New seeding proposal

[ShinobiMusashi]

^Good stuff, I'm with you. I don't know about the Texans in the NFC East I guess it would work. What about this, swap Carolina out of the NFC West with Dallas. Put Dallas in the NFC West with Houston. NFC West is the 6 in the NFC(Dallas/SF/Houston/Atlanta/New Orleans/St. Louis then LA).

Scenario A:

NFC East

NY Giants
Philadelphia
Carolina
Arizona
Washington

NFC West

San Francisco
Dallas
Houston
New Orleans
Atlanta
St. Louis(Los Angles)

or Scenario B the one I always thought would have worked, moved Baltimore to the NFC east to make them the 6th team there, while Houston takes their place in the AFC Central. Of course this robs us of some good rivalries Baltimore has in the 21st century with Pit. But they would have fit perfectly from what I understand all those cities are really close together(Baltimore/Philly/DC/NYC). If any AFC team could move it would be the Ravens for me. IDK, either way you split it up somebody will have issues with it, I guess the big gripe with the 5/6/5 format was scheduling mess.

[ShinobiMusashi]

Its crazy to think of how that realignment changed everything the way it did. Id love to see what some of the alternate proposals were, I know there had to have been a few.

[JuggernautJ]

I think (at least mathematically) the current division/conference alignments make sense.
32 teams divided into 2 conferences each of which has four divisions of four teams... it is simple and elegant and makes the standings and playoffs (relatively) easy to comprehend. And it is relatively easy to schedule because it is symmetrical... there are no divisions with an unequal number of teams.

The one change I would make (and it confounded me at the time of realignment) is to swap Indianapolis and Baltimore...
Indianapolis is further North than Baltimore.
And Indiana was pretty solidly in the Union (going back to a previous North/South divide) while Maryland was technically blue but certainly had some divided loyalties.

I know Modell and the original Browns (now Ravens) had to stay in the AFC North to maintain all those old rivalries and bad feelings...
But the single change I would've wanted to see made switched those two teams so that the AFC would have the following divisions:

AFC North
Pittsburgh
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Indianapolis


AFC South
Tennessee
Jacksonville
Houston
Baltimore

Aside from being geographically more precise it has the three teams that left the NFL to join the AFC all in the same division (Steelers, Browns and Colts).

[ShinobiMusashi]

One thing we do know and can say for sure that the 2002 realignment robbed us of 2 potentially classic all time great Brady vs Manning games in the 2002 season. They didn't play each other at all that year, Manning was 26 and Brady was 25. They played the first meeting in 2001 but Colts were bad that year, worst defense in the league under Mora's final season with them. 2002 the Colts had Dungy. If we pretend they don't realign the league in 2002 and just put Houston somewhere in the NFC, then that 2002 AFC East division is a banger son. All 5 teams would have been going at it. New England and Indianapolis in particular would have been really going at it for playoff spots.

Seeing how Indy's defense was that year I think they could have finished worse than they did irl, potentially getting swept by NE and NYJ and maybe even Miami too(Miami beat them in Indy that year). So if New England sweeps Indy that year and gets 10 wins instead of 9, and they get the tie breaker over the Browns for the playoff spot(the Browns now having 2 games against Titans and Jaguars could most likely change their 9-7 record they had in 2002). Those 2002 AFC playoffs just got a lot more interesting, especially if Jets got #3 seed and low seed wild card winner goes to Oakland black hole to face #1 seed Raiders.

[74_75_78_79_]

One thing we do know and can say for sure that the 2002 realignment robbed us of 2 potentially classic all time great Brady vs Manning games in the 2002 season. They didn't play each other at all that year, Manning was 26 and Brady was 25. They played the first meeting in 2001 but Colts were bad that year, worst defense in the league under Mora's final season with them. 2002 the Colts had Dungy. If we pretend they don't realign the league in 2002 and just put Houston somewhere in the NFC, then that 2002 AFC East division is a banger son. All 5 teams would have been going at it. New England and Indianapolis in particular would have been really going at it for playoff spots.

