How NFL Expansion Will Happen By Anthony Durham July 08, 2014 10:07 pm The (pending) sale of the Clippers should've made Goddell and every owner of an NFL team start salivating. If basketball, infinitely less popular than the NFL, can have a franchise sell for $2 billion, what could an expansion team get?$3 billion. And that might be low. According to Forbes Magazine from last summer, the average NFL team is worth $1.17 billion with the Dallas Cowboys coming in at $2.3 billion. The Clippers, prior to their sale, were valued at $575 million.So yeah, $3 billion.
One last piece of evidence. The lowly Jaguars, who have a lot of debt, a stadium they can't fill, and the 24th-largest metropolitan in an area affectionately termed "South Georgia", sold for $770 million two and a half years (and numerous, big-time TV deals) ago.NFL expansion would be printing money.However, the manner in which it was done would have to be measured and appropriate as to not disrupt current markets or the established balance of the league.The Number of Teams to Add.As it stands now, there are 32 teams divided across 8, four-team divisions. In order to keep some balance, the league would have to increase by four. Increasing by one or three would leave an odd number and screw up scheduling, increasing by two would not divide properly as 17 and 2 are the only factors of 34. Leaving 36 as the only option.Also, a 36-team league would allow Goddell and company to have the two things they want most:1) 18-game schedule. As previously mentioned, adding four teams would allow the NFL to keep its convenient scheduling matrix as well as providing balance in the divisions. By adding four teams, the current alignment would move to six divisions (three divisions per conference) of six teams. A team would play their division foes twice (10) + the team that finished in the same position they did the previous season in the other two divisions in their conference (2) + six teams from the corresponding division in the other conference (6) = 18.2) Expanded play-offs Currently, only six teams from each conference qualify for the play-offs, which is 38% of the league. A number which is less than the NBA and NHL (both 53%), but more than baseball (33%). With an expanded team pool, adding two more teams (another wild card spot for each conference) would keep the current 38% mark and wouldn't alter the nature of the play-offs. Currently, the top, two division winners receive a BYE week. In the expanded play-offs, only the top seed would receive one. The fight for the lone BYE would keep teams from resting star players toward the end of the season as well as an extra, Wild Card spot creates more drama at the season's conclusion.Where the new teams will go.The obvious...
There should be two teams in the Los Angeles area.One should play chiefly in the LA-proper. The proposed Farmer's Field would be ideal. Alternatively, there's a lot of space around Dodgers Stadium and The Coliseum and Rose Bowl aren't exactly dumps and, as part of the ownership agreement, the league should foot upgrading costs. The league wouldn't mind because this team would sell for around $3 billion. The other team should play in Anaheim (Hey, Angels Stadium), somewhere else in Orange County, or somewhere further north (Santa Barbara would be as far north as would be practical). If the league really wanted to be greedy/jerks, they could just Meadowland the two teams somewhere. But I don't think that would fly on the West Coast where space isn't so much at a premium. Losing the prime real estate would effect the sale, but not drastically, I could see Steve Ballmer or Magic Johnson crew doubling up and dropping $2.25 billon.This might seem hard to support two, brand new teams. But, according to the census, LA + Anaheim + Santa Barbara = 14.5 million people. Even splitting that in two would leave each franchise with the fourth, largest market in the league/country.Now, where could the other teams go (probably selling between $1.8-2 billion)No Way...London: Until we invent a way to get from NYC to London in an hour, this will never happen. It's a logistical nightmare in every sense of the word (How would they try-out new players in season with such a huge trip?, When would their games air?, How would you convince west coast teams this was a good idea?, etc.).Outside shots...
South Jersey: After NYC and LA, Chicago and Houston are the next, largest metropolitan areas. Due to tradition and Jerry Jones needing to fill his terrordome, respectively, those two cities are out as possible expansion targets. The next largest metropolitan area is Philadelphia. New Jersey, has a regional rivalry with Philly (seriously, every Eagles fan from NJ is begrudgingly so), is the most population dense state and, with the population of nearby Delaware rising by the year, a great fit. However, getting the land and parking space will cost an outrageous amount in addition to the leagues' concerns about being so close to Atlantic City.Austin: The nation's 11th largest market falls in a turf dispute between the Texans and Cowboys and is more of a college football and artsy capital, anyway.Louisville: The nation's 28th-largest market already has a built in affinity for football, but, in addition to the Bengals and Colts crying bloody murder, the train wreck that is the St. Louis Rams serves as a cautionary tale about expansion to the Rust BeltLas Vegas: The nation's 30th largest market offers a lot of glitz and sparkle, but the concerns of gambling connections and the desert heat may be a little too much even for a league as hypocritical as the NFL.Solid Options...
San Antonio: The nation's seven largest market would be a great landing spot, but Lord Jerry of the House Jones would never let that happen. The Rains of Alamodome would be a catchy song.Toronto: The combination of Drake and Rob Ford and the NFL would be amazing and it would serve as the league's, third largest market and start the global domination the league seems set on. Though, like Austin, Toronto isn't exactly the most football-rich city (their tailgating laws ruffled some and the Argonauts aren't exactly selling the Rogers Centre out) and a team there may effectivly murder football in Buffalo.Mexico City: While 8.9 million people would be awfully tempting for NFL suits along with the sheer ridiculousness of exchange rate, but what happens the first time a key player's kid ends up on a real-life reenactment of "Man on Fire"? They'd never sign a decent free agent again.Portland: The 29th-largest metropolitan area in America has seen itself blow up in recent years. Even if they don't exactly have a pedigree as a "football town" (I can't remember the last decent prospect to come from the state) and nearby Seattle is the toast of the town, the Rose City is one of the fastest growing cities in America. But it's topped by...Oklahoma City: The 27th largest metropolitan area in America seemed like a weird landing spot for the Sonics eight years ago, but it's been nothing but sweet living sense. OKC loves football just as much (if not more) than basketball.So, if I had to bet on the other two expansion cities? I'd guess Oklahoma City and Portland. If only to add a regional balance, as the league is exceedingly East Coast heavy at present.Your new divisions (with respect to rivalries first and geographic-correctness second):AFCEastNew EnglandBuffaloMiamiNY JetsBaltimoreJacksonvilleCentralPittsburghIndianapolisOklahoma CityClevelandCincinnatiTennesseeWestHoustonLADenverOaklandKCSan DiegoNFCEastPhiladelphiaNY GiantsWashingtonAtlantaDallasTampa BayCentralMinnesotaGreen BayChicagoCarolinaDetroitNew OrleansWestSan FranciscoSt. LouisArizonaLA2SeattlePortlandlink
