The Pointless Realignment Outpost

[McCall]

When doing a realignment, you can't only look at geographical layout, whether college or pro.

You have to look at tradition (yes at this point in time, some teams have been in conferences/leagues/divisons and rivalries for quite some time), current placement (such as if they have been in a certain league for awhile, would it be a good idea to actually move them to another) and geography. And it's not exactly one first, then the second and then the third. You have to look at which one stands out the most as a reason to keep or move a team. And with colleges, you have to look at school size and athletic department sizes, as some schools may geographically fit, but you may put a small time school in a conference with all big schools, leaving them no chance. Or vice versa with a big school dominating a conference of smaller ones.

[evanaho]

When doing a realignment, you can't only look at geographical layout, whether college or pro.

You have to look at tradition (yes at this point in time, some teams have been in conferences/leagues/divisons and rivalries for quite some time), current placement (such as if they have been in a certain league for awhile, would it be a good idea to actually move them to another) and geography. And it's not exactly one first, then the second and then the third. You have to look at which one stands out the most as a reason to keep or move a team. And with colleges, you have to look at school size and athletic department sizes, as some schools may geographically fit, but you may put a small time school in a conference with all big schools, leaving them no chance. Or vice versa with a big school dominating a conference of smaller ones.

My apologies if yours is a general statement McCall, but I'm going to treat it as a direct response with no malice intended.

You're absolutely right McCall. In light of factors beyond geography, I did take a look at which rivalries might be adversely affected by regionalizing the conferences and decided to go with regionalization anyway. I didn't find too many rivalries that needed to be split up. Also, I'm a firm believer that (hypothetically) if the rivalry was strong enough between the two schools, they would schedule each other out-of-conference year after year.

I also understand the small school vs. large school argument. My theory (which of course hasn't been lab-tested) is that competition levels will even out between conferences if the powerhouse schools are spread around. Then it's less of "SEC is so much tougher than other conferences" and comes down more to the individual play of schools.

FYI, TCU is the 7th smallest school (enrollment) in Division 1A, yet they've managed to hang with the big programs. Central Florida is the 3rd largest.

[loogodude90]

When doing a realignment, you can't only look at geographical layout, whether college or pro.

You have to look at tradition (yes at this point in time, some teams have been in conferences/leagues/divisons and rivalries for quite some time), current placement (such as if they have been in a certain league for awhile, would it be a good idea to actually move them to another) and geography. And it's not exactly one first, then the second and then the third. You have to look at which one stands out the most as a reason to keep or move a team. And with colleges, you have to look at school size and athletic department sizes, as some schools may geographically fit, but you may put a small time school in a conference with all big schools, leaving them no chance. Or vice versa with a big school dominating a conference of smaller ones.

I disagree. I can't speak for college, but I think when the NBA changed to 6 divisions in 2004, they almost strictly did it using geographical layout. If any teams stayed in their "historical" division, I'm pretty sure that was purely coincidence or luck. I'm glad they based it more on geography (especially since the divisions are named after geographic regions) instead of trying to maintain old divisions as much as possible based on history. It just makes more sense.

Also, in the NBA at least, using a strictly geographical layout ensures that teams close to each other play each other more often, which reinforces regional rivalries.

[The_Admiral]

The NBA has the weakest regional rivalries. I guess the league is too hip for such tribalism.

[McCall]

When doing a realignment, you can't only look at geographical layout, whether college or pro.

You have to look at tradition (yes at this point in time, some teams have been in conferences/leagues/divisons and rivalries for quite some time), current placement (such as if they have been in a certain league for awhile, would it be a good idea to actually move them to another) and geography. And it's not exactly one first, then the second and then the third. You have to look at which one stands out the most as a reason to keep or move a team. And with colleges, you have to look at school size and athletic department sizes, as some schools may geographically fit, but you may put a small time school in a conference with all big schools, leaving them no chance. Or vice versa with a big school dominating a conference of smaller ones.

I disagree. I can't speak for college, but I think when the NBA changed to 6 divisions in 2004, they almost strictly did it using geographical layout. If any teams stayed in their "historical" division, I'm pretty sure that was purely coincidence or luck. I'm glad they based it more on geography (especially since the divisions are named after geographic regions) instead of trying to maintain old divisions as much as possible based on history. It just makes more sense.

Also, in the NBA at least, using a strictly geographical layout ensures that teams close to each other play each other more often, which reinforces regional rivalries.

