Hypothetical 2016 Olympic Team

[Giantsmojo]

They could expand to 36 teams and go back to 3 divisions per league, 6 teams per division to keep the divisions and leagues equal.

 

[Bemular]

They could expand to 36 teams and go back to 3 divisions per league, 6 teams per division to keep the divisions and leagues equal.

That would also work perfectly with an 18-game schedule - hmmm??? Coincidence? Not so much, IMO.

 

[numone9er]

Geez, Im imagining what an "international" version of football would be like, and it could get weird. As for your question, here is a side-by-side breakdown of the rules for American vs Canadian football. The website is Canadian, so when explaining American rules they blended/combined/confused/plain gotten a few things wrong, but IMO this is one of the more concise left side vs right side comparison of differences.

Another good and equally weird example of one of the differences of CFL rules are how FGs are handled. A missed FG can give the kicking team a point, but the ball is live, so the defense can remove the ball from their own end zone to.... you know what, just watch the clip below.




(stolen from another place breaking down CFL vs NFL rules)

Very interesting. Thanks.

 

[deep9er]

I would love to see the league more geographically balanced by whatever means it takes -

do you mean re-align the CURRENT teams to be more geographic? or do you mean move teams to other cities, to become geographically balamced? i would think you meant current teams, but then again.......i'll just ask.

if we look at current teams in each Division, to me its ok now? maybe they 'tweak' it when a team finally moves to LA?

 

[numone9er]

They could expand to 36 teams and go back to 3 divisions per league, 6 teams per division to keep the divisions and leagues equal.

I could see that. That would obviously mean more wild card teams. I actually prefer the way it's run right now with 32 teams, but i don't expect it to stay that way.

 

[Bemular]

do you mean re-align the CURRENT teams to be more geographic? or do you mean move teams to other cities, to become geographically balanced? i would think you meant current teams, but then again.......i'll just ask.

if we look at current teams in each Division, to me its ok now? maybe they 'tweak' it when a team finally moves to LA?

Glad you asked, geographically balanced means division realignment or geographical re-location and/or addition. I have NEVER liked the idea of anchoring divisions to an ultimately poor geographical alignment.

I would do away with the North, East West & South designations and call the divisions something else that would allow travel miles/time zones to be the determining factor for what teams would play in what divisions.

Acquisition of the UFL will provide two more west teams, one more mid-west team and one more east team, so that will help a little but I would still like to see divisional realignment to be more geographically balanced as well.

Make sense? (I think you now know my saying this is intended to incite conversation and not at all intended to offend - at least I hope so)

 

[Giantsmojo]

I could see that. That would obviously mean more wild card teams. I actually prefer the way it's run right now with 32 teams, but i don't expect it to stay that way.

I don't care about Wild Card teams, it's getting the best teams in the playoffs, doesn't matter if they win a weak division or come in 2nd in a strong division.

I prefer 3 divisions per league vs 4, reduces the chances that a team makes the playoffs with a sub .500 record just because they win their division.

 

[deep9er]

Glad you asked, geographically balanced means division realignment or geographical re-location and/or addition. I have NEVER liked the idea of anchoring divisions to an ultimately poor geographical alignment.

I would do away with the North, East West & South designations and call the divisions something else that would allow travel miles/time zones to be the determining factor for what teams would play in what divisions.

Acquisition of the UFL will provide two more west teams, one more mid-west team and one more east team, so that will help a little but I would still like to see divisional realignment to be more geographically balanced as well.

Make sense? (I think you now know my saying this is intended to incite conversation and not at all intended to offend - at least I hope so)

ok, thanks for explaining. yeah ok, now got your thought process.

i guess technically (mathematically?) you could do it, but seems like a lot of "upheaval" on rivalries? NFL rivalries aren't intense like college, but its still there.

say the NFL did balance travel times, isn't the direction of travel also a factor? for myself, i don't have a problem flying to the Far East (West direction), but do have jet lag flying East.

anyways.....

 

[Bemular]

I could see that. That would obviously mean more wild card teams. I actually prefer the way it's run right now with 32 teams, but i don't expect it to stay that way.

Aside from the changing one team's designation from being a Div. Winner to a WC team, nothing at all would change.

 

[Flyingiguana]

nfl vs rugby all stars

 

[MHSL82]

ok, thanks for explaining. yeah ok, now got your thought process.

i guess technically (mathematically?) you could do it, but seems like a lot of "upheaval" on rivalries? NFL rivalries aren't intense like college, but its still there.

say the NFL did balance travel times, isn't the direction of travel also a factor? for myself, i don't have a problem flying to the Far East (West direction), but do have jet lag flying East.

anyways.....

