OT : 40 teams

[Simpelton]

Aside from the QB dilution, there would be a serious fan base dilution. Other than St Louis, what American city--even small city--isn't already full of fans for another franchise. Any new American team would be the Chargers, a team with tepid local support.

I suppose they could go international and put teams in London, Mexico City, Pyongyang, Tehran, etc.

all new teams have this problem. That isn't new. The question is can it be overcome in various markets.

I think there's no doubt that San Diego and St. Louis would support new teams. Throw in Portland, Oregon and Oklahoma City which are largish downs with sizeable metropolitan areas and little in terms of major league competition for fan and business partner money and you could probably make it work.

 

[Simpelton]

This league doesn’t have enough talent to make 32 teams competitive.

I disagree. Generally speaking teams that are perennial losers more or less have themselves to blame. It is really, really hard to be elite in the NFL, but it is also not easy to be consistently terrible. If even the Browns can sneak into the playoffs occasionally, talent dilution isn't the biggest problem the league has right now.

There's always going to be teams that are down and out at any given time. When you see parity problems is when it's always the same teams at the bottom. Right now that's not the case, other than a handful of poorly run franchises (JAX, DET) that aren't a parity problem so much as a can't-find-their-butt-with-both-hands-and-a-flashlight problem.

Besides, the biggest problem with your argument is the fact that top GMs like Bill keep finding hidden gems in the UDFA pool. That suggests to me that there are people with the talent level to perform that only lack opportunity, and they get passed over simply because they're surplus to requirement. That's the opposite of a talent dilution problem.