Seeing how Indy's defense was that year I think they could have finished worse than they did irl, potentially getting swept by NE and NYJ and maybe even Miami too(Miami beat them in Indy that year). So if New England sweeps Indy that year and gets 10 wins instead of 9, and they get the tie breaker over the Browns for the playoff spot(the Browns now having 2 games against Titans and Jaguars could most likely change their 9-7 record they had in 2002). Those 2002 AFC playoffs just got a lot more interesting, especially if Jets got #3 seed and low seed wild card winner goes to Oakland black hole to face #1 seed Raiders.

Very interesting post! Never even thought of how the 2002 season, itself, actually turns out in a no-realignment hypothetical with simply Houston going to the NFC (again, East, my preference) and nothing else thus making two conferences, now, with the 5-6-5 format thus still a mind-scrambler for the schedule-maker.

Yes with the AFC East being real compact! IRL the Colts finish 10-6 elsewhere (in their new division, the South) with NJY, NE, and Mia each finishing 9-7 and Buffalo at 8-8 (who swept Miami). Of course with this 5-6-5 format in, now, both conferences you wouldn't know for sure every team who each of the five would play either within their conference or outside their conference. But, either way, yes indeed it would be a..."banger son" of a division race!

The Steelers, in that 'year of Maddox', don't win the Central due to Tennessee still being in the division with them and, yes, this makes it all the harder for the Browns to get in. You mean they'd actually have to wait until...2020 to make their first playoff berth since coming back in '99??

In the NFC Central you would now have TWO games between Mike Sherman and Warren Sapp instead of just one! And considering that both finished 12-4 IRL in separate divisions, who ends up winning this division with BOTH teams still in it in 2002? This simply would have added further example as to why the Bucs should have stayed in the 'Black and Blue'.

And how about the NFC West?? San Fran (10-6 IRL), Atlanta (9-6-1 IRL as well), Saints (9-7) along with the Rams (7-9) and Carolina (7-9) ought to really make that one, really, no less interesting than the AFC East!

Again, we would not know fully who'd play who either within the conference or outside of it due to the 5-6-5 x 5-6-5 format. Can anyone come up with a guess on how the formula would be?

Going by the every-three-year rotation all along, here's what the inter-conference set-up would have been for 2002...

AFC East vs NFC East
AFC Central vs NFC West
AFC West vs NFC Central

That's if they even still GO by that with this 5-6-5 in both conferences. Maybe the Rhodes mathematicians, I mean...schedule-makers, come up with a 21st Century version of those years following the merger. Or likely the matching-conferences rotation will continue on thus all being close to the way it was the three years leading up. Simply tweak what already was with the 31 teams to, maybe, a slightly simpler version now that there are an even amount of teams again. I lean with that.

[ShinobiMusashi]

One thing we do know and can say for sure that the 2002 realignment robbed us of 2 potentially classic all time great Brady vs Manning games in the 2002 season. They didn't play each other at all that year, Manning was 26 and Brady was 25. They played the first meeting in 2001 but Colts were bad that year, worst defense in the league under Mora's final season with them. 2002 the Colts had Dungy. If we pretend they don't realign the league in 2002 and just put Houston somewhere in the NFC, then that 2002 AFC East division is a banger son. All 5 teams would have been going at it. New England and Indianapolis in particular would have been really going at it for playoff spots.

Seeing how Indy's defense was that year I think they could have finished worse than they did irl, potentially getting swept by NE and NYJ and maybe even Miami too(Miami beat them in Indy that year). So if New England sweeps Indy that year and gets 10 wins instead of 9, and they get the tie breaker over the Browns for the playoff spot(the Browns now having 2 games against Titans and Jaguars could most likely change their 9-7 record they had in 2002). Those 2002 AFC playoffs just got a lot more interesting, especially if Jets got #3 seed and low seed wild card winner goes to Oakland black hole to face #1 seed Raiders.

Very interesting post! Never even thought of how the 2002 season, itself, actually turns out in a no-realignment hypothetical with simply Houston going to the NFC (again, East, my preference) and nothing else thus making two conferences, now, with the 5-6-5 format thus still a mind-scrambler for the schedule-maker.

