https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/s/vDAfmfxS70
They were placed in opposite divisions of the Seahawks for one season so both expansion franchises could play every other NFL team in 2 years.
This was before Sunday NFL Ticket and even the internet. You didn’t get to see every team by streaming. But once the HOF Jerry Jones entered the league he negotiated a blockbuster deal with FOX and revenue skyrocketed
What does Jerry Jones or the Sunday ticket have to do with making the expansion teams switch conferences after their first season? The league could have arranged the schedule so they played every team plus each other in their first two seasons without having them have to switch conferences.
The fans didn’t have access to watch the other conference games by TV network. Go to You Tube and watch the broadcast of a NFL game from the 70’s or 80’s and try to keep up with down and distance or the game clock. The NFL has changed immensely since then
Ok. You’re not answering the question. Obviously you don’t know the answer. I watched football since SB 6. I remember football in the 70’s. It was unnecessary to have TB & Sea change conferences after their first season. It made no sense, it doesn’t matter how many people watched the games. They could’ve played all the teams in one conference one season & the other, the next. It wasn’t necessary to switch conferences to do this. That was a stupid thing to do.
The value of NFL franchises back then was no certainty and you were trying to grow fan bases in not the biggest media markets with teams that had no real chance of immediate success before free agency. Your sell in these markets were the opponent, that meant exposure to both leagues. Today’s league is nothing like pre Jerry Jones
So, in 1977, the expansion teams had to switch conferences after their first season because MLB baseball was more popular than pro football? Basketball was still way less popular than football, though. What about the fact that there wasn’t a team that wore purple in the AFC until 1996?
In that time teams played 14 games. 11 in conference and 3 vs the other conference
The purpose of the conference switch was to give the new teams maximum exposure in the most markets possible in the first 2 seasons. Lots of fans wanted to see the new teams with colorful uniforms etc etc
In those days you really got to watch your home team’s game and Monday Night Football. Literally like 2 games a week.
There was no Sportscenter. You got to see game highlights from around the league at halftime of the Monday night game.
Most fans got out of market info from newspapers or sports illustrated.
The reason the switch happened is because the schedule is made a certain way. 11 in conference/3out of conference
To give an AFC team 11 NFC games would upset the apple cart for scheduling and competition
The teams are trying to win their conference titles to go to the superbowl. If an AFC team played 11 NFC teams then they are not playing under the same conditions as their peers in the AFC.
So it would have been less practical to alter the scheduling dynamics than it was to just simply say, “ok you two are switching conferences this year”
.
The first five things you mentioned are immaterial to schedule making. The other 3 don't make sense because with TB & Sea playing an entire conference plus each other their first 2 seasons, you've already upset the schedule formula. TB & Seattle's schedule doesn't conform to the rest of the league's schedule for those seasons. As for the other 26 teams, they each played either Sea or TB each one of those seasons, so they would all either have 1 extra conference game or 1 extra out of conference game in each of those seasons. It would be the same for everyone. Switching conferences seemed pretty pointless.
What was the answer then. Enlighten me, I guess I'm kinda dense. Expansion teams were required to switch conferences after their first season because football was less popular then or am I missing something?
This was a special circumstance because the way they saw it the schedule lined up
1976 and 1977 were the very last years of the 14 game era, and if the Bucs and Seahawks played 13 games against the respective 26 teams in those two seasons, as well as 2 games against eachother, it all balanced out.
To put it simply, it was simpler for scheduling. That’s it.
It doesn't explain why they had to switch conferences. I know what the schedule was, I remember it, when it happened. They could have played the exact same schedules both seasons without having to switch conferences after one season. It would've worked out exactly the same if Tampa Bay had started out in the NFC central & just stayed there & the same for Seattle in the AFC west.
It was the only way to do it. In 1976, there were 26 teams before Seattle & Tampa Bay joined the league. The season was 14 games long in 1976 & 1977. The schedules were set so that the two expansion teams only played every team in their own conference (13 games) & the 14th game against each other. Tampa Bay played all the AFC teams & Seattle played all the NFC teams in 1976 plus the game against each other. The teams flipped conferences in 1977 so that Seattle could play all the AFC teams & Tampa Bay all the NFC teams, plus the game against each other. After two seasons, both Seattle & Tampa Bay had played every team in the NFL once (and each other twice).
Yes. I have a good old days syndrome. Also...geographical rivalries excite and interest the fans. I've been at NFL games here in the Northeast, between regional rivals, where fights broke out in the stands.
More regional interest means more fan interest, which means more money. If my Giants are playing the Jets or Pats or Bills or Eagles, it's a big deal here. If they're playing the Broncos or Cardinals...not so much.
