The Pointless Realignment Outpost

[McCall]

Sorry, I meant to explain, but I was so upset with the trolls on here.

What trolls? You're the only trolling around here.

[BrySmalls]

My mind hurts from reading max's posts and that's saying something!

[Top Shelf]

With Sacramento potentially moving to Seattle:

WESTERN CONFERENCE

PACIFIC

Denver

Golden State

LA Clippers

LA Lakers

Phoenix

Portland

Seattle

Utah

MIDWEST

Dallas

Houston

Memphis

Minnesota

New Orleans

Oklahoma City

San Antonio

EASTERN CONFERENCE

CENTRAL

Atlanta

Chicago

Cleveland

Detroit

Indiana

Milwaukee

Toronto

ATLANTIC

Boston

Brooklyn

Charlotte

Miami

New York

Orlando

Philadelphia

Washington

[TBGKon]

Oddly uneven sports divisions are the dumbest idea I have ever heard....end of story.

[McCall]

Oddly uneven sports divisions are the dumbest idea I have ever heard....end of story.

Sometimes you can't help it, but the NBA is not one of those instances. They can easily be evenly divided.

[max]

I think I need something more creative than the "Seattle Kings to the Northwest Division/Pacific Division" logic. Something new from the regulars.

Sometimes you can't help it,

All leagues have at least two teams. This is the First Commandment of the Pointless Realignment Outpost. Baseball. There is a certain amount of teams per league that require a certain length to the season (because MLB has 30 teams - if they had 29 one team would have to be 'off' every day/series every 29th day/series while the other 28 teams played). One team in an 11-team baseball league would have to be 'off' every 11th day for at least one day (and because baseball schedules are blocked into series' for traveling purposes, a team would have to sit out for perhaps one full series every 10th series)

but the NBA is not one of those instances. They can easily be evenly divided.

The NBA's divisions matter because the top three division winners get a home playoff game. An NBA team's schedule is mostly balanced (home and home vs every other NBA team), but the remaining games could be played anywhere within their conferences as many times as possible - and the Milwaukee Bucks are in the opposite conference of the Minnesota Timberwolves. The schedules are uneven, conferences/divisions create this unevenness (not a problem of European soccer). Why have geographical divisions at all?

The schedules should fit the grouping arrangements. My idea is that you play your closest geographical rivals more often than other teams and if you win the series, you go to the playoffs (think NHL divisional playoffs of the four-division days).

Look at it from the perspective of the Central Hockey League:

10 teams

No divisions

Missouri plays Quad City like 11 times this year (Missouri's closest geographical rival is the Wichita Thunder who they play like 4 times).

The logic I think somebody needs to apply must relate to current or proposed or potential scheduling formats to divisional alignment ('inherent divisions' could be based on the largest number of home and home series played between teams, real rivals, created by scheduling, placed together (rather than grouping teams based closest geographically to each other - AND ANOTHER REASON why geographical proximity is useful in grouping teams together: it's the top criteria used by sports fans in forming their favorite teams >> see the other thread named "How many teams can I root for" or something like that)...if divisions are going to exist at all...

I think if you have created a mock-up of the NBA in which the Pacific (westernmost Western Conference division) Division has 8 teams, the Atlantic (easternmost Eastern Conference division) Division must also have 8 teams.

I think balanced opportunity will help us determine World Champions (not the BCS system), and this activity we involve ourselves in here is probably a never-ending engagement.

[McCall]

I think I need something more creative than the "Seattle Kings to the Northwest Division/Pacific Division" logic. Something new from the regulars.

Sometimes you can't help it,

All leagues have at least two teams. This is the First Commandment of the Pointless Realignment Outpost. Baseball. There is a certain amount of teams per league that require a certain length to the season (because MLB has 30 teams - if they had 29 one team would have to be 'off' every day/series every 29th day/series while the other 28 teams played). One team in an 11-team baseball league would have to be 'off' every 11th day for at least one day (and because baseball schedules are blocked into series' for traveling purposes, a team would have to sit out for perhaps one full series every 10th series)

but the NBA is not one of those instances. They can easily be evenly divided.

