jlog3000

This pic is from one of the topics within the "Concepts" sub-forum:

May anyone guess the closest type of letter/number font of this?

Why did you put Mizzou in every name? Missouri-Columbia is the only school that uses it.

How about "Why not?" as a better question?

And also, it's not much of an idea. Anybody can make a list of all the public schools in a state, nevermind that they're in various division levels.

Besides, this is what this topic is all about, about posting random dream-like pointless conference/league alignments within sports. You're saying it like it's a sin or something. Geez!

Since this is about dream conference posts (pointless or ideal or such), how about a Missouri-only conference of public universities (excluding the Mizzou Tigers)?:

Mizzou State (formerly Southwest Mizzou State)

Mizzou-Kansas City

Mizzou-St. Louis

Mizzou S&T (formerly Mizzou-Rolla)

Truman (formerly Northeast Mizzou State)

Northwest Mizzou State

Southeast Mizzou State

Mizzou Western State

Mizzou Southern State

Cemtral Mizzou

Harris-Stowe State

Lincoln (Mo.)

Even though it won't ever happen, I just wanna know you guys' thoughts about this.

thats just classic Norte Dame I don't think that is really a specific font.

Aww, I see. I've been trying to find it, especially I asked the Notre Dame brand staff (but to no avail since they won't tell it to me anyways). So it's a custom-like typeface (even if it's vintage). Thanks for sharing though.

Any idea of which type of number font is this one?:

Thanks in advance.

How do you know that would've happened?

I was just assuming as if it did happen, RIGHT before the 2012-13 or 2011-12 seasons. I posted this as part of this topic for a reason.

What would have happened to conference realignment during the 2013-14 season, involving the old Big East and the Big XII? It would consist of the following:

Big XII would add Louisville and Cincinnati from old Big East (along with West Virginia), and TCU from the MW:

Big XII North: Kansas, Kansas St., Iowa St., West Virginia, Louisville, Cincinnati

Big XII South: Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., TCU

Old Big East (now AAC) would NOT have lost Syracuse and Pitt (leaving the ACC and the B1G with 12 still); but would have gained Houston, SMU, UCF, Temple, and Memphis:

AAC: Syracuse, Pitt, UConn, USF, Rutgers, Houston, SMU, UCF, Temple, Memphis

Later for 2014-15, the AAC would have a CCG with additions of East Carolina, Tulsa and Tulane (maybe another school like Marshall), and Navy as a fb-only member out of the question:

AAC North: Syracuse, Pitt, UConn, Rutgers, Temple, Marshall, East Carolina

AAC South: Houston, SMU, UCF, USF, Memphis, Tulsa, Tulane

This would leave Maryland still in the ACC, but Notre Dame would be Independent for all sports. In case the ACC needs new members for the 2015-16 season, then it would be Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers (from the AAC) and West Virginia (from the Big XII); after that, the AAC would gain either UAB or Southern Miss, while the Big XII would gain Marshall.

Your thoughts?

The current phoenix suns font

Does not match with my last request.

How about the old Pittsburgh Panthers number font used on their football uniforms back from 1996 to 2004? Any ideas?

Sherwood will get you close.

Looks very close to me, at least on some of the letters/numbers. Thanks.

Does anyone know any fonts that are closer to the one according to this pic?

All I know is that it's been mostly used on some of Notre Dame's athletic sports (i.e.: women's basketball, ice hockey; except men's basketball and football).

This might be a bit pointless, but I'm about to share something interesting. Perhaps this is some serious retrospective dreaming but what if back at the formation of the original Big East football conference instead of the Big East taking the conference under its umbrella the three schools that sponsored the sport at the time (Boston College, Syracuse and Pittsburgh) would have left the league and instead founded a new league with the best of the independents. At the time, those 3 schools only represented 1/3rd of Big East membership and the basketball schools could have flat out said no to the notion of a football league. The new conference might have included:

Boston College

Syracuse

Pittsburgh

Rutgers (from A-10)

Temple (from A-10)

West Virginia (from A-10)

Virginia Tech (from Metro)

Cincinnati (from Metro)

Louisville (from Metro)

Memphis (from Metro)

Miami (FL) (from Indy status)

If a 12th acceptable member could be found, such as East Carolina, then division play and a conference title game could have been in place.

