The Pointless Realignment Outpost

[max]

"Pointless" being that its impossible to predict but not void of reason or logic. This kid claims he has reason for his realignments, but he can never articulate what the reasoning or logic is. Even though the title says its pointless, you still have to stay on track. You can't just on the carpet and call it art.

I am creating the science of dreams. Like the art of , anybody can weigh in at any time in hopes that their two cents (or usually about two sentences) are committed to the work we appreciate doing collectively for no reason.

- While you have been climbing the walls of text I have posted, I have at the same time been repelling down the cliff handing out water and Cracker-Jack. *I read upside-down*

We'll see if I'm interested in you

max: 7.41 PV/AP

[rams80]

"Pointless" being that its impossible to predict but not void of reason or logic. This kid claims he has reason for his realignments, but he can never articulate what the reasoning or logic is. Even though the title says its pointless, you still have to stay on track. You can't just on the carpet and call it art.

I am creating the science of dreams. Like the art of , anybody can weigh in at any time in hopes that their two cents (or usually about two sentences) are committed to the work we appreciate doing collectively for no reason.

*Reports poster to Chinese authorities for recreational drug abuse.*

[max]

*Reports poster to Chinese authorities for recreational drug abuse.*

"Dianhua yao yao ling ruguo ni yao jingcha zai zhongguo."

Dial 110 if you need the police in China.

[max]

Central Hockey League with (parenthetical NHL affiliations) listed:

South

Allen, TX Americans (Stars)

Fort Worth Brahmas (None)

North

Wichita Thunder (None)

Missouri Mavericks (Canucks)

Tulsa Oilers (None)

West

Denver Cutthroats (Avalanche)

Arizona Sundogs (Coyotes)

Rapid City Rush (None)

East

Bloomington, IL Blaze (None)

Quad City, IL Mallards (None) *owned by the CHL, league offices located in Arizona

Division Champs to the playoffs.

Key point: The "division" (the sole geographic factor I used to base this formulation on) already "exists" in the geography of league and is based on all teams' geographical relative location to every other team. Every team is partnered with their closest geographical neighbor within the group; if that team is not the closest geographical neighbor of the first team, the third team is included until two teams are each others' closest geographical neighbors.

*Missouri closest to Wichita, Tulsa closest to Wichita, Wichita closest to Missouri, therefore, Wichita, Missouri, and Tulsa are in one group because they all share "Wichita" as a rival. The group names above are arbitrary.

**In fact, in the groups with three teams, there is one city that both of the other cities are rivals with, and those two other cities cannot be rivals with each other (this formulation is not based on pairing teams' "two closest geographical rivals," so the most descriptive names of these groups are inherently "Wichita Division" and "Denver Division."

***As it stands now, in the 2012-13 season standings, Wichita and Denver would be the leaders of their respective groups...

Is it unfair?

[DaytonBlue]

And this is the pointless realignment outpost. The place for us to share all the crazy realignment ideas that run through our heads while keeping us from posting a new NCAA realignment in the NCAA realignment thread every time one new team jumps conferences.

"Pointless" being that its impossible to predict but not void of reason or logic. This kid claims he has reason for his realignments, but he can never articulate what the reasoning or logic is. Even though the title says its pointless, you still have to stay on track. You can't just on the carpet and call it art.

Oh I agree, I can barely even tell what his realignments are (except for this last one of 2 and 3 team divisions, but I still don't understand the "logic" behind it) and some of his posts are just thoughts about how one should do a realignment. We've all had those thoughts since we've posted them before.

[max]

The first NCAA Football Game was played between two teams with no apparent "playoff incenive" to motivate either team.

Today NCAA Division I playoffs are totally determined by factors weighed by statistical referees (BCS Standings and RPI for football and basketball, respectively)

In 100 years, Princeton and Rutgers will play the last "college football" game with computers.

I imagine that, before then, college sports will become non-profit, the NFL will fold, and "Watson" will hand us a print-out of the league standings on Super Bowl Sunday and people will be more excited for this than an actual football game.

I think the ultimate goal here is to create balance among the teams in a league in all possible ways we can and we need to prove our theories.

Now is the time for more pointless theories.

Begin by answering my question, Griffinmarlins...

[Still MIGHTY]

STAHP

[max]

Popularity is the only way to articulate time's passage.

Lacanian theories could be used to form new league realignments...

[max]

Like this one:

P.S. > Let me post whatever I want that "pertains to" realignment. I am not sure what you all think I am ruining for you here. That said, you can judge my trolling (I have no idea what a troll is, but you all seem to know pretty well).

How to align divisions based on "time" (past performance like the NFL schedule, I don't want to explain this again) does not require a definition of whether time has passed, in this case, but rather the answering of the question, "when does time start?"

