Lee.

The Pointless Realignment Outpost

Recommended Posts

On 7/17/2019 at 7:53 AM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

It wouldn't have been the West; the Mets wanted a divisional alignment that was based on something other than geography.

 

The National League's hesitancy to adopt divisions was admirable, but misplaced. What should have been as obvious to that league's owners as it was to the American League's owners is that nothing about the feel of the season would change as long as only the first-place teams could advance; the magic of traditional pennant race would endure. 

 

It's too bad we had none of this skepticism when the owners brought in the three-division alignment and the wild card, which really did kill the pennant race.

 

Anyway, the team that got the worst deal was the White Sox, who were rightfully angry at being grouped with the Angels, Royals, and Pilots, instead of with their peers the Yankees, Red Sox, and Tigers.

 

On 7/17/2019 at 12:46 PM, schlim said:

I had never really thought about why the White Sox are such a bland team before, but being split from those teams damaged their club a ton.

 

They further screwed the White Sox by not putting them with the Brewers. Especially once the Senators moved to Texas where they were on their own island in the middle of the country and could have concievably played in either division. Not only did the Sox nearly move to Milwaukee after playing a slate of home games at County Stadium, but both were putting some of their best teams on the field by the early 80s. It's a shame that rivalry was never given a proper chance to blossom. Especially given how well Brewers-Cubs has taken off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike the 2100 series I have posted here and in my pointless realignment blog, this one will be more realistic.

 

MLB: If Tampa and Oakland move

Expansion teams in italics

 

AL East

Baltimore Orioles

Boston Red Sox

Charlotte Lynx

Chicago White Sox

Cleveland Indians

Detroit Tigers

Milwaukee Brewers

Montreal Expos (relocated Tampa Bay Rays)

New York Yankees

Toronto Blue Jays

 

AL West

Anaheim Angels (renamed Los Angeles Angels)

Kansas City Royals

Minnesota Twins

Oakland Oaks

Oklahoma City 66ers

Portland Athletics (relocated Oakland Athletics)

San Antonio Alamos

Seattle Mariners

Texas Rangers

Vancouver Mounties

 

NL East

Atlanta Braves

Chicago Cubs

Cincinnati Reds

Miami Marlins

Nashville Sounds

New York Mets

Philadelphia Phillies

Pittsburgh Pirates

St. Louis Cardinals

Washington Nationals

 

NL West

Arizona Diamondbacks

Austin Murcielagos

Colorado Rockies

Houston Astros

Las Vegas 51s

Los Angeles Dodgers

Omaha Bison

San Diego Padres

San Francisco Giants

Salt Lake Bees

 

MLB: If Tampa and Oakland find their stadiums in the Tampa Bay Area and Alameda County, California

Expansion teams in italics

 

AL East

Baltimore Orioles

Boston Red Sox

Chicago White Sox

Cleveland Indians

Detroit Tigers

Milwaukee Brewers

Montreal Expos

New York Yankees

Tampa Bay Rays

Toronto Blue Jays

 

AL West

Anaheim Angels (renamed Los Angeles Angels)

Kansas City Royals

Minnesota Twins

Oakland Athletics

Oklahoma City 66ers

Portland Beavers

San Antonio Alamos

Seattle Mariners

Texas Rangers

Vancouver Mounties

 

NL East

Atlanta Braves

Chicago Cubs

Cincinnati Reds

Miami Marlins

Nashville Sounds

New York Mets

Philadelphia Phillies

Pittsburgh Pirates

St. Louis Cardinals

Washington Nationals

 

NL West

Arizona Diamondbacks

Austin Murcielagos

Colorado Rockies

Houston Astros

Las Vegas 51s

Los Angeles Dodgers

Omaha Bison

San Diego Padres

San Francisco Giants

Salt Lake Bees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Pro Football Alignment when Car Wars is Released

 

