Rockstar Matt Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 In light of the possibility of Seattle getting a new arena and with that, a new basketball team, this is my new NBA. Same division lay out and such.WESTPacific DivisionLA LakersLA ClippersGolden StatePhoenixSacramentoNorthwest DivisionSeattle (Toronto's team)UtahDenverMinnesotaPortlandSouthwest DivisionOklahoma CityDallasSan Antonio New OrleansHoustonEASTCentralChicagoDetroitClevelandIndianaMilwaukeeAtlantic BostonPhiladelphiaNew YorkBrooklynWashingtonSoutheastMiamiOrlandoCharlotteAtlantaMemphisWhat do you guys think? Quote Cowboys - Lakers - LAFC - USMNT - LA Rams - LA Kings - NUFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 My dad would be mortified if the Raptors disappeared from Toronto. I would be okay with this fix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 In light of the possibility of Seattle getting a new arena and with that, a new basketball team, this is my new NBA. Same division lay out and such.WESTPacific DivisionLA LakersLA ClippersGolden StatePhoenixSacramentoNorthwest DivisionSeattle (Toronto's team)UtahDenverMinnesotaPortlandSouthwest DivisionOklahoma CityDallasSan Antonio New OrleansHoustonEASTCentralChicagoDetroitClevelandIndianaMilwaukeeAtlantic BostonPhiladelphiaNew YorkBrooklynWashingtonSoutheastMiamiOrlandoCharlotteAtlantaMemphisWhat do you guys think?You move Toronto, but leave New Orleans and Sacramento? Seriously? Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockstar Matt Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I've been hearing and reading reports that Toronto is going to lose the Raptors. And it looks like Sacramento is getting their act together. I left New Orleans because I can't think of a place they'll move to. Seriously. Plus, moving Toronto but keeping the others allows for a division lay out that makes sense. Quote Cowboys - Lakers - LAFC - USMNT - LA Rams - LA Kings - NUFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkJourney Posted February 10, 2012 Share Posted February 10, 2012 New Orleans to Seattle, Sacramento stays put, and Charlotte gets the Hornets nickname back. All fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aci Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 How is Toronto going to lose the Raptors? Their owners are absolutely loaded AND own their home arena, and they still draw fans despite being a horrible team year-in and year-out.New Orleans to Seattle. Problem solved. Quote Hamilton Eagles- 2012 and 2013 Continental Hockey League Champions! 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 & 2015 CHL East Division Champions! Niagara Dragoons- 2012 United League and CCSLC World Series Champions! 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 UL Robinson Division Champions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crashcarson15 Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 I've been hearing and reading reports that Toronto is going to lose the Raptors. And it looks like Sacramento is getting their act together. I left New Orleans because I can't think of a place they'll move to. Seriously. Plus, moving Toronto but keeping the others allows for a division lay out that makes sense.Those "reports" are just idiots on this board posting it. The Raptors make money because they sell tickets to the people who are too poor to go to Leafs games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaRadniz29 Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 Sacramento from what I hear on the 5 minutes of news I watch here is attempting to get their act together, but it seems they are at best scrambling, and last I heard a few days ago, they proposed plan of public parking paying for the new arena was expected to be voted down, and that would all but doom them, but days before that I heard the Kings and Sacramento were ready to go - so it's hard for me to keep up.I know The Red Wings really want to be in the Eastern Conference, and while it would make for some great renewed and new rivalries, wouldn't that really damage the Western Conference in terms of ticket sales potential not to mention ratings. If I was in charge of the NHL and realignment - I would look at a MLB style of divisions where each league has West/Central/East type divisions. I don't know yet how I would divide them up, but would do my best to keep traditional rivalries in tact while maintaining a balance of power house teams in each conference. One I figure it out - I'll post it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoughRiders9 Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 reading this thread got me thinking about mlb realingment. Here's my plan if MLB decided to scrap this whole