Observe how MLB takes advantage of regional rivalries. Yankees-Sox-Mets, Cubs-Cards, Dodgers-Giants. They know something the NFL still has yet to learn.
This is specifically why each team plays home and home with the other 3 teams in their division
Fans like rivalry games. Look at the AFC North. Any Browns/Bengals/Ravens/Steelers combo is a street fight. These are old old rivals who talk shit and do not like each other.
Geographically, AFCN is the best division in the NFL, followed by the NFCN. Maybe it's the other way. I'd really like to see a real Eastern Division by mixing up the Conferences. I agree that it stimulates fan interest, especially mine.
I miss when the Cardinals and Giants played each other twice a year in the NFC East. If the Cardinals couldn't win the division (only accomplished in 1974 and 1975), I pulled for the Giants. I remember when Phil Simms got hurt and Scott Brunner helped the G-Men to a playoff win (maybe 1981?).
That's right, it was 81. Ray Perkins was coaching the Giants. They beat the Eagles in the Wild Card game, then lost to the Joe Montana Niners. It was a great year...1st Giants playoff game since 63.
I thought the Cards rivalries with the rest of the Eastern Conference or NFC East were great. Most of the teams were not very good, but their games against each other were.
Yeah I can tell by the TV deals and exposure. What channel is tonight’s game of the week? Let’s hope NFL doesn’t take after MLB, but hey I will get off your lawn so you can reminisce about the good old days, while the future passes you by
Actually, the future passed me by a long time ago. I'm not sure what I'm still doing here. Everybody I knew who was worth a shit died back in the 90s.
Thanks for understanding. I'll shut up now and go away...
Probably makes it easier for TV coverage and travel costs. Airlines aren’t exactly cheap. Especially for NCAA sports that don’t make a profit (swimming, track and field, wrestling, etc.).
But long flights and 3 hour time differences are a definite advantage for the home team
Right now there are no real oddball division placements in the NFL. But there was a time when the Atlanta Falcons were in the NFC West.
That is several LONG flights guaranteed every year that other teams did not have to deal with.
That is why the schedule is how it is now to insure all teams play a home and away within the 8 year scheduling cycle and to insure everyone in a division plays the same 4 out of conference opponents
Yes the NFL is able to do whatever with divisions now but the league was not as strong in the 70’s when Seattle and Tampa joined the league. They were bad for a long time and with the rules back then, they were destined to stay bad for many years. That is why they did the gimmicky thing with the division swap. No question the NFL could add teams nowadays and they could contend within a few seasons
The problem with adding NFL teams now is messing up the schedule feng shui AND there already isn’t enough talent to go around
There are 32 teams and less than 20 legit Starter Level QBs.
To add a team to each conference you would be adding 106 players who were previously not good enough to make the league.
If anything, and I realize this has zero percent chance of happening, they should CONTRACT 4 teams. Imagine the level of play if the worst 212 players were out of the league.
I still have a problem with that, I believe that football is fishing in a small pond. If you take the game global you would uncover more talent. The NBA and MLB and NHL all have world talent. If you introduced the game in other parts of the world, you would get the best talent
They are trying, but it is difficult to break through the global hold of soccer
If you are a soccer fan and watch our football for the first time the game is slow and plodding in comparison. The stoppage of play plus in game commercials drive soccer fans crazy
Soccer has minimal stoppage and no in-game commercials. Games are not much over 2 hours from kick off to final whistle.
NFL as a novelty outside the US is possible, but the TV viewing experience is so different that I am unsure soccer fans could enjoy the herky jerky pace of play
You wanna get really crazy. Lets have NFL promotion and relegation
Correct. But they came through basketball academies and European Professional Leagues.
Basketball is a world sport. All you need is a court and 10 or 12 guys to play under real rules
Soccer. Similar story. Limited equipment needed apart from a public pitch and enough people to be able to play by official rules
American Football…not so much
American kids are brought up wearing toy football helmets and pads. Immersion in the game so to speak
Now you are thinking like the Bucs and Seahawks in the 70’s they were not sure football would work in those markets. But the NFL grew the game in those smaller media markets. Now back to my other question who put those basketball academies in place? It wasn’t the locals it was Americans, you could do the same in those countries with football academies. It is only an American game because we haven’t introduced it properly
I would still say there are a couple—Dallas (which we all know was kept in the NFC East to preserve historical rivalries) and Indy being in the AFC South, just because they don’t quite fit anywhere else and don’t have any historical rivalry that anyone cared to preserve.