The NBA's divisions matter because the top three division winners get a home playoff game. An NBA team's schedule is mostly balanced (home and home vs every other NBA team), but the remaining games could be played anywhere within their conferences as many times as possible - and the Milwaukee Bucks are in the opposite conference of the Minnesota Timberwolves. The schedules are uneven, conferences/divisions create this unevenness (not a problem of European soccer). Why have geographical divisions at all?

The schedules should fit the grouping arrangements. My idea is that you play your closest geographical rivals more often than other teams and if you win the series, you go to the playoffs (think NHL divisional playoffs of the four-division days).

Look at it from the perspective of the Central Hockey League:

10 teams

No divisions

Missouri plays Quad City like 11 times this year (Missouri's closest geographical rival is the Wichita Thunder who they play like 4 times).

The logic I think somebody needs to apply must relate to current or proposed or potential scheduling formats to divisional alignment ('inherent divisions' could be based on the largest number of home and home series played between teams, real rivals, created by scheduling, placed together (rather than grouping teams based closest geographically to each other - AND ANOTHER REASON why geographical proximity is useful in grouping teams together: it's the top criteria used by sports fans in forming their favorite teams >> see the other thread named "How many teams can I root for" or something like that)...if divisions are going to exist at all...

I think if you have created a mock-up of the NBA in which the Pacific (westernmost Western Conference division) Division has 8 teams, the Atlantic (easternmost Eastern Conference division) Division must also have 8 teams.

I think balanced opportunity will help us determine World Champions (not the BCS system), and this activity we involve ourselves in here is probably a never-ending engagement.

What the... ??? Why did you quote me and totally in the wrong manner? Even without all the mumbo jumbo numbers you still don't make sense. Beating your closest geographical neighbor means nothing if they have a .250 winning percentage and someone else's geographical neighbor has a .680. And minor league hockey and other minor leagues play so many local games because leagues are set-up as closely geographical leagues. They're the minors. They don't have the financial resources that major league teams do to travel back and forth across the country.

[ESTONES6]

What the... ??? Why did you quote me and totally in the wrong manner? Even without all the mumbo jumbo numbers you still don't make sense. Beating your closest geographical neighbor means nothing if they have a .250 winning percentage and someone else's geographical neighbor has a .680. And minor league hockey and other minor leagues play so many local games because leagues are set-up as closely geographical leagues. They're the minors. They don't have the financial resources that major league teams do to travel back and forth across the country.

Wait... so you mean playing in a Division with only 1 other team isn't as good of a gauge, league wide, as playing in a division for 4-6 teams?

[McCall]

What the... ??? Why did you quote me and totally in the wrong manner? Even without all the mumbo jumbo numbers you still don't make sense. Beating your closest geographical neighbor means nothing if they have a .250 winning percentage and someone else's geographical neighbor has a .680. And minor league hockey and other minor leagues play so many local games because leagues are set-up as closely geographical leagues. They're the minors. They don't have the financial resources that major league teams do to travel back and forth across the country.

Wait... so you mean playing in a Division with only 1 other team isn't as good of a gauge, league wide, as playing in a division for 4-6 teams?

Only if they're located more than 0.037459274830184637 miles from the primary bathroom of the other team.

[ESTONES6]

What the... ??? Why did you quote me and totally in the wrong manner? Even without all the mumbo jumbo numbers you still don't make sense. Beating your closest geographical neighbor means nothing if they have a .250 winning percentage and someone else's geographical neighbor has a .680. And minor league hockey and other minor leagues play so many local games because leagues are set-up as closely geographical leagues. They're the minors. They don't have the financial resources that major league teams do to travel back and forth across the country.

Wait... so you mean playing in a Division with only 1 other team isn't as good of a gauge, league wide, as playing in a division for 4-6 teams?

Only if they're located more than 0.037459274830184637 miles from the primary bathroom of the other team.