AL-NL thing and realigned the league based on geography, assuming there are no "historical" rivalries or whatever. It's like MLB completely started ALL OVER again or start anew. NORTHEASTToronto Blue JaysBoston Red SoxNew York MetsNew York YankeesPhiladelphia PhilliesEASTDetroit TigersCleveland IndiansPittsburgh PiratesBaltimore OriolesWashington NationalsCENTRALChicago CubsChicago White SoxCincinnati RedsMilwaukee BrewersSt. Louis CardinalsSOUTHEASTAtlanta BravesHouston AstrosMiami MarlinsTampa Bay RaysTexas RangersWESTArizona DiamondbacksColorado RockiesKansas City RoyalsMinnesota TwinsSeattle MarinersPACIFICLos Angeles AngelsLos Angeles DodgersOakland AthleticsSan Diego PadresSan Francisco GiantsI know the West Division doesn't make sense, but imo, it makes more sense to keep the five California teams in one division. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninersdd Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 You might as well change it to the California division instead of Pacific. Quote BEAR DOWN ARIZONA!2013/14 Tanks Picks Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Just had a thought because MLB decided to go with 10 teams in the playoffs this season. Make it 12 for next season when they realign to 15 teams per league.All three division winners, so there is still a reason to win your division, and the next three best teams in each league. Then seed all teams 1-6 by record, without giving preference to whether or not they won their division. This would prevent the weak division winner from gaining home field advantage. Seed 3 v 6 and 4 v 5 in 3-game series (Wild Card). Then go with Division Series, League Championship, and World Series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 No more playoff expansion in baseball. 10 teams is already too many. It was just fine the way it was. Only change that needed to made was the top seed playing the wild card team regardless of division. Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 I have always wished for a Great Lakes division. With MLB moving away from the AL-NL divide with season long interleague games we can move to geographical rivalries divisions. This is my proposed realignment: I would have liked to add Cleveland to the Great Lakes division but it makes it harder to keep up the Chicago rivalry and the Battle of Ohio. Playoffs: 6 Division winners + 4 best records play 2 games (7 vs. 10 and 8 vs. 9) to determine the 8 matchups.EAST : Boston Red Sox, New York Yankees, New York Mets, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh PiratesATLANTIC: Baltimore Orioles, Washington Nationals, Atlanta Braves, Tampa Bay Rays, Miami MarlinsGREAT LAKES: Toronto Blue Jays, Detroit Tigers, Milwaukee Brewers, Chicago Cubs, Chicago White SoxMIDWEST: St. Louis Cardinals, Kansas City Royals, Cincinnati Reds, Cleveland Indians, Minnesota TwinsSOUTHWEST: Texas Rangers, Houston Astros, Colorado Rockies, Arizona Diamondbacks, San Diego PadresPACIFIC: Los Angeles Dodgers, Los Angeles Angels, San Francisco Giants, Oakland Athletics, Seattle Mariners Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 I have always wished for a Great Lakes division. With MLB moving away from the AL-NL divide with season long interleague games we can move to geographical rivalries divisions. This is my proposed realignment: I would have liked to add Cleveland to the Great Lakes division but it makes it harder to keep up the Chicago rivalry and the Battle of Ohio. Playoffs: 6 Division winners + 4 best records play 2 games (7 vs. 10 and 8 vs. 9) to determine the 8 matchups.EAST : Boston Red Sox, New York Yankees, New York Mets, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh PiratesATLANTIC: Baltimore Orioles, Washington Nationals, Atlanta Braves, Tampa Bay Rays, Miami MarlinsGREAT LAKES: Toronto Blue Jays, Detroit Tigers, Milwaukee Brewers, Chicago Cubs, Chicago White SoxMIDWEST: St. Louis Cardinals, Kansas City Royals, Cincinnati Reds, Cleveland Indians, Minnesota TwinsSOUTHWEST: Texas Rangers, Houston Astros, Colorado Rockies, Arizona Diamondbacks, San Diego PadresPACIFIC: Los Angeles Dodgers, Los Angeles Angels, San Francisco Giants, Oakland Athletics, Seattle MarinersYou can't force geographical rivalries by disbanding history-long rivalries. You've seperated the Cardinals and Cubs, one of the game's best. And even if you did this, why would all the California teams get put together EXCEPT San Diego? This looks more like some College breakdown rather than an appropriate realignment for a league with that had been in, more or less, the same alignment for more than a century. Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loogodude90 Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 You can't force geographical rivalries by disbanding history-long rivalries. Sure you can. That's why it's called realignment and not same-alignment. He's got a rhyme and reason to his realignment, and I think it's fine. Quote WIZARDS ORIOLES CAPITALS RAVENS UNITED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 You can't force geographical rivalries by disbanding history-long rivalries. Sure you can. That's why it's called realignment and not same-alignment. He's got a rhyme and reason to his realignment, and I think it's fine.There are 3 regional rivalries that should be inviolate. Cards-Cubs is one of them. Any alignment that splits it up is by definition not good. Quote On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 My idea of ideal locations for AHL teams, in relation to their NHL affiliates: (all distances in km, taken from Google Maps)VAN - Victoria (115 km)LAK - San Bernadino (96 km)ANA - Bakersfield (221 km)PHX - Scottsdale (33 km) SEA - Tacoma (54 km) Spokane (451)SJS - San Francisco (77 km)EDM - Fort Mac (452 km)CGY - Saskatoon (614)COL - Colorado Springs (114)WPG - Brandon (216)MIN - Bloomington (29)STL - Kansas City (399)NSH - Memphis (343)CBJ - Cleveland (231)CHI - Rockford/Rosemont, IL (143) (28)DAL - Cedar Park (300)DET - Grand Rapids (254)TOR - Toronto (3)OTT - Binghamton (430)MTL - Hamilton (561) QUE - Sherbrooke (233)BUF - Rochester (120)BOS - Providence (81)PHI - Wilmington, DE (47)NJD - Trenton/Atlantic City (96)(193)NYR - Hartford, CT (189)NYI - Bridgeport, CT (110)PIT - Youngstown, OH (107)WSH - Baltimore (64)TBL - Orlando (135)MIA - Fort Lauderdale (44)CAR - Charlotte (241) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH42XCC Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 My idea of ideal locations for AHL teams, in relation to their NHL affiliates:LAK - San BernadinoANA - BakersfieldPHX - ScottsdaleSJS - San FranciscoDAL - Cedar ParkVAN - VictoriaEDM - Fort MacCGY - SpokaneCOL - Colorado SpringsMIN - BloomingtonDET - Grand RapidsSTL - Kansas CityNSH - MemphisCBJ - ClevelandCHI - Rockford/Rosemont, ILTOR - TorontoOTT - BinghamtonMTL - HamiltonBOS - ProvidenceBUF - RochesterPHI - Wilmington, DEPIT - Youngstown, OHNJD - Trenton/Atlantic CityNYR - Hartford, CTNYI - Bridgeport, CTWSH - BaltimoreTBL - OrlandoMIA - Fort LauderdaleCAR - CharlotteWPG - BrandonHere's my version:LAK - San Diego, CAANA - Bakersfield, CAPHX - Las Vegas, NVSJS - Sacramento, CADAL - Cedar Park, TXVAN - Abbotsford, BCEDM - Oklahoma City, OKCGY - Lethbridge, ABCOL - Colorado Springs, COMIN - Fargo, NDDET - Grand Rapids, MISTL - Kansas City, MONSH - Memphis, TNCBJ - Cleveland, OHCHI - Rockford/Rosemont, ILTOR - Toronto, ONOTT - Binghamton, NYMTL - Hamilton, ONBOS - Providence, RIBUF - Rochester, NYPHI - Trenton/Atlantic City, NJPIT - Wilkes-Barre/Scranton, PANJD - Albany, NYNYR - Hartford, CTNYI - Bridgeport, CTWSH - Norfolk, VATBL - Jacksonville, FLMIA - Orlando, FLCAR - Charlotte, NCWPG - St. John's, NL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEW.ERA Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 I think for a team like Calgary you couldn't uproot an Alberta WHL team, they'd have to look elsewhere. I mean playing here in Calgary would be the best option, but I doubt that they'd draw very well and we're not big enough to have the Flames, Hitmen and an AHL affiliate. Abbotsford makes no sense just because of the market they play in and they still draw terribly. Best option put the team somewhere in the Pacific Northwest in a market that isn't ready for NHL quite yet, but could possibly support an AHL team.Portland comes to mind, yeah the Winterhawks are there but with the size of their city they could probably support two hockey teams. Especially with two buildings. Unlike more regional possibilities like Lethbridge or Red Deer who aren't nearly large enough and only have one building which barely crack 10,000 seats. Quote JETS|PACK|JAYS|NUFC|BAMA|BOMBERS|RAPS|ORANJE| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aci Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Until such time as the MLB inevitably expands, I think the best course of action is to do away with the divisions entirely. By moving to an East/West ?conference? alignment, which I?ll refer to as the National and American Leagues, respectively, and with baseball playing multi-game series throughout the year, divisions really aren?t needed to save on travel costs.Instead, I?d divide the teams as follows:National League- Seattle Mariners, Oakland Athletics, Houston Astros, Anaheim Angels, Texas Rangers, Kansas City Royals, Minnesota Twins, Colorado Rockies, San Francisco Giants, Los Angeles Dodgers, San Diego Padres, Arizona Diamondbacks, St Louis