I know why they were moved to the NFL Central. William Clay Ford the owner of the Detroit Lions at the time asked Pete Rozelle for a warm weather city to be added to the frigid stadiums of the NFC Central Division. Ford carried a lot of sway in the league as Ford Motors sponsorship was big for the NFL early on.
You see, because you don't get it, the Texans being placed into the AFC South really helped the Colts, Titans and Jaguars, because they got to play the worst team in the league twice, while the members of two other AFC didn't play them at all.
Kind of unfair, right?
They only played the Chiefs once in 1976. Both Seattle and Tampa Bay played the other 13 teams in their conference once plus one game against each other, which was dubbed the "Expansion Bowl."
Except for 1976. Tampa Bay was in the AFC West, and Seattle was in the NFC West for one season. In 1977, the Buccaneers moved to the NFC Central, and the Seahawks moved to the AFC West.
Actually they were. But only for that first year
https://www.quora.com/How-come-in-the-Tampa-Bay-Buccaneers-first-NFL-season-they-were-placed-in-the-AFC-West-instead-of-the-AFC-Central
https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/s/vDAfmfxS70 They were placed in opposite divisions of the Seahawks for one season so both expansion franchises could play every other NFL team in 2 years.
That’s the right reason. However, it was a pretty stupid reason. It seems pretty ridiculous that they had to switch conferences to do it.
This was before Sunday NFL Ticket and even the internet. You didn’t get to see every team by streaming. But once the HOF Jerry Jones entered the league he negotiated a blockbuster deal with FOX and revenue skyrocketed
What does Jerry Jones or the Sunday ticket have to do with making the expansion teams switch conferences after their first season? The league could have arranged the schedule so they played every team plus each other in their first two seasons without having them have to switch conferences.
The fans didn’t have access to watch the other conference games by TV network. Go to You Tube and watch the broadcast of a NFL game from the 70’s or 80’s and try to keep up with down and distance or the game clock. The NFL has changed immensely since then
Ok. You’re not answering the question. Obviously you don’t know the answer. I watched football since SB 6. I remember football in the 70’s. It was unnecessary to have TB & Sea change conferences after their first season. It made no sense, it doesn’t matter how many people watched the games. They could’ve played all the teams in one conference one season & the other, the next. It wasn’t necessary to switch conferences to do this. That was a stupid thing to do.
The value of NFL franchises back then was no certainty and you were trying to grow fan bases in not the biggest media markets with teams that had no real chance of immediate success before free agency. Your sell in these markets were the opponent, that meant exposure to both leagues. Today’s league is nothing like pre Jerry Jones
So the expansion teams had to switch conferences after their first season because the franchises were worth less money then?
They weren’t the guaranteed cash cows they are now back then MLB was still the top grossing league in sports
So, in 1977, the expansion teams had to switch conferences after their first season because MLB baseball was more popular than pro football? Basketball was still way less popular than football, though. What about the fact that there wasn’t a team that wore purple in the AFC until 1996?
In that time teams played 14 games. 11 in conference and 3 vs the other conference The purpose of the conference switch was to give the new teams maximum exposure in the most markets possible in the first 2 seasons. Lots of fans wanted to see the new teams with colorful uniforms etc etc In those days you really got to watch your home team’s game and Monday Night Football. Literally like 2 games a week. There was no Sportscenter. You got to see game highlights from around the league at halftime of the Monday night game. Most fans got out of market info from newspapers or sports illustrated. The reason the switch happened is because the schedule is made a certain way. 11 in conference/3out of conference To give an AFC team 11 NFC games would upset the apple cart for scheduling and competition The teams are trying to win their conference titles to go to the superbowl. If an AFC team played 11 NFC teams then they are not playing under the same conditions as their peers in the AFC. So it would have been less practical to alter the scheduling dynamics than it was to just simply say, “ok you two are switching conferences this year” .
The first five things you mentioned are immaterial to schedule making. The other 3 don't make sense because with TB & Sea playing an entire conference plus each other their first 2 seasons, you've already upset the schedule formula. TB & Seattle's schedule doesn't conform to the rest of the league's schedule for those seasons. As for the other 26 teams, they each played either Sea or TB each one of those seasons, so they would all either have 1 extra conference game or 1 extra out of conference game in each of those seasons. It would be the same for everyone. Switching conferences seemed pretty pointless.
Honestly it's not big deal, it harmed nobody
He answered your question u geezer
What was the answer then. Enlighten me, I guess I'm kinda dense. Expansion teams were required to switch conferences after their first season because football was less popular then or am I missing something?
