JH42XCC Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Cincinnati Reds in the American League with Cleveland Indians (their in-state rival) and the Boston Red Sox? An absolute "no-no". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loogodude90 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Cincinnati Reds in the American League with Cleveland Indians (their in-state rival) and the Boston Red Sox? An absolute "no-no".To be fair, Pennsylvania has two NL teams (in-state rivals, if you will) in real life. Quote WIZARDS ORIOLES CAPITALS RAVENS UNITED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Cincinnati Reds in the American League with Cleveland Indians (their in-state rival) and the Boston Red Sox? An absolute "no-no".To be fair, Pennsylvania has two NL teams (in-state rivals, if you will) in real life.Cincinnati will never switch leagues. They were the first team and will ways be in the NL. Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loogodude90 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Cincinnati Reds in the American League with Cleveland Indians (their in-state rival) and the Boston Red Sox? An absolute "no-no".To be fair, Pennsylvania has two NL teams (in-state rivals, if you will) in real life.Cincinnati will never switch leagues. They were the first team and will ways be in the NL.Hmm. Maybe in that case Cincinnati and Charlotte can switch places. Or, if that's not good enough, move CIN to the NL North, STL to the NL south, and CHA to the AL South. Quote WIZARDS ORIOLES CAPITALS RAVENS UNITED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Cincinnati Reds in the American League with Cleveland Indians (their in-state rival) and the Boston Red Sox? An absolute "no-no".To be fair, Pennsylvania has two NL teams (in-state rivals, if you will) in real life.Cincinnati will never switch leagues. They were the first team and will ways be in the NL.Hmm. Maybe in that case Cincinnati and Charlotte can switch places. Or, if that's not good enough, move CIN to the NL North, STL to the NL south, and CHA to the AL South.You're not seriously proposing splitting up the Cards and the Cubs, are you? 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...
loogodude90 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Cincinnati Reds in the American League with Cleveland Indians (their in-state rival) and the Boston Red Sox? An absolute "no-no".To be fair, Pennsylvania has two NL teams (in-state rivals, if you will) in real life.Cincinnati will never switch leagues. They were the first team and will ways be in the NL.Hmm. Maybe in that case Cincinnati and Charlotte can switch places. Or, if that's not good enough, move CIN to the NL North, STL to the NL south, and CHA to the AL South.You're not seriously proposing splitting up the Cards and the Cubs, are you?As an alternate suggestion, yes. Do you have any comments about my initial suggestion? Because if you are okay with that one, then the second one becomes moot. Quote WIZARDS ORIOLES CAPITALS RAVENS UNITED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norva Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Cincinnati Reds in the American League with Cleveland Indians (their in-state rival) and the Boston Red Sox? An absolute "no-no".To be fair, Pennsylvania has two NL teams (in-state rivals, if you will) in real life.Cincinnati will never switch leagues. They were the first team and will ways be in the NL.They were not the first team. The Cincinnati Red Stockings of 1869 have absolutely no relationship to the current Reds franchise which started in 1882 in the American Association. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnclearInitial Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Cincinnati Reds in the American League with Cleveland Indians (their in-state rival) and the Boston Red Sox? An absolute "no-no".To be fair, Pennsylvania has two NL teams (in-state rivals, if you will) in real life.Cincinnati will never switch leagues. They were the first team and will ways be in the NL.They were not the first team. The Cincinnati Red Stockings of 1869 have absolutely no relationship to the current Reds franchise which started in 1882 in the American Association.Indeed. The Braves have more of a claim than the Reds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Cincinnati Reds in the American League with Cleveland Indians (their in-state rival) and the Boston Red Sox? An absolute "no-no".To be fair, Pennsylvania has two NL teams (in-state rivals, if you will) in real life.Cincinnati will never switch