Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

I've opined this a few times already my always wishing that each conference would have stayed at three divisions apiece (whilst, of course, having never added an extra playoff team per conference in 2020). And keep the Colts, Hawks, Cards, and Bucs with their division foes regardless of geography with the latter. And add the Texans to the NFC East (they and Big D together, and twice a year). And I still LOVE and MISS that very short-lived BIG 6-team AFC Central from '99-thru-'01! Crammed with rivalries - old and new!

But the 2002 realignment simply DID happen! And that's that.

The 2008 Cardinals heavily benefited from 2002! As we know, they were 3-7 outside of their division while feasting off a real weak NFC West that they finished 6-0 within. Yes, they beat a Dolphins team early on that won their division, finishing at 11-5. They beat 9-7 Dallas early on as well, in OT, which leads us to the hypo of they still being in the NFC East instead - a division that was the total opposite of the NFC West. It was TOUGH.

The Cards lost at home convincing-enough to NYG. I imagine they lose to them a second time in 2008 as well; the defending-Champs were the best team that regular season IMO (Steeler-fandom aside, they "should have" repeated). 'Zona did lose convincingly at Philly. Maybe they split with them considering they did beat them in that NFCCG, but sure-enough Dallas splits with them as well. And Washington, who finished in last place, finished with an 8-8 record while also beating the Cards in 2008. I see 'Zona going 4-4 in the division at absolute best! And simply seeing just how bad they were outside their division in real-time as a NFC West member...(also getting blown-out by the likes of the Jets, Vikings, and Pats)...

There is no definite as to who within their conference they would have actually played. It all would have depended on how the 2007 standings playout. But, cross-conference, the NFC East would have actually been matched up with the AFC East as the NFC West was in real-time in '08. Now once the real-time 2008 NFC playoffs began, yes, the Cards were suddenly a Super Bowl team. But they would have simply had to have made it to the dance in the first place! And considering just now poor they actually were outside their division during that regular season, they making the playoffs hypothetically in a real tough NFC East would have been, to me, un-doable for them.

The Seahawks in 2010, of course, benefited as well. Winning their division at 7-9/hosting a playoff game which they'd win while - in their former division - the Chiefs, Chargers, and Raiders finish at 10-6, 9-7, 8-8 respectively. Oh, and yes, Hawks played all four of their former foes that season going 1-3 vs them; beating only SD with the other three defeats each lopsided and by a combined 106-41 margin! Yes, it doesn't look like they make the playoffs either had things stayed as-is thus they also benefited from the realignment in Carroll's first year with them.

And considering the Vikings', Lions' and Packers' respective 13-4, 9-8, and (also) 8-9 finishes (Packers beat them in TB), it looks like Brady..."benefited" by FWIW (again, FWIW) at least making the playoffs in his final season!

There are other examples to give, but it IS the '08 Cards who have to be the biggest benefactors of the realignment being that it, indeed, essentially took them all the way to a Super Bowl (and coming razor-close to winning it, mind you)!


2011 G-men? Well, considering that they, of course, are still in the NFC East anyway in this scenario, and the Cardinals elsewhere finished 8-8, and the G-men did beat them early in 'Zona, its safe-enough to assume with me that they still win the division anyway (then "get HOT"). While we also wouldn't be sure who'd play who within their conference had Cards still been a member, or if the Giants beat them a second time (both East divisions pitted against each other once again as WAS actually the case in real-time), I'm sure-enough, down-the-stretch, those infamous G-men would have won any important games they would have had to win in order to still take the division - and then the rest!

EDIT - the one thing that I didn't even think of in this 2011 scenario, my mistake, was the Texans that year! They, indeed, finished at 10-6, winning the AFC South IRL. This would have made them a legit obstacle in this they-in-the-NFC East hypo. But back to my concluding statement last paragraph, sure-enough the Giants still win any important games they may need to win to get there anyway. Sweeping the Texans to do so I would not count out.

2002 Bucs

No more GB/CHI cold weather trips, new division, got to play ATL/CAR/NO, won SB in year 1 of said realignment

74_75_78_79_ wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2024 12:33 pm I've opined this a few times already my always wishing that each conference would have stayed at three divisions apiece (whilst, of course, having never added an extra playoff team per conference in 2020). And keep the Colts, Hawks, Cards, and Bucs with their division foes regardless of geography with the latter. And add the Texans to the NFC East (they and Big D together, and twice a year). And I still LOVE and MISS that very short-lived BIG 6-team AFC Central from '99-thru-'01! Crammed with rivalries - old and new!

