BigMac12 Posted November 5, 2010 Share Posted November 5, 2010 Chicago's JerseyNorthwest IndianaWould that be Gary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted November 21, 2010 Share Posted November 21, 2010 Here's an MLB minor realignment I just came up with. It's without expansion, so still 30 teams. NL goes to the NFL format (4 divisions of 4 teams) and AL stays as is. I have 2 different ones; one with Colorado and Texas swapping leagues, and the other with Colorado and Tampa Bay swapping.Scenario #1:NLWest: Arizona, LA Dodgers, San Diego, San FranciscoCentral: St. Louis, Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati, MilwaukeeEast: NY Mets, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, WashingtonSouth: Atlanta, Houston, Miami/Florida, TexasALWest: LA Angels, Colorado, Oakland, SeattleCentral: Chicago Sox, Cleveland, Detroit, Kansas City, MinnesotaEast: Baltimore, Boston, NY Yankees, Toronto, Tampa BayScenario #2:NLWest: Arizona, LA Dodgers, San Diego, San FranciscoCentral: St. Louis, Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati, MilwaukeeEast: NY Mets, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, WashingtonSouth: Atlanta, Houston, Miami/Florida, Tampa BayALWest: LA Angels, Colorado, Oakland, SeattleCentral: Chicago Sox, Cleveland, Kansas City, Minnesota, TexasEast: Baltimore, Boston, Detroit, NY Yankees, TorontoMakes all divisions as about numerically even as possible with 30 teams and not going to 15 teams in each league (which would require constant interleague play); instead of four divisions with 5 teams, one with 6 and one with 4, five will have 4 and two will have 5. Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted November 21, 2010 Share Posted November 21, 2010 Would that scenario have interleague play at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted November 21, 2010 Share Posted November 21, 2010 Would that scenario have interleague play at all?Probably. I'm kind of tired of interleague play, but I'm not against keeping it as is. This, by keeping the leagues with even number of teams each, prevents there from being an interleague series always being played, as would be the case with 15 teams in each league. Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still MIGHTY Posted November 21, 2010 Share Posted November 21, 2010 So for the playoffs, would the AL have the only Wild Card?And Cleveland in the Central when it's farther East than East division Detroit? Quote | ANA | LAA | LAR | LAL | ASU | CSULB | USMNT | USWNT | LAFC | OCSC | MAN UTD | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 So for the playoffs, would the AL have the only Wild Card?And Cleveland in the Central when it's farther East than East division Detroit?Yes and yes. Prior to 1998, Detroit was in the east when they switched to the 6 division format. They moved to the central when Tampa Bay joined. If the playoffs do change as it seems it might, with each league 5 playoff teams, then the NL would have 1 WC team and the AL 2. This was an alignment proposal back around 2000, to go 4 divisions in the NL and 3 in the AL, but it had Arizona and Tampa Bay swapping. There was also one in 1998, but it was far more radical and had a lot of teams switching with Minnesota being the most western AL team. Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canadiancreed Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 Well good to see that toronto would be doomed to finsihing third or lower regardless of format. Quote The Sports Blog Network Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illwauk Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 Chicago's JerseyNorthwest IndianaI always (begrudgingly) thought of Wisconsin as the New Jersey to Chicago's NYC:Newark = MilwaukeeNew Brunswick/Rutgers = East Milwaukee/UWMSeton Hall = MarquettePrinceton = MadisonAtlantic City = Wisconsin DellsSeaside(-guidos) = Lake GenevaTwin Cities = Phily Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted November 24, 2010 Share Posted November 24, 2010 NFL: 2 preseason games, 18 regular. 14 divisional games, 4 games against half of another division, rotated over a 6-year period. Playoffs could be top 2, 3 or 4 in each division.4 divisions of 8:West: Seahawks, Niners, Raiders, Chargers, Cards, Broncos, Texans, Cowboys.South: Saints, Jags, Bucs, Fins, Falcons, Panthers, Rams, Chiefs.North: Bears, Vikes, Lions, Pack, Bengals, Browns, Colts, Titans. East: Pats, Jets, Giants, Bills, Eagles, Steelers, Skins, Ravens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 NFL: 2 preseason games, 18 regular. 14 divisional games, 4 games against half of another division, rotated over a 6-year period. Playoffs could be top 2, 3 or 4 in each division.4 divisions of 8:West: Seahawks, Niners, Raiders, Chargers, Cards, Broncos, Texans, Cowboys.South: Saints, Jags, Bucs, Fins, Falcons, Panthers, Rams, Chiefs.North: Bears, Vikes, Lions, Pack, Bengals, Browns, Colts, Titans. East: Pats, Jets, Giants, Bills, Eagles, Steelers, Skins, Ravens.So goodbye NFC and AFC? Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KennyRock Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 NFL: 2 preseason games, 18 regular. 14 divisional games, 4 games against half of another division, rotated over a 6-year period. Playoffs could be top 2, 3 or 4 in each division.4 divisions of 8:West: Seahawks, Niners, Raiders, Chargers, Cards, Broncos, Texans, Cowboys.South: Saints, Jags, Bucs, Fins, Falcons, Panthers, Rams, Chiefs.North: Bears, Vikes, Lions, Pack, Bengals, Browns, Colts, Titans. East: Pats, Jets, Giants, Bills, Eagles, Steelers, Skins, Ravens.So goodbye NFC and AFC?In addition to that, you lose a little parity here. Those 2 games a team plays again a same-conference opponent that finished in the same spot as it did the previous year can make or break a team's season. The Jets have 2 of their 9 wins this season thanks to games versus Houston and Denver. Under this format, all division teams play the same schedule so if you're not as good a team, you ain't going anywhere. You can argue "that's how it should be" but I LOVE when a team can get itself into the playoffs thanks to a softer schedule and go on a run. Heck, I can use the Jets again from last year: Sure Cincy rested their starters in Week 17 but it was the same spot in the standings from 2008 that got the Jets that game. Because of playing Cincy that week, that situation, they come within 30 minutes of the Superbowl. Under this format, that game doesn't happen.I guess I see it as lateral, or a very slight downgrade, but not better.And good lord, the Bills may go 0-14 in that new NFL East. Quote New York Jets |3-3| First, AFC EastNew York Mets |74-88| Fourth, NL EastNew York Islanders|34-37-11| Fifth, Atlantic DivisionNew Orleans Hornets |21-45| Third, Southwest Division Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 4 divisions of 8:West: Seahawks, Niners, Raiders, Chargers, Cards, Broncos, Texans, Cowboys.South: Saints, Jags, Bucs, Fins, Falcons, Panthers, Rams, Chiefs.North: Bears, Vikes, Lions, Pack, Bengals, Browns, Colts, Titans. East: Pats, Jets, Giants, Bills, Eagles, Steelers, Skins, Ravens.You lose a little parity here. You can argue "that's how it should be" but I LOVE when a team can get itself into the playoffs thanks to a softer schedule and go on a run. Good lord, the Bills may go 0-14 in that new NFL East.Well, "that's how it should be" . This is a simple, geography-based re-organization, without consideration of whether or not the divisional teams are "competitive" with each other. Screw Buffalo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KennyRock Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 4 divisions of 8:West: Seahawks, Niners, Raiders, Chargers, Cards, Broncos, Texans, Cowboys.South: Saints, Jags, Bucs, Fins, Falcons, Panthers, Rams, Chiefs.North: Bears, Vikes, Lions, Pack, Bengals, Browns, Colts, Titans. East: Pats, Jets, Giants, Bills, Eagles, Steelers, Skins, Ravens.You lose a little parity here. You can argue "that's how it should be" but I LOVE when a team can get itself into the playoffs thanks to a softer schedule and go on a run. Good lord, the Bills may go 0-14 in that new NFL East.Well, "that's how it should be" . This is a simple, geography-based re-organization, without consideration of whether or not the divisional teams are "competitive" with each other. Screw Buffalo.Definitely your opinion, and I have no issue with that. If you want 4 divisions of 8 teams, geographically aligned, this is the way to do it. I'm simply posting my opinion. Also, just note my main point was losing the non-divisional games, NOT if divisional teams are competitive since that's impossible to assure. I'd also like to think it was apparent that my Buffalo comment was a joke. Quote New York Jets |3-3| First, AFC EastNew York Mets |74-88| Fourth, NL EastNew York Islanders|34-37-11| Fifth, Atlantic DivisionNew Orleans Hornets |21-45| Third, Southwest Division Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 I think losing the American/National Leagues/Conferences in the NFL and MLB wouldn't be a good idea. They're seperated like that because of the merger from 2 past leagues in each sport. I personally prefer it over Western/Eastern conferences. Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 I'd also like to think it was apparent that my Buffalo comment was a joke.Understood. I knew it was a joke. My "Screw Buffalo" comment was too.As for retaining tradition by keeping the AFC and NFC, I think that can be taken under advisement, but if it's going to help the league cut travel costs (and therefore save money, because businesses of any sort are inherently greedy buggers), that's what this alignment would be there for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DustDevil61 Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Well, in the NBA, with all the Hornets-to-Seattle discussion, here's what a Hornets-to-Seattle scenario would look like (just the Western Conference in both cases; relocating teams are underlined, teams just changing divisions are colored and bolded):Western ConferencePacific Division--Golden State--LA Clippers--LA Lakers--Phoenix--SacramentoSouthwest Division--Dallas--Houston--Memphis--Oklahoma City (from Northwest Division)--San AntonioNorthwest Division--Denver--Minnesota--Portland--Seattle (from New Orleans and Southwest Division)--UtahOf course, this would be if other possible relocatees (Memphis, Minnesota, Sacramento, etc.) stayed put. It's that simple.In the event of a Kings-back-to-Kansas City situation coupled with a Hornets-to-Seattle scenario, the West could end up looking like this:Western ConferencePacific Division--Golden State--LA Clippers--LA Lakers--Portland (from Northwest/Midwest Division)--Seattle (from New Orleans and Southwest Division)Southwest Division--Dallas--Houston--Memphis--Phoenix (from Pacific Division)--San AntonioMidwest Division (formerly Northwest Division)--Denver--Minnesota--Kansas City (from Sacramento and Pacific Division)--Oklahoma City--UtahThis is another interesting option--as it would put the Suns in the same division as the Spurs, while the lowly Timberwolves would not be as far from other teams in the new Midwest division. Seattle and Portland would go together into the Pacific, replacing the moving Kings and the Suns, renewing some of the old rivalries with the remaining California teams. What seems to be a new rivalry between Utah and Oklahoma City would also be maintained in the new Midwest.Of course, I don't know how long the Suns have been in the same division as the California teams, but it would seem to make sense to put them in with the Texas teams and the Grizzlies. Thoughts? Quote Insert Signature Here? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KennyRock Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Well, in the NBA, with all the Hornets-to-Seattle discussion, here's what a Hornets-to-Seattle scenario would look like (just the Western Conference here):Western ConferencePacific Division--Golden State--LA Clippers--LA Lakers--Phoenix--SacramentoSouthwest Division--Dallas--Houston--Memphis--Oklahoma City (from Northwest Division)--San AntonioNorthwest Division--Denver--Minnesota--Portland--Seattle (relocated Hornets; from Southwest Division)--UtahOf course, this would be if other possible relocatees (Memphis, Minnesota, Sacramento) stayed put.No complaints here, definitely the most logical realignment. I'd be for it, if it means my Hornets don't have to keep turning in piss-poor performances against the Spurs and Mavs 4 times a year. Quote New York Jets |3-3| First, AFC EastNew York Mets |74-88| Fourth, NL EastNew York Islanders|34-37-11| Fifth, Atlantic DivisionNew Orleans Hornets |21-45| Third, Southwest Division Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo_prankster Posted December 9, 2010 Share Posted December 9, 2010 For those about to freak out over a possible 7-9 or 6-10 playoff team from the NFC West, I propose the return to 3 divisions to a conference.AFC EastBuffaloIndianapolisMiamiNew EnglandN.Y. JetsAFC CentralBaltimoreCincinnatiClevelandJacksonvillePittsburghTennesseeAFC WestDenverHoustonKansas CityOaklandSan DiegoNFC EastArizonaDallasN.Y. GiantsPhiladelphiaWashingtonNFC CentralChicagoDetroitGreen BayMinnesotaTampa BayNFC WestAtlantaCarolinaNew OrleansSt. LouisSan FranciscoSeattle Quote The Fictional Story of Austus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH42XCC Posted December 9, 2010 Share Posted December 9, 2010 For those about to freak out over a possible 7-9 or 6-10 playoff team from the NFC West, I propose the return to 3 divisions to a conference.AFC EastBuffaloIndianapolisMiamiNew EnglandN.Y. JetsAFC CentralBaltimoreCincinnatiClevelandJacksonvillePittsburghTennesseeAFC WestDenverHoustonKansas CityOaklandSan DiegoNFC EastAtlantaCarolinaDallasN.Y. GiantsPhiladelphiaWashingtonNFC CentralChicagoDetroitGreen BayMinnesotaTampa BayNFC WestArizonaNew OrleansSt. LouisSan FranciscoSeattleFixed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo_prankster Posted December 9, 2010 Share Posted December 9, 2010 For those about to freak out over a possible 7-9 or 6-10 playoff team from the NFC West, I propose the return to 3 divisions to a conference.AFC EastBuffaloIndianapolisMiamiNew EnglandN.Y. JetsAFC CentralBaltimoreCincinnatiClevelandJacksonvillePittsburghTennesseeAFC WestDenverHoustonKansas CityOaklandSan DiegoNFC EastAtlantaCarolinaDallasN.Y. GiantsPhiladelphiaWashingtonNFC CentralChicagoDetroitGreen BayMinnesotaTampa BayNFC WestArizonaNew OrleansSt. LouisSan FranciscoSeattleFixed it.Okay, much better geographically. Quote The Fictional Story of Austus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.