cF[Authentic]
southpaw
You've got Baltimore twice (East & North) and are missing Indianapolis. I'd imagine they're a better fit geographically for the north.
TN and Pitt could be swapped to keep some rivalries for the old AFC North.
Regardless, it's a stupid idea to base a league on geography because 1) teams move and 2) you're locking yourself in to future expansion locations. If you expand by 4 teams you have to space it out evenly or now you're moving teams to a random other division. When St. Louis and San Diego come back and you add in San Antonio and Portland where do these teams go? I guess KC loses all of their rivals to join the North? But St. Louis fits that area better. Do they both join and Pitt gets kicked to the East? SA joins the south is the only easy one if you add 4.
TN and Pitt could be swapped to keep some rivalries for the old AFC North.
Regardless, it's a stupid idea to base a league on geography because 1) teams move and 2) you're locking yourself in to future expansion locations. If you expand by 4 teams you have to space it out evenly or now you're moving teams to a random other division. When St. Louis and San Diego come back and you add in San Antonio and Portland where do these teams go? I guess KC loses all of their rivals to join the North? But St. Louis fits that area better. Do they both join and Pitt gets kicked to the East? SA joins the south is the only easy one if you add 4.
Last edited:
