You own an expansion team!

[Spider-Dan]

Oh my god, I know you are smarter than this. But the teams in the NHL and NBA  have the VAST majority of their games  on local regional sports networks.  The NFL doesn't have that! EVERY NFL game is a national game on a national network where they SPLIT the money evenly! That's why you can't have 2 NFL teams in the same conference. Because its the ONLY league where every game is played essentially on the same day and its really only 1 day a week. Minues the Monday Night schedule an a handful of Thursday games.

This would be an amazingly relevant point if we were discussing this issue from the standpoint of individual team revenue.  We are not.  From the national TV network perspective, having multiple teams in the same conference or division doesn't matter.

The bottom line is, the NFL has the ability to work any potential LA scenario into the pricing structure of the new TV contracts without realigning any teams.  You just finished saying that the NFC package already costs more than the AFC package, so surely you acknowledge that the opposite is a possibility.  And given that not too long ago, the NFL told FOX/CBS that their best game every week would be up for grabs in the new contract and both of them sucked it up... well, that shows a clear precedent for radical scheduling changes on a new TV contract.

This league will not realign twice in ten years for any reason.

[MikeO]

This league will not realign twice in ten years for any reason.

jesus christ, moving 1 team isn't realignment!  MLB is sending Houston to the American League, I don't hear people calling it some major vast realignment. It's just moving 1 team. lol, WOW!

And its funny you say no way will they do realignment (which nobody is even mentioning but YOU) but they will do a radical schedule change to fit your silly and weak argument. ha ha, that's funny!

[Spider-Dan]

The NFL does not realign for individual team moves.  There are plenty of instances of teams moving, and the NFL has never shuffled teams around for ANY of them.

Not for the Colts.
Not for the Raiders.
Not for the Cardinals.
Not for the Rams.
Not for the Ravens.

In the span of two offseasons (94-95), the NFL had three teams move and added two more new teams.  They did not realign a single team (not even 1!) to accommodate the new regional changes.  They chose putting Carolina in the NFC West over moving a single team.

In contrast, the NFL has shown much more willingness to revamp TV contracts.  They eliminated the week 17 game from MNF.  They created Wild Card Saturday for the third broadcast network.  Hell, they completely swapped the showcase game from Monday night to Sunday night to accommodate ratings, implemented flex scheduling to make sure that game is always relevant, and gave exclusive highlight rights to the SNF network (effectively ending ESPN's NFL Primetime, as it existed, in the process).

The NFL is very flexible and innovative when it comes to broadcast contracts.  They don't give a damn about conference alignment, and are extremely reticent to realign any team for any reason, no matter how much geographical or logistical sense it might make.

[Dave Gray]

For what it's worth, I wouldn't like 2 teams in L.A.

[Phishfan]

^^^ I only disliked it the first time because Oakland had relocated which I thought was a shame. It doesn't really affect me.

[MikeO]

The NFL does not realign for individual team moves.  There are plenty of instances of teams moving, and the NFL has never shuffled teams around for ANY of them.

Not for the Colts.
Not for the Raiders.
Not for the Cardinals.
Not for the Rams.
Not for the Ravens.

In the span of two offseasons (94-95), the NFL had three teams move and added two more new teams.  They did not realign a single team (not even 1!) to accommodate the new regional changes.  They chose putting Carolina in the NFC West over moving a single team.

In contrast, the NFL has shown much more willingness to revamp TV contracts.  They eliminated the week 17 game from MNF.  They created Wild Card Saturday for the third broadcast network.  Hell, they completely swapped the showcase game from Monday night to Sunday night to accommodate ratings, implemented flex scheduling to make sure that game is always relevant, and gave exclusive highlight rights to the SNF network (effectively ending ESPN's NFL Primetime, as it existed, in the process).

The NFL is very flexible and innovative when it comes to broadcast contracts.  They don't give a damn about conference alignment, and are extremely reticent to realign any team for any reason, no matter how much geographical or logistical sense it might make.

That is wrong on so many levels I don't know where to start. But I don't have the energy anymore.  Nobody is even talking realignment, but you are arguing it against yourself. WOW!

[MikeO]

For what it's worth, I wouldn't like 2 teams in L.A.

It might happen. SD and Jax it looks like. Time will tell. I'm with you though, hope it doesn't. To to from no teams to 2 is foolish.

[Spider-Dan]

Nobody is even talking realignment, but you are arguing it against yourself.

I don't know what kind of word game you're trying to play, but when two teams change divisions (cross-conference, even!), that's a realignment.  Replace the word "realignment" with whatever term you like; the point is, the NFL doesn't do that for moving teams.

[MikeO]

I don't know what kind of word game you're trying to play, but when two teams change divisions (cross-conference, even!), that's a realignment.  Replace the word "realignment" with whatever term you like; the point is, the NFL doesn't do that for moving teams.

Have 2 teams ever moved to the SAME city at the SAME time in NFL history?! NO. That's the point. It's not realignment, its just swapping teams.

Whatever, you believe you what you want. Time will prove me right IF 2 teams end up going to LA. And I will be here saying I told ya so!

[Spider-Dan]

So in your plan where a team moves from the NFC to the AFC (to replace an LA AFC team), where does that NFC team come from?  How is that team not participating in a realignment?

If you don't call two teams switching (cross-conference!) divisions a "realignment," then Miami could trade divisions with Indy next year and that also wouldn't be a "realignment."  That's absurd.

Whatever term you want to use for what everyone else calls a realignment, the NFL does not do it when teams move.  To your point, two teams LEFT LA in the same offseason and the NFL did not realign a damned thing.

[MikeO]

So in your plan where a team moves from the NFC to the AFC (to replace an LA AFC team), where does that NFC team come from?  How is that team not participating in a realignment?

If you don't call two teams switching (cross-conference!) divisions a "realignment," then Miami could trade divisions with Indy next year and that also wouldn't be a "realignment."  That's absurd.

Whatever term you want to use for what everyone else calls a realignment, the NFL does not do it when teams move.  To your point, two teams LEFT LA in the same offseason and the NFL did not realign a damned thing.

dude, let it go. We will see what happens IF 2 teams move to LA. You know my stance, I know yours. We will see who ends up being right and wrong. And the other can say I told you so.

let's not go in circles for a 3rd day on this. It's pointless