Several years ago, I analyzed how well the NFL teams are spread across the country. Does the geographic dispersion of teams accurately reflect the same of the population in general?
To start, I compared a simple east-west split at the geographic mean, since there is greater deviation along that access than north-south. There should be 20 of 32 teams east of that point based on population, but in actuality there is 22. Further and further breakdowns (always along the mean in the axis of highest deviation) produced these results.
East vs. West: 22 to 10 (population is closest to 20:12)
In the east, North vs. South: 15 vs. 7 (taking 20 for the east, should be 13:7)
In the west, center west vs. far west: 5 to 5 (from 12, should be 6:6)
East-North-East-East: 3 teams (Pats, Giants, Jets) population would call for 4
East-North-East-West: 4 teams (Bills, Eagles, Skins, Ravens) should be 3
East-North-West-East: 4 teams (Steelers, Browns, Lions, Bengals) should be 3
East-North-West-West: 4 teams (Bears, Packers, Colts, Rams) should be 3
East-South-North: 3 teams (Falcons, Titans, Panthers) should be 4
East-South-South: 4 teams (Bucs, Jags, Dolphins, Saints) should be 3
West-East-North: 3 teams (Broncos, Vikings, Chiefs) as it should be
West-East-South: 2 teams (Cowboys, Texans) should be 3
West-West-East: 2 teams (Cardinals, Chargers) should be 3
West-West-West: 3 teams (Seahawks, 49ers, Raiders) as it should be
So how to make the league better represent where people live? Move the Ravens to New England, the Jaguars to Raleigh or Richmond, the Rams back to Los Angeles, and the Steelers to San Antonio, Albuquerque or Okla. City.
No comments:
Post a Comment