But the 2002 realignment simply DID happen! And that's that.

The 2008 Cardinals heavily benefited from 2002! As we know, they were 3-7 outside of their division while feasting off a real weak NFC West that they finished 6-0 within. Yes, they beat a Dolphins team early on that won their division, finishing at 11-5. They beat 9-7 Dallas early on as well, in OT, which leads us to the hypo of they still being in the NFC East instead - a division that was the total opposite of the NFC West. It was TOUGH.

The Cards lost at home convincing-enough to NYG. I imagine they lose to them a second time in 2008 as well; the defending-Champs were the best team that regular season IMO (Steeler-fandom aside, they "should have" repeated). 'Zona did lose convincingly at Philly. Maybe they split with them considering they did beat them in that NFCCG, but sure-enough Dallas splits with them as well. And Washington, who finished in last place, finished with an 8-8 record while also beating the Cards in 2008. I see 'Zona going 4-4 in the division at absolute best! And simply seeing just how bad they were outside their division in real-time as a NFC West member...(also getting blown-out by the likes of the Jets, Vikings, and Pats)...

There is no definite as to who within their conference they would have actually played. It all would have depended on how the 2007 standings playout. But, cross-conference, the NFC East would have actually been matched up with the AFC East as the NFC West was in real-time in '08. Now once the real-time 2008 NFC playoffs began, yes, the Cards were suddenly a Super Bowl team. But they would have simply had to have made it to the dance in the first place! And considering just now poor they actually were outside their division during that regular season, they making the playoffs hypothetically in a real tough NFC East would have been, to me, un-doable for them.

The Seahawks in 2010, of course, benefited as well. Winning their division at 7-9/hosting a playoff game which they'd win while - in their former division - the Chiefs, Chargers, and Raiders finish at 10-6, 9-7, 8-8 respectively. Oh, and yes, Hawks played all four of their former foes that season going 1-3 vs them; beating only SD with the other three defeats each lopsided and by a combined 106-41 margin! Yes, it doesn't look like they make the playoffs either had things stayed as-is thus they also benefited from the realignment in Carroll's first year with them.

And considering the Vikings', Lions' and Packers' respective 13-4, 9-8, and (also) 8-9 finishes (Packers beat them in TB), it looks like Brady..."benefited" by FWIW (again, FWIW) at least making the playoffs in his final season!

There are other examples to give, but it IS the '08 Cards who have to be the biggest benefactors of the realignment being that it, indeed, essentially took them all the way to a Super Bowl (and coming razor-close to winning it, mind you)!


2011 G-men? Well, considering that they, of course, are still in the NFC East anyway in this scenario, and the Cardinals elsewhere finished 8-8, and the G-men did beat them early in 'Zona, its safe-enough to assume with me that they still win the division anyway (then "get HOT"). While we also wouldn't be sure who'd play who within their conference had Cards still been a member, or if the Giants beat them a second time (both East divisions pitted against each other once again as WAS actually the case in real-time), I'm sure-enough, down-the-stretch, those infamous G-men would have won any important games they would have had to win in order to still take the division - and then the rest!

Not sure how much the realignment plays a role here, but most of the success of my Seahawks comes after that point.

CSKreager wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2024 3:52 pm 2002 Bucs

No more GB/CHI cold weather trips, new division, got to play ATL/CAR/NO, won SB in year 1 of said realignment

Bucs & Packers would have clearly dog-fought all season for that very easy division thus 1st-Rd bye. TB did beat GB in real life in 2002 (Sapp/Sherman post-game confrontation). I think both split in this scenario while feasting off the three others in their division. IRL GB went 5-1 vs them, the loss being at Minny. Bucs at least go 5-1 as well.

The 'final four' remains the same, IMO, as well as Bucs toppling Raiders in the SB. But it looks like some teams that won divisions and made the playoffs IRL may not have done so in a no-realignment scenario. The 10-5-1 Steelers, in that Year of Maddox, won their new North division, but elsewhere the Titans were 11-5 winners of the South as well as having beat Pittsburgh during the regular season (and again in the divisional). Pretty safe assumption that Tenn wins the Central in such a hypo.

And instead of Herm's 9-7 Jets winning the AFC East, perhaps its Indy doing so. They were 10-6 IRL. But no sure thing. That would have been SUCH a logjam, that entire division! Pats & Dolphins also finished 9-7 with Bills at 8-8 IRL! Safe to assume the Steelers get the top WC spot, but who gets the other two?