Cardinals, Chicago Cubs and Milwaukee BrewersAmerican League- New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox, Chicago White Sox, Toronto Blue Jays, Cleveland Indians, Detroit Tigers, Baltimore Orioles, New York Mets, Philadelphia Phillies, Miami Marlins, Tampa Bay Rays, Atlanta Braves, Cincinnati Reds, Washington Nationals and Pittsburgh PiratesEach team would play each other team in its league 9 times, with either two home series and one away series, or vice versa. It would switch each year for each team, so if the Yankees play 6 games in Boston in 2012, the Red Sox would have to play 6 games in the Bronx in 2013. This accounts for the vast majority of the schedule, and 126 games in total.The other 36 games each year would be comprised of twelve 3-game series against opponents from the other league. As such, in any given year, each team would play against 26 of the 29 other MLB teams, and by rotating between home series, away series and no series, each city would be visited by each team at least twice in any given five-year period. As an example, say the Toronto Blue Jays were to play in San Francisco in 2012, then the Giants played in Toronto in 2013, then the Jays played in SF again in 2014, then the teams didn?t play each other in 2015, and then the Giants came back to Toronto in 2016. Which teams do and don?t play would just rotate through until each team has played twice in a given city, had that team visit their city twice, and had one year with no series in every five-year span.The simplest way to do this to save on travel would be to divide the inter-league games into packages of 9 games for each team. As an example, you could have the Yankees head out West in May and August in two separate road trips, where they'd play 3 games against three teams each time. By doing this, it limits the amount of cross-continental travel, but still creates some variety in the schedule for the fans, who would get to see a lot of different teams.By doing this, I think there would be a strong balance between travel distances, interleague play and fair competition, and each team would be given a fair and equal opportunity to make or miss the playoffs, with much less emphasis being put on strength of schedule or being in a particularly strong division.History has suggested that with more divisions comes more unfairness in regards to which teams make the playoffs. For the past 15 years or so, this has occured in the AL East, and at time, it has affected each of the NL divisions. For a very long time, too, the AL Central was terrible from top to bottom, and perhaps none of the teams deserved to qualify for the postseason some years. It certainly appears that over the next 5 years, very good teams could miss the playoffs in the NL East and AL West, too, simply because all the strongest teams are packed into one division.By returning to single-table leagues, this problem is erased. Blue Jay fans won?t be able to complain that they didn?t get a fair shake against the Rays, Yankees and Red Sox, and a terrible team won?t qualify for the playoffs by winning a division when they?d amass a losing record in a stronger division. Instead, the 8 best teams would qualify for the postseason.My proposal would include an eight-team playoff, where the top four teams from each league qualify. The playoffs would work just like they did up until and including the 2011 MLB season, with a 5-game Division Series (or League Semifinal now), a 7-game League Championship Series, and a 7-game World Series to decide the champion.As a side note, it is difficult to divide up the Midwest teams, but I did the best I could. I had to choose between the White Sox and Brewers to be the odd team out, and I went with the White Sox. I felt that, despite being in the same city as the Cubs, they weren?t currently in the same league as the Brewers/Cardinals/Cubs anyways, so they wouldn?t be losing their chief rivals in the realignment. Also, there is the issue of the Designated Hitter Rule. With a lot of teams crossing 'leagues', but obviously there being a constant divide between NL and AL baseball minds when it comes to the value of the DH, I think the best solution would be to just let each team decide at the time of the realignment whether they want to adopt the DH rule at their home park, and are locked into whichever decision they make. Quote Hamilton Eagles- 2012 and 2013 Continental Hockey League Champions! 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 & 2015 CHL East Division Champions! Niagara Dragoons- 2012 United League and CCSLC World Series Champions! 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 UL Robinson Division Champions! 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.