- Thread starter
- #1
iknowftbll
Well-Known Member
- 4,124
- 1,285
- 173
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2013
- Hoopla Cash
- $ 1,000.00
- Fav. Team #1
- Fav. Team #2
- Fav. Team #3
Hey, Gang,
I realize we're all very excited about the season that is just weeks in front of us. I am as much as anyone. This may seem like the kind of conversation to have sometime in late May-early July to get us through those long hot summer football-less days (especially for those of us who are Rockies fans and have no reason to be excited about baseball season save the love of the game itself), but this is a subject that has the potential to really shake up the landscape in the AFC and NFC West.
It's no secret the league is entertaining proposals to relocate teams to Los Angeles. Right now the candidates are the Rams, the Raiders, and the Chargers, each having played under the Los Angeles moniker in their past. Now the Rams seem to be the favorite. Despite St. Louis showing some solid progress on its proposal to build a river front stadium, Kroenke seems dead set on returning the Rams to their rightful city. Meanwhile the Raiders and Chargers are both interested in relocating but lack the resources to go it alone. Thus an interesting pairing of bedfellows has formed: The Raiders and Chargers, longtime AFC West rivals, are looking at moving in together. And here's where it really gets interesting: The league won't allow division rivals to shack up. Someone is going to have to move to the NFC and an NFC West team is going to have to agree to move over to the AFC.
Let's consider some scenarios.
1: All three teams move to Los Angeles: The Rams would likely be the team to move to the AFC West as a condition of the owners approving their relocation. This allows the Raiders and Chargers to develop their project and between them decide who's going to the NFC. But the league isn't going to allow all three teams to move.
2: Rams and Raiders or Chargers move to Los Angeles: No realignment required. In this scenario the league would likely require Kroenke to agree to taking on a roommate as a condition of approving the Rams relocation. Since it would be an NFC and AFC team sharing the stadium the realignment is not required.
3: Rams remain in St. Louis, Raiders and Chargers move to Los Angeles: This would require a realignment. And here's where it gets really interesting. One of the Raiders or Chargers would be leaving the AFC West and one of the NFC West teams would be moving in. If this is the scenario that happens, here's what I'd like to see:
Chargers to NFC West, Cardinals to AFC West. Here's why this is the most logical option:
The Chargers are the least of the AFC West teams. Sure they're better than the Raiders, but they lack the history and more importantly the Super Bowl wins the Raiders do. I believe the teams with the Super Bowl wins should have the option of remaining in the conference they were in at the time they won. Then add to it the AFC West is really a three-way rivalry among the Raiders-Chiefs-Broncos with the Chargers being essentially an "also ran" getting an honorable mention only because they've been a solid team for 10+ years now. The league would be wise to break up the least impactful AFC West rivalries and that means the Chargers are the logical choice.
The Cardinals to the AFC West follows very similar logic. They're the only team in that division that has not won a Super Bowl. At first glance, one may want the Seahawks back, and had they not won a Super Bowl they'd be an obvious choice. Also, you can forget Kroenke being willing to help the league's realignment plan if he doesn't get his move to Los Angeles approved. As for the 49ers, you're just not going to move that team out of the NFC. Get that idea out of your head right now and never let it back in. That leaves the Cards, who at this time would be a really solid addition to the AFC West.
What say the Broncos fans?
I realize we're all very excited about the season that is just weeks in front of us. I am as much as anyone. This may seem like the kind of conversation to have sometime in late May-early July to get us through those long hot summer football-less days (especially for those of us who are Rockies fans and have no reason to be excited about baseball season save the love of the game itself), but this is a subject that has the potential to really shake up the landscape in the AFC and NFC West.
It's no secret the league is entertaining proposals to relocate teams to Los Angeles. Right now the candidates are the Rams, the Raiders, and the Chargers, each having played under the Los Angeles moniker in their past. Now the Rams seem to be the favorite. Despite St. Louis showing some solid progress on its proposal to build a river front stadium, Kroenke seems dead set on returning the Rams to their rightful city. Meanwhile the Raiders and Chargers are both interested in relocating but lack the resources to go it alone. Thus an interesting pairing of bedfellows has formed: The Raiders and Chargers, longtime AFC West rivals, are looking at moving in together. And here's where it really gets interesting: The league won't allow division rivals to shack up. Someone is going to have to move to the NFC and an NFC West team is going to have to agree to move over to the AFC.
Let's consider some scenarios.
1: All three teams move to Los Angeles: The Rams would likely be the team to move to the AFC West as a condition of the owners approving their relocation. This allows the Raiders and Chargers to develop their project and between them decide who's going to the NFC. But the league isn't going to allow all three teams to move.
2: Rams and Raiders or Chargers move to Los Angeles: No realignment required. In this scenario the league would likely require Kroenke to agree to taking on a roommate as a condition of approving the Rams relocation. Since it would be an NFC and AFC team sharing the stadium the realignment is not required.
3: Rams remain in St. Louis, Raiders and Chargers move to Los Angeles: This would require a realignment. And here's where it gets really interesting. One of the Raiders or Chargers would be leaving the AFC West and one of the NFC West teams would be moving in. If this is the scenario that happens, here's what I'd like to see:
Chargers to NFC West, Cardinals to AFC West. Here's why this is the most logical option:
The Chargers are the least of the AFC West teams. Sure they're better than the Raiders, but they lack the history and more importantly the Super Bowl wins the Raiders do. I believe the teams with the Super Bowl wins should have the option of remaining in the conference they were in at the time they won. Then add to it the AFC West is really a three-way rivalry among the Raiders-Chiefs-Broncos with the Chargers being essentially an "also ran" getting an honorable mention only because they've been a solid team for 10+ years now. The league would be wise to break up the least impactful AFC West rivalries and that means the Chargers are the logical choice.
The Cardinals to the AFC West follows very similar logic. They're the only team in that division that has not won a Super Bowl. At first glance, one may want the Seahawks back, and had they not won a Super Bowl they'd be an obvious choice. Also, you can forget Kroenke being willing to help the league's realignment plan if he doesn't get his move to Los Angeles approved. As for the 49ers, you're just not going to move that team out of the NFC. Get that idea out of your head right now and never let it back in. That leaves the Cards, who at this time would be a really solid addition to the AFC West.
What say the Broncos fans?
Really though it makes a lot of since for Rams to get to west coast and stay in NFC West.Travel expenses.