Well I mean that makes sense.

[max]

Using the same logic that NHL, MLB, NFL, MLS, NCAA, NBA, and most American professional sports leagues use when they organize their divisions, a 2-team division (two teams are each others' closest rivals, the "team with the better record" between the two making the playoffs...) in a league in which the teams are geographically close and (what I am postulating as necessary because playoff formats in these sports leagues are based on regional proximity) a scheduling format that weighs geographical proximity among opponents (only one other team) as the most important factor in scheduling games.

I think you all already have all the sports teams organized in your brain pretty efficiently. For some reason you associate the Atlanta Falcons with the Cleveland Browns because you had a football card of some linebacker on the Falcons named "Gregg Williams" spearing the 1993 quarterback of the Browns. You grew up to hate the Browns and move to Atlanta. This seemingly innocuous football card is stuck in your brain for the rest of eternity subconsciously and every time you see the Cleveland Browns logo, you think of the Atlanta Falcons, and vice versa. This is just one "realignment" or grouping of parts of a whole that you have created for a very common pastime (a pastime that brought all of us to this message board). Now we have the chance to talk about this phenomenon.

It should take a long time to figure out your subconscious realignment format. Get to work.

That being said, the NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB, NCAA, etc. already have realignments planned out pretty well (you see, their jobs depend on it and they are aware of factors that you and I don't even get to see!) and it's all fine.

Fine, I'll do the NBA seriously. It's hideous:

Phoenix

Lakers

Clippers

Golden State

Kings/Seattle

Portland

Utah

Denver

Dallas

Houston

San Antonio

New Orleans

Oklahoma City

Minnesota

Milwaukee

Chicago

Toronto

Detroit

Cleveland

Indianapolis

Atlanta

Memphis

Charlotte

Orlando

Miami

Philadelphia

Boston

New York

Brooklyn

Washington

One more thing, these teams are listed in the order I remembered they were a team in the NBA (the order is based on God?)

It is subconscious? I'm not saying my subconscious is the only subconscious out there (I mean there's a collective unconscious which IS the current division alignment, is that incomprehensible?)

76ers

Knicks

Nuggets

Sonics/Kings

Thunder

Mavericks

Hornets (#1)

Bobcats

Hawks

Heat

Magic

Wizards

Nets

Knicks (they're listed here twice, this is the second time, maybe a good division/conference break)

Suns

Lakers

Clippers

Raptors

Pacers

Pistons

Bucks

Timberwolves

Jazz

Bulls

Hornets (#2)

Celtics

(really running out of teams at this point)

Spurs

Rockets

(really)

Cavaliers

(3 more!?)

Warriors

Trailblazers

Memphis (ah, the most forgotten)

Right now, my best idea:

Division 1 (13 teams)

Philadelphia 76ers

New York Knicks

Denver Nuggets

Sacramento/Seattle Kings

Oklahoma City Thunder

Dallas Mavericks

New Orleans Hornets

Charlotte Bobcats

Atlanta Hawks

Miami Heat

Orlando Magic

Washington Wizards

Brooklyn Nets

Division 2 (10 teams)

Phoenix Suns

Los Angeles Lakers

Los Angeles Clippers

Toronto Raptors

Indiana Pacers

Detroit Pistons

Milwaukee Bucks

Minnesota Timberwolves

Utah Jazz

Chicago Bulls

Division 3 (7 teams)

Boston Celtics

San Antonio Spurs

Houston Rockets

Cleveland Cavaliers

Golden State Warriors

Portland Trailblazers

Memphis Grizzlies

This is a one-man show.

[ESTONES6]

Nevermind. I don't even know what to say anymore.

[GriffinM6]

Do you think it's OK if I report his posts?

[rams80]

Iä! Shub-Niggurath! The Black Goat of the Woods with a Thousand Young!

[max]

NCAA FBS teams in divisions with their closest geographical neighbors. 16 regional divisions of between 6-11 teams each. 10 games per season per team. 16-team tournament at the end of the year.