However, if that might had happened, what would be the future of the A-10, the Metro and the old Big East (before adding football) for the 1991-92 season? Would there be a merger between the A-10 and the old Big East to form a basketball-spekked all-sports super-conference?

Take a look at what would have happened with those remaining schools after those leaving their respective conferences:

A-10: Penn St.*, Duquesne, George Washington, UMass*, St. Bonaventure, Rhode Island*, St. Joseph's

Big East (1979-2013): UConn*, Georgetown, Providence, St. John's, Seton Hall, Villanova*

Metro: Tulane*, Southern Miss*; later add UNC-Charlotte, UAB and USF (who would eventually become football-playing schools), and possibly East Carolina* (from the CAA)

By the way, the asterisk means that it's a school with football (FBS or FCS level), just to point that out.

Back with the member list for a Eastern-spekked/based football conference, I would prefer to put Penn St. as the possible 12th member instead of East Carolina; and the divisions would go as follows:

North: Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Penn St., Rutgers, Temple

South: Miami, Memphis, Louisville, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Cincinnati

But if it's East Carolina, then it would be like this:

North: Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Penn St., Rutgers, Temple, Cincinnati

South: Miami, Memphis, Louisville, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, East Carolina

Found this font from some page, but don't know the exact name of it. Just thought I posted it.

Any ideas?

SF Automaton

Ok, thanks. No wonder that font looks legit.

Found this font from some page, but don't know the exact name of it. Just thought I posted it.

Any ideas?

Alabama has used City Bold for a lot of its athletic branding, the same font as the San Francisco picture above.

This wordmark might be unique for basketball alone, just as Texas A&M has its own font for football.

Texas A&M has a unique font too? But for football? Wow! Back to Alabama, this pic I posted was from a women's basketball game worn jersey. The men's basketball jersey's font is similar to what was Maryland men's basketball's font. Like a variation of the Aachen Bold font or such.

Can anyone tell me the name of this font?:

In my opinion, I wish all of Alabama's sports programs should be re-branded under this modern letter/number font, while keeping its traditional colors.

Looks like a heavily modified version of Compacta to me.

I see. But thanks for your help. And I still think that it should be applied to Alabama's athletic program re-branding.

Can anyone tell me the name of this font?:

In my opinion, I wish all of Alabama's sports programs should be re-branded under this modern letter/number font, while keeping its traditional colors.

Since this is the Pointless Realignment sub-forum, I was wondering if I can add a little WNBA flavor by the following:

Eastern Conference:

Atlantic Division:

*Connecticut Sun

*New York Liberty

*Washington Mystics

*Charlotte Sting - returning team

*Miami Tropics - returning team, but renamed

*Orlando Miracle - returning team

Central Division:

*Atlanta Dream

*Chicago Sky

*Indiana Fever

*Cleveland Rockers - returning team

*Detroit Mechanics - returning team, but renamed

*Milwaukee Stallions - expansion team

Western Conference:

Midwest Division:

*Minnesota Lynx

*San Antonio Silver Stars

*Tulsa Shock

*Houston Comets - returning team

*Utah Bluezz - returning team, but renamed

*Dallas Longhorns - expansion team

Pacific Division:

* Los Angeles Sparks

* Phoenix Mercury

* Seattle Storm

* Portland Fire - returning team

* Sacramento Monarchs - returning team

* Bay Area Knights - expansion team

Schedule format:

Division play - 5 x 4 (2 home/2 road) = 20 games

Non-division play - 6 x 2 (1 home/1 road) = 12 games

Non-conference play - 12 x 1 = 12 games [home-and-home basis will rotate per every two years]

Total games: 44

Your thoughts about this guys?