If we want to go back to the 1400s, where history really starts (according to Anatoli Fomenko, author of "New Chronology"), we can start the placement of current NFL teams like this, based on geographical location (for grouping purposes and in comparing team identities that "match" identities established in the past) and a qualitative analysis of current team nicknames as representations of identity, representations established in history. The Los Angeles Lakers: Lakers moved from Minneapolis, therefore the city of Los Angeles has no bearing on placement within league groups until the Lakers move there and whether "Lakes" or basketball existed upon establishment of the city.

Beginning in 1400, Native American Indian populations were spread throughout the continent...

How's this one?

[max]

Or this one:

Same idea as the geographic rivals baby-feed, but with team sanctioned "dates of establishment."

And this question:

should the electoral college be done away with? If you say yes, you think that every vote should count, regardless of geography (indicating a penchant for a balanced schedule). If you say no, you believe states should gather more votes depending on their populations and the structure of Congress (to be interpreted as a penchant for grouping teams based on playoff format or having divisions/conferences for the sake of divisions/conferences because of tradition, etc.).

Maybe I'm trying to gerrymander with no bias (prove I am a fan of the Wichita Wranglers, better yet, I'll change my avatar - I just remember the logo on Minor League Baseball cards I bought a long time ago).

[aci]

I'm not sure how much of what you're smoking, but I'd like to speak to your dealer.

[ESTONES6]

Or this one:

Same idea as the geographic rivals baby-feed, but with team sanctioned "dates of establishment."

And this question:

should the electoral college be done away with? If you say yes, you think that every vote should count, regardless of geography (indicating a penchant for a balanced schedule). If you say no, you believe states should gather more votes depending on their populations and the structure of Congress (to be interpreted as a penchant for grouping teams based on playoff format or having divisions/conferences for the sake of divisions/conferences because of tradition, etc.).

Maybe I'm trying to gerrymander with no bias (prove I am a fan of the Wichita Wranglers, better yet, I'll change my avatar - I just remember the logo on Minor League Baseball cards I bought a long time ago).

Seriously... STFU and GTFOutta here.

[McCall]

Or this one:

Same idea as the geographic rivals baby-feed, but with team sanctioned "dates of establishment."

And this question:

should the electoral college be done away with? If you say yes, you think that every vote should count, regardless of geography (indicating a penchant for a balanced schedule). If you say no, you believe states should gather more votes depending on their populations and the structure of Congress (to be interpreted as a penchant for grouping teams based on playoff format or having divisions/conferences for the sake of divisions/conferences because of tradition, etc.).

Maybe I'm trying to gerrymander with no bias (prove I am a fan of the Wichita Wranglers, better yet, I'll change my avatar - I just remember the logo on Minor League Baseball cards I bought a long time ago).

Look, you go from the electoral college to proving you're a Wichita Wranglers fan. What the hell, man?

STOP!

I remember when this thread used to be enjoyable. Now it's maddening. I blame you for that.

[max]

Look, you go from the electoral college to proving you're a Wichita Wranglers fan. What the hell, man?

I'm saying you can't prove bias if I change my avatar. "Gerrymandering" is notorious, and probably synonymous with "biased realignment."

I should change this theory, bold added:

should the electoral college be done away with? If you say yes, you think that every vote should count, regardless of geography (indicating a penchant for a balanced schedule and therefore less interest in a playoff championship like the Super Bowl, World Series, Stanley Cup). If you say no, you believe states should gather more votes depending on their populations and the structure of Congress (to be interpreted as a penchant for grouping teams based on playoff format or having divisions/conferences for the sake of divisions/conferences because of tradition, etc.).

[McCall]

Look, you go from the electoral college to proving you're a Wichita Wranglers fan. What the hell, man?

I'm saying you can't prove bias if I change my avatar. "Gerrymandering" is notorious, and probably synonymous with "biased realignment."

I should change this theory, bold added:

should the electoral college be done away with? If you say yes, you think that every vote should count, regardless of geography (indicating a penchant for a balanced schedule and therefore less interest in a playoff championship like the Super Bowl, World Series, Stanley Cup). If you say no, you believe states should gather more votes depending on their populations and the structure of Congress (to be interpreted as a penchant for grouping teams based on playoff format or having divisions/conferences for the sake of divisions/conferences because of tradition, etc.).

No one said anything about your damn avatar. Only you did. The only thing anyone's said at all about any of your posts is how they make absolutely no sense and how we're all sick of seeing them.

[max]

http://www.rawstory....ctoral-college/

To all gerrymanderers,

Bring your best work. Show off your talent.