(west - 8 divisions, 4 in Pacific/Mountain time zones, 4 in Central time zone)

Oregon

Oregon State

Boise State

Washington State

Washington

Idaho

Stanford

San Jose State

Fresno State

Cal

Nevada

Hawaii

Utah State

BYU

Utah

Wyoming

Air Force

Colorado State

Colorado

Arizona State

USC

UCLA

Arizona

San Diego State

UTEP

New Mexico

UNLV

New Mexico State

(beginning of central time zone)

Kansas State

Oklahoma

Nebraska

Oklahoma State

Missouri

Tulsa

Arkansas

Kansas

Texas A&M

Texas

Baylor

TCU

Texas Tech

SMU

Rice

Houston

UTSA

North Texas

Texas State

LSU

LA-Lafayette

LA-Monroe

Louisiana Tech

Tulane

South Alabama

Southern Miss

Vanderbilt

Mississippi

Mississippi State

Arkansas State

Middle Tennessee State

Western Kentucky

Memphis

(east - 8 divisions)

Northwestern

Wisconsin

Northern Illinois

Iowa State

Minnesota

Iowa

Notre Dame

Michigan

Michigan State

Toledo

Bowling Green

Central Michigan

Western Michigan

Eastern Michigan

Louisville

Cincinnati

Ball State

Purdue

Indiana

Kentucky

Miami OH

Illinois

Ohio State

Penn State

West Virginia

Kent State

Pittsburgh

Ohio

Marshall

Akron

Florida

Florida State

UCF

Miami FL

South Florida

FIU

FAU

North Carolina

Virginia Tech

North Carolina State

Duke

East Carolina

Wake Forest

Alabama

Georgia

South Carolina

Clemson

Georgia Tech

Tennessee

Auburn

Troy

UAB

Syracuse

Rutgers

Navy

Connecticut

Virginia

Temple

Maryland

Boston College

Buffalo

Army

Massachusetts

FBS Playoffs Round 1

Oregon

Stanford

Utah State

Arizona State

Kansas State

Texas A&M

LSU

Vanderbilt

Northwestern

Notre Dame

Louisville

Ohio State

Florida

North Carolina

Alabama

Syracuse

Round 2

Oregon

Utah State

Texas A&M

LSU

Notre Dame

Ohio State

Florida

Alabama

Semifinals

Oregon

Texas A&M

Notre Dame

Alabama

Championship Game

Oregon

Alabama

*Free. Developed. Can't post everything.

[RoughRiders99]

Do you think it's OK if I report his posts?

Please do. Even though he's 'trying' to contribute to the thread, which I can see, but what he's posting is just completely full of non-sense and is basically killing this thread.

I've always enjoyed reading through this thread to see some interesting and 'out-of-the-box-that-still-makes-sense' ideas here and there because that makes for a fun read. But this guy wouldn't just stop giving up and post confusing things.

[max]

Find your favorite college team within the post above, the closest geographical rival of your favorite team and the closest geographical rival of your favorite team's rival (and so on until two teams are closest to each other) are in the same division.

*I am listening to a podcast and trying to explain how this works at the same time. Sorry for any confusion.

[McCall]

Seriously, your like a cross between Rainman and Cousin Eddie from "Christmas Vacation".

Can we keep the spambots and get rid of him? At least we can understand what they're saying.

[ESTONES6]

What's sad is that there are SOME divisions that actually make sense. I mean, its rare, but some you kind of look at and ok, OK, sure. But that's usually 1 out of 5 or 6 and the rest are just completely off the reservation.

Although I like the Counsin Eddie comparison... I was thinking more of Cousin Eddie if he joined the Illuminati or the Free Masons.

[McCall]

How exactly does beating the team closest to you earn a playoff spot? Proximity means nothing in deciding who is in and who's out of the playoffs. You set up divisions. Who ever has the best record, that means WINS the most games, goes to the playoffs. He absolutely makes 0% sense.