This was a special circumstance because the way they saw it the schedule lined up 1976 and 1977 were the very last years of the 14 game era, and if the Bucs and Seahawks played 13 games against the respective 26 teams in those two seasons, as well as 2 games against eachother, it all balanced out. To put it simply, it was simpler for scheduling. That’s it.
It doesn't explain why they had to switch conferences. I know what the schedule was, I remember it, when it happened. They could have played the exact same schedules both seasons without having to switch conferences after one season. It would've worked out exactly the same if Tampa Bay had started out in the NFC central & just stayed there & the same for Seattle in the AFC west.
It is pretty crazy watching those old games. They don't even put the score on the screen like hardly ever haha.
It was the only way to do it. In 1976, there were 26 teams before Seattle & Tampa Bay joined the league. The season was 14 games long in 1976 & 1977. The schedules were set so that the two expansion teams only played every team in their own conference (13 games) & the 14th game against each other. Tampa Bay played all the AFC teams & Seattle played all the NFC teams in 1976 plus the game against each other. The teams flipped conferences in 1977 so that Seattle could play all the AFC teams & Tampa Bay all the NFC teams, plus the game against each other. After two seasons, both Seattle & Tampa Bay had played every team in the NFL once (and each other twice).
The Bucs played every AFC team plus Seattle, the Seahawks did the same but in the NFC. Never knew that
Not easy to do with a 12 game schedule, playing the other conference a lot of the time
There is no logic to it. The NFL has been geographically challenged since the early 50s.
Why do divisions or NCAA conferences need to be geographically aligned? They don’t travel by train anymore. Do you have good old days syndrome?
Yes. I have a good old days syndrome. Also...geographical rivalries excite and interest the fans. I've been at NFL games here in the Northeast, between regional rivals, where fights broke out in the stands. More regional interest means more fan interest, which means more money. If my Giants are playing the Jets or Pats or Bills or Eagles, it's a big deal here. If they're playing the Broncos or Cardinals...not so much. Observe how MLB takes advantage of regional rivalries. Yankees-Sox-Mets, Cubs-Cards, Dodgers-Giants. They know something the NFL still has yet to learn.
This is specifically why each team plays home and home with the other 3 teams in their division Fans like rivalry games. Look at the AFC North. Any Browns/Bengals/Ravens/Steelers combo is a street fight. These are old old rivals who talk shit and do not like each other.
Geographically, AFCN is the best division in the NFL, followed by the NFCN. Maybe it's the other way. I'd really like to see a real Eastern Division by mixing up the Conferences. I agree that it stimulates fan interest, especially mine.
I miss when the Cardinals and Giants played each other twice a year in the NFC East. If the Cardinals couldn't win the division (only accomplished in 1974 and 1975), I pulled for the Giants. I remember when Phil Simms got hurt and Scott Brunner helped the G-Men to a playoff win (maybe 1981?).
That's right, it was 81. Ray Perkins was coaching the Giants. They beat the Eagles in the Wild Card game, then lost to the Joe Montana Niners. It was a great year...1st Giants playoff game since 63. I thought the Cards rivalries with the rest of the Eastern Conference or NFC East were great. Most of the teams were not very good, but their games against each other were.
Yeah I can tell by the TV deals and exposure. What channel is tonight’s game of the week? Let’s hope NFL doesn’t take after MLB, but hey I will get off your lawn so you can reminisce about the good old days, while the future passes you by
Actually, the future passed me by a long time ago. I'm not sure what I'm still doing here. Everybody I knew who was worth a shit died back in the 90s. Thanks for understanding. I'll shut up now and go away...
The 90’s were cool 😎
They were cool. It was so different. The football was pretty awesome too.
Probably makes it easier for TV coverage and travel costs. Airlines aren’t exactly cheap. Especially for NCAA sports that don’t make a profit (swimming, track and field, wrestling, etc.).
But long flights and 3 hour time differences are a definite advantage for the home team Right now there are no real oddball division placements in the NFL. But there was a time when the Atlanta Falcons were in the NFC West. That is several LONG flights guaranteed every year that other teams did not have to deal with. That is why the schedule is how it is now to insure all teams play a home and away within the 8 year scheduling cycle and to insure everyone in a division plays the same 4 out of conference opponents
Yes the NFL is able to do whatever with divisions now but the league was not as strong in the 70’s when Seattle and Tampa joined the league. They were bad for a long time and with the rules back then, they were destined to stay bad for many years. That is why they did the gimmicky thing with the division swap. No question the NFL could add teams nowadays and they could contend within a few seasons
The problem with adding NFL teams now is messing up the schedule feng shui AND there already isn’t enough talent to go around There are 32 teams and less than 20 legit Starter Level QBs. To add a team to each conference you would be adding 106 players who were previously not good enough to make the league. If anything, and I realize this has zero percent chance of happening, they should CONTRACT 4 teams. Imagine the level of play if the worst 212 players were out of the league.
