steelers fan, not a huge fan of the Rams), I can say that the old Rams - 49ers rivalry is rather dead, and since the Seahawks were an AFC team before the realignment to 8 4's, there is little true rivalry there....

St. Louis actually feels a strong affection for Kurt Warner. His life story has been so compelling, and he still returns to St. Louis regularly to do charitable work (often with a press black-out, since he doesn't feel a burning desire for publicity, but still word gets out regarding all his good deeds). So where St. Louis had a love / hate relationship with their old team (the Cardinals), many many St. Louisans want to see Kurt succeed, especially if the Rams aren't competitive (as has been the case now for 5+ years).

When the Rams relocation was approved in 1995, there was a stipulation that they would not contest where the league placed them in any realignment. They stayed with SF in the NFC West, as "'non-west" teams Carolina, Atlanta, and New Orleans were moved to the newly created NFC South. Not sure if they have a right to complain should the NFL see fit to shift them again.

Should the Jags move to LA, I would personally like to see St. Louis take the jags spot in the AFC South.
Indy, Nashville, and Houston would make decent geographic rivals.... The baseball Cardinals have a rivalry with the Houton Astros, Indy is just 4 hours down I-70, and the St. Louis Rams one moment of glory was vs. the Titans in SB XXXIV.

Obviously, Jacksonville is a very small market, and the Jags have fallen on hard times and RIGHT NOW would be a candidate to move. By the time a stadium is built in LA, Jacksonville could be back on top...

The Rams have an option to break their lease in St. Louis after the 2014 season, if the stadium isn't "among the top 25% of NFL facilities" (which it will NOT be, due to the plethora of newer, more palatial stadii). Some improvements were made this past year to the Edward Jones Dome (skylights, more video stuff), but I suppose without a reetractable roof, the place isn't quite as "competitive" as a brand new structure like the Jerry Jones Monstrosity...

Rams ownership may / may not undergo upheaval VERY SOON. After Georgia Frontiere died, her two children Chip & Lucy inherited Georgia's 60% ownership stake. They have explored selling the team, and 3 groups are reportedly submitting proposals. One is led by St. Louis Blues owner Dave Checketts (although he is NOT the big money man, Ruch Limbaugh WAS, but has reportedly been replaced). Checketts would likely keep the team in St. Louis. Not sure about the other 2 groups. Much of what transpires may be driven by tax implications of sale / non-sale.

Tute, one thing to consider that many look past is the role TV plays in the conference alignment.

The NFL WANTS teams in nearby markets to be in separate conferences since it usually means 2 "home teams" on "local" TV. For instance, NYJ in the AFC while NYG in NFC, SF in NFC with Oakland in AFC, Houston in AFC while Dallas in NFC, and KC in the AFC while St. Louis is in the NFC. In Florida, it was until Jax joined Miami in AFC with Tampa Bay in the NFC. In most cases in the state of Florida, you'd have your old NBC Miami game and CBS Tampa game. Now in all Texas markets you tend to get Houston as your AFC game and Dallas as your NFC game. In St. Louis, there are a good number of KC games broadcast as the St. Louis "AFC" game of the week.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Quinn -

You make a good point.

In St. Louis, the CBS affilitate (or NBC back when they had the AFC contract) would show a lot of KC Chiefs games here, but thankfully it was during a time when the Chiefs were pretty good.

This past year, the CBS affiliate generally aired one of the better games that was in the time slot(s) that they were allowed to show that day. We saw the Chiefs - Cowboys, and maybe ONE other Chiefs games, where the Chiefs were hosting a good team.

I think the "rule" you refer to applies ABSOLUTELY to a single market (opposite conferences).
NYG-NYJ
Washington - Baltimore
SF - Oakland

You can site perhaps Texas and Florida (Dallas / Houston and Tampa / Miami in opposite conferences).

If you consder southern California to be one market, that strongly suggests an LA team be in the NFC to offser the San Diego Chargers in the AFC.

