New 36 Team Nfl?
-
I like it, regardless though- Baltimore needs moved out of our division. They aren't even in close proximity to us at all. I think they should be moved and I think that it would help to ease the pain and suffering of Browns Fans memory of the team being taken. Plus, it gives us a better shot of winning the division.
I like it, regardless though- Baltimore needs moved out of our division. They aren't even in close proximity to us at all. I think they should be moved and I think that it would help to ease the pain and suffering of Browns Fans memory of the team being taken. Plus, it gives us a better shot of winning the division.
Baltimore is approximately a six hour drive from Cleveland. Not particularly far, but it kinda makes more sense for Detroit to be in our division.
-
the LA "Riots"
the Salt Lake "Polygamists"
the San Antonio "Coyotes" (not the animal)
the Portland "Stoners"
-
Could just as easily see 4 expansion teams in international area's as well. London wants to get in on the NFL action, Berlin has been growing a bigger and bigger american football fan base every year. Toronto wants a team now and Mexico City has hosted several games. I don't think it would be out of the question to see Canada get a team here within the next 5-10 years along with London. The only problem with putting teams in Europe is figuring out how to work divisions and travel time every single week.
Ruining threads since 1897. -
Los Angeles Douchebags
San Antonio Fence Hurdlers
Portland Potheads
Salt Lake Samoans
-
Portland and Salt Lake City with NFL teams? No. Los Angeles and San Antonio should be next if they expand. If the Raiders move back to L.A., I'd like to see the NFL put a team in Las Vegas.
-
Portland and Salt Lake City with NFL teams? No. Los Angeles and San Antonio should be next if they expand. If the Raiders move back to L.A., I'd like to see the NFL put a team in Las Vegas.
Portland and Salt Lake City with NFL teams? No. Los Angeles and San Antonio should be next if they expand. If the Raiders move back to L.A., I'd like to see the NFL put a team in Las Vegas.
I don't know if the NFL has this rule but I know the NBA does. A professional team is not allowed in Las Vegas due to all the gambling. It was a big deal when the NBA All-Star game went to Vegas.
I am in the US Air Force and was stationed in Vegas for year, I would love to see a pro team there.
-
Portland and Salt Lake City with NFL teams? No. Los Angeles and San Antonio should be next if they expand. If the Raiders move back to L.A., I'd like to see the NFL put a team in Las Vegas.
I don't know if the NFL has this rule but I know the NBA does. A professional team is not allowed in Las Vegas due to all the gambling. It was a big deal when the NBA All-Star game went to Vegas.
I am in the US Air Force and was stationed in Vegas for year, I would love to see a pro team there.
I don't know if the NFL has this rule but I know the NBA does. A professional team is not allowed in Las Vegas due to all the gambling. It was a big deal when the NBA All-Star game went to Vegas.
I am in the US Air Force and was stationed in Vegas for year, I would love to see a pro team there.
I don't think that the NBA has any rule stating that a team cannot be located in a town with Gambling. Cleveland is getting a casino and I haven't heard anything about it conflicting with the Cavs. The only rule I can think of for professional sports involving gambling is that Owners are not allowed to own casinos if they own NFL teams. As in as much as Dan Gilbert wants to buy the Browns if part of the team or the whole team was put up for sale he would first have to sell his rights to his casino or at least sign his rights over to a family member.
-
I don't know if the NFL has this rule but I know the NBA does. A professional team is not allowed in Las Vegas due to all the gambling. It was a big deal when the NBA All-Star game went to Vegas.
I am in the US Air Force and was stationed in Vegas for year, I would love to see a pro team there.
I don't think that the NBA has any rule stating that a team cannot be located in a town with Gambling. Cleveland is getting a casino and I haven't heard anything about it conflicting with the Cavs. The only rule I can think of for professional sports involving gambling is that Owners are not allowed to own casinos if they own NFL teams. As in as much as Dan Gilbert wants to buy the Browns if part of the team or the whole team was put up for sale he would first have to sell his rights to his casino or at least sign his rights over to a family member.
