scar988 Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 22 hours ago, Danger said: Philly's hatred for Dallas, and don't even get me started on the international soccer fans. They blow both of these NFL disdains out of the water. Falcons and Saints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted July 17, 2019 Share Posted July 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, scar988 said: Falcons and Saints. There are Falcons fans? I wouldn't know based off this forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scar988 Posted July 29, 2019 Share Posted July 29, 2019 On 7/17/2019 at 12:38 PM, Danger said: There are Falcons fans? I wouldn't know based off this forum. There's a ton. I rarely visit these forums anymore despite being one of the OGs because everyone tends to be on Twitter now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeTheBallDeep Posted July 29, 2019 Share Posted July 29, 2019 2 hours ago, scar988 said: There's a ton. I rarely visit these forums anymore despite being one of the OGs because everyone tends to be on Twitter now. I hate Twitter so much, wish more of those football fans would make their way back/to forums Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckoz24 Posted July 29, 2019 Share Posted July 29, 2019 Before I'd do any realignment, I'd ask myself the question of what are you trying to do. Are you trying to: A) make travel easier for opposing fans. To increase sale price of tickets = potentially more revenue. B) cut down on travel time and time zone = potential to take out jet lag and improve consistent performance (not sure if that affects football as much as other sports tbh) C) increase potential rivalry = potential increased branding power D) other The one thing I wouldn't change would be historic rivalry. The problem is that you can make the comparison in any realignment. Where I would make changes is where you see other sports doing it right. For example, if option C is your vision than there's no way you wouldn't put Pittsburg and Philadelphia together based on the NHL rivalry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiltman Posted July 30, 2019 Share Posted July 30, 2019 13 hours ago, ckoz24 said: The one thing I wouldn't change would be historic rivalry. The problem is that you can make the comparison in any realignment. Where I would make changes is where you see other sports doing it right. For example, if option C is your vision than there's no way you wouldn't put Pittsburg and Philadelphia together based on the NHL rivalry. I think a proposal like this would work for what I've long thought was the compromise to the 18 game schedule, a 17 game one. Where you keep the existing structure intact for schedule making But that 17th game is a "rivalry" game. Each team has an opposing conference "rival" they play every year., typically a regional foe. But could be expanded upon. So if Dallas leaves the NFC East, they would play the Skins or Eagles every year still. If they were naturally going to play them that year anyway, then those two teams enter a pool the NFL will pool from to make their international game slate. So if the Eagles and Steelers are deemed a rival, and it's the once every 4 years they would play each other anyway. And the same goes for say the Rams and Chargers. All 4 teams would enter the pool for International. Neutral site games. So like the Eagles and Chargers go to Berlin and the Rams and Steelers play in Mexico City This way teams are guaranteed at least one international game every 4 years at least. But anyways this would allow you to recapture some lost rivalries from realignment too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scar988 Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 On 7/30/2019 at 12:08 AM, Kiltman said: I think a proposal like this would work for what I've long thought was the compromise to the 18 game schedule, a 17 game one. Where you keep the existing structure intact for schedule making But that 17th game is a "rivalry" game. Each team has an opposing conference "rival" they play every year., typically a regional foe. But could be expanded upon. So if Dallas leaves the NFC East, they would play the Skins or Eagles every year still. If they were naturally going to play them that year anyway, then those two teams enter a pool the NFL will pool from to make their international game slate. So if the Eagles and Steelers are deemed a rival, and it's the once every 4 years they would play each other anyway. And the same goes for say the Rams and Chargers. All 4 teams would enter the pool for International. Neutral site games. So like the Eagles and Chargers go to Berlin and the Rams and Steelers play in Mexico City This way teams are guaranteed at least one international game every 4 years at least. But anyways this would allow you to recapture some lost rivalries from realignment too I proposed something like this years ago too... I also think those 16 rivalry games should be the international games. Play them all over the world throughout the year. Some in Canada (MTL, TOR), Cuba, Mexico, Brazil, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.