But then you have clusters of markets close together in the same conference.
No better examples than the AFC North - Cincy, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Baltimore
and NFC North - Chicago, Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota

These can be intense long-term rivalries. Perhaps these hurt the other network. For example, is there interest in Cleveland in watching an NFC game on Fox ? (all the neighboring markets are AFC, including Buffalo). I contend there is interest IF Fox shows them one of the better NFC games. One benefit of this clustering (and admittedly much of this structure (especially the NFC North) pre-dates the NFL on TV) is that fans who travel well may see the opportunity to buy tickets to games in a nearby market if that home team is having a really down year and not selling out their home games.
For example, I have yet to get back home to see a Steelers game since Heinz Field was built, but I have seen the Steelers play in KC, St. Louis, and Phoenix.

In your example, you seem to view KC and St. Louis as a market (Missouri). They are not, but perhaps you are making a valid point that putting the Rams in the AFC would over-concentrate this part of the country with AFC teams (it might).
Therefore, if you are the FOX affiliate in KC or Indy or Dallas or Nashville, you can't show Rams home games any more.
You CAN probably show an NFC South or NFC West game in that time slot. I doubt people in those cities have any special affinity for the Rams. However I was predicating the Rams move on a Jags move to Losa Angeles (presumable to the NFC), so Fox would have access to the LA Jags now.

If the Jags are the ones that re-locate, I think it would be much more important to move them to the NFC (and offer a southern California team to each network), and make an off-setting NFC -> AFC shift elsewhere.


Then again, if logic were in vogue, would Dallas still be in the NFC East ?
Go figure....

I agree that a St. Louis-to-AFC South move would make the most sense pursuant to a Jax-LA relocation.

I don't like St.Louis going to the AFC, they've been to 3 super bowls as a NFC member. I already hate that the Colts and Jets played in the super bowl. Seattle's move worked because they had never been to the super bowl and were nothing special at the time.

STL has to stay NFC because of KC

Is LA and SD too close for 2 AFC teams? we had the Chargers and Raiders

best route is KC to the south Jacksonville to the west.

If I had my way the div. would look like this
AFC

East
Jets
Patriots
Bills
Ravens*

North
Bengals
Browns
Steelers
Colts*

South
Texans
Jags
Titans
Dolphins*

West
Raiders
Chiefs
Broncos
Chargers

NFC

East
Redskins
Giants
Eagles
Panthers*

North
Packers
Vikings
Bears
Lions

South
Saints
Falcons
Buccaneers
Rams*

West
49ers
Seahawks
Cardinals
Cowboys*

Cowboys & Rams could go either way Dallas more west and south than St.Louis. I think the West needs more talent.

_________________

WRANGLERS 153-55-1 CVFL CHAMPS '04 '05 '09 '12

NFL CHAMPS '29 '30 '31 '36 '39 '44 '61 '62 '65 '66 '67 '96 '10

BW/WAC/MWC CHAMPS '77 '82 '85 '88 '89 '91 '92 '93 '99 '12
'08 NCAA BASEBALL CHAMPS

There is now an agreement in place to sell the majority ownership stake in the St. Louis Rams.

Reportedly, Georgia Frontiere's children Chip Rosenbloom and Lucy Rodriguez have agreed to sell their 60% to a guy named Shalid Khan of Champaign, Illinois. The other 40% will remain with husband of Wal-mart heiress Stan Kronke of Columbia, MO (owner of Denver Nuggets and Colorado Avalanche).

Khan has issued statements that he intends to keep the Rams in St. Louis (although the Rams do have an opt-out option on their lease after the 2014 season, that they may use for leverage to force facility improvements).

So if this sale is approved by the NFL owners and goes through, it may remove the Rams from the candidate list of franchises that may be approched regarding relocation to L.A.

As a Packer Fan I would love for the Vikings to move to L.A and for the St. Louis Rams to be in the NFC North. The L.A Vikings can be in the NFC West.

_________________
RODGERS
MATHEWS
2012