And in the NFC, sure-enough with Texans joining the East, that would only inflate the Eagles & Giants' W/L records to better than 12-4 & 10-6 respectively! I think whoever doesn't win the Central between TB & GB would have still gotten top-WC-spot anyway thus host the Giants 1st-Rd. As for who beat NYG IRL in that Classic 1st-Rd game? Would 10-6 IRL San Fran have actually won their division or even made the playoffs? Instead of being in that easy division with three teams that would each have a losing season, SF would have still been with the Falcons & Saints who IRL had respective 9-6-1 & 9-7 records in the South!

I don't think it'd be difficult for any of us to imagine what the actual scheduling formula would be in a hypo 2002 three-divisions-per set-up, adding Houston in the NFC East. Sure it would have been a slight variation of the formula that was applied during that brief three-year '99-thru-'01 stint with an odd 31 teams.

This is what inter-conference matchings we would have had with no realignment in 2002...

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

And, of course, already gone since 1999 was four teams from one division all playing the other four teams from the matched cross-conference division. Already NOT liking that in '99-thru-'01, that really would have been the only thing about this 'dream' since-2002 hypo that I would not have liked. Yes, also the 'weird' Texans being matched with not just the Cards, but also with NYG, Philly, and Wash. But, to me, that would be a necessary evil for Indy, Seattle, Cards, and TB should have stayed where they were IMO.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I should have mentioned my 2005 Steelers on this very thread (although I did previously mention what I'm about to mention elsewhere on this site). Both the 'Burgh and two-time-defending-Champs, NE, are each in jeopardy of missing the playoffs in such a hypo! The IRL 14-2 Colts and IRL 12-4 Jags now being in the East and Central respectively is the key reason (Indy beat NE and Jax beat Steelers that season).

Shoving the Jags into the Central with Pittsburgh & Cincy along with...SEATTLE now being in their CONFERENCE would make it all the tougher. Jax, also beating Cincy that season IRL, likely win the division with Indy a shoe-in in the East (sweeping the Pats very possible with me). Hawks & Broncos (both 13-3 IRL) duke it out for the West with 2nd-place (likely Denver IMO) getting top-WC/4th-seed leaving the Pats, Bengals, Steelers, and also Vermeil's 10-6 IRL Chiefs all fighting for the other two spots. It would have added quite more suspense in the Steelers' playoff push possibly they not making it at all in the first place! If they don't make it, then it'd have to be Seattle (who I still think makes the CCG even as a WC) and Indy in a "real Super Bowl" showdown!

Who wins the NFC? Their IRL runner-up, Carolina, looks to be the first one to notice! Not just mighty Seattle out of the way, but Panthers would be in a soft NFC West thus their IRL 11-5 record ought to be inflated to top-seed status thus take "advantage" of that home field! John Fox/Steve Smith's Carolina Panthers (an extra SB-berth for all, Jake Delhomme included) are likely the biggest de-benefactors of the 2002 realignment.

Or does JOE GIBBS - whose Redskins didn't play so bad at Seattle in the RL divisional - actually appear in a Super Bowl during his brief, forgotten 21st Century comeback?? Maybe that, instead, is the best guess that should be made in the NFC!

The Patriots, clearly. They were in a cupcake division from 2001-19 for the most part.

Would have been interesting how successful the Colts would have been staying in the same eastern division?

Oh man I think you would have to give the title to the Colts without question, they had no business being in a "South" division with the expansion team that was put in Houston(and one that was suspiciously set up to fail from the start). Those 2 wins ever year went a long way in the Colts playoff seeding or making the playoffs at all some seasons. Now they went from trips to Buffalo, New York, Foxboro to road trips to Houston indoor stadium, Jacksonville, and Manning's annual return trip to his alma matter. The whole division seemed taylor made to get Manning over the hump and into the spotlight as one of the faces of the league for the next decade. He was the chosen one.

Also I settled on my favorite alternate 2002 realignment without switching the divisions; I like the idea of moving Baltimore to the NFC East and putting Houston in the AFC Central. Baltimore when they were the Browns played the Cowboys, Cardinals, and Giants a lot at one point, they have close proximity for regional rivalries with the Giants, Eagles, and Redskins(beating the Giants in a Super Bowl two years earlier). Also the Browns started as an NFL team so it' in their dna to move to the NFC. I know the Raven's weren't technically the Browns anymore but in a literal sense that was their lineage. That way we get Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburgh as Houston's division rivals the way it was meant to be(plus we get the cross dressing Tennessee team suffering identity crisis). Also at that point they had only been the Ravens for 6 seasons, even though they won the Super Bowl in 2000 as an AFC team(playing like a classic NFC team mind you), it still wouldn't have been as jarring for them switching conferences as it was for me seeing Seattle in the NFC. Houston for me needs to be an AFC team, that was an AFL town. Shipping Baltimore back to where they started in the NFC fixes a lot.