The NBA has always been Eastern/Western conferences. MLB, NFL and NCAA are different. They have different leagues/conferences that stretch across the country. You can't simply start at the east or west and just group every 4 or 5 teams that come up as you make your way. Obviously with the NBA, as MLB did in 1994, when you go from divisions of 8 teams down to 5, some are gonna split. But you have to look at which teams need to stay together, and then figure it out. With the NBA's realignment, the only major move were the Hornets going from the East to the West. Other than that, it was just splitting the existing conferences into smaller divisions, where teams still play conference opponents not in their division at least 3 times a season. Besides, most of their traditional rivalries stayed in tact. Look at the Central and the Atlantic. Or even the Pacific, where the Blazers (and at the time the Sonics) were really the only ones split away.

[BBTV]

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.

They're not really rivals though. Philadelphia's sports rivalries are with the New York and New Jersey teams. The non-sports "jealous younger brother" rivalry that some (albeit few) idiots think exists would clearly be with New York. Pittsburgh vs Philadelphia is only really a rivalry in Pittsburgh - though there, I'd say that the non-sports factor is even greater than the sports factor.

[loogodude90]

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.

They're not really rivals though. Philadelphia's sports rivalries are with the New York and New Jersey teams. The non-sports "jealous younger brother" rivalry that some (albeit few) idiots think exists would clearly be with New York. Pittsburgh vs Philadelphia is only really a rivalry in Pittsburgh - though there, I'd say that the non-sports factor is even greater than the sports factor.

True, but the point was that PA's only two teams are in the same league. And one of JH4XCC's objections was that having CIN and CLE be in the same league was a problem.

[BBTV]

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.

They're not really rivals though. Philadelphia's sports rivalries are with the New York and New Jersey teams. The non-sports "jealous younger brother" rivalry that some (albeit few) idiots think exists would clearly be with New York. Pittsburgh vs Philadelphia is only really a rivalry in Pittsburgh - though there, I'd say that the non-sports factor is even greater than the sports factor.

True, but the point was that PA's only two teams are in the same league. And one of JH4XCC's objections was that having CIN and CLE be in the same league was a problem.

Oh, well then it's certainly not a problem. It's only a problem when they're in the same market, as in a non-shared-revenue league, keeping them split gives more of the smaller teams access to dates with the bigger / higher-revenue-generating clubs. Or in the case of the NFL, it allows them to sell NY as a market to two separate networks. Cleveland and Cincinnati, both being relatively smaller markets, would cause no such issues if grouped together.

[McCall]

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.

They're not really rivals though. Philadelphia's sports rivalries are with the New York and New Jersey teams. The non-sports "jealous younger brother" rivalry that some (albeit few) idiots think exists would clearly be with New York. Pittsburgh vs Philadelphia is only really a rivalry in Pittsburgh - though there, I'd say that the non-sports factor is even greater than the sports factor.

True, but the point was that PA's only two teams are in the same league. And one of JH4XCC's objections was that having CIN and CLE be in the same league was a problem.

Oh, well then it's certainly not a problem. It's only a problem when they're in the same market, as in a non-shared-revenue league, keeping them split gives more of the smaller teams access to dates with the bigger / higher-revenue-generating clubs. Or in the case of the NFL, it allows them to sell NY as a market to two separate networks. Cleveland and Cincinnati, both being relatively smaller markets, would cause no such issues if grouped together.

Yeah, there's no market issues, but in MLB, it falls under tradition. The Reds have always been an NL team, and the Indians an AL team. So grouping them in one division or league would not be a good move.

[loogodude90]

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.

They're not really rivals though. Philadelphia's sports rivalries are with the New York and New Jersey teams. The non-sports "jealous younger brother" rivalry that some (albeit few) idiots think exists would clearly be with New York. Pittsburgh vs Philadelphia is only really a rivalry in Pittsburgh - though there, I'd say that the non-sports factor is even greater than the sports factor.

True, but the point was that PA's only two teams are in the same league. And one of JH4XCC's objections was that having CIN and CLE be in the same league was a problem.

Oh, well then it's certainly not a problem. It's only a problem when they're in the same market, as in a non-shared-revenue league, keeping them split gives more of the smaller teams access to dates with the bigger / higher-revenue-generating clubs. Or in the case of the NFL, it allows them to sell NY as a market to two separate networks. Cleveland and Cincinnati, both being relatively smaller markets, would cause no such issues if grouped together.

Yeah, there's no market issues, but in MLB, it falls under tradition. The Reds have always been an NL team, and the Indians an AL team. So grouping them in one division or league would not be a good move.

Any re-alignment is going to break tradition. The Brewers were an AL team for almost 30 years before they were moved to the NL.

[McCall]

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.

They're not really rivals though. Philadelphia's sports rivalries are with the New York and New Jersey teams. The non-sports "jealous younger brother" rivalry that some (albeit few) idiots think exists would clearly be with New York. Pittsburgh vs Philadelphia is only really a rivalry in Pittsburgh - though there, I'd say that the non-sports factor is even greater than the sports factor.

