Jump to content

2010 MLB Realignment


RoughRiders9

Recommended Posts

In my little fantasy world, by the time 2010 rolls around, there will two expansion teams, the Portland Beavers and the Iowa Oaks (I did a concept for them a bit while back).

This is how the MLB Realignment will be set up:

AL East

Boston Red Sox

Cleveland Indians

New York Yankees

Toronto Blue Jays

AL North

Chicago White Sox

Colorado Rockies

Detroit Tigers

Minnesota Twins

AL West

Los Angeles Angels

Portland Beavers

Oakland Athletics

Seattle Mariners

AL South

Baltimore Orioles

Kansas City Royals

Tampa Bay Rays

Texas Rangers

NL East

Cincinnati Reds

Philadelphia Phillies

Pittsburgh Pirates

New York Mets

NL North

Chicago Cubs

Iowa Oaks

Milwaukee Brewers

St. Louis Cardinals

NL West

Arizona Diamondbacks

Los Angeles Dodgers

San Diego Padres

San Francisco Giants

NL South

Atlanta Braves

Houston Astros

Miami Marlins

Washington Nationals

And this is how the scheduling would work:

-162 Games

-72 Games versus Division teams (12 Home, 12 Away, 24 each)

-72 Games versus League teams (3 Home, 3 Away, 6 each)

-18 Games versus Interleague teams (6 teams each year, against rotating Division [12 games] and 2 against rivals [3 home, 3 away, 6 games], teams with no interleague rivals rotates teams)

Thoughts? Feelings? Ideas?

Please don't say that Iowa shouldn't get a team because there are other larger cities or whatever. It's my own little world. Just tell me what you think of the realignment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Switch the Brewers and Rockies and I don't think this is a bad idea.

Since the Brewers use to be in the A.L. it would make more sense.

Thats the only thing I see wrong with it.

Safe to say the Indians would probably never win the division. haha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Switch the Brewers and Rockies and I don't think this is a bad idea.

Since the Brewers use to be in the A.L. it would make more sense.

Thats the only thing I see wrong with it.

Safe to say the Indians would probably never win the division. haha.

Yeah, I had a tough time with those two teams. I wanted to move the Brewers back to the AL, but since they're starting a rivalry with the Chicago Cubs, so I kept them there. But if I put Colorado in NL North, they could probably finally start a rivalry with the Iowa Oaks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Switch the Brewers and Rockies and I don't think this is a bad idea.

Since the Brewers use to be in the A.L. it would make more sense.

Thats the only thing I see wrong with it.

Safe to say the Indians would probably never win the division. haha.

Yeah, I had a tough time with those two teams. I wanted to move the Brewers back to the AL, but since they're starting a rivalry with the Chicago Cubs, so I kept them there. But if I put Colorado in NL North, they could probably finally start a rivalry with the Iowa Oaks.

The Brewers already have a rivalry with the Twins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AL East

Boston Red Sox

Baltimore Orioles

New York Yankees

Toronto Blue Jays

AL North

Chicago White Sox

Detroit Tigers

Minnesota Twins

Cleveland Indians

AL West

Los Angeles Angels

Portland Beavers

Oakland Athletics

Seattle Mariners

AL South

Colorado Rockies

Kansas City Royals

Tampa Bay Rays

Texas Rangers

Very simple switch. Move Baltimore back to the east, cause they were in the south. Move the Rockies to the south. And move the Indians to the North. Now at least travel costs make more sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Switch the Brewers and Rockies and I don't think this is a bad idea.

Since the Brewers use to be in the A.L. it would make more sense.

Thats the only thing I see wrong with it.

Safe to say the Indians would probably never win the division. haha.

:cry: That's why I dissaprove this concept :P . I like these kind of ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NL East

Washington Nationals

Philadelphia Phillies

Pittsburgh Pirates

New York Mets

NL North

Chicago Cubs

St. Louis Cardinals

Iowa Oaks

Milwaukee Brewers

NL West

Arizona Diamondbacks

Los Angeles Dodgers

San Diego Padres

San Francisco Giants

NL South

Atlanta Braves

Houston Astros

Miami Marlins

Cincinnati Reds

The Cards should be in the south because of the Iowa Oaks. However, you can't move the Cards out of a divison they share with the Cubs. Cincinnati gets snubbed with travel costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AL East

Boston Red Sox

Baltimore Orioles

New York Yankees

Toronto Blue Jays

AL North

Chicago White Sox

Detroit Tigers

Minnesota Twins

Cleveland Indians

AL West

Los Angeles Angels

Portland Beavers

Oakland Athletics

Seattle Mariners

AL South

Colorado Rockies

Kansas City Royals

Tampa Bay Rays

Texas Rangers

Very simple switch. Move Baltimore back to the east, cause they were in the south. Move the Rockies to the south. And move the Indians to the North. Now at least travel costs make more sense.

You're forgetting something. Time Zones. In the AL South, the Rockies would be starting their games at 6, while KC and Texas would start at 7, and Rays would be starting at 8. That's just crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NL East

Washington Nationals

Philadelphia Phillies

Pittsburgh Pirates

New York Mets

NL North

Chicago Cubs

St. Louis Cardinals

Iowa Oaks

Milwaukee Brewers

NL West

Arizona Diamondbacks

Los Angeles Dodgers

San Diego Padres

San Francisco Giants

NL South

Atlanta Braves

Houston Astros

Miami Marlins

Cincinnati Reds

The Cards should be in the south because of the Iowa Oaks. However, you can't move the Cards out of a divison they share with the Cubs. Cincinnati gets snubbed with travel costs.

Your Realignment is legit i like it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AL

east

New York

Boston

Toronto

Baltimore

north

Chicago

Detroit

Milwaukee(nl)

Cleveland

midwest

Minnesota

Kansas City

Texas

Colorado(nl)

west

Los Angeles

Oakland

Seattle

Portland(exp)

NL

east

New York

Montreal(exp)

Washington

Philadelphia

south

Atlanta

Miami

Tampa Bay(al)

Houston

north

Chicago

St. Louis

Cincinnati

Pittsburgh

west

Los Angeles

San Fransisco

San Diego

Arizona

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm always up for a good realignment, I think you did pretty well with your 8 divisions.

However, if it were up to me, MLB would go fully interleague. I would also lose the outdated concept of divisions/leagues and feature a fully balanced schedule. Your addition of two teams would screw this up a bit, but as the MLB stands today, I would have each team play each of the other 29 teams 6 times per year, one home series and one away. That would add 12 games to the schedule, bringing the total to 174. I would add more double-headers, or perhaps extend the season a week or two earlier to accommodate the extra games. Now the traditionalists would never have it, and the rivalry fiends would have a fit, but I honestly don't care. I'd keep the postseason as it is, just the top 8 teams overall get in and are seeded accordingly.

Okay that's the end of my fantasy MLB rant lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice graphic.

I'm also for realignment, though, so who am I to judge?

EAST

Yankees

Mets

Toronto

Atlanta

Baltimore

Washington

Tampa

Florida

Pittsburgh

Philadelphia

CENTRAL

Boston

Detroit

Milwaukee

Minnesota

White Sox

Cubbies

Cleveland

Cincinatti

St Louis

KC

WEST

Dodgers

Angels

Oakland

Seattle

Texas

Houston

Arizona

Colorado

San Fran

San Diego

Divisional play is 90 games.

INTERDIVISIONAL PLAY

5 central teams play West 6 times each

5 central teams play East 6 times each

5 east teams play Central 6 times each

5 east teams play West 6 times each

5 West teams play East 6 times each

5 West teams play Central 6 times each

This adds up to 30 games per team.

Then the other 5 teams play the other 5 teams, to add another 30 games.

The regular season totals 150 games.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The top 2 teams in each division play in the Division Series

While the Wild Card teams from each division play each other.

In the second round, the four remaining teams are seeded 1-4 based on record.

1 plays 4, 2 plays 3.

