jlog3000

What would happen if conference realignment was today, but involving the Sun Belt? Currently, the Sun Belt membership will consist with the following as of 2014-15:

Sun Belt - East:

Appalachian State

Georgia Southern

Georgia State

South Alabama

Troy

Sun Belt-12

Sun Belt - West:

Arkansas State

Arkansas-Little Rock (non-fb)

Louisiana-Lafayette

Louisiana-Monroe

Texas-Arlington (non-fb)

Texas State

Idaho (fb-only)

New Mexico State (fb-only)

In case the Sun Belt loses potential members to C-USA such as UL-Lafayette, Arkansas St., and/or Troy, I would say that the conference should focus on finding full members with football from the FCS (i.e.: Southland, SoCon, Big South, OVC or A-Sun), such as:

Sam Houston State

Stephen F. Austin State

Northwestern State

Southeastern Louisiana

Nicholls State

McNeese State

Lamar

Liberty

Tennessee-Chattanooga

Jacksonville State

Eastern Kentucky

If successful, that would leave those conferences raid on some D-II members from the following:

SoCon/Big South - South Atlantic

Southland - Lone Star

A-Sun - Sunshine State or Peach Belt

OVC - GLVC or GLIAC

What would happen if conference realignment was today, but involving the CAA? Currently, the CAA membership consists with the following:

Delaware (w. fb)

James Madison (w. fb)

Towson (w. fb)

William & Mary (w. fb)

Col. of Charleston (n-fb)

Elon (w. fb) (coming in 2014-15)

Drexel (n-fb)

Hofstra (n-fb)

Northeastern (Mass.) (n-fb)

UNC-Wilmington (n-fb)

I would say that the CAA should focus on having full members with football and put aside with the non-football members. So I was thinking that the CAA should raid the America East and grab the full members whose football programs are in the CAA, such as:

SUNY-Albany

Maine

New Hampshire

Rhode Island (from the A-10)

SUNY-Stony Brook

Also, the CAA should bring along Vermont and SUNY-Binghamton. That would leave the AmEast to raid on the Northeastern U.S. D-II conferences (such as the Northeast-10, the CACC and the former NYCAC turned ECC).

As far as the non-football members (excluding Hofstra, Drexel and Northeastern), CoC should join either the Big South or re-join the A-Sun, while UNC-Wilmington should be either in the Big South or in the SoCon.

I'd like the MLS to split into 4 divisions, but I don't think they plan to change the 2 conference/no division system ever.

Yeah, I bet that's the unfortunate part. But who knows if the MLS staff would plan to test in out under consideration?

The "Ultimate" NFL Realignment

*AMERICAN (AFC)*

Baltimore

Buffalo

Cincinnati

Cleveland

Denver

Houston

Indianapolis

Jacksonville

Kansas City

Miami

New England

NY Jets

Oakland

Pittsburgh

San Diego

Tennessee

*NATIONAL (NFC)*

Arizona

Atlanta

Carolina

Chicago

Dallas

Detroit

Green Bay

Minnesota

New Orleans

NY Giants

Philadelphia

St. Louis

San Francisco

Seattle

Tampa Bay

Washington

Keep current system. Get rid of 2 preseason games and make those regular season games. Play every team in your conference once (15 games, on an every other home-away basis) plus 3 games against your "traditional foes" aka current divisions. Top 6 go to playoffs from each conference.

Pretty simple, yet will never be done...

Sounds simple, but the schedule format would be like vintage league/conference play (without inter-league/inter-conference play) back in the old MLB days until 1996. But it might work out. Who'll know?

Oops my bad, sorry for forgetting Houston

so here we go:

Expansion in italics

East

Atlanta

Chicago Fire

Columbus Crew

D.C. United

Miami

Montreal Impact

New England Revolution

New York City FC

New York Red Bulls

Orlando City SC

Philadelphia Union

Toronto FC

West

Colorado Rapids

FC Dallas

Houston Dynamo

LA Galaxy

Los Angeles FC (or whatever Chivas is re-branded as)

Portland Timbers

Real Salt Lake

San Jose Earthquakes

Seattle Sounders FC

Sporting Kansas City

Vancouver Whitecaps FC

Then maybe Minnesota or San Antonio as the 24th club

Nice. But imagine if it was in 4 divisions:

1.) East

a.) Atlantic - Atlanta, Miami, New York City FC, N.Y. Red Bulls, Orlando City, D.C. United

b.) Northeast - New England, Montreal, Toronto, Philadelphia, Columbus, Chicago

2.) West

a.) Midwest - Real Salt Lake, Colorado, Sporting K.C., Houston, Dallas, Minnesota or San Antonio

b.) Pacific - Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, Chivas U.S.A., L.A. Galaxy, San Jose

So with Atlanta in all likelihood being added as the 22nd franchise in MLS, here is the 2017 alignment:

Expansion in italics

East

Atlanta

Columbus Crew

D.C. United

Miami

Montreal Impact

New England Revolution

New York City FC

New York Red Bulls

Orlando City SC

Philadelphia Union

Toronto FC

West

Chicago Fire

Colorado Rapids

FC Dallas

LA Galaxy

Los Angeles FC (or whatever Chivas is re-branded as)

Portland Timbers

Real Salt Lake

San Jose Earthquakes

Seattle Sounders FC

Sporting Kansas City

Vancouver Whitecaps FC

I can approve the realignment, but how come Houston is not in the list?

Houston should be west

And I'd put Chicago in the east

Having them in the west requires so much more travel for them with all the other west teams being so far away

You have a point right there wonderbread, and I can understand that. Chicago should be in the East, if Houston is included. But that would leave an empty spot on the West with 11 teams, needing a 24th franchise in general for the league. I think that it should be either in Phoenix or another city in Texas. Just my opinion. And both East and West conferences should be divided equally into 2 6-team divisions. You feel me?

So with Atlanta in all likelihood being added as the 22nd franchise in MLS, here is the 2017 alignment:

Expansion in italics

East

Atlanta

Columbus Crew

D.C. United

Miami

Montreal Impact

New England Revolution

New York City FC

New York Red Bulls

Orlando City SC

Philadelphia Union

Toronto FC

West

Chicago Fire

Colorado Rapids

FC Dallas

LA Galaxy

Los Angeles FC (or whatever Chivas is re-branded as)

Portland Timbers

Real Salt Lake

San Jose Earthquakes

Seattle Sounders FC

Sporting Kansas City

Vancouver Whitecaps FC

I can approve the realignment, but how come Houston is not in the list?

For giggles, I think the following would work a bit better:

ATLANTIC

Brooklyn Nets

Philadelphia 76ers

Boston Celtics

Orlando Magic

Washington Wizards

New York Knicks

Miami Heat

Charlotte Hornets

The Atlantic Division of old is kept intact except for the addition of the reincarnated Charlotte Hornets.

CENTRAL

Detroit Pistons

Indiana Pacers

Milwaukee Bucks

Memphis Grizzlies

Chicago Bulls

Toronto Raptors

Cleveland Cavaliers

Atlanta Hawks

Switching out New Orleans with Memphis for geographical reasons.

MIDWEST

San Antonio Spurs

Dallas Mavericks

Minnesota Timberwolves

Utah Jazz

Houston Rockets

New Orleans Pelicans

Denver Nuggets

Oklahoma Thunder

Curiously, this setup creates two mini-divisions within the same division: the modern Southwest teams versus the Midwest teams.

PACIFIC

Sacramento Kings

LA Lakers

LA Clippers

Portland Supersonics

Phoenix Suns

Seattle Supersonics

Golden State Warriors

Las Vegas Sharks

Not only does this makes sense for the future Seattle team but, for me personally, the next NBA expansion is going to be on the western side of the continent. It'll either be Las Vegas, San Jose, or even longshots like San Diego and Vancouver.

Interesting on how you put Memphis in the East while putting New Orleans in the West. Geographically, sounds truly logic. But like the mini-division idea, which it should be like this:

1. - Eastern Conference:

1.1. - Atlantic Division:

1.1.1. - Northeast: Boston, Brooklyn, N.Y. Knicks, Philadelphia

1.1.2. - Southeast: Miami, Orlando, Charlotte, Washington

1.2. - Central Division:

1.2.1. - Great Lakes: Toronto, Detroit, Indiana, Cleveland

1.2.2. - Mideast: Atlanta, Memphis, Chicago, Milwaukee

2. - Western Conference:

2.1. - Midwest Division:

2.1.1. - Southwest: Dallas, San Antonio, Houston, New Orleans

2.1.2. - Midwest: Minnesota, Denver, Utah, Oklahoma

2.2. - Pacific Division:

2.2.1. - Northwest: Portland, Sacramento, ''Seattle'', ''expansion team'' of either Las Vegas, San Diego, San Jose or Vancouver

2.2.2. - West Coast: Phoenix, L.A. Clippers, L.A. Lakers, Golden State

Pointless NBA Alignment

Western Conference

PACIFIC

Golden State Warriors

LA Clippers

LA Lakers

Phoenix Suns

Portland Trailblazers

Sacramento Kings

Seattle Supersonics (Expansion)

MIDWEST

Dallas Mavericks

Denver Nuggets

Houston Rockets

Memphis Grizzlies

Minnesota Timberwolves

Oklahoma City Thunder

San Antonio Spurs

Utah Jazz

Eastern Conference

CENTRAL

Atlanta Hawks

Chicago Bulls

Cleveland Cavaliers

Detroit Pistons

Indiana Pacers

Milwaukee Bucks

New Orleans Pelicans

Toronto Raptors

ATLANTIC

Boston Celtics

Brooklyn Nets

Charlotte Hornets

Miami Heat

New York Knicks

Orlando Magic

Philadelphia 76ers

Washington (Something other than Wizards)

Nice format, nearly much like the same one from 1996 to almost to 2004 (way before the Charlotte Bobcats joined). But you forgot the 32nd possible expansion team for having to represent the Pacific Division. You have the Seattle SuperSonics (as a return team, but from scratch). But how about another team, but from Vancouver (except having the Grizzlies name since it belongs to Memphis, franchise-wise)? And good thing that you put the new Charlotte Hornets as part of the Atlantic Division since it's more near to the other Atlantic teams instead of those from its former division (the Central Division) as well as having Oklahoma City as part of the Midwest Division.

The Flyers have to play with the Rangers, Devils, and Islanders.

I sincerely agree. So I go re-modify like this:

1. - Campbell Conference:

1.1. - Smythe Division:

1.1.1. - Northwest: Calgary/Edmonton/Vancouver/Seattle

1.1.2. - Pacific: Anaheim/LA Kings/Phoenix/San Jose

1.2. - Norris Division:

1.2.1. - Central: Chicago/Detroit/Milwaukee/St. Louis

1.2.2. - Midwest: Colorado/Houston/Minnesota/Winnipeg

2. - Wales Conference:

2.1. - Adams Division:

2.1.1. - Northeast: Boston/Buffalo/Quebec/Montreal

2.1.2. - Mideast: Cleveland/Ottawa/Pittsburgh/Toronto

2.2. - Patrick Division:

2.2.1. - Atlantic: Philadelphia/NJ Devils/NY Islanders/NY Rangers

2.2.2. - Southeast: Carolina/Florida/Tampa Bay/Washington

Plus, I have other possibilities based on my division alignment format.

After seeing the previous posts, I like the Milwaukee one in the Norris Division. However, no "sections"? You know, 2 4-team sub-divisions?

I would group like this:

1. - Campbell Conference:

1.1. - Smythe Division:

1.1.1. - Northwest: Calgary/Edmonton/Vancouver/Seattle

1.1.2. - Pacific: Anaheim/LA Kings/Phoenix/San Jose

1.2. - Norris Division:

1.2.1. - Central: Chicago/Detroit/Milwaukee/St. Louis

1.2.2. - Midwest: Colorado/Houston/Minnesota/Winnipeg

2. - Wales Conference:

2.1. - Adams Division:

2.1.1. - Northeast: Boston/Buffalo/Quebec/Montreal

2.1.2. - Mideast: Cleveland/Ottawa/Pittsburgh/Toronto

2.2. - Patrick Division:

2.2.1. - Atlantic: Hartford/NJ Devils/NY Islanders/NY Rangers

2.2.2. - Southeast: Carolina/Philadelphia/Tampa Bay/Washington

Any thoughts?

Which type of font are the following photo samples that I'm about to post?:

a.)

b.)

To be honest, I wish the letters should be well-represented as part of the SEC logo. Just my opinion.

Can someone tell me the name of this font?

I believe that it should had stayed within the Temple Owls athletics program as part of its typeface system.

Any one of you guys a fan of the Ontario Hockey League (OHL)? Just wondering, because here's the format of the teams so far:

1. - Eastern Conference

1.1. - East Division

Belleville Bulls

Kingston Frontenacs

Oshawa Generals

Ottawa 67's

Peterborough Petes

1.2. - Central Division

Barrie Colts

Mississauga Steelheads

Niagara IceDogs

North Bay Battalion

Sudbury Wolves

2. - Western Conference

2.1. - Midwest Division

Erie Otters

Guelph Storm

Kitchener Rangers

London Knights

Owen Sound Attack

2.2. - West Division

Plymouth Whalers

Saginaw Spirit

Sarnia Sting

Sault Ste. Marie Greyhounds

Windsor Spitfires

So far, the current number of total games played for a team per season is 68. But I have a curious but well-modified and proposed/suggested schedule format of the OHL so that every team can compete in a perfectly well-balanced way. Here goes the following:

Schedule Format (72 total games):

a.) Conference play; Division play; Each team will play its other division rivals eight times – four home, four away – for a total of 32 Division games (4 * 8 = 32).

b.) Conference play; Out-of-Division play: Each team will play the four teams from the other division four times – two home, two away – for a total of 20 Out-of-Division games (5 * 4 = 20).

c.) Out-of-Conference play: Each team will play all 10 teams from the other conference twice – one home, one away – for a total of 20 Out-of-Conference games (10 * 2 = 20).

Lemme know your opinions and thoughts about this guys.

On 2/23/2014 at 1:09 AM, Virtual Appliance said:

I'm definitely not a fan of the "we'll play all of the NFC East/AL West teams at once every four years" ideas. It totally takes away from the completeness of a season (i.e. "Why not have a Super Super Bowl every four years after every team has played all the others?").

On the MLS: Balanced schedule like the Mexican Primera, but also like Mexico, have a big ass playoff tournament at the end of every "season." Supporter's Shield winner, MLS Cup winner get top 2 champs league spots, runners up in MLS Cup and Open Cup winner get 3rd and 4th spots in CONCACAF. Simple.

So you're not impressed with my well-balanced scheduling formats on my top sports realignments. I can understand that. My intention was to explain it that the pure pro staff member cannot.

And your MLS playoff format looks amazing, along with the spots being in stake (or up for grabs). But since there are like 20 teams, it'll be like 38 total games (facing all 19 others twice).

Can someone guess the name of this font?

Just re-edited my previous post: http://boards.sportslogos.net/topic/21954-name-that-font/?p=2171620 Just hope that someone could see the image well and lemme know the font of that image.

I dunno. Seems kinda complex.

I think I'm gonna realign myself right outta here. I've run out of posts.

What seems complex? My MLB alignment? To me, it's the most balanced format I can think of. Besides, interleague play for each team can occur at least one series on each of the 16 teams, and a home/away basis for every two years. Unless, I take out the 12 games from the "League play; Division play, Out-of-Section play" section to make it like this: (4 * 6) and put those 12 games onto the "Inter-League" section, but parallel to the same division that team is on. For instance: the Boston Red Sox, representing the AL East. They would face the other 4 NL East teams 6 times (2 series, 1 home and 1 road) for a total of 24. Hope this helps on clarifying.

Hey guys. I made an MLB realignment, only for schedule format purposes:

1. – AL:

1.1. – North-West Division:

1.1.1. – North Section:

Chicago White Sox

Cleveland Indians

Detroit Tigers

Minnesota Twins

1.1.2. – West Section:

Los Angeles (Anaheim) Angels

Oakland Athletics

Seattle Mariners

Portland Beavers (expansion)

1.2. – South-East Division:

1.2.1. – South Section:

Houston Astros

Kansas City Royals

Tampa Bay Rays

Texas Rangers

1.2.2. – East Section:

Baltimore Orioles

Boston Red Sox

New York Yankees

Toronto Blue Jays

2 – NL:

2.1. – North-East Division:

2.1.1. – North Section:

Chicago Cubs

Cincinnati Reds

Milwaukee Brewers

Pittsburgh Pirates

2.1.2. – East Section:

Montreal Expos (return)

New York Mets

Philadelphia Phillies

Washington Nationals

2.2. – South-West Division:

2.2.1. – South Section:

Atlanta Braves

Colorado Rockies

Miami Marlins

St. Louis Cardinals

2.2.2. – West Section:

Arizona Diamondback

Los Angeles Dodgers

San Diego Padres

San Francisco Giants

Schedule Format (168 total games):

a.) League 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-Division, Intra-Section games (3 * 12 = 36).

b.) League play; Division play, Out-of-Section 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-Division, Out-of-Section games (4 * 9 = 36). Home-and-home basis will rotate every two years.

c.) League play; Out-of-Division 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-Division games (8 * 6 = 48).

d.) 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.

Your thoughts guys?

Does anyone know the logo of this font? I believe that the ECU font on that helmet from the early 90's looked legit and unique at that time before the current modern fonts on college sports.

With the ECHL divisions being really lopsided, I see a realignment coming next season. Here is a realignment that makes most sense...

EASTERN CONFERENCE

Cincinnati Cyclones

Elmira Jackals

Evansville Icemen

Florida Everblades

Ft. Wayne Komets

Greenville Road Warriors

Gwinnett Gladiators

Indianapolis Fuel

Kalamazoo Wings

Orlando Solar Bears

Reading Royals

South Carolina Stingrays

Toledo Walleye

Wheeling Nailers

WESTERN CONFERENCE

Alaska Aces

Bakersfield Condors

Colorado Eagles

Idaho Steelheads

Las Vegas Wranglers

Ontario Reign

Stockton Thunder

Utah Grizzlies

Despite the realignment, it STILL leaves the league with 2 unbalanced conferences, if you know what I mean.

How about this to balance it out? 3 divisions, no conferences.

EASTERN DIVISION

Elmira Jackals

Florida Everblades

Greenville Road Warriors

Orlando Solar Bears

Reading Royals

South Carolina Stingrays

Wheeling Nailers

CENTRAL DIVISION

Cincinnati Cyclones

Evansville Icemen

Ft. Wayne Komets

Gwinnett Gladiators

Indianapolis Fuel

Kalamazoo Wings

Toledo Walleye

WESTERN DIVISION

Alaska Aces

Bakersfield Condors

Colorado Eagles

Idaho Steelheads

Las Vegas Wranglers

Ontario Reign

Stockton Thunder

Utah Grizzlies

Sounds fair, but I was expecting 4 divisions and no conferences. lol

With the ECHL divisions being really lopsided, I see a realignment coming next season. Here is a realignment that makes most sense...

EASTERN CONFERENCE

Cincinnati Cyclones

Elmira Jackals

Evansville Icemen

Florida Everblades

Ft. Wayne Komets

Greenville Road Warriors

Gwinnett Gladiators

Indianapolis Fuel

Kalamazoo Wings

Orlando Solar Bears

Reading Royals

South Carolina Stingrays

Toledo Walleye

Wheeling Nailers

WESTERN CONFERENCE

Alaska Aces

Bakersfield Condors

Colorado Eagles

Idaho Steelheads

Las Vegas Wranglers

Ontario Reign

Stockton Thunder

Utah Grizzlies

Despite the realignment, it STILL leaves the league with 2 unbalanced conferences, if you know what I mean.

Either crillee or the adidas invader font might be a distant match for it.

Looks close. Maybe a little bold would make it closer. But thanks for the answer Walker. Plus, that font looked legit for that school, which should had stayed. Same goes for the concept design.

It's a custom font designed for Boston College. Not sure if it ever had a specific name.

Aww, that sucks, to be honest. Any other font at least close to that one?

On a side note, does anyone know this font type (number and letter)? I honestly like that version of the Arizona State Sun Devils back in the mid-2000's.

Why don't you just have four divisions like the NBA used to have?

Because it would be impossible to group on which teams belong to which division. Plus, you want two conference where one division is a team ahead than the other? Talk about unbalanced scheduling in my opinion.

Back to my NBA realignment plan, it'll be on either of the two versions in terms of scheduling:

Schedule Format V-1.0 (84 total games):

Conference play; Division play; Intra-Section play: Each team will play four times – two home, two away – for a total of 12 Intra-Division Intra-Section games (3 * 4 = 12).

Conference play; Division play; Out-of-Section play: Each team will play all four teams four times – two home, two away – for a total of 16 Intra-Division Out-of-Section games (4 * 4 = 16).

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).

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).

Schedule Format V-2.0 (82 total games):

Conference play; Division play; Intra-Section play: Each team will play six times – three home, three away – for a total of 18 Intra-Division Intra-Section games (3 * 6 = 18).

Conference play; Division play; Out-of-Section play: Each team will play all four teams four times – two home, two away – for a total of 16 Intra-Division Out-of-Section games (4 * 4 = 16).

Conference play; Out-of-Division play: Each team will play all eight teams twice – one home, one away – for a total of 16 Out-of-Division games (8 * 2 = 16).

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).

Lemme know your thoughts.