ACFL: Atlantic Schooners, Baltimore Ravens, Buffalo BIlls, Charlotte Panthers, Cincinnati Bengals, Cleveland Browns, Detroit Lions, Hamilton Tiger-Cats, Indianapolis Colts, Montreal Alouettes, New England Patriots, New York Giants, New York Jets, Ottawa Redblacks, Philadelphia Eagles, Pittsburgh Steelers, Toronto Argonauts, Washington Redskins (Need 10 More Teams)
DFL: Atlanta Falcons, Jacksonville Jaguars, Miami Dolphins, New Orleans Saints, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Tennessee Titans (Need 22 More Teams)
ISFL: Chicago Bears, Dallas Cowboys, Green Bay Packers, Houston Texans, Kansas City Chiefs, Minnesota Vikings, WInnipeg Blue Bombers (Need 21 More Teams)

PCFL: Arizona Cardinals, British Columbia Lions, Calgary Stampeders, Denver Broncos, Edmonton Eskimos, Los Angeles Rams, Oakland Raiders, San Diego Chargers, San Francisco 49ers, Saskatchewan Roughriders, Seattle Seahawks (Need 17 More Teams)

 

However 4 Leagues in Pro Football will have 28 Teams each if you any suggestions let me know, but right now let's go to Baseball

 

ABL: Baltimore Orioles, Boston Red Sox, Cincinnati Reds, Cleveland Indians, Detroit Tigers, New York Mets, New York Yankees, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh Pirates, Toronto Blue Jays, Washington Nationals (Need 17 More Teams)

IBL: Chicago Cubs, Chicago White Sox, Houston Astros, Kansas City Royals, Milwaukee Brewers, Minnesota Twins, St. Louis Cardinals, Texas Rangers (Need 20 More Teams)

PCBL: Arizona Diamondbacks, Colorado Rockies, Los Angeles Angels, Los Angeles Dodgers, Oakland Athletics, San Diego Padres, San Francisco Giants, Seattle Mariners (Need 20 More Teams)

SBL: Atlanta Braves, Miami Marlins, Tampa Bay Bay Rays (Need 25 More Teams)

So if there's any suggestions you wanna consider let me know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The MLB in 2022 - Divisions are realigned and the league implements Universal DH

 

NL East

Montreal Expos

New York Mets

Philadelphia Phillies

Pittsburgh Pirates

 

NL South

Atlanta Braves

Miami Marlins

Tampa Bay Rays

Washington Nationals

 

NL Central

Chicago Cubs

Cincinnati Reds

Milwaukee Brewers

St. Louis Cardinals

 

NL West

Arizona Diamondbacks

Los Angeles Dodgers

San Diego Padres

San Francisco Giants

 

AL East

Baltimore Orioles

Boston Red Sox

New York Yankees

Toronto Blue Jays

 

AL South

Colorado Rockies

Houston Astros

Kansas City Royals

Texas Rangers

 

AL  Central

Chicago White Sox

Cleveland Indians

Detroit Tigers

Minnesota Twins

 

AL West

Los Angeles Angels

Oakland A's

Portland Beavers

Seattle Mariners

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the recent expansion news, I decided to do an MLS realignment. This would be as of 2022, when St. Louis begins play:

 

spacer.png

 

(Los Angeles=LA Galaxy, Long Beach=LA FC, Covington=FC Cincinnati, New York=NYC FC, Newark=NY Red Bulls, Boston=New England, Fort Lauderdale=Inter Miami CF)

 

EASTERN CONFERENCE

 

NORTHEAST DIVISION

 

DC United
Montreal Impact
New England Revolution
New York City FC
New York Red Bulls
Philadelphia Union
Toronto FC

 

CENTRAL DIVISION

 

Atlanta United FC
Chicago Fire
FC Cincinnati
Columbus Crew SC
Inter Miami CF
Nashville SC
Orlando City SC

 

WESTERN CONFERENCE

 

MIDWEST DIVISION

 

Austin FC
Colorado Rapids
FC Dallas
Houston Dynamo
Minnesota United FC
Sporting Kansas City
St. Louis

 

PACIFIC DIVISION

 

Los Angeles Galaxy
Los Angeles FC
Portland Timbers
Real Salt Lake
San Jose Earthquakes
Seattle Sounders FC
Vancouver Whitecaps FC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's how to take all the BS out of college football. Start a new Division called Division 1 Elite. Each school has to pay a buy in. ...it comes down to the same schools every year anyways so let's just have a mega league. The "league" is broken down into four conferences of 12 based upon location. The top four from each conference move on to a single elimination tournament. Plain and simple. Better games better ratings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s my ideal MLB, from my research and opinions on how markets worked out.