The remaining two teams play for the World Series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always love a good reallignment. Going in a diffferent direction from the original poster I've always wanted to contract two teams. In this case I think of two reallignments. First:

AL East - Yankees, Sox, Orioles, Rays,, Indians

AL Central - Sox, Rangers, Twins, Tigers, Brewers

AL West - A's, Angels, D'Backs, Mariners

NL East - Mets, Phils, Nationals, Marlins, Reds

NL Central - Cubs, Astros, Cardinals, Pirates, Braves

NL West - Giants, Dodgers, Padres, Rockies

In this concept the Royals and Jays are out. The season would be 154 games long. The schedule would be balanced among your League opponents. Wild Card would be the automatic fourth seed, but they would play number 1 no matter who holds the spot. Right now a Wild Card can't play the number 1 if they're in the same division. Thats lame. The only interleague would be two series, a home and away, against a "natural rival. Some of those are easy to pick, Cubs White Sox. Some aren't. I've displayed the matchups above. "Natural" rivals are in the same division listed in the same spot. The ones I created for lack of a better option are: Phils-Sox, Cards-Twins, Brewers-Braves, Mariners-Rockies . The Phils-Sox and Mariners-Rockies were leftovers. No one is really close to Seattle or Denver. Philly and Boston were close enough from the left overs. I picked Cards Twins because of the 7 game 87 WS meeting between the two. I picked Brewers - Braves because the BRaves moved from Milwaukee. The Division Series would be held in the last week of September, still a 5 game format. October would bring the CS and WS. Both would be 7 games in a 2-3-2 with ONE travel day between cities. The Series would wrap up in mid October. Once the Series is over we'd have award week at the end of October with the All Star game in a warm location. This concept balances traditionalists with people who like change.

My second idea is a little more traditional:

AL East - Yankees, R Sox, Orioles, Tigers, Indians, Rays, Brewers

AL West - A's, Angels, Mariners, D, Backs, Rangers, Twins, W Sox

NL East - Mets, Phils, Nationals, Pirates, Reds, Marlins, Braves

NL West - Giants, Dodgers, Rockies, Padres, Astros, Cardinals, Cubs

Another 154 game season. The schedule would be unbalanced in favor of your division. Same interleague theory. Playoffs would still be four teams. Two division winners and two WC's. Division winners get spots 1 and 2, WCs 3 and 4. Again, 1 always plays 4 etc. Two WCs can come from the same division. The goal with two divisions is to cut down on weak teams earning a birth by winning a weak division. The rest of the playoffs are the same DS starts end of September. CS and WS in October. 5-7-7. 2-3-2 for the seven game series. Award week after the Series is over, but we'll keep the All Star Game in summer so it can play anywhere.

What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AL

east

New York

Boston

Toronto

Baltimore

north

Chicago

Detroit

Milwaukee(nl)

Cleveland

midwest

Minnesota

Kansas City

Texas

Colorado(nl)

west

Los Angeles

Oakland

Seattle

Portland(exp)

NL

east

New York

Montreal(exp)

Washington

Philadelphia

south

Atlanta

Miami

Tampa Bay(al)

Houston

north

Chicago

St. Louis

Cincinnati

Pittsburgh

west

Los Angeles

San Fransisco

San Diego

Arizona

As far as expansion and reallignment concepts go, this is great. I buy Montreal getting an expansion team with a better owner. I buy Portland, last I checked they are growing, getting another. The Rays barely have a history in the AL, so they are fine to move and would probably enjoy the increase in rivalry potential and the change in opposition. Same with Colorado, they would probably enjoy playing the Royals more often, both from a record and rivalry standpoint. The Brewers, who are re growing a nice fanbase, are from the Al and could easily rekindle great heat with the White Sox and Tigers. I also enjoy the hockey-esque divisional names. Both have a west, north and east. But one gets the midwest and one gets the south.

I'm curious how the playoffs would work. Personally, I'd like to see just the division winners go. Obviously you'll have weak divisions that turn out weak opponents, but thats not to different from how it is now. And then the Class division winners would have a better time making it too the Series, rather than having to face some team that got hot in their division and got in like that, even though the same team may have had a horrible first half. Earn your spot, beat the other three teams or you're done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always love a good reallignment. Going in a diffferent direction from the original poster I've always wanted to contract two teams. In this case I think of two reallignments. First:

AL East - Yankees, Sox, Orioles, Rays,, Indians

AL Central - Sox, Rangers, Twins, Tigers, Brewers

AL West - A's, Angels, D'Backs, Mariners

NL East - Mets, Phils, Nationals, Marlins, Reds

NL Central - Cubs, Astros, Cardinals, Pirates, Braves

NL West - Giants, Dodgers, Padres, Rockies

In this concept the Royals and Jays are out. The season would be 154 games long. The schedule would be balanced among your League opponents. Wild Card would be the automatic fourth seed, but they would play number 1 no matter who holds the spot. Right now a Wild Card can't play the number 1 if they're in the same division. Thats lame. The only interleague would be two series, a home and away, against a "natural rival. Some of those are easy to pick, Cubs White Sox. Some aren't. I've displayed the matchups above. "Natural" rivals are in the same division listed in the same spot. The ones I created for lack of a better option are: Phils-Sox, Cards-Twins, Brewers-Braves, Mariners-Rockies . The Phils-Sox and Mariners-Rockies were leftovers. No one is really close to Seattle or Denver. Philly and Boston were close enough from the left overs. I picked Cards Twins because of the 7 game 87 WS meeting between the two. I picked Brewers - Braves because the BRaves moved from Milwaukee. The Division Series would be held in the last week of September, still a 5 game format. October would bring the CS and WS. Both would be 7 games in a 2-3-2 with ONE travel day between cities. The Series would wrap up in mid October. Once the Series is over we'd have award week at the end of October with the All Star game in a warm location. This concept balances traditionalists with people who like change.

My second idea is a little more traditional:

AL East - Yankees, R Sox, Orioles, Tigers, Indians, Rays, Brewers

AL West - A's, Angels, Mariners, D, Backs, Rangers, Twins, W Sox

NL East - Mets, Phils, Nationals, Pirates, Reds, Marlins, Braves

NL West - Giants, Dodgers, Rockies, Padres, Astros, Cardinals, Cubs

Another 154 game season. The schedule would be unbalanced in favor of your division. Same interleague theory. Playoffs would still be four teams. Two division winners and two WC's. Division winners get spots 1 and 2, WCs 3 and 4. Again, 1 always plays 4 etc. Two WCs can come from the same division. The goal with two divisions is to cut down on weak teams earning a birth by winning a weak division. The rest of the playoffs are the same DS starts end of September. CS and WS in October. 5-7-7. 2-3-2 for the seven game series. Award week after the Series is over, but we'll keep the All Star Game in summer so it can play anywhere.

What do you think?

Why is Toronto contracted? There is absolutely no reasoning for that to happen. You need to look at teams in financial and fan support problems. Usually the Marlins, Twins and/or Rays would be the most likely candidates, but they either have new stadiums under contruction, planned and basically approved, or are winning and have elevated fan support.

And to those who constantly post the "Stop-Reel-A Line-Mint" graphic, so what? So some of us like to do realignments. I agree, the Sports Logos Forum was not the right one, should've gone in Sports in General, but why such animosity towards the topic anyway? It's relevent to the whole board; it's sports, so I don't get the big deal.

I say we be able to start one League Realignment thread (to encompass ALL sports leagues) in the Sports in General Forum for those of us who actually ARE interested in the topic. I'm sure there's plenty of us who don't care for some of the topics being discussed in other threads, but that doesn't mean everyone else shouldn't be able to discuss them. If realignments annoy you, simply don't look in the thread. It's that simple. If we're able to start this one thread, then if a seperate thread is ever made for a realignment proposal (a thread reporting an actual realignment should still be allowed), that thread could either be merged into the main thread or simply graveyarded, no questions asked. But I don't get why we shouldn't be able to discuss something that interests us and IS relevent to the boards, just because some members don't like to.

Here is my plan, according to your expansion plans (note: Since it's simply your fantasy plan, I included Iowa, knowing they'll never have a team before some of the other cities out there):

American League

WEST: Arizona*, LA Angels, Oakland, Seattle

"CENTRAL": Colorado, Iowa, Kansas City, Texas

"NORTH": Chicago Sox, Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota

EAST: Baltimore, Boston, NY Yankees, Toronto

National League

WEST: LA Dodgers, Portland*, San Diego, San Francisco

"SOUTH": Atlanta, Florida, Houston, Tampa Bay

"NORTH": St. Louis, Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati, Milwaukee

EAST: NY Mets, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington

*= I, for one, would seperate Portland and Seattle, but really, Arizona and Portland are interchangeable between the AL and NL.

Each league as one "odd" division that is not equal to the other, thus the AL "Central" and NL "South". I just put those designations in for the sake of the idea. Also, I would still refer to the "North" divisions as Central, but again, for the sake of this plan, I changed them to North, since the AL Central isn't necessarily a South division, or I would have it the opposite of the NL South, even though one's further west and the other east, they'd both be a south, but Iowa in there kind of nullifies the south designation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.