I don't think that the NBA has any rule stating that a team cannot be located in a town with Gambling. Cleveland is getting a casino and I haven't heard anything about it conflicting with the Cavs. The only rule I can think of for professional sports involving gambling is that Owners are not allowed to own casinos if they own NFL teams. As in as much as Dan Gilbert wants to buy the Browns if part of the team or the whole team was put up for sale he would first have to sell his rights to his casino or at least sign his rights over to a family member.
You're right. I must have gotten my wires crossed somewhere. In some ways I wouldn't mind Gilbert owning the Browns, seems like Lerner cares more about his soccer team.
-
I don't think that the NBA has any rule stating that a team cannot be located in a town with Gambling. Cleveland is getting a casino and I haven't heard anything about it conflicting with the Cavs. The only rule I can think of for professional sports involving gambling is that Owners are not allowed to own casinos if they own NFL teams. As in as much as Dan Gilbert wants to buy the Browns if part of the team or the whole team was put up for sale he would first have to sell his rights to his casino or at least sign his rights over to a family member.
You're right. I must have gotten my wires crossed somewhere. In some ways I wouldn't mind Gilbert owning the Browns, seems like Lerner cares more about his soccer team.
You're right. I must have gotten my wires crossed somewhere. In some ways I wouldn't mind Gilbert owning the Browns, seems like Lerner cares more about his soccer team.
I'd rather have Gilbert own the Indians, where he can make a difference with money via free agency.
-
I don't know how much I would like to see division totally realigned even if they make sense geographically. I just don't know if it would be the best thing to break up some of those great rivalries that have around for 20 or 30 or 40 or even 50 years.
Like Cowboys vs all 3 other NFC East teams. Those rivals are strong because of there history on the field and battles for the division since the 70s. Why try and force a Cowboys rival with a terrible new expansion team with no history and will mostly likely be a terrible team like expansion teams have been in recent memory. Even if there is a "natural" geographic rival it doesn't really mean anything if the teams are playing meaningful games against each other. And even if they play meaningful games ... it takes a few years of meaningful game for the rival to really start getting strong. Of if not meaningful games atleast some sort of unique history that makes the franchise dislike each other (I.E. Ravens/Browns Old vs new)
You are also breaking up Jets/Phins which is a big rival along with the other good rivals in the AFC East. Just seems like you are almost startiing from stratch.
Also if you add 4 more teams and 2 more games ... the talent is going to become very saturated. The NFL would certainly expand the roster. Lets say they expand from a 53 man to a 60 man (which might even be conservative) and from 32 to 36 teams. You are going to have 464 more players in the NFL that shouldn't be. You are going to have a lot less talented football players on the field. All that expansion is going to ultimately lead to putting a crappy product on the field (maybe not crappy but not as good)
-
I do think a lot.
It can go any number of ways.
I could see a Great Lakes division......Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Pitts, Indy.
I also think about cities that could support a NFL team.
You are adding 4.
LA, no brainer, San Antonio,good option.
You say Salt Lake.....I say Oklahoma City.
I also think the deep south could support another team in Alabama...Birmingham might be a good location..Memphis is another location that has the population and they have tried in the past. There are a lot of people living in Memphis, north Mississippi, and east Arkansas that would support a team. That also hits a geographic void in the center of the country, as does OKC.....you could place them in several division that make sense.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
I think their may not be enough talent at the QB position to warrant a 36 team league.
Look at it now, 32 teams & many teams hurting at QB. I don't want the best sports league in the USA to get diluted, like the NBA.
I DO agree about getting the Ratbirds out of our division though.
Karlis Missed -
Could just as easily see 4 expansion teams in international area's as well. London wants to get in on the NFL action, Berlin has been growing a bigger and bigger american football fan base every year. Toronto wants a team now and Mexico City has hosted several games. I don't think it would be out of the question to see Canada get a team here within the next 5-10 years along with London. The only problem with putting teams in Europe is figuring out how to work divisions and travel time every single week.