 

AL East

Baltimore Orioles

Boston Red Sox

Chicago White Sox

Cleveland Spiders (‘77 expansion)

Detroit Tigers

New York Yankees

Toronto Blue Jays (‘77 expansion)

 

AL West

Anaheim Angels (‘61 expansion)

Dallas Chaparrals (‘61 expansion team, relocated ‘72)

Denver Zephyrs (‘93 expansion)

Kansas City Royals (‘69 expansion)

Minnesota Twins

Oakland Athletics

Seattle Rainiers (former Cleveland/Seattle Indians - moved in 1965, renamed in 1993)

 

NL East

Atlanta Firebirds (former Boston Braves/Milwaukee Brewers)

Cincinnati Reds

Montréal Expos (‘69 expansion)

New York Mets (‘62 expansion)

Philadelphia Phillies

Pittsburgh Pirates

Washington Grays (‘93 expansion)

 

NL West

Chicago Cubs

Houston Astros (‘62 expansion)

Los Angeles Dodgers

Milwaukee Brewers (‘69 expansion)

St. Louis Cardinals

San Diego Padres (‘69 expansion)

San Francisco Giants

 

What I like about this alignment is that there are only 28 teams, with zero Florida clubs, no Arizona team, and relative geographic harmony. Other perks include only one team with a state name, no Native American-themed identifies, and the Expos stuck around. Even the one relocation I did add features a replacement team. 

 

Edited by SFGiants58

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

Here’s my ideal MLB, from my research and opinions on how markets worked out.

 

4 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

What I like about this alignment is that there are only 28 teams, with zero Florida clubs, no Arizona team, and relative geographic harmony.

 

Having no teams in the spring training states is a big plus.

 

However, that is cancelled out by the loss of the Braves' identity.  The team has dumped the only really questionable part of its iconography, the shouting Indian logo.  The tomahawk is borderline; but, I could see getting rid of it, despite its aesthetic qualities and its historical value as having represented the team in all three of its homes.  Indeed, the team's current alt uniform without the tomahawk and with the number on the front is very nice.  The use of the noun form of the adjective "brave" with no Native imagery would be the best way to go. (Though a logo with a feather would probably be alright, as evidenced by the fact that the L.A. Clippers continue to use a feather logo on their Buffalo Braves throwback with no objections.)

 

 

4 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

Dallas Chaparrals (‘61 expansion team, relocated ‘72)

 

Are we to assume that the 1961 expansion team was placed in Washington, as in the real history?

 

Also, you have three 1969 expansion teams in the National League, and only one in the American League.  That would give us a 13-team National League and an 11-team American League from 1969 through 1976, and two 13-team leagues from 1977 through 1992, with even numbers restored in 1993.  So, this raises the ugly prospect of interleague play dating back to 1969.  Not cool.

And "Anaheim Angels"?  Please no.  Whether this team plays in Los Angeles proper or in a relatively unimportant city in the next county over, it is an L.A. team — as were the Rams when they played in Anaheim.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

 

Having no teams in the spring training states is a big plus.

 

However, that is cancelled out by the loss of the Braves' identity.  The team has dumped the only really questionable part of its iconography, the shouting Indian logo.  The tomahawk is borderline; but, I could see getting rid of it, despite its aesthetic qualities and its historical value as having represented the team in all three of its homes.  Indeed, the team's current alt uniform without the tomahawk and with the number on the front is very nice.  The use of the noun form of the adjective "brave" with no Native imagery would be the best way to go. (Though a logo with a feather would probably be alright, as evidenced by the fact that the L.A. Clippers continue to use a feather logo on their Buffalo Braves throwback with no objections.)

 

It’s still a Native American-themed name in origin that has few other associations (like Warriors), so it goes bye-bye. I don’t care that it “links the history of the franchise,” it still goes away in favor of a local approach.

 

What better way to get rid of the tomahawks chop?