leagues. They were the first team and will ways be in the NL.Hmm. Maybe in that case Cincinnati and Charlotte can switch places. Or, if that's not good enough, move CIN to the NL North, STL to the NL south, and CHA to the AL South.You're not seriously proposing splitting up the Cards and the Cubs, are you?As an alternate suggestion, yes. Do you have any comments about my initial suggestion? Because if you are okay with that one, then the second one becomes moot.For Portland and Charlotte?NLWest: Arizona, LA Dodgers, San Diego, San FranciscoCentral: St. Louis, Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati, MilwaukeeEast: NY Mets, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, WashingtonSouth: Atlanta, CHARLOTTE, Miami, Tampa BayALWest: Colorado, LA Angels, Oakland, SeattleCentral: Chicago Sox, Cleveland, Detroit, MinnesotaEast: Baltimore, Boston, NY Yankees, TorontoUm, South, I guess you could call it: Colorado, Houston, Kansas City, TexasI switched Tampa Bay and Houston for no other reason than it worked out the best without really taking any traditional teams out of their natural habitats. Using Charlotte is a kind of tricky one. I actually have worked one out better with these 2 expansions before, but I can't remember it off the top of my head. I have it written out somewhere, so I may try and find it. Portland and San Antonio are the easiest ones, if you're just going by the easiest way to realign. Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmoehrin Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 For both football and baseball I would have it sorted more along the lines of Northeast and Southwest rather then AL versus NL and AFC versus NFC.Here's what I would do for the NFL.East Conference---------------Division 1----------Atlanta FalconsJacksonville JaguarsMiami DolphinsTampa Bay BuccaneersDivision 2----------Baltimore RavensCarolina PanthersPittsburgh SteelersWashington RedskinsDivision 3----------Buffalo BillsCincinnati BengalsCleveland BrownsDetroit LionsDivision 4----------New England PatriotsNew York GiantsNew York JetsPhiladelphia EaglesWest Conferece--------------Division 1----------Chicago BearsGreen Bay PackersIndianapolis ColtsMinnesota VikingsDivision 2----------Dallas CowboysHouston TexansNew Orleans SaintsTennessee TitansDivision 3----------Arizona CardinalsDenver BroncosKansas City ChiefsSt. Louis RamsDivision 4----------Oakland RaidersSan Diego ChargersSan Francisco 49ersSeattle SeahawksFor MLBEast League-----------Division 1----------Atlanta BravesChicago CubsChicago White SoxCincinnati RedsMilwaukee BrewersDivision 2----------Baltimore OriolesBoston Red SoxNew York MetsNew York YankeesPhiladelphia PhilliesDivision 3----------Cleveland IndiansDetroit TigersPittsburgh PiratesToronto Blue JaysWashington NationalsWest League-----------Division 1----------Arizona DiamondbacksColorado RockiesKansas City RoyalsMinnesota TwinsSeattle MarinersDivision 2----------Florida MarlinsHouston AstrosSt. Louis CardinalsTampa Bay RaysTexas RangersDivision 3----------LA Angels of AnaheimLos Angeles DodgersOakland AthleticsSan Diego PadresSan Francisco GiantsI'm pretty sure with that alignment you cannot make any division swaps and have the average distance between teams in the division decrease. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 For both football and baseball I would have it sorted more along the lines of Northeast and Southwest rather then AL versus NL and AFC versus NFC.Here's what I would do for the NFL.East Conference---------------Division 1----------Baltimore RavensCarolina PanthersPittsburgh SteelersWashington RedskinsDivision 2----------Buffalo BillsCincinnati BengalsCleveland BrownsDetroit LionsDivision 3----------New England PatriotsNew York GiantsNew York JetsPhiladelphia EaglesDivision 4----------Atlanta FalconsJacksonville JaguarsMiami DolphinsTampa Bay BuccaneersWest Conferece--------------Division 1----------Dallas CowboysHouston TexansNew Orleans SaintsTennessee TitansDivision 2----------Chicago BearsGreen Bay PackersIndianapolis ColtsMinnesota VikingsDivision 3----------Arizona CardinalsDenver BroncosKansas City ChiefsSt. Louis RamsDivision 4----------Oakland RaidersSan Diego ChargersSan Francisco 49ersSeattle SeahawksFor MLBEast League-----------Division 1----------Atlanta BravesChicago CubsChicago White SoxCincinnati RedsMilwaukee BrewersDivision 2----------Baltimore OriolesBoston Red SoxNew York MetsNew York YankeesPhiladelphia PhilliesDivision 3----------Cleveland IndiansDetroit TigersPittsburgh PiratesToronto Blue JaysWashington NationalsWest League-----------Division 1----------Arizona DiamondbacksColorado RockiesKansas City RoyalsMinnesota TwinsSeattle MarinersDivision 2----------Florida MarlinsHouston AstrosSt. Louis CardinalsTampa Bay RaysTexas RangersDivision 3----------LA Angels of AnaheimLos Angeles DodgersOakland AthleticsSan Diego PadresSan Francisco GiantsWow. So many comments to make here. I'm just gonna focus on baseball for now:- Splitting up the Cubs and Cardinals? Mistake numero uno.