I too feel that geography should dictate all, so let me derail this conversation with my proposed NFL realignment divisions
Midwest: Chicago, Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota (keeps Black and Blue Division intact)
Southeast: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa Bay (3 Florida teams lumped with Georgia's sole team)
West Coast: Oakland, San Diego, San Fransisco, Seattle (3 Cali teams with Seattle; like this more than giving them Arizona and putting Seattle in with DEN, DAL and HOU)
Southwest: Arizona, Dallas, Houston, New Orleans (Two Texas teams in same division, all warmer weather teams keeps things pretty fair come winter and I hear Texas and Louisiana don't like each other)
Central: Denver, Indianapolis, Kansas City, St. Louis (Puts Missouri teams together, wouldn't be horribly upset to swap New Orleans with Denver but I prefer keeping Bronco-Chief rivalry in tact)
New England: Buffalo, New England, New York Giants, New York Jets (3 New York teams and Boston are most the four teams all in one corner, pretty easy)
Atlantic: Baltimore, Carolina, Tennessee, Washington (Maryland teams together, basically the other two were remainders)
Rust Belt: Cincinnati, Cleveland, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh (Has AFC North gain Philly, and people from Philly hate everyone, but particularly people from these three cities. Added bonus: someone gets a rusty belt and its kept by the division winner each year)
You may say "Euro, why are you wasting our time with this?" but I say anyone who starts threads based on what they're crossing their fingers and hoping for's time is pretty worthless to begin with. Also, Goodell doesn't have to deal with any team's gaining extra game exemptions due to being non-continental, the McNaughton owners, or a Southern school nobody seems to want, so I'd say that this has a better chance of passing than the proposed alignment that started this thread.