True, but the point was that PA's only two teams are in the same league. And one of JH4XCC's objections was that having CIN and CLE be in the same league was a problem.

Oh, well then it's certainly not a problem. It's only a problem when they're in the same market, as in a non-shared-revenue league, keeping them split gives more of the smaller teams access to dates with the bigger / higher-revenue-generating clubs. Or in the case of the NFL, it allows them to sell NY as a market to two separate networks. Cleveland and Cincinnati, both being relatively smaller markets, would cause no such issues if grouped together.

Yeah, there's no market issues, but in MLB, it falls under tradition. The Reds have always been an NL team, and the Indians an AL team. So grouping them in one division or league would not be a good move.

Any re-alignment is going to break tradition. The Brewers were an AL team for almost 30 years before they were moved to the NL.

28 seasons for a team with a limited success in their AL history in a once NL city is nothing compared to the history of the Reds and Indians.

[Magnus]

Moves: Atlanta to Winnipeg, Phoenix to Kansas City.

Changes in division without team relocation: Colorado shifts to Pacific, Nashville shifts to Southeast.

Northwest: Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Minnesota, Winnipeg

Central: Detroit, Columbus, St. Louis, Kansas City, Chicago

Pacific: Los Angeles, Anaheim, San Jose, Dallas, Colorado

Northeast: unchanged

Atlantic: unchanged

Southeast: Nashville, Washington, Tampa Bay, Florida, Carolina

[pmoehrin]

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.

Kind of a half bump/half if anyone has any specific requets for any league outside of Division 1 College Basketball which I am currently working on, I can do it as well.

[jrh31584]

If anyone would like, I have an excel sheet that gives you exact mileage "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.

Kind of a half bump/half if anyone has any specific request for any league outside of Division 1 College Basketball which I am currently working on, I can do it as well.

Damn, I was working on something like that for college football, except it was driving distances (except for Hawaii).

Anyway, here's my (and probably other people's) NBA idea. No more conferences, just five divisions of six teams.

PACIFIC

Lakers

Clippers

Warriors

Kings

Blazers

Suns

SOUTHWEST

Jazz

Nuggets

Spurs

Mavericks

Rockets

Thunder

SOUTH

Grizzlies

Hornets

Heat

Magic

Hawks

Bobcats

CENTRAL

Timberwolves

Bucks

Bulls

Pacers

Pistons

Cavaliers

EAST

Wizards

Raptors

76ers

Knicks

Nets

Celtics

Top 16 make playoffs, division champions guaranteed home court advantage in first round. All-Star teams picked same way as in the NHL.

[McCall]

If anyone would like, I have an excel sheet that gives you exact mileage "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.

Kind of a half bump/half if anyone has any specific request for any league outside of Division 1 College Basketball which I am currently working on, I can do it as well.

Damn, I was working on something like that for college football, except it was driving distances (except for Hawaii).

Anyway, here's my (and probably other people's) NBA idea. No more conferences, just five divisions of six teams.

PACIFIC

Lakers

Clippers

Warriors

Kings

Blazers

Suns

SOUTHWEST

Jazz

Nuggets

Spurs

Mavericks

Rockets

Thunder

SOUTH

Grizzlies

Hornets

Heat

Magic

Hawks

Bobcats

CENTRAL

Timberwolves

Bucks

Bulls

Pacers

Pistons

Cavaliers

EAST

Wizards

Raptors

76ers

Knicks

Nets

Celtics

Top 16 make playoffs, division champions guaranteed home court advantage in first round. All-Star teams picked same way as in the NHL.

Ha. That's the exact same plan I have (haven't posted it in this thread, I don't think, so I'm not crying plagiarism here). I think this could work for the NBA and them just go top however 16 teams and just basically have a playoff tournament regardless of conference/division.

[pmoehrin]

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.

Kind of a half bump/half if anyone has any specific requets for any league outside of Division 1 College Basketball which I am currently working on, I can do it as well.

I'm currently in the process of adding team colors to the cells, and throwing in a few defunct teams into the mix such as the LA Rams, Montreal Expos, Seattle Sonics, and Winnipeg Jets. The colors of course can be changed back to default and defunct teams eliminated if you don't like them. I'm not however doing teams like the Houston Oilers or any other defunct team that has since been replaced, or teams like the Fort Wayne Pistons who simply have no chance of ever seeing an NBA team again.

The colors are also going to be taken from Wikipedia, not from the SSUR.org site. The colors on Wikipedia tend to be brighter and therefore easier to read.