- Then, you put the Braves with the Chicago teams, Milwaukee and Cincinnati instead of St. Louis, even though they're much closer to those cities. And you put the Florida teams, who are closer to Atlanta, with St. Louis and the Texas teams... in the WEST league. How in the world is Florida teams in the West League? Florida and Texas teams in one divison works, in the AL/NL format, but you should swap St. Louis and Atlanta.- All this on top of the fact that you ditched the NL and AL. Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmoehrin Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 For both football and baseball I would have it sorted more along the lines of Northeast and Southwest rather then AL versus NL and AFC versus NFC.Here's what I would do for the NFL.East Conference---------------Division 1----------Baltimore RavensCarolina PanthersPittsburgh SteelersWashington RedskinsDivision 2----------Buffalo BillsCincinnati BengalsCleveland BrownsDetroit LionsDivision 3----------New England PatriotsNew York GiantsNew York JetsPhiladelphia EaglesDivision 4----------Atlanta FalconsJacksonville JaguarsMiami DolphinsTampa Bay BuccaneersWest Conferece--------------Division 1----------Dallas CowboysHouston TexansNew Orleans SaintsTennessee TitansDivision 2----------Chicago BearsGreen Bay PackersIndianapolis ColtsMinnesota VikingsDivision 3----------Arizona CardinalsDenver BroncosKansas City ChiefsSt. Louis RamsDivision 4----------Oakland RaidersSan Diego ChargersSan Francisco 49ersSeattle SeahawksFor MLBEast League-----------Division 1----------Atlanta BravesChicago CubsChicago White SoxCincinnati RedsMilwaukee BrewersDivision 2----------Baltimore OriolesBoston Red SoxNew York MetsNew York YankeesPhiladelphia PhilliesDivision 3----------Cleveland IndiansDetroit TigersPittsburgh PiratesToronto Blue JaysWashington NationalsWest League-----------Division 1----------Arizona DiamondbacksColorado RockiesKansas City RoyalsMinnesota TwinsSeattle MarinersDivision 2----------Florida MarlinsHouston AstrosSt. Louis CardinalsTampa Bay RaysTexas RangersDivision 3----------LA Angels of AnaheimLos Angeles DodgersOakland AthleticsSan Diego PadresSan Francisco GiantsWow. So many comments to make here. I'm just gonna focus on baseball for now:- Splitting up the Cubs and Cardinals? Mistake numero uno.- Then, you put the Braves with the Chicago teams, Milwaukee and Cincinnati instead of St. Louis, even though they're much closer to those cities. And you put the Florida teams, who are closer to Atlanta, with St. Louis and the Texas teams... in the WEST league. How in the world is Florida teams in the West League? Florida and Texas teams in one divison works, in the AL/NL format, but you should swap St. Louis and Atlanta.- All this on top of the fact that you ditched the NL and AL.As far as the splitting up the Cubs and Cards, the NL/AL or any division rivalry, I'm not really going much for realisim. There's obviously problems. I'm just simply going for closest distance.The west league is kind of a bad name for what I was going for, and I don't really know why I put it. It's really more of a south-west league. How many of those teams are above the mason dixon line, versus what I had for the NFL?Atlanta was a tough team to place. I threw them in there mainly because of their relation in regards to everyone else in their league moreso then their division. I will agree that St. Louis is a better for that division, but not not for the league.If it was a serious proposition, I wouldn't be completely closed minded to the idea of swapping Atlanta for St. Louis. St. Louis is also closer fit then Atlanta for that division, but not the overall league. I like it the way I had it, but its a good point to bring up. I don't even think of it because I had it sorted by league first and then division. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCall Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 For both football and baseball I would have it sorted more along the lines of Northeast and Southwest rather then AL versus NL and AFC versus NFC.Here's what I would do for the NFL.East Conference---------------Division 1----------Baltimore RavensCarolina PanthersPittsburgh SteelersWashington RedskinsDivision 2----------Buffalo BillsCincinnati BengalsCleveland BrownsDetroit LionsDivision 3----------New England PatriotsNew York GiantsNew York JetsPhiladelphia EaglesDivision 4----------Atlanta FalconsJacksonville JaguarsMiami DolphinsTampa Bay BuccaneersWest Conferece--------------Division 1----------Dallas CowboysHouston TexansNew Orleans SaintsTennessee TitansDivision 2----------Chicago BearsGreen Bay PackersIndianapolis ColtsMinnesota VikingsDivision 3----------Arizona CardinalsDenver BroncosKansas City ChiefsSt. Louis RamsDivision 4----------Oakland RaidersSan Diego ChargersSan Francisco 49ersSeattle SeahawksFor MLBEast League-----------Division 1----------Atlanta BravesChicago CubsChicago White SoxCincinnati RedsMilwaukee BrewersDivision 2----------Baltimore OriolesBoston Red SoxNew York MetsNew York YankeesPhiladelphia PhilliesDivision 3----------Cleveland IndiansDetroit TigersPittsburgh PiratesToronto Blue JaysWashington NationalsWest League-----------Division 1----------Arizona DiamondbacksColorado RockiesKansas City RoyalsMinnesota TwinsSeattle MarinersDivision 2----------Florida MarlinsHouston AstrosSt. Louis CardinalsTampa Bay RaysTexas RangersDivision 3----------LA Angels of AnaheimLos Angeles DodgersOakland AthleticsSan Diego PadresSan Francisco GiantsWow. So many comments to make here. I'm just gonna focus on baseball for now:- Splitting up the Cubs and Cardinals? Mistake numero uno.- Then, you put the Braves with the Chicago teams, Milwaukee and Cincinnati instead of St. Louis, even though they're much closer to those cities. And you put the Florida teams, who are closer to Atlanta, with St. Louis and the Texas teams... in the WEST league. How in the world is Florida teams in the West League? Florida and Texas teams in one divison works, in the AL/NL format, but you should swap St. Louis and Atlanta.- All this on top of the fact that you ditched the NL and AL.As far as the splitting up the Cubs and Cards, the NL/AL or any division rivalry, I'm not really going much for realisim. There's obviously problems. I'm just simply going for closest distance.The west league is kind of a bad name for what I was going for, and I don't really know why I put it. It's really more of a south-west league. How many of those teams are above the mason dixon line, versus what I had for the NFL?Atlanta was a tough team to place. I threw them in there mainly because of their relation in regards to everyone else in their league moreso then their division. I will agree that St. Louis is a better for that division, but not not for the league.If it was a serious proposition, I wouldn't be completely closed minded to the idea of swapping Atlanta for St. Louis. St. Louis is also closer fit then Atlanta for that division, but not the overall league. I like it the way I had it, but its a good point to bring up. I don't even think of it because I had it sorted by league first and then division.Better fit for the league? What does that even mean? There are 3 rivalries you NEVER split up divisionally in baseball: Yanks/Sox, Cards/Cubs and Dodgers/Giants. There is nothing logical, geographically or "fit-wise", about the way you have the Cardinals and Braves placed. Quote https://dribbble.com/MakaioCall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmoehrin Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 For both football and baseball I would have it sorted more along the lines of Northeast and Southwest rather then AL versus NL and AFC versus NFC.Here's what I would do for the NFL.East Conference---------------Division 1----------Baltimore RavensCarolina PanthersPittsburgh SteelersWashington RedskinsDivision 2----------Buffalo BillsCincinnati BengalsCleveland BrownsDetroit LionsDivision 3----------New England PatriotsNew York GiantsNew York JetsPhiladelphia EaglesDivision 4----------Atlanta FalconsJacksonville JaguarsMiami DolphinsTampa Bay BuccaneersWest Conferece--------------Division 1----------Dallas CowboysHouston TexansNew Orleans SaintsTennessee TitansDivision 2----------Chicago BearsGreen Bay PackersIndianapolis ColtsMinnesota VikingsDivision 3----------Arizona CardinalsDenver BroncosKansas City ChiefsSt. Louis RamsDivision 4----------Oakland RaidersSan Diego ChargersSan Francisco 49ersSeattle SeahawksFor MLBEast League-----------Division 1----------Atlanta BravesChicago CubsChicago White SoxCincinnati RedsMilwaukee BrewersDivision 2----------Baltimore OriolesBoston Red SoxNew York MetsNew York YankeesPhiladelphia PhilliesDivision 3----------Cleveland IndiansDetroit TigersPittsburgh PiratesToronto Blue JaysWashington NationalsWest League-----------Division 1----------Arizona DiamondbacksColorado RockiesKansas City RoyalsMinnesota TwinsSeattle MarinersDivision 2----------Florida MarlinsHouston AstrosSt. Louis CardinalsTampa Bay RaysTexas RangersDivision 3----------LA Angels of AnaheimLos Angeles DodgersOakland AthleticsSan Diego PadresSan Francisco GiantsWow. So many comments to make here. I'm just gonna focus on baseball for now:- Splitting up the Cubs and Cardinals? Mistake numero uno.