My only thoughts are on the sudden peak of interest in the WNBA for all this to actually happen .

Jokes aside, decent job. Not a big fan of the name Detroit Mechanics for a WNBA team though, seeing as the male demographic dominates in that job industry. I'm just not sure it's a good name to reflect the team.

Alignment wise, excellent.

Thanks. When it comes to alignment and expansion talk, it's the least I can do. And I have to give you credit for acknowledging about the "renamings" like the "Detroit Mechanics". To be honest, I couldn't find anything feminine (but powerful) to mirror/reflect to its NBA counterpart; plus any unique way to de-sync out the Miami Soul, Detroit Shock and Utah Starzz. But at least I'm trying my hardest.

Since this is the Pointless Realignment sub-forum, I was wondering if I can add a little WNBA flavor by the following:

Eastern Conference:

Atlantic Division:

*Connecticut Sun

*New York Liberty

*Washington Mystics

*Charlotte Sting - returning team

*Miami Tropics - returning team, but renamed

*Orlando Miracle - returning team

Central Division:

*Atlanta Dream

*Chicago Sky

*Indiana Fever

*Cleveland Rockers - returning team

*Detroit Mechanics - returning team, but renamed

*Milwaukee Stallions - expansion team

Western Conference:

Midwest Division:

*Minnesota Lynx

*San Antonio Silver Stars

*Tulsa Shock

*Houston Comets - returning team

*Utah Bluezz - returning team, but renamed

*Dallas Longhorns - expansion team

Pacific Division:

* Los Angeles Sparks

* Phoenix Mercury

* Seattle Storm

* Portland Fire - returning team

* Sacramento Monarchs - returning team

* Bay Area Knights - expansion team

Schedule format:

Division play - 5 x 4 (2 home/2 road) = 20 games

Non-division play - 6 x 2 (1 home/1 road) = 12 games

Non-conference play - 12 x 1 = 12 games [home-and-home basis will rotate per every two years]

Total games: 44

Your thoughts about this guys?

1. Two expansion teams, one per league. In the American League the Charlotte Knights, in the National League a new version of the Montreal Expos.

2. The Houston Astros are moved back into the National League.

3. The Arizona Diamondbacks move to the American League.

4. The Expos/Nationals rivalry would be both international as well as similar to the Browns/Ravens type rivalry in the NFL.

5. The Miami Marlins become the Florida Marlins again, with their original logo. The Los Angeles Angels become the Anaheim Angels again.

6. Four 4-team divisions per league. Each group of 8 divided into East and West. and West champions play

7. Atlantic & Central Division winners play the best 3 out of 5 to determine the East Champion, Midwest & Pacific Division winners play the best 3 out of 5 to determine the West Champion.

8. East & West Champions play the best 4 out of 7 to win the League Championship Series.

9. League Champions AL & NL play the best 4 out of 7 in the World Series. In all post-season series, the home team will alternate every year. In Round 1, it will be 2-2-1, then 2-3-2 for the other 2 rounds.

10. No more wild card teams, only division winners qualify for post-season play.

11. No more interleague play. Being without it made MLB unique from the other major sports and should go back to that, especially since the AL has the DH rule and the NL does not.

12. 22 division games vs. the other 3, 12 games vs. the other 4 non-division teams in your own region, and 6 games vs. the remaining 8 teams from the other region in your own league.

Wow wdm, gotta give credit where credit is due. Maybe your variation is much better than mine. However, I don't like the "no interleague play" rule, despite that I agree with you on a standpoint that has allowed MLB its uniqueness from other pro sports leagues in the U.S. prior to 1997 (when interleague play was introduced). And what a great way to align the divisions/sub-divisions; but if it was in an interleague play standpoint, it almost allows every team to have a natural rivalry (i.e.: N.Y. Mets/N.Y. Yankees; Washington/Baltimore; Houston/Texas; etc.)

About the playoff format, nice format. But if it was me, I would add the wild cards, just for upsets.