[DarkJourney]

Anyway, here's my (and probably other people's) NBA idea. No more conferences, just five divisions of six teams.

PACIFIC

Lakers

Clippers

Warriors

Kings

Blazers

Suns

SOUTHWEST

Jazz

Nuggets

Spurs

Mavericks

Rockets

Thunder

SOUTH

Grizzlies

Hornets

Heat

Magic

Hawks

Bobcats

CENTRAL

Timberwolves

Bucks

Bulls

Pacers

Pistons

Cavaliers

EAST

Wizards

Raptors

76ers

Knicks

Nets

Celtics

Top 16 make playoffs, division champions guaranteed home court advantage in first round. All-Star teams picked same way as in the NHL.

This is how the bracket would look based on this seasons records:

1 Chicago

16 Philadelphia

8 Orlando

9 Denver

5 Dallas

12 Memphis

4 L.A. Lakers

13 Atlanta

6 Boston

11 New Orleans

3 Miami

14 Houston

7 Oklahoma City

10 Portland

2 San Antonio

15 New York

[McCall]

Anyway, here's my (and probably other people's) NBA idea. No more conferences, just five divisions of six teams.

PACIFIC

Lakers

Clippers

Warriors

Kings

Blazers

Suns

SOUTHWEST

Jazz

Nuggets

Spurs

Mavericks

Rockets

Thunder

SOUTH

Grizzlies

Hornets

Heat

Magic

Hawks

Bobcats

CENTRAL

Timberwolves

Bucks

Bulls

Pacers

Pistons

Cavaliers

EAST

Wizards

Raptors

76ers

Knicks

Nets

Celtics

Top 16 make playoffs, division champions guaranteed home court advantage in first round. All-Star teams picked same way as in the NHL.

This is how the bracket would look based on this seasons records:

1 Chicago

16 Philadelphia

8 Orlando

9 Denver

5 Dallas

12 Memphis

4 L.A. Lakers

13 Atlanta

6 Boston

11 New Orleans

3 Miami

14 Houston

7 Oklahoma City

10 Portland

2 San Antonio

15 New York

I'd be happy with this. I think the NBA's conference seperations aren't as "sacred" as NL/AL in baseball or NFC/AFC in football (not sure about NHL so I'm leaving it alone.) This gives it more of a tournament feel ala March Madness, though still inferior to the Big Dance.

[aci]

Anyway, here's my (and probably other people's) NBA idea. No more conferences, just five divisions of six teams.

PACIFIC

Lakers

Clippers

Warriors

Kings

Blazers

Suns

SOUTHWEST

Jazz

Nuggets

Spurs

Mavericks

Rockets

Thunder

SOUTH

Grizzlies

Hornets

Heat

Magic

Hawks

Bobcats

CENTRAL

Timberwolves

Bucks

Bulls

Pacers

Pistons

Cavaliers

EAST

Wizards

Raptors

76ers

Knicks

Nets

Celtics

Top 16 make playoffs, division champions guaranteed home court advantage in first round. All-Star teams picked same way as in the NHL.

This is how the bracket would look based on this seasons records:

1 Chicago

16 Philadelphia

8 Orlando

9 Denver

5 Dallas

12 Memphis

4 L.A. Lakers

13 Atlanta

6 Boston

11 New Orleans

3 Miami

14 Houston

7 Oklahoma City

10 Portland

2 San Antonio

15 New York

I'd be happy with this. I think the NBA's conference seperations aren't as "sacred" as NL/AL in baseball or NFC/AFC in football (not sure about NHL so I'm leaving it alone.) This gives it more of a tournament feel ala March Madness, though still inferior to the Big Dance.

I really like it, too. Basketball should be all about tournaments... it just fits at every level of the game. With the severely unbalanced conferences they've had in the past, it'd be a welcome change.

[Magnus]

My NBA:

West - Blazers, Warriors | Kings, Clippers | Lakers, Suns | Jazz, Nuggets | Thunder, Mavericks |

(Most of these teams are in the Pacific or Mountain time zone. I didn't want to separate Dallas from Houston and San Antonio, but this was the best I could do.)

Central - Spurs, Rockets | Grizzlies, Hornets | Wolves, Bucks | Bulls, Pacers | Pistons, Cavaliers |

(Most are in the Central time zone.)

East - Raps, Nets | Celtics, Knicks | Sixers, Wizards | Bobcats, Hawks | Magic, Heat |

(All of these teams are in the Eastern time zone)

SEASON

Division opponents 4x (36), other divisions twice each (40), one rival four more times(4). (total 80)

PLAYOFFS

Top 5 in each division qualify, plus the best 6th-place team. All teams seeded 1-16.

4 rounds determine the league champion.