Yes with the AFC East being real compact! IRL the Colts finish 10-6 elsewhere (in their new division, the South) with NJY, NE, and Mia each finishing 9-7 and Buffalo at 8-8 (who swept Miami). Of course with this 5-6-5 format in, now, both conferences you wouldn't know for sure every team who each of the five would play either within their conference or outside their conference. But, either way, yes indeed it would be a..."banger son" of a division race!

The Steelers, in that 'year of Maddox', don't win the Central due to Tennessee still being in the division with them and, yes, this makes it all the harder for the Browns to get in. You mean they'd actually have to wait until...2020 to make their first playoff berth since coming back in '99??

In the NFC Central you would now have TWO games between Mike Sherman and Warren Sapp instead of just one! And considering that both finished 12-4 IRL in separate divisions, who ends up winning this division with BOTH teams still in it in 2002? This simply would have added further example as to why the Bucs should have stayed in the 'Black and Blue'.

And how about the NFC West?? San Fran (10-6 IRL), Atlanta (9-6-1 IRL as well), Saints (9-7) along with the Rams (7-9) and Carolina (7-9) ought to really make that one, really, no less interesting than the AFC East!

Again, we would not know fully who'd play who either within the conference or outside of it due to the 5-6-5 x 5-6-5 format. Can anyone come up with a guess on how the formula would be?

Going by the every-three-year rotation all along, here's what the inter-conference set-up would have been for 2002...

AFC East vs NFC East
AFC Central vs NFC West
AFC West vs NFC Central

That's if they even still GO by that with this 5-6-5 in both conferences. Maybe the Rhodes mathematicians, I mean...schedule-makers, come up with a 21st Century version of those years following the merger. Or likely the matching-conferences rotation will continue on thus all being close to the way it was the three years leading up. Simply tweak what already was with the 31 teams to, maybe, a slightly simpler version now that there are an even amount of teams again. I lean with that.

Yeah, you can't go too far into the future because the scheduling being different changes win-loss records therefore changing everything, draft orders, coaching changes, everything. But we can look at the 2002 season and say for sure that the realignment robbed us of a more interesting season, 2 potentially all time classic Manning vs Brady games, and definitely a more interesting AFC playoffs that year.

Obviously the big problem with this format is scheduling. The 6 team divisions are locked into 10 division games every year, leaving 6 non-division. So how you split that up would be interesting, 2 games a year vs other conference, 2 vs AFC West, 2 vs AFC East? Under that format teams would go YEARS without playing each other. Is that really that big of a deal though? I think this perpetuates the scenario where each division has it's own distinct style of play.

I just don't think everything always needs to be perfectly symetrical and perfect. Geography seems to be the big gripe people have with the old alignment, as if these teams were still driving 18 hours across the country to play each other. It takes like 2.5 hours to fly from Texas to California. I liked the older format the way it was and I feel like plenty of evidence can be supported that it was just flat out better. One big piece of evidence is that they are changing the playoff seeding rules now because this format is broken with losing teams getting into the playoffs hosting playoff games.

[ShinobiMusashi]

Thinking more about it the last few days I still can't get over just how much the realignment helped out Manning's career. Look at all the easy wins over the Texans, who were set up to be bad on purpose seemingly. Suddenly he no longer had to worry about December trips to Foxboro/Buffalo/New York now he's going to Houston and Jacksonville lol. I really am starting to think it was rigged up on purpose for him, especially after the way his little brother got to pick what team drafted him.

[CSKreager]

Ravens vs Titans was the best rivalry in the NFL to me starting with the 1999 games spilling into the trilogy of games in 2000 that got me back into the NFL after a few years of not really caring for it. To me my favorite trilogy of games in NFL season ever. That was the real Super Bowl in 2000, they split that apart with the realignment is a big one that was lost.

BAL/TEN in 2000 was basically 15 minutes of fame. 3 games in one season does not constitute a rivalry.

The idea that a snoozefest between defenses without an offense was the real Super Bowl says all I need to know about how dreadful the 2000 season was.