 

The Buffalo Braves’ logo looks more like a jet contrail than it does a feather, so no, it doesn’t count. It shouldn’t have been allowed anyway, since Buffalo never got a replacement team.

 

Quote

Are we to assume that the 1961 expansion team was placed in Washington, as in the real history?

 

Yes.

 

Quote

 

Also, you have three 1969 expansion teams in the National League, and only one in the American League. 

 

The Brewers would still flip to the NL, albeit in the ‘93 expansion. They’d want Chicago games, while the AL West would get a mountain time team.

 

Quote

And "Anaheim Angels"?  Please no.  Whether this team plays in Los Angeles proper or in a relatively unimportant city in the next county over, it is an L.A. team — as were the Rams when they played in Anaheim.  

 

The Anaheim Angels won the 2002 World Series and the Anaheim Ducks exist. Anaheim forever, LA never.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SFGiants58 said:

The Anaheim Angels won the 2002 World Series and the Anaheim Ducks exist. Anaheim forever, LA never.

 

The Florida Marlins won the World Series; that didn't keep the team from correcting its name to "Miami".

 

Also, the New Jersey Devils exist, as did the New Jersey Nets and New Jersey Generals.  Yet the current XFL wised up and named its Meadowlands team the New York Guardians. even after having erred the last time by including New Jersey in the name of the New York / New Jersey Hitmen . And of course MLS's team in northern New Jersey is rightfully called New York, despite its origin with the risible New York / New Jersey moniker. 

The important point is that a city's sphere of influence extends far beyond its borders, even into other municipalities.  And this goes double for the collosi of New York and Los Angeles.  If you turn on the television in Anaheim, all the local stations are Los Angeles stations; and this is all you need to know in order to establish objectively and conclusively that that town is part of the L.A. metropolitan area.  Indeed, Anaheim is significant only on account of being part of that urban area, not in its own right.

Leagues smaller than Major League Baseball can reasonably identify with less significant locales; for instance, the NHL with teams in the Los Angeles and New York areas called Anaheim and New Jersey, respectively.  The MLL once had a team called Long Island, which made sense for that league (a lot more sense than changing that team's name to New York despite the fact that the team's entire fan base is located on the Island and not in the City).  But the bigger leagues should not be dealing with that sort of nonsense.  In a league the calibre of Major League Baseball, goofy Anaheim has no business being listed alongside the Chicagos and Philadephias of the world.  Even Kansas City and Milwaukee, the smallest cities in the Major Leagues, dwarf Anaheim — not only in population, but also in cultural significance and overall mystique.

"Anaheim" in the Major Leagues.  Egad, man.  Major League Baseball is better than that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

The Florida Marlins won the World Series; that didn't keep the team from correcting its name to "Miami".

 

They had two fire sales and never made the playoffs after 2003. It's different.

 

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Also, the New Jersey Devils exist, as did the New Jersey Nets and New Jersey Generals.  Yet the current XFL wised up and named its Meadowlands team the New York Guardians. even after having erred the last time by including New Jersey in the name of the New York / New Jersey Hitmen . And of course MLS's team in northern New Jersey is rightfully called New York, despite its origin with the risible New York / New Jersey moniker. 

 

Sure.

 

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

The important point is that a city's sphere of influence extends far beyond its borders, even into other municipalities.  And this goes double for the collosi of New York and Los Angeles.  If you turn on the television in Anaheim, all the local stations are Los Angeles stations; and this is all you need to know in order to establish objectively and conclusively that that town is part of the L.A. metropolitan area.  Indeed, Anaheim is significant only on account of being part of that urban area, not in its own right.

 

The Orange Curtain still exists.

 

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Leagues smaller than Major League Baseball can reasonably identify with less significant locales; for instance, the NHL with teams in the Los Angeles and New York areas called Anaheim and New Jersey, respectively.

 

The NHL isn't that much smaller than MLB. WIth a large Canadian presence, it's arguably bigger. That's snooty to say otherwise.

 

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

  The MLL once had a team called Long Island, which made sense for that league (a lot more sense than changing that team's name to New York despite the fact that the team's entire fan base is located on the Island and not in the City).  But the bigger leagues should not be dealing with that sort of nonsense. 