As far as rivalries go, I think that over time, teams will develop new rivalries just like kids make new friends when they more. But moving too often is bad for business. And it's not like realignment will move everybody. It may end up being like the NFC East - rivalrous - and then add a third wheel or two. If geography is important, it could add to it. I don't want to be in Oakland's division due to geography, so we may have to wait for it to move to LA before realignment .

Sidenote: it's getting really hard getting used to having an avatar after a year or more without one. I keep thinking someone else responded right after I did. Plus, I wish my avatar had PW or Frank Gore instead of Crabtree. I mean, seriously, WTF? (I liked the rest of it, though with Smith and Davis.)

 

[Flyingiguana]

photoshop crabtree out. drop him like he does to footballs!

 

[deep9er]

As far as rivalries go, I think that over time, teams will develop new rivalries just like kids make new friends when they more. But moving too often is bad for business. And it's not like realignment will move everybody. It may end up being like the NFC East - rivalrous - and then add a third wheel or two. If geography is important, it could add to it. I don't want to be in Oakland's division due to geography, so we may have to wait for it to move to LA before realignment .

Sidenote: it's getting really hard getting used to having an avatar after a year or more without one. I keep thinking someone else responded right after I did. Plus, I wish my avatar had PW or Frank Gore instead of Crabtree. I mean, seriously, WTF? (I liked the rest of it, though with Smith and Davis.)

in order to balance travel times, the west coast teams would likely be separated. there just isn't enough west teams to balance the east ones?

 

[MHSL82]

in order to balance travel times, the west coast teams would likely be separated. there just isn't enough west teams to balance the east ones?

Since when has the NFL cared about travel times? :P

 

[imac_21]

Since when has the NFL cared about travel times? :P

Since they altered the schedule rotation between the East divisions and West divisions so that East coast teams traveling west wouldn't have to go to the Pacific time zone twice in one season (no east division teams will travel to SF and Seattle in the same season, or to SD and Oakland).

Edit:

Slight correction. No non-divisional opponent will travel to SF and Seattle or SD and Oakland in the same year. It's for the whole league, not just the East divisions.

 

[MHSL82]

Since they altered the schedule rotation between the East divisions and West divisions so that East coast teams traveling west wouldn't have to go to the Pacific time zone twice in one season (no east division teams will travel to SF and Seattle in the same season, or to SD and Oakland).

Edit:

Slight correction. No non-divisional opponent will travel to SF and Seattle or SD and Oakland in the same year. It's for the whole league, not just the East divisions.

I was kidding because it seems that we always travel the longest and others travel significantly less. But I know they have a method to their madness. But I guess, in a small respect, St. Louis is far anyway. And being on the coast makes us an extreme (a middle state presumably wouldn't have to travel far anywhere, except London).

 

[threelittleturds]

36 teams is a big jump, and I'm not sure the NFL would do that... the owners are really proud of their exclusive club and don't really like to expand it or share it. We know Goodell wants teams in London and Los Angeles... but there really aren't a lot of other places to put football teams because of how the fan base is already set up. Maybe a team could go to Portland or Oklahoma City, but almost every other region is locked into their teams.

It took 19 years to go from 28 teams to 30... and the quick expansion to 32 seven years later probably only happened for two reasons. To give Cleveland a team back and even out the divisions.

I'm not sure that I'd like an NFL where they played 10 division games and only 6 outside... although granted by the time it gets to 36 teams they may be playing 18 games a year?

 

[imac_21]

I was kidding because it seems that we always travel the longest and others travel significantly less. But I know they have a method to their madness. But I guess, in a small respect, St. Louis is far anyway. And being on the coast makes us an extreme (a middle state presumably wouldn't have to travel far anywhere, except London).

I know you were kidding. I just thought it was a good opportunity to point out that the NFL has made concessions and altered the schedule to accommodate the eastern teams traveling west, but not vice versa.

According to the original schedule formula, we were supposed to host Baltimore this year, but because of the tweaked schedule, we went there so they wouldn't have to travel to Seattle and San Francisco in the same season.

 

[MHSL82]

I know you were kidding. I just thought it was a good opportunity to point out that the NFL has made concessions and altered the schedule to accommodate the eastern teams traveling west, but not vice versa.

According to the original schedule formula, we were supposed to host Baltimore this year, but because of the tweaked schedule, we went there so they wouldn't have to travel to Seattle and San Francisco in the same season.

Thanks for the information. I only clarified because sometimes people don't get my humor or my posts. Damn, I wish we had the Baltimore game, it would have made up for the short week (but didn't they have a short week, too?)