Could the Arizona Cardinals end up in the AFC West?

[Cheesebeef]

I agree with this. Only negative to me in moving to the AFC would be dealing with Tom Brady and Big Ben in the playoffs and that era is nearly over as well.

Add to that is it would even out the AFC and NFC from a competitive standpoint fairly quickly.

not only that... but our "rivalries" just aren't really rivalries. The Niners-Seahaws was a brief rivalry. Those teams hated each other and had to fight through each other to both get to the Super Bowl. The Niners-Rams rivalry is one steeped in tradition. We really don't have anything like that. We won ONE big game against the Hawks in the last three years, but I don't get any feeling that that team or their fans give us a second thought. The Niners have the Rams and Seahags. That leaves us with... the Rams... because... they are in the city we used to be in? That's ancient history and no one gives a crap about that either.

as Cardinals fans WE probably think there's a rivalry with teams, but considering we haven't flip flopped division titles or played any of those teams in the playoffs, much less even won a playoff game in 5 years means we're the easiest candidate to ship off.

 

[Cardsfanstl]

It's very rare that a team jumps conferences...I don't see it happening at all

It was one thing to move us from the NFC East to the West...made sense

Even with the Rams moving to LA there is no need to switch things up.

I'd bet the house that everything stays put.

SD and Oak cannot be in the same conference and share a stadium. So one of them has to go.

 

[HeavyB3]

I read something like this months ago that suggested the Raiders were willing to move to the NFC West and the likely team to go to the AFC West was Seattle, because of their history in the NFC. Although, if we get moved to the AFC and win the AFC championship, how many teams can say they won conference championships in both conferences?

 

[HeavyB3]

SD and Oak cannot be in the same conference and share a stadium. So one of them has to go.

Yep.

 

[Matt L]

I remember when we first moved from the NFC East to the NFC West, Bill Bidwill made statements that the team should not leave because of the historic rivalries with the Cowboys, Eagles and Giants. I am pretty sure everyone in the national media rolled their eyes at that statement. Ultimately, I believe the re-alignment worked in our favor as we don't have as many east coast (early) games to play each year.

For those that are adamantly against a change in conference I have to wonder if you think there is a difference between the NFC and AFC. I know historically the NFC was the establishment and the AFC was the upstart conference that shook up the league but that was 40-50 years ago. I don't believe that those traditions hold up.

Ultimately, I would not be opposed to it.

 

[unseenaz]

SD and Oak cannot be in the same conference and share a stadium. So one of them has to go.

Why not?

 

[AZCrazy]

Send the Chargers to St Louis, and get the Rams back where they belong.

I feel bad for San Diego. Lost their hockey team, lost their basketball team to LA, now the football team wants
to go too. I, for one, would much rather be in San Diego any day.

 

[kerouac9]

SD and Oak cannot be in the same conference and share a stadium. So one of them has to go.

Why not?

Television.

Due to the league's television deals, with NFC games being televised by FOX and AFC games on CBS, two teams in the same market can not be in the same conference.

Both networks are going to want access to the LA market, but if both teams were in the AFC, roughly 75% of the games would be CBS exclusives.

 

[daves]

SD and Oak cannot be in the same conference and share a stadium. So one of them has to go.

Why not?

Television.

Both networks are going to want access to the LA market, but if both teams were in the AFC, roughly 75% of the games would be CBS exclusives.

What I have never understood is why the TV contracts have to be divvied up based on the conferences. Why couldn't the NFL simply divide the teams equally into two groups based on market size and distribution that have nothing to do with the conferences?! It's asinine that TV contracts would be a factor resulting in teams switching conferences.

I have also always been baffled by the fact that the conference of the ROAD team determines the broadcaster of interconference games. It would make so much more sense for the conference (or arbitrary assignment) of the HOME team to determine the broadcaster. Then the networks could permanently keep equipment at their assigned teams' stadia, rather than having to move it to follow their assigned teams on the road, while some other network moves their equipment into their home team's stadium. Seems like a logistical hassle and wasted expense.

...dbs

 

[BigRedRage]

I remember when we first moved from the NFC East to the NFC West, Bill Bidwill made statements that the team should not leave because of the historic rivalries with the Cowboys, Eagles and Giants. I am pretty sure everyone in the national media rolled their eyes at that statement. Ultimately, I believe the re-alignment worked in our favor as we don't have as many east coast (early) games to play each year.

For those that are adamantly against a change in conference I have to wonder if you think there is a difference between the NFC and AFC. I know historically the NFC was the establishment and the AFC was the upstart conference that shook up the league but that was 40-50 years ago. I don't believe that those traditions hold up.