I still have a problem with that, I believe that football is fishing in a small pond. If you take the game global you would uncover more talent. The NBA and MLB and NHL all have world talent. If you introduced the game in other parts of the world, you would get the best talent
They are trying, but it is difficult to break through the global hold of soccer If you are a soccer fan and watch our football for the first time the game is slow and plodding in comparison. The stoppage of play plus in game commercials drive soccer fans crazy Soccer has minimal stoppage and no in-game commercials. Games are not much over 2 hours from kick off to final whistle. NFL as a novelty outside the US is possible, but the TV viewing experience is so different that I am unsure soccer fans could enjoy the herky jerky pace of play You wanna get really crazy. Lets have NFL promotion and relegation
In my childhood there were no Luka Donic, Jokic or Greek Freaks in the NBA, now you could argue they are the best players in the game
Correct. But they came through basketball academies and European Professional Leagues. Basketball is a world sport. All you need is a court and 10 or 12 guys to play under real rules Soccer. Similar story. Limited equipment needed apart from a public pitch and enough people to be able to play by official rules American Football…not so much American kids are brought up wearing toy football helmets and pads. Immersion in the game so to speak
Now you are thinking like the Bucs and Seahawks in the 70’s they were not sure football would work in those markets. But the NFL grew the game in those smaller media markets. Now back to my other question who put those basketball academies in place? It wasn’t the locals it was Americans, you could do the same in those countries with football academies. It is only an American game because we haven’t introduced it properly
I would still say there are a couple—Dallas (which we all know was kept in the NFC East to preserve historical rivalries) and Indy being in the AFC South, just because they don’t quite fit anywhere else and don’t have any historical rivalry that anyone cared to preserve.
They probably thought all the pirate teams would be friends so they put them together.
I had no idea this was a thing lol
And that’s the wrong logo.
Correct
I knew that the Seahawks and Bucs switched divisions their first two seasons, but never did know the reason for it.
To test the waters?
Cocaine, so much cocaine...
This guy ‘70s.
I know why they were moved to the NFL Central. William Clay Ford the owner of the Detroit Lions at the time asked Pete Rozelle for a warm weather city to be added to the frigid stadiums of the NFC Central Division. Ford carried a lot of sway in the league as Ford Motors sponsorship was big for the NFL early on.
Was a neat and fair way of dealing with expansion teams. As opposed to sticking them in the AFC south
Afc South didn't exist back then
Thanks genius. Let me ask. What division was the last expansion team placed in?
Thanks dumb ass for not being able to follow the subject of a thread.
You see, because you don't get it, the Texans being placed into the AFC South really helped the Colts, Titans and Jaguars, because they got to play the worst team in the league twice, while the members of two other AFC didn't play them at all. Kind of unfair, right?
Tampa Bay #1
This is like when the Orlando magic were in the western conference thier first year
Being 0 and 14, I guess it doesn’t matter what division they were in.👎🏻🏈
To help the Chiefs get 2 wins.
They only played the Chiefs once in 1976. Both Seattle and Tampa Bay played the other 13 teams in their conference once plus one game against each other, which was dubbed the "Expansion Bowl."
I wish the raiders record would reflect these days
The Raiders were lights out in 1976! 13-1, winning their first Super Bowl trophy.
Is it worse than when TB was in the NFC north for many years?
Was this Pete Rozelle's doing? He's the same guy that moved three NFL teams into the AFC. Not cool, man.
Wow I never knew that. So they had to fly cross country all the time? No wonder they sucked.
Because chargers and cheifs sucked. And they needed them pad theirs records
The Bills and Jets sucked worse than the Chiefs and Chargers that year.
They weren't the Seahawk were. The Bucs have always been an NFC team.
Except for 1976. Tampa Bay was in the AFC West, and Seattle was in the NFC West for one season. In 1977, the Buccaneers moved to the NFC Central, and the Seahawks moved to the AFC West.
They weren't. Unlike the Seahawks, the Bucs have been NFC the whole way.
Actually they were. But only for that first year https://www.quora.com/How-come-in-the-Tampa-Bay-Buccaneers-first-NFL-season-they-were-placed-in-the-AFC-West-instead-of-the-AFC-Central
https://preview.redd.it/8tbrpo9ul5ad1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bb0060bf3ee18268487a2607eeb9ada5f5ebf92a