MLB - Swap Arizona and Houston. I can't wrap myself around Houston being an A.L. team. Milwaukee to the NL back in 1998 I could buy, as the Braves were there.

By swapping Arizona & Houston, you'd have the following "natural" interleague rivals...

Texas Rangers - Houston Astros

Los Angeles Angels - Los Angeles Dodgers

Oakland Athletics - San Francisco Giants

Seattle Mariners - Colorado Rockies

Arizona Diamondbacks - San Diego Padres

The D'Backs are only 17 years old, the Astros 50+. Plus it would have been awesome having the Astros back in the NL West with their longtime rivals the Padres, Giants and especially the Dodgers. I still remember that 1980 NL West Division Series!

If MLB expanded to 32 teams - bringing back the Montreal Expos to the NL (And swapping Houston & Arizona), and adding a new A.L. expansion franchise in either Charlotte (Strikers) or Nashville (Knights), I'd do something like this:

EASTERN CONFERENCE - Atlantic & Central Division

WESTERN CONFERENCE - Metro & Pacific Division

*Note - Listing the teams in AL on top and NL on bottom, lined up with "natural" interleague rivals*

EASTERN CONFERENCE:

A.L. - (Atlantic Division) - Yankees, Red Sox, Orioles, Blue Jays

N.L. - (Atlantic Division) - Mets, Phillies, Nationals, Expos

A.L. - (Central Division) - Tigers, Indians, Rays, Nashville Knights*

N.L. - (Central Division) - Pirates, Reds, Marlins, Braves

WESTERN CONFERENCE:

A.L. - (Metro Division) - Royals, White Sox, Twins, Rangers

N.L. - (Metro Division) - Cardinals, Cubs, Brewers, Astros (back in NL where they belong!)

A.L. - (Pacific Division) - Angels, Athletics, Diamondbacks (from NL to AL), Mariners

N.L. - (Pacific Division) - Dodgers, Giants, Padres, Rockies

162 game season. 12 interleague games on a 4 year rotating basis, would bring the novelty of Mets/Yankees, White Sox/Cubs back, rather than it being every year. Better still, I'd have no interleague games!

22 division games x 3 teams = 66 games (11 home & 11 road)

12 games vs other 4 teams in your conference = 48 games (6 home & 6 road)

6 games vs other 8 teams in your league = 48 games (3 home & 3 road)

Only division champions qualify for post-season.

Round 1 - CONFERENCE SERIES

The 2 Eastern Division champs play a best 3 out of 5 to determine the EASTERN CONFERENCE Champ, same for the Western Division.

Round 2 - LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES

East vs West winners (akin to 1969-1993) best 4 out of 7.

Round 3 - WORLD SERIES

AL champ vs NL champ - best 4 out of 7.

Love the format. Similar to mine. But I prefer the following:

League play; Conference play, Division play: Each team will play with all of their three rival teams within the division 12 times (in 12 total series; 6 home, 6 away) – 18 home, 18 away – for a total of 36 Intra-Conference, Intra-Division games (3 * 12 = 36).

League play; Conference play, Out-of-Division play: Each team will play all four teams from the other section within the same division nine times (in 12 total series; 6 home, 6 away) – 18 home, 18 away – for a total of 36 Inter-Conference, Out-of-Division games (4 * 9 = 36). Home-and-home basis will rotate every two years.

League play; Out-of-Conference play: Each team will play all eight teams of the other division within the same league six times (in 16 total series; 8 home, 8 away) – 24 home, 24 away – for a total of 48 Out-of-Conference games (8 * 6 = 48).

Inter-League play: Each team will play all 16 teams from the other league three times (in 16 total series; 8 home, 8 away) – 24 home, 24 away – for a total of 48 Inter-League games (16 * 3 = 48). Home-and-home basis will rotate every two years.

Total games: 168

I think eventually Adam Silver will convince the owners to realign the NBA back to 4 divisions. Assuming teams don't relocate, Seattle & Vancouver are added as expansion teams for the 2018-2019 season.