- Then, you put the Braves with the Chicago teams, Milwaukee and Cincinnati instead of St. Louis, even though they're much closer to those cities. And you put the Florida teams, who are closer to Atlanta, with St. Louis and the Texas teams... in the WEST league. How in the world is Florida teams in the West League? Florida and Texas teams in one divison works, in the AL/NL format, but you should swap St. Louis and Atlanta.- All this on top of the fact that you ditched the NL and AL.As far as the splitting up the Cubs and Cards, the NL/AL or any division rivalry, I'm not really going much for realisim. There's obviously problems. I'm just simply going for closest distance.The west league is kind of a bad name for what I was going for, and I don't really know why I put it. It's really more of a south-west league. How many of those teams are above the mason dixon line, versus what I had for the NFL?Atlanta was a tough team to place. I threw them in there mainly because of their relation in regards to everyone else in their league moreso then their division. I will agree that St. Louis is a better for that division, but not not for the league.If it was a serious proposition, I wouldn't be completely closed minded to the idea of swapping Atlanta for St. Louis. St. Louis is also closer fit then Atlanta for that division, but not the overall league. I like it the way I had it, but its a good point to bring up. I don't even think of it because I had it sorted by league first and then division.Better fit for the league? What does that even mean? There are 3 rivalries you NEVER split up divisionally in baseball: Yanks/Sox, Cards/Cubs and Dodgers/Giants. There is nothing logical, geographically or "fit-wise", about the way you have the Cardinals and Braves placed.What I mean by that was that Atlanta is closer to places like Washington, Baltimore, Philly, New York, and Boston then St. Louis is. Just like St. Louis is much closer to Seattle, Minnesota, KC, Colorado, San Fran and Oakland.And I even said it was a good point, and I could understand where you were coming from. I don't know what more you want from me? It's a joke thing that I did in 20 minutes, but you seem to be very upset over it. If it bothers you that much, then do the switch for Atlanta and St. Louis yourself. I rather that then try to continuly defend something I thought of that I know has no chance of happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evanaho Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I always thought conferences (FBS) would make more sense if they were regionalized. Also, since many conferences are moving to a two-division format, I thought relatively equal-sized conferences seemed like an agreeably symmetrical way of organizing teams. I began with the current 120 teams and added the three schools* due to join FBS in the near future (Texas State, South Alabama, UTSA). I did my best to preserve some rivalries, though I did move Ohio State and Michigan to seperate conferences (*gasp!*). They can schedule a non-conference every year for the last game. I welcome your thoughts and/or criticisms.AtlanticNorthEast Carolina, Maryland, NC State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake ForestSouthClemson, Duke, Florida Atlantic, Georgia Tech, Miami, North CarolinaDixielandEastAlabama, Auburn, Florida State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, UAB, VanderbiltWestArkansas, Arkansas State, LA Tech, LSU, Memphis, TulaneGreat LakesEastAkron, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Michigan, Michigan State, Toledo, Western MichiganWestIllinois, Minnesota, Northern Illinois, Northwestern, Notre Dame, WisconsinLone StarNorthBaylor, North Texas, SMU, TCU, Texas Tech, UTEPSouthHouston, Rice, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas State*, UTSA*MountainNorthBoise, BYU, Idaho, Utah, Utah State, WyomingSouthArizona, Arizona State, Nevada, New Mexico, New Mexico State, UNLVNortheastNorthArmy, Boston