ShinobiMusashi wrote: ↑Mon Aug 25, 2025 12:35 am Also I settled on my favorite alternate 2002 realignment without switching the divisions; I like the idea of moving Baltimore to the NFC East and putting Houston in the AFC Central. Baltimore when they were the Browns played the Cowboys, Cardinals, and Giants a lot at one point, they have close proximity for regional rivalries with the Giants, Eagles, and Redskins(beating the Giants in a Super Bowl two years earlier). Also the Browns started as an NFL team so it' in their dna to move to the NFC. I know the Raven's weren't technically the Browns anymore but in a literal sense that was their lineage. That way we get Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburgh as Houston's division rivals the way it was meant to be(plus we get the cross dressing Tennessee team suffering identity crisis). Also at that point they had only been the Ravens for 6 seasons, even though they won the Super Bowl in 2000 as an AFC team(playing like a classic NFC team mind you), it still wouldn't have been as jarring for them switching conferences as it was for me seeing Seattle in the NFC. Houston for me needs to be an AFC team, that was an AFL town. Shipping Baltimore back to where they started in the NFC fixes a lot.

Hmm...you know what? You know what? I actually think I'm buying! I think.

The first few seconds reading your post, I dismissed it at first. But yes to them having the mentality of a Classic 'NFC' team! The only problem, a small one, would be that though it'd have some way to go for it to be of the Tomlin/Harbaugh status it is today, the first true building block of the Steelers/Ravens rivalry was installed that very last season before the realignment via a...rubber-band playoff match! The 'Burgh beating Ravens at Baltimore in 2000 a nice set-up. But I would think that Titans/Ravens at that immediate moment was a bigger rivalry with Steelers/Jaguars bigger still. Those rivalries IRL would be missed by fans in-general, but borrowing your term, nothing too..."jarring" as time wore on.

I'd think an even better idea - to assure those rivalries not being missed/nipped in the bud - would be having the Ravens move to the NFC East already in 1999! They didn't even post a respectable/mediocre record their first three seasons in Baltimore, so that would make some sense considering no real rivalries developing just yet. Simply bring Cleveland into the AFC Central as was the case, making that division still a 5-teamer, as the NFC East would be the lone 6-team division in the entire league during that '31 teams' mini-era. Then in 2002 you place Houston in the AFC Central.

Yes, looking at just the AFC Central here, it's better with me to have Baltimore in there than Houston considering all that's already happened - what all of us have been used to and accustomed to. But looking at both the AFC Central & NFC East collectively, its a better idea overall to have had the Ravens in the NFC East than the Texans! They, right off the bat, fit in so much better with Dallas (despite not being a Texas team themselves), NYG (without even needing their 2000 SB match as a 'lift'), Philly, and obvious geographical rivalry, Washington. Instead of there being two 5th-wheels in the NFC East, it would now be just one extra wheel instead. But, who knows? Cards may have forged a nice-enough rivalry with the Ravens better than you think.

Hate "picking on" the Texans here (or the Cards), not fair to their fans, but other than the Watt/Kubiak era and right immediately now, not much of an established winning tradition these past 20+ years and, fair or not (not), not a big market franchise.

And I agree, Houston should be an AFC team - rejoining Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and Cincy.

Hey, maybe we would have had ourselves a Ravens/Steelers Super Bowl in 2008!

And a Ravens/Titans one in 2000! A "real" Super Bowl quite literally. And on the very final week instead of three weeks prior!

Still just a little weird given what actually IRL transpired all this time since. Steelers/Ravens have become one of the biggest rivalries in sports. But starting all over again without any of us knowing nor imagining what actually happened IRL, Baltimore Ravens an NFC power this century - with Dallas, NYG, Philly, Washington, and...Cardinals being their rivals - would have to be seen by all as something so normal. I wonder what Modell's take would be on this idea? Being in same division with those big markets teams nothing to sneeze at.


PS - that all said, this new agreed opinion of mine is based solely on the fact that Modell already moved the Browns In '95 as he did, turning them into the Baltimore Ravens, and nothing can be done to reverse it. Of course, much more than all I've just written, I wish the Browns would have NEVER left Cleveland in the first place!

The one change to the 2002 realignment I would make is flipping the Colts and Ravens.

All of the then-“new” teams in one division. All of the former NFL teams in a geographically sensible division.