EASTERN CONFERENCE

Atlantic Division

Boston, Brooklyn, Miami, New York, Orlando, Philadelphia, Toronto, Washington

Central Division

Atlanta, Charlotte, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Indiana, Milwaukee, Minnesota

WESTERN CONFERENCE

Midwest Division

Dallas, Denver, Houston, Memphis, New Orleans, Oklahoma City, San Antonio, Utah

Pacific Division

L.A. Clippers, L.A. Lakers, Phoenix, Portland, Sacramento, San Francisco, Seattle, Vancouver

Good format, especially putting Minnesota in the Eastern Conference. For scheduling purposes, it would be as the following:

Conference play; Division play; Each team will play four times – two home, two away – for a total of 28 Intra-Division Intra-Section games (7 * 4 = 28).

Conference play; Out-of-Division play: Each team will play all eight teams three times for a total of 24 Out-of-Division games (8 * 3 = 24). Home-and-home basis will rotate per every 2 years. For instance: Team A will face Team B-1 in H/A/H on odd numbers, but in A/H/A on even numbers.

Out-of-Conference play: Each team will play all 16 teams twice – one home, one away – for a total of 32 Out-of-Conference games (16 * 2 = 32).

How about the CFL try the US experiment again? But with a little twist:

CFL Canadian Conference:

West: B.C., Calgary, Edmonton, Saskatchewan, Winnipeg; Saskatoon (expansion)

East: Hamilton, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto; Nova Scotia (expansion), Quebec City (expansion)

CFL United States Conference (all expansions):

West: Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Las Vegas, San Antonio, Shreveport

East: Orlando, Birmingham, Chicago, Memphis, New York/New Jersey, Baltimore

Each team will face 5 division foes twice, plus facing 2 teams of other 3 divisions for every 3 years (and on a home-and-home basis for every 6 years).

Your thoughts?

Pretty good alignment, here's an article I found on this same subject...

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1685288-cfl-usa-how-to-make-it-work-this-time-and-15-places-where-it-could

Thanks neo. I just simply added the defunct CFL franchises mixed with most of the defunct XFL franchises (Keep in mind that Las Vegas, Birmingham and Memphis had franchises on both leagues, so they are the 'shared' ones). And I'll go check out the link you've posted.

How about the CFL try the US experiment again? But with a little twist:

CFL Canadian Conference:

West: B.C., Calgary, Edmonton, Saskatchewan, Winnipeg; Saskatoon (expansion)

East: Hamilton, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto; Nova Scotia (expansion), Quebec City (expansion)

CFL United States Conference (all expansions):

West: Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Las Vegas, San Antonio, Shreveport

East: Orlando, Birmingham, Chicago, Memphis, New York/New Jersey, Baltimore

Each team will face 5 division foes twice, plus facing 2 teams of other 3 divisions for every 3 years (and on a home-and-home basis for every 6 years).

Your thoughts?

I did leave Iowa State out for the moment but you're right I do think super conferences might go to 18 or 20. I'm starting think that eventually the Big Ten & SEC will raid the ACC for schools again.

Why would the ACC be the raid target to the Big TEN and the SEC? Just wondering. And I know it'll be impossible for Maryland to re-join the ACC.

But for the Big TEN to have 18, for example, I would add Mizzou (Missouri) from the SEC along with Iowa State. Then, the SEC would try to add 3 ACC schools, which would force the ACC to add 5 schools. You get an idea or such?

College Football Realignment Armageddon 2025

SEC

East

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

West

Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

PAC-16

Coast

California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Washington State

Plains

Arizona, Arizona State, Baylor, Colorado, Texas, TCU, Texas Tech, Utah

BIG SIXTEEN

East

Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

West

Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kansas State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

ACC

Coastal

Boston College, Clemson, Florida State, Louisville, N.C. State, Syracuse, Wake Forest, West Virginia

Atlantic

Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Nice realignment preview Muggens. But I don't see Iowa State in there. However, what if the max cap number of members is upto 20 instead of 16, who would you add those 4 more members on each super-conference?