College, Buffalo, Connecticut, Rutgers, SyracuseSouthMarshall, Navy, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Temple, West VirginiaPacificNorthCal, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington StateSouthFresno State, Hawai'i, San Diego State, San Jose State, UCLA, USC Great PlainsNorthAir Force, Colorado, Colorado State, Iowa, Iowa State, NebraskaSouthKansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, TulsaRiver ValleyEastBowling Green, Cincinnati, Kent State, Miami (OH), Ohio, Ohio StateWestBall State, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisville, Purdue, Western KentuckySun BeltNorthGeorgia, Louisiana-Monroe, Middle Tennessee, South Carolina, Tennessee, TroySouthCentral Florida, Florida, Florida International, Louisiana-Lafayette, South Alabama*, South Florida, Southern Mississippi Quote Go Cougs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 though I did move Ohio State and Michigan to seperate conferences I'll be taking your next of kin information now. 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...
evanaho Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 though I did move Ohio State and Michigan to seperate conferences I'll be taking your next of kin information now.*ducks and covers head*Opinion noted. That's a legit gripe.I thought for a long time about that move and justified it by saying the River Valley conference needed a stronger school to justify it as a legitimate conference. If I moved Ohio State to the Great Lakes Conference, someone from the former MAC would end up filling the River Valley slot and it would just look too weak. Quote Go Cougs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmoehrin Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 If anyone would like, I have an excel sheet that gives you excat milledge "as the crow flies" for how far away every team is in comparison to another.I have MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL, MLS and D1A College Football.Just give me your e-mail and I can send you the excel file. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 I always thought conferences (FBS) would make more sense if they were regionalized. Also, since many conferences are moving to a two-division format, I thought relatively equal-sized conferences seemed like an agreeably symmetrical way of organizing teams. I began with the current 120 teams and added the three schools* due to join FBS in the near future (Texas State, South Alabama, UTSA). I did my best to preserve some rivalries, though I did move Ohio State and Michigan to seperate conferences (*gasp!*). They can schedule a non-conference every year for the last game. I welcome your thoughts and/or criticisms.--SNIP--This makes a nice 10-conference layout. Got a playoff to go with it? Say, all ten conference champions, with #7 meeting #10 and #8 meeting #9 in the first round? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evanaho Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 I always thought conferences (FBS) would make more sense if they were regionalized. Also, since many conferences are moving to a two-division format, I thought relatively equal-sized conferences seemed like an agreeably symmetrical way of organizing teams. I began with the current 120 teams and added the three schools* due to join FBS in the near future (Texas State, South Alabama, UTSA). I did my best to preserve some rivalries, though I did move Ohio State and Michigan to seperate conferences (*gasp!*). They can schedule a non-conference every year for the last game. I welcome your thoughts and/or criticisms.--SNIP--This makes a nice 10-conference layout. Got a playoff to go with it? Say, all ten conference champions, with #7 meeting #10 and #8 meeting #9 in the first round?Thank you! I suppose this alignment could support a playoff easily... Two teams with the best records get byes in the first round? That would make things relatively straightforward if we're trying to crown a national champion.Personally though, I'm anti-playoff. I would be in favor of five post-season bowls for conference champions and one "at-large" bowl. I'm also a big proponent of conference tie-ins to bowls. The way I'd like to see it play out:Rose Bowl: Pacific Champ vs. Great Lakes ChampFiesta Bowl: Mountain Champ vs. Northeast ChampOrange Bowl: Great Plains Champ vs. Atlantic ChampSugar Bowl: Dixieland Champ vs. Sun Belt ChampCotton Bowl: Lone Star Champ vs. River Valley ChampAloha Bowl: At Large vs. At Large Quote Go Cougs. 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.