For many years, I always thought about why it seemed like the divisions of the NFL have been so geographically awkward. Being born in the 1980’s, I can remember the times when the NFL had only three divisions per conference: the Central (now North), East and West. There was no South. For the last several years dating back to 1995, with the expansions of the Texans, the Titans, the Ravens, the “new” Browns, the Jaguars and the Panthers, the divisions have been even with 4 teams each. However, there always seemed to be something out of place. Some time ago, I came across an article from Bleacher Report that echoed those same thoughts and put it into perspective. (See the article here.)

The fact that the teams in each division for the most part don’t even regionally match up from their rivals, it personally scrambles my brain. The reason why the NFL at the time decided to align it in the way that they have was so they could keep the old longtime rivalries in place while maintaining a balance. Maybe being the geographical nerd that I am, I find it slightly irritating. Don’t get me wrong, being a Midwestern native, I totally love watching the “Black and Blue Division” rumble it out twice a year (when it’s actually competitive). But I always hated the fact that the Tampa Bay Buccaneers would play Detroit, Chicago, Green Bay and Minnesota…..when they are NOWHERE near the north!

When I came back across this article, I thought, “Hey, why don’t I actually make a visual of this realignment idea?”

Just like the B/R article explains, the teams would be realigned in the order of the closest proximities of all the division rivals. The only one they truly did seem to get absolutely right is the NFC North. The AFC North would keep both Ohio teams and Pittsburgh as it is today, but taking out Baltimore and adding Indianapolis. The NFC and AFC South would dramatically change, along with others by actually taking some teams out of their old conference, and in the real case of Seattle when they did this back in 2002, send them BACK to the former conference division. In short, it would be as follows:

AFC North: Addition: (Indianapolis) Release: (Baltimore)
AFC South: Additions (Dallas, New Orleans) Releases (Jacksonville, Indianapolis)
NFC South: Additions (Miami, Jacksonville) Releases (New Orleans, Carolina)
AFC East: Addition (New York Giants) Release (Miami)
NFC East: Additions (Baltimore, Carolina) Releases (Dallas, New York Giants)
AFC West: Additions (San Francisco, Seattle) Releases (Denver, Kansas City)
NFC West: Additions (Denver, Kansas City) Releases (San Francisco, Seattle)

By regional terms, it would clearly make travel for divisional games a lot simpler to manage as well as bring in some extra competition to the fanbases of each city. Unfortunately this would very likely never pass through, because NFL purists will loudly say no to this. Why? Because seeing historic rivalries like a Dallas/Washington, an Atlanta/New Orleans, a Kansas City/Oakland or a Philadelphia/NY Giants are blockbuster games every single year. Those games bring out the biggest fanatics in football, and for that, it would make all the sense in the world to keep the divisions as is, so you’re guaranteed those games. However, at the same time, would you not like to see the Battle of Missouri (Kansas City/St. Louis), the Florida Wars (Miami/Tampa Bay), or the Texas Showdown (Dallas/Houston)? Those would be nice to see, even despite it could possibly never happen.

To conclude this, this is not in any way saying the old rivalries should go away. This is just a simple “What If….?” scenario that MIGHT could take place like the NBA and MLB have done with their divisions? Either way, it’s all wishful thinking, but hey, one can dream, right?