Ultimately, I would not be opposed to it.

I dont like watching CBS broadcasts for some reason vs Fox.

 

[kerouac9]

What I have never understood is why the TV contracts have to be divvied up based on the conferences. Why couldn't the NFL simply divide the teams equally into two groups based on market size and distribution that have nothing to do with the conferences?! It's asinine that TV contracts would be a factor resulting in teams switching conferences.

I have also always been baffled by the fact that the conference of the ROAD team determines the broadcaster of interconference games. It would make so much more sense for the conference (or arbitrary assignment) of the HOME team to determine the broadcaster. Then the networks could permanently keep equipment at their assigned teams' stadia, rather than having to move it to follow their assigned teams on the road, while some other network moves their equipment into their home team's stadium. Seems like a logistical hassle and wasted expense.

...dbs

Because FOX wants to broadcast Pats and Steelers games--and they have a greater opportunity if they get to travel to Foxborough. CBS wants to broadcast Packers and Cowboys games--and they more opportunity if they travel to Dallas and Green Bay.

 

[CardLogic]

This whole idea will never come to fruition.

The Rams will be moving back to LA, putting a NFC team in that city. Any other team that moves to LA will be an AFC team. Problem solved.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

This whole idea will never come to fruition.

The Rams will be moving back to LA, putting a NFC team in that city. Any other team that moves to LA will be an AFC team. Problem solved.

The real question is - does LA deserve TWO teams? Not in my opinion. Just move the Rams back there and leave the other teams alone.

 

[Cardiac]

The real question is - does LA deserve TWO teams? Not in my opinion. Just move the Rams back there and leave the other teams alone.

I agree with this.

 

[daves]

Because FOX wants to broadcast Pats and Steelers games--and they have a greater opportunity if they get to travel to Foxborough. CBS wants to broadcast Packers and Cowboys games--and they more opportunity if they travel to Dallas and Green Bay.

That argument makes absolutely no sense. Each network could broadcast exactly the same number of games of teams from the other conference if they did so when those teams visited teams from their own conference.

It would make much more sense for Fox to broadcast Pats games when the Pats visit an NFC team, than when an NFC team visits the Pats (because they could just keep their equipment at the NFC stadium all season long - or at least they could store it nearby and would be extremely familiar with the logistics of setting things up in the NFC stadium, rather than having to ship it to unfamiliar AFC stadia for every NFC road game).

...dbs

 

[Matt L]

The real question is - does LA deserve TWO teams? Not in my opinion. Just move the Rams back there and leave the other teams alone.

You must be registered for see images

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

I think SD will stay and the Rams and Raiders will end up in LA. That will cause an issue because I'm sure the NFL will want a team in St. Louis.

Maybe they expand by two teams and add a team in St. Louis and somewhere like San Antonio. Either that or move a current team, like Jacksonville, to St. Louis.

If I'm in St. Louis, I'd rather have an expansion team than a transplanted team.

 

[BullheadCardFan]

Just move the Rams back there and leave the other teams alone.

+1

 

[BigRedRage]

I think SD will stay and the Rams and Raiders will end up in LA. That will cause an issue because I'm sure the NFL will want a team in St. Louis.

Maybe they expand by two teams and add a team in St. Louis and somewhere like San Antonio. Either that or move a current team, like Jacksonville, to St. Louis.

If I'm in St. Louis, I'd rather have an expansion team than a transplanted team.

The problem with expanding two teams is you would have to have two divisions with 5 teams.

 

[az jam]

The Cards are not going to move out of the NFC West.

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

The real question is - does LA deserve TWO teams? Not in my opinion. Just move the Rams back there and leave the other teams alone.

I agree with this.

Me too.

 

[JCSunsfan]

I can see why some might suggest this. The Cardinals really have no significant blood-fued rivals. The closest thing is SF and that really is mild these days.

 

[az jam]

NFL owners would not force Cards to move unless Michael Bidwill agreed to it. The Cards have always been an NFC team. Don't see that changing. However as a season ticket holder, I could live with it. Better than losing my team which may be happening to San Diego, Oakland and St Louis fans.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I could see LA supporting the Rams... or the Raiders if ONE of them came here, but not both the Raiders AND the Chargers. The double up option is one too many teams, especially since one of them already has a large fan base here. No one in LA gives a crap about the Chargers and if they got the Raiders, that would become painfully obvious in attendance.

 

[Vermont Maverick]

Assuming the Rams stay in St. Louis, another reason that the Rams should move is because both KC and St. Louis are in Missouri. A natural rivalry if you ask me.