 

Ok.

 

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

In a league the calibre of Major League Baseball, goofy Anaheim has no business being listed alongside the Chicagos and Philadephias of the world.  Even Kansas City and Milwaukee, the smallest cities in the Major Leagues, dwarf Anaheim — not only in population, but also in cultural significance and overall mystique.

 

That lacks so much local perspective and understanding that Anaheim became big-league. Not every city needs some "cultural significance" or "mystique" to be in the majors. That's elitist crap. @Still MIGHTY and the other people of Orange County would like a word with you.

 

1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:


"Anaheim" in the Major Leagues.  Egad, man.  Major League Baseball is better than that. 

 

"Anaheim" belongs in the majors. Deal with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, SFGiants58 said:

"Anaheim" belongs in the majors. Deal with it.

 

I don't have to, because the Angels have done the right thing and reverted to the name Los Angeles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

I don't have to, because the Angels have done the right thing and reverted to the name Los Angeles.


Because Arte wanted to maybe leave Anaheim, which alienated a bunch of fans with that move. 
 

I’m sure many fans want to bring “Anaheim” back. It’s the name of the best team in franchise history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NBA alignment is boring, too many teams make the playoffs and divisions mean nothing. I'd like to see them try this:

ATLANTIC DIVISION

Boston Celtics

New York Knicks

Brooklyn Nets

Philadelphia 76ers

Washington Wizards

Toronto Raptors

CENTRAL DIVISION

Cleveland Cavaliers

Detroit Pistons

Indiana Pacers

Milwaukee Bucks

Chicago Bulls

Minnesota Timberwolves

SOUTHEAST DIVISION

Charlotte Hornets

Memphis Grizzlies

Atlanta Hawks

Orlando Magic

Miami Heat

New Orleans Pelicans

SOUTHWEST

San Antonio Spurs

Dallas Mavericks

Houston Rockets

OKC Thunder

Denver Nuggets

Utah Jazz

PACIFIC

Phoenix Suns

Los Angeles Lakers

LA Clippers

Sacramento Kings

Golden State Warriors

Portland Trailblazers

 

So obviously not too much change, outside of conferences being abandoned and being replaced by five 6 team divisions. Some teams get shuffled around, but into more geographically sensical arrangements.Here's how I'd do the playoffs, using the 2018-19 results as a guide. 11 teams are in, the five division winners and the next six best teams.

Division Winners (First round bye)

1. Milwaukee Bucks: 60-22

2. Toronto Raptors: 58-24

3. Golden State Warriors: 57-25

4. Denver Nuggets: 54-28

5. Orlando Magic: 42-40

Wildcards (Best of 5 Play in Round)

6. Portland Trail Blazers: 53-29

7. Houston Rockets: 53-29

8. Philadelphia 76ers: 51-31

9. Utah Jazz: 50-32

10. Boston Celtics: 49-33

11. OKC Thunder: 49-33

 

The very obvious problem here is that the Southeast division is hot garbage and so the Magic make the playoffs at 42-40, a worse record than the Spurs, Clippers, and Pacers who all missed the playoffs. I think this is a small price to pay for this new alignment, and will likely be an outlier as the league shifts. With this alignment, the divisions actually matter and so hopefully division rivalries will matter a lot more. Also with first round byes at stake hopefully there would be fewer "rest" days for big stars and the teams that perform better during the regular season and win the division will be rewarded with a week of rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/26/2019 at 3:12 PM, SFGiants58 said:

The Anaheim Angels won the 2002 World Series and the Anaheim Ducks exist. Anaheim forever, LA never.

 

What if the team was named the Los Angeles Stars from the get go and treated as a merger of the old PCL clubs? California Stars and Anaheim Stars would sound a lot better than a name that only makes sense when it's attached to LA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NicDB said:

 

What if the team was named the Los Angeles Stars from the get go and treated as a merger of the old PCL clubs? California Stars and Anaheim Stars would sound a lot better than a name that only makes sense when it's attached to LA.


I’m not sure that it’s good branding to have both a Stars and an Astros in the same level. I know that Los Angeles Angels makes sense in a linguistic sense, but the alliteration/assonance makes “Angels” far more usable. 
 