Quote from article:

“If Republicans in 2011 had abused their monopoly control of state government in several key swing states and passed new laws for allocating electoral votes, the exact same votes cast in the exact same way in the 2012 election would have converted Barack Obama’s advantage of nearly five million popular votes and 126 electoral votes into a resounding Electoral College defeat,” FairVote election expert Rob Richie explained last month.

Raw Story (http://s.tt/1yqfc)

According to my hypothesis, Republicans would not be in favor of an European soccer-style balanced-schedule, favor dividing major league teams into groups for no reason (considering a balanced schedule, no divisions are necessary), and such a balanced system would deem any playoffs at all arbitrary. They aren't really ever on the side of fairness anyway.

[ESTONES6]

Look, you go from the electoral college to proving you're a Wichita Wranglers fan. What the hell, man?

I'm saying you can't prove bias if I change my avatar. "Gerrymandering" is notorious, and probably synonymous with "biased realignment."

I should change this theory, bold added:

should the electoral college be done away with? If you say yes, you think that every vote should count, regardless of geography (indicating a penchant for a balanced schedule and therefore less interest in a playoff championship like the Super Bowl, World Series, Stanley Cup). If you say no, you believe states should gather more votes depending on their populations and the structure of Congress (to be interpreted as a penchant for grouping teams based on playoff format or having divisions/conferences for the sake of divisions/conferences because of tradition, etc.).

No one said anything about your damn avatar. Only you did. The only thing anyone's said at all about any of your posts is how they make absolutely no sense and how we're all sick of seeing them.

Am I the only other person who thinks Max is on his second semester of college and is trying to show off his new, extensive vocabulary and liberated thought process? I mean it sounds like, he just completed English 1000 and General History 1010 in the Fall. Unfortunatly, Logic 1000 and English 2000 aren't given until next Fall semester. So, putting cohesive and logical arguements together haven't been taught to him yet by the Hippy TA with dread locks yet.

[McCall]

http://www.rawstory....ctoral-college/

To all gerrymanderers,

Bring your best work. Show off your talent.

Quote from article:

“If Republicans in 2011 had abused their monopoly control of state government in several key swing states and passed new laws for allocating electoral votes, the exact same votes cast in the exact same way in the 2012 election would have converted Barack Obama’s advantage of nearly five million popular votes and 126 electoral votes into a resounding Electoral College defeat,” FairVote election expert Rob Richie explained last month.

Raw Story (http://s.tt/1yqfc)

According to my hypothesis, Republicans would not be in favor of an European soccer-style balanced-schedule, favor dividing major league teams into groups for no reason (considering a balanced schedule, no divisions are necessary), and such a balanced system would deem any playoffs at all arbitrary. They aren't really ever on the side of fairness anyway.

Is your neighbor's dog telling you what to write?

[Geoff]

[max]

There are also only five "states" in the United States, North-West, North-East, South, Alaska and Hawaii (because they have no land borders with other states). List includes Washington, DC:

North-West

Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan

North-East

New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, Rhode Island, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, DC, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Missouri, Illinois

South

Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Kansas, California, Nevada, Utah, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Florida, Georgia

Alaska, Hawaii, *Puerto Rico

These are the "states" that exist within the current structure geographical structure of the United States.

States are paired with the one state they share the longest border with, and then those groupings of states are paired with the one group they share the longest border with (a border that could include more than one State).

Electoral College:

North-West = 82, 61 to Obama in 2012

North-East = 238, 163 to Obama in 2012

South = 211, 104 to Obama in 2012

Others (AK, HI) = 7, 4 to Obama in 2012

A third iteration would group the North-West and South groups together and create two "states" ("East," which would include Missouri and Arkansas, and "West," which would include the Southeastern States, Iowa, and Michigan).

East = 238, 163 to Obama in 2012

West = 293, 165 to Obama in 2012

Others (AK, HI) = 7, 4 to Obama in 2012

Here is the first iteration, 14 divisions, 12 groups from contiguous USA:

Alaska

Hawaii

Alabama

Mississippi

Louisiana

Florida

Georgia

Iowa

Minnesota

Wisconsin

Michigan

Arizona

New Mexico

Texas (Texas' electoral vote would override the sum of all other states in this group)

Oklahoma

Colorado

Kansas

Nebraska

South Dakota

North Dakota

New Jersey

Pennsylvania

New York

Oregon

Washington (Washington's electoral vote overrides Oregon's)

Arkansas

Missouri

Illinois (Illinois' electoral vote overrides the sum of all other states in the group)

California (California's electoral vote overrides the sum of all others in the group)

Nevada

Utah

Connecticut

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

Vermont

Maine

Rhode Island

Delaware

Maryland

Virginia

West Virginia

DC

North Carolina

Ohio

South Carolina

Idaho

Montana

Wyoming

Indiana

Kentucky

Tennessee

*Now I want to do this with counties!

Source: There are 109 land-borders in the USA