Could just as easily see 4 expansion teams in international area's as well. London wants to get in on the NFL action, Berlin has been growing a bigger and bigger american football fan base every year. Toronto wants a team now and Mexico City has hosted several games. I don't think it would be out of the question to see Canada get a team here within the next 5-10 years along with London. The only problem with putting teams in Europe is figuring out how to work divisions and travel time every single week.
I considered International expansion....I just don't really see how it could work. North America, sure, like Toronto or Mex City (they better have a dome) but not all the way to London and Berlin.
-
Portland and Salt Lake City with NFL teams? No. Los Angeles and San Antonio should be next if they expand. If the Raiders move back to L.A., I'd like to see the NFL put a team in Las Vegas.
Portland and Salt Lake City with NFL teams? No. Los Angeles and San Antonio should be next if they expand. If the Raiders move back to L.A., I'd like to see the NFL put a team in Las Vegas.
???? Did you read my post? LA and SA were included. Hello!!
And here is the dope: Portland and Salt Lake are in fact larger markets than Las Vegas. Portland ranks 22d, SLC 33, while Vegas is only #40. It if it eyeballs on TVs that you want, then those two outrank Vegas.
Plus, there is the gambling factor. The NFL is never going to go where gambling on their games is illegal.
-
I don't know how much I would like to see division totally realigned even if they make sense geographically. I just don't know if it would be the best thing to break up some of those great rivalries that have around for 20 or 30 or 40 or even 50 years.
Like Cowboys vs all 3 other NFC East teams. Those rivals are strong because of there history on the field and battles for the division since the 70s. Why try and force a Cowboys rival with a terrible new expansion team with no history and will mostly likely be a terrible team like expansion teams have been in recent memory. Even if there is a "natural" geographic rival it doesn't really mean anything if the teams are playing meaningful games against each other. And even if they play meaningful games ... it takes a few years of meaningful game for the rival to really start getting strong. Of if not meaningful games atleast some sort of unique history that makes the franchise dislike each other (I.E. Ravens/Browns Old vs new)
You are also breaking up Jets/Phins which is a big rival along with the other good rivals in the AFC East. Just seems like you are almost startiing from stratch.
Also if you add 4 more teams and 2 more games ... the talent is going to become very saturated. The NFL would certainly expand the roster. Lets say they expand from a 53 man to a 60 man (which might even be conservative) and from 32 to 36 teams. You are going to have 464 more players in the NFL that shouldn't be. You are going to have a lot less talented football players on the field. All that expansion is going to ultimately lead to putting a crappy product on the field (maybe not crappy but not as good)
I don't know how much I would like to see division totally realigned even if they make sense geographically. I just don't know if it would be the best thing to break up some of those great rivalries that have around for 20 or 30 or 40 or even 50 years.
Like Cowboys vs all 3 other NFC East teams. Those rivals are strong because of there history on the field and battles for the division since the 70s. Why try and force a Cowboys rival with a terrible new expansion team with no history and will mostly likely be a terrible team like expansion teams have been in recent memory. Even if there is a "natural" geographic rival it doesn't really mean anything if the teams are playing meaningful games against each other. And even if they play meaningful games ... it takes a few years of meaningful game for the rival to really start getting strong. Of if not meaningful games atleast some sort of unique history that makes the franchise dislike each other (I.E. Ravens/Browns Old vs new)
You are also breaking up Jets/Phins which is a big rival along with the other good rivals in the AFC East. Just seems like you are almost startiing from stratch.