Going the Hollywood angle with Stars could work, to homage the PCL team’s city name. A film canister as a baseball roundel, anybody?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MLB has proposed eliminating 42 MiLB clubs from affiliated baseball(basically by nuking the short season leagues) and is seeking to bring in two independent league teams to help get to 120. Those being

Spoiler

St. Paul, MN and Sugarland, TX.

So...with that in mind, what 42 clubs would you eliminate? This of course assumes this idea passes through without modifications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, buzzcut said:

MLB has proposed eliminating 42 MiLB clubs from affiliated baseball(basically by nuking the short season leagues) and is seeking to bring in two independent league teams to help get to 120. Those being

  Hide contents

St. Paul, MN and Sugarland, TX.

So...with that in mind, what 42 clubs would you eliminate? This of course assumes this idea passes through without modifications.

 

The talk is that they would eliminate the Rookie level teams and the short season level teams. This means these leagues would disappear...

 

-New York/Penn League (14)

-Northwest (8)

-Appalachian (10)

-Pioneer (8)

 

You're at 40 teams right now if you cut out those four leagues out. Don't know where the other two are coming in. With what has been mentioned, here's what I think will happen here with the things mentioned in the article and what you have brought up:

 

Triple A:

Pacific Coast League (10) - Albuquerque, El Paso, Fresno, Las Vegas, Reno, Round Rock, Sacramento, Salt Lake, San Antonio, Tacoma

International League (20) - Buffalo, Charlotte, Columbus, Durham, Gwinnett, Indianapolis, Iowa, Lehigh Valley, Louisville, Memphis, Nashville, Norfolk, Oklahoma City, Omaha, Pawtucket, Rochester, Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, Syracuse, Toledo, Wichita

 

Double A:

Eastern League (12) - Altoona, Akron, Binghamton, Bowie, Erie, Harrisburg, Hartford, New Hampshire, Portland (Maine), Reading, Richmond, Trenton

Southern League (8) - Birmingham, Biloxi, Chattanooga, Jacksonville, Montgomery, Rocket City, Pensacola, Tennessee

Texas League (10) - Amarillo, Arkansas, Corpus Christi, Frisco, Midland, Northwest Arkansas, Shreveport (Formerly Jackson Generals), Springfield, Sugar Land (Former Mississippi Braves), Tulsa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Seadragon76 said:

 

The talk is that they would eliminate the Rookie level teams and the short season level teams. This means these leagues would disappear...

 

-New York/Penn League (14)

-Northwest (8)

-Appalachian (10)

-Pioneer (8)

 

You're at 40 teams right now if you cut out those four leagues out. Don't know where the other two are coming in. With what has been mentioned, here's what I think will happen here with the things mentioned in the article and what you have brought up:

 

Triple A:

Pacific Coast League (10) - Albuquerque, El Paso, Fresno, Las Vegas, Reno, Round Rock, Sacramento, Salt Lake, San Antonio, Tacoma

International League (20) - Buffalo, Charlotte, Columbus, Durham, Gwinnett, Indianapolis, Iowa, Lehigh Valley, Louisville, Memphis, Nashville, Norfolk, Oklahoma City, Omaha, Pawtucket, Rochester, Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, Syracuse, Toledo, Wichita

 

Double A:

Eastern League (12) - Altoona, Akron, Binghamton, Bowie, Erie, Harrisburg, Hartford, New Hampshire, Portland (Maine), Reading, Richmond, Trenton

Southern League (8) - Birmingham, Biloxi, Chattanooga, Jacksonville, Montgomery, Rocket City, Pensacola, Tennessee

Texas League (10) - Amarillo, Arkansas, Corpus Christi, Frisco, Midland, Northwest Arkansas, Shreveport (Formerly Jackson Generals), Springfield, Sugar Land (Former Mississippi Braves), Tulsa

I actually saw a report on ballparkdigest.com saying that a PCL team is being targeted for a move to St. Paul and that some short season clubs, like the whole Northwest League may become full season operations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the 16 teams in the PCL that could move to St. Paul: Fresno maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.