jlog3000

I'm not sure if anyone has posted this one yet. But if not, can anyone guess what's the font of the numbers based on the jersey of the pic I'm showing here?

Yes, this is a Pitt Panthers jersey back in like 1997-ish to 2004. To me, that number font looked pretty legit and unique, especially with the gold and navy blue in it.

Almost a year ago, I made a prediction of how the NHL league format would look like, which Detroit and Columbus are in the Eastern Conference, while Winnipeg is back to the Western Conference. Love that current format which is displayed for this season. But in my mind, it needed some modifications, which I believe that the Quebec Nordiques and the Hartford Whalers should have returned, just like the Winnipeg Jets did after replacing the Atlanta Thrashers last season. Here was my predicted format with some game-scheduling boost:

1. – Eastern Conference:

1.1. – Patrick Division:

1.1.1. – Atlantic Section:

New Jersey

N.Y. Islanders

N.Y. Rangers

Philadelphia

1.1.2. – Southeast Section:

Carolina

Florida

Tampa Bay

Washington

1.2. – Adams Division:

1.2.1. – Northeast Section:

Boston

Buffalo

Hartford (return)

Pittsburgh

1.2.2. – Mideast Section:

Montreal

Ottawa

Quebec (return)

Toronto

2 – Western Conference:

2.1. – Norris Division:

2.1.1. – Central Section:

Chicago

Columbus

Detroit

St. Louis

2.1.2. – Midwest Section:

Dallas

Minnesota

Nashville

Winnipeg

2.2. – Smythe Division:

2.2.1. – Northwest Section:

Calgary

Colorado

Edmonton

Vancouver

2.2.2. – Pacific Section:

Anaheim

Los Angeles

Phoenix

San Jose

I.) Schedule Format V-1.0 (84 total games):

a.) 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).

b.) 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).

c.) 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).

d.) 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).

II:) Schedule Format V-2.0 (82 total games):

a.) 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).

b.) 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).

c.) 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).

d.) 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 opinions or thoughts.

I like your WHL proposal, monkeypower. I don't like adding more teams. 22 is more than plenty for a regional league, and it's not like they're leaving a lot of big cities on the table while committing to Prince George and Swift Current. Bellevue and Tacoma are bad ideas with one team in Kent and another in Everett already. Fort McMurray is connected to the rest of the world by little planes and one road; that it even exists in the condition it does is something of an abomination.

You prefer to see a league with certain numbers with an unbalanced schedule than to have a well-fit quantity of teams per division with a well-balanced schedule? Damn! But I won't blame you for that because it's your opinion, after all.

For Alberta, I would guess Fort Saskatchewan, Drumheller and Fort McMurray (even though those two have pretty successful AJHL teams) would be the best ideas. The WHL could try Billings again and it being in Montana would fit in with the Alberta teams.

Just going off Wikipedia population numbers, the Northwest team could be Tacoma (they had a team before), or Bellevue but I don't know much about that area of the States.

Those suggestions would be great if there was a moment of expansion. But when it comes to scheduling, it would be like the following:

One WHL team would face the other 5 intra-division teams 6 times (total of 30), then the other 6 non-division/intra-conference teams 3 times (total of 18), and finally the other 12 non-conference teams twice (total of 24) for a total of 72 games in a season.

Right now in the WHL there are 22 teams, 10 in the West and 12 in the East. The prairie teams are in the East, while the American teams and the B.C. teams are in the West... besides Kootenay. The divisional are all set up provincially (the East is Saskatchewan and Manitoba) and American, with Kootenay stuck with the Alberta teams.

Right now the conferences and divisions are set up like so:

Eastern Conference

East Division Central Division

Brandon Calgary

Moose Jaw Edmonton

Prince Albert Kootenay

Regina Lethbridge

Saskatoon Medicine Hat

Swift Current Red Deer

Western Conference

B.C. Division American Division

Kamloops Everett

Kelowna Portland

Prince George Seattle

Vancouver Spokane

Victoria Tri-City

What I would do is move Kootenay over to the B.C. Division to even out the conferences and then rename the Eastern Conference divisions, so there's no more East Division of the Eastern Conference.

