These are my proposed changes to major North American sports leagues.
Basketball
In NBA, two breaks would be set around FIBA international match days. They occur in late November and late February. The last games before break would be played on Sunday before break and first games after the break woud be played on Thursday after break.
An in-season tournament, called NBA Cup, would be played. It would have all 30 NBA teams, plus two guest teams from Europe. NBA Cup would consist a group stage (8 groups of 4 teams, played before start of regular season, and playoffs of 16 teams after it. The first two rounds would be best-of-three and last two would be played between end of regular season and start of playoffs in a "Super Four". It would also have a 3rd place game.
Football
NFL regular season would be expanded to 25 games, beginning in early August and ending in late February. There would be 16-team playoffs without reseeding and Super Bowl in late March.
Baseball
MLB would expand to 32 teams with new divisions (8 4-team divisions, four in each conference) and expand playoffs to 16 teams with all rounds best-of-seven. MLB would also start to use game clock.
MLB would start to use promotion and relegation with sub league called MLB 2.
Hockey
NHL season would be expanded to 90 games with Stanley Cup finals would extended to best-of-nine.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 11:19:06 AM
These are my proposed changes to major North American sports leagues.
Basketball
In NBA, two breaks would be set around FIBA international match days.
That's not the change I would make. I would do something more like:
BasketballFouling a player to gain an advantage, especially at the end of the game, would somehow be made unfeasible.
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on February 13, 2023, 11:28:42 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 11:19:06 AM
These are my proposed changes to major North American sports leagues.
Basketball
In NBA, two breaks would be set around FIBA international match days.
That's not the change I would make. I would do something more like:
Basketball
Fouling a player to gain an advantage, especially at the end of the game, would somehow be made unfeasible.
The breaks is a change which I would implement as as soon as possible because US national teams should be full of NBA players in these breaks.
I would reorganize Hockey, Basketball, Baseball and 'fútbol' into fully promotion and relegation based federations.
Make the lower levels important and truly set the Stanley Cup 'free' again.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on February 13, 2023, 12:05:41 PM
I would reorganize Hockey, Basketball, Baseball and 'fútbol' into fully promotion and relegation based federations.
Make the lower levels important and truly set the Stanley Cup 'free' again.
Mike
:thumbsup: Yes!!! I would also start promotion and relegation. With sub-leagues (NHL -> AHL, NBA -> ABA, MLB -> MLB 2, MLS -> MLS 2) and promotion/relegation playoffs between winners of lower league and last placers of upper league.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 12:10:52 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 13, 2023, 12:05:41 PM
I would reorganize Hockey, Basketball, Baseball and 'fútbol' into fully promotion and relegation based federations.
Make the lower levels important and truly set the Stanley Cup 'free' again.
Mike
:thumbsup: Yes!!! I would also start promotion and relegation. With sub-leagues (NHL -> AHL, NBA -> ABA, MLB -> MLB 2, MLS -> MLS 2) and promotion/relegation playoffs between winners of lower league and last placers of upper league.
I would also keep the 'post seasons' in the upper division of each sport exactly the same as they are now.
Mike
Football
Eliminate conferences and just have eight 4-team divisions.
Eliminate kickoffs. Kicking team has the option to give the opponent possession at their own 25, or attempt a 4th and 15 from their own 30.
Move touchbacks on punts from the 20 to the 25.
Teams who still have all three timeouts at the 2-minute warning have their total reduced to two.
Eliminate Thursday games except for opening week and Thanksgiving and have doubleheaders on Monday night.
Eliminate overtime in the regular season. Winner gets three points. In a tie the team that was ahead last gets two points and the other team one point. (Scoreless ties give each team one point.)
Playoff overtime each team gets one possession. The team possessing the ball second may not attempt a tying score. (Can't attempt FG if first team got FG, must go for two after TD if first team got TD.)
Baseball
MLB negotiates all TV deals, both national and local, and all revenue is split