Also if you add 4 more teams and 2 more games ... the talent is going to become very saturated. The NFL would certainly expand the roster. Lets say they expand from a 53 man to a 60 man (which might even be conservative) and from 32 to 36 teams. You are going to have 464 more players in the NFL that shouldn't be. You are going to have a lot less talented football players on the field. All that expansion is going to ultimately lead to putting a crappy product on the field (maybe not crappy but not as good)
Yes, I am sacrificing some current rivalries like the Jets/Dolphins...but I think I am creating many more better more natural rivalries. Like Jets/Giants Dolphins/Bucs to use those two teams. And Raiders/49ers. Old rivalries have been discarded over the years. Quite frankly, the Browns biggest rivals at one time were the Lions and Giants, but those went by the wayside.
As for the expanded rosters, I think the NFL can handle it. There is decent talent out there right now that doesn't play.
The USA is a nation of over 300 million people. 36 teams of 60 man rosters means there would be 2160 players in the NFL. I think this population base...plus what we get from other countries can come up with 2160 decent football players.
-
I do think a lot.
It can go any number of ways.
I could see a Great Lakes division......Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Pitts, Indy.
I also think about cities that could support a NFL team.
You are adding 4.
LA, no brainer, San Antonio,good option.
You say Salt Lake.....I say Oklahoma City.
I also think the deep south could support another team in Alabama...Birmingham might be a good location..Memphis is another location that has the population and they have tried in the past. There are a lot of people living in Memphis, north Mississippi, and east Arkansas that would support a team. That also hits a geographic void in the center of the country, as does OKC.....you could place them in several division that make sense.
I do think a lot.
It can go any number of ways.
I could see a Great Lakes division......Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Pitts, Indy.
I also think about cities that could support a NFL team.
You are adding 4.
LA, no brainer, San Antonio,good option.
You say Salt Lake.....I say Oklahoma City.
I also think the deep south could support another team in Alabama...Birmingham might be a good location..Memphis is another location that has the population and they have tried in the past. There are a lot of people living in Memphis, north Mississippi, and east Arkansas that would support a team. That also hits a geographic void in the center of the country, as does OKC.....you could place them in several division that make sense.
I considered Birmingham and Memphis. Two things led me to choose Portland/SA, and SLC: most importantly, size. Those are the biggest markets without a team that were not already basically on top of other NFL markets. In fact here is the order of DMAs that do not have NFL teams:
2 LA
19 Orlando
20 Sacramento
22 Portland
24 Raleigh-durham
30 Hartford
32 Columbus
33 Salt Lake
36 San Antonio
39 Birmingham
40 Las Vegas
43 Norfolk/Va Beach
44 OKC
45 Albequerque
47 Austin
49 Memphis
As mentioned, adding Austin/SA together however makes them like the 14th larges market.
Orlando is only @75-80 miles from Tampa. The same with Sacramento from Oakland. Hartford is about 100 miles from NY and Boston...and I guess technically, since Connecticut is in "New England", the already have their team.
The Panthers bill themselves as Carolina's team so I discounted Raleigh Durham.
So, Portland and SLC were the largest and most remote markets left.
Though, I think Birmingham would viable as another "southern" team and probably comes in right after the ones I chose.
The other southern option would be the "Tidewater" team in Virg.
-
I think their may not be enough talent at the QB position to warrant a 36 team league.
Look at it now, 32 teams & many teams hurting at QB. I don't want the best sports league in the USA to get diluted, like the NBA.
I DO agree about getting the Ratbirds out of our division though.
I think their may not be enough talent at the QB position to warrant a 36 team league.
Look at it now, 32 teams & many teams hurting at QB. I don't want the best sports league in the USA to get diluted, like the NBA.
I DO agree about getting the Ratbirds out of our division though.
You don't think Seneca Wallace could go somewhere and be a starting NFL QB?
-
I think their may not be enough talent at the QB position to warrant a 36 team league.
Look at it now, 32 teams & many teams hurting at QB. I don't want the best sports league in the USA to get diluted, like the NBA.
I DO agree about getting the Ratbirds out of our division though.
You don't think Seneca Wallace could go somewhere and be a starting NFL QB?
You don't think Seneca Wallace could go somewhere and be a starting NFL QB?
Lol....nope.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login