Eastern Conference

Prairie Division Alberta Division

Brandon Calgary

Moose Jaw Edmonton

Prince Albert Lethbridge

Regina Medicine Hat

Saskatoon Red Deer

Swift Current

Western Conference

B.C. Division American Division

Kamloops Everett

Kelowna Portland

Kootenay Seattle

Prince George Spokane

Vancouver Tri-City

Victoria

Love your idea monkeypower. Obviously, Kootenay is a team from the B.C. area. But it would be more well-balanced if two expansion teams would join in to have a total of 24 in the WHL. Maybe one team from Alberta to replace Kootenay's previous spot and another one from the U.S. Pacific Northwest.

I have a pointless realignment dream idea. How about a revival of the Metro Conference (but as a football-sponsoring all-sports league)?

Version A: North/South:

Metro North:

Cincinnati
Louisville
Memphis
UNC-Charlotte
South Carolina
Virginia Tech

Metro South:

Florida State
Georgia Tech
Southern Mississippi
South Florida
Tulane
UAB

Version B: East/West:

Metro East:

Florida State
Georgia Tech
UNC-Charlotte
South Carolina
South Florida
Virginia Tech

Metro West:

Cincinnati
Louisville
Memphis
Southern Mississippi
Tulane
UAB

Summary: This fan-based dream conference is based on like MOST of the old union of C-USA back in 95-96 (Cincinnati, Louisville, Memphis, Southern Mississippi and Tulane), but with Florida State, Georgia Tech and South Carolina (from the ACC and SEC respectively), UAB, South Florida and UNC-Charlotte once former non-football schools who were also part of that old union and eventually started sponsoring football, and Virginia Tech a former football affiliate of an FBS conference while belonging to a non-football conference for other sports.

Any of you board members a fan of NCAA D-I FBS college football? Just wanna say the following:

Prior to 1991, ALL FBS (Div. I-A) conferences had a maximum number of upto at least 9-10 schools, plus tens of Indy schools along the way, and NEITHER didn't have a conference championship game (or in short, CCG).

In the 1991-92 season, the SEC became the first conference to establish one with the additions of Arkansas (former SWC full member) and South Carolina (former Metro non-football full member with Indy football).

In the 1996-97 season, the Big 12 (then the Big 8) started to have their CCG with the merged additions of the "top leftovers" of the defunct SWC (making references to the 4 Texas schools); while the "mid-major leftovers" (Rice, SMU and TCU) joined the WAC, who also made their own CCG (which it was short-lived because most of the longtime WAC schools parted ways to create their own conference); and leaving Houston to join C-USA.

In the 1997-98 season, the MAC also started a CCG after re-adding Northern Illinois and Marshall.

Almost a decade had passed, and due to conference realignment changes on the 2005-06 season, the ACC and C-USA also sponsored their first CCG's respectively.

Recently on this decade, specifically in 2011, the Big 12 CCG came to an end when Nebraska joined the Big TEN and Colorado (along with Utah from the MW) joined the Pac-10 (now as the Pac-12), leading both of these conferences to respectively have their own CCG's.

But presently, other conferences have started to plan their own CCG's in the future as long as they get the requirement when it comes to expansion, which the key number is 12. For instance, the MW recently started their own CCG (with fb-affiliate Hawaii, after the additions of San Jose State and Utah State). However, the conference in question for a CCG at this moment are the Sun Belt and The American (or AAC).

But all aside, my point is that the "Power 5" conferences are getting more power-hungry when it comes to have like over 14 members. The key question is: "When those conferences reach over 14 to 16 to 18 members, will there be possible splits to bring small conferences; just like what happened to the WAC after the 1998-99 season, resulting the creation of the MW?" You be the judge!

Now sure if this board has a thread or topic that discusses about conference realignment concepts made by and based by the fans

Look up at the top.

Where? I tried searching it before making this thread and there was nothing related.

Now sure if this board has a thread or topic that discusses about conference realignment concepts made by and based by the fans; you know, dream conferences. But here's a start:

Here's my sample of a dream conference based from the defunct Metro Conference:

i.) - Charter members

Cincinnati (75-76 to 90-91)

Louisville (75-76 to 94-95)

Memphis (75-76 to 90-91)

Tulane (75-76 to 94-95)

Georgia Tech (75-76 to 78-79)

Florida State (76-77 to 90-91)

Virginia Tech (79-80 to 94-95)

Southern Mississippi (82-83 to 94-95)

South Carolina (83-84 to 90-91)

ii.) - Possible expansion candidates:

South Florida (91-92 to 94-95)

North Carolina-Charlotte (91-92 to 94-95)

Alabama-Birmingham

Central Florida

Houston

Lemme know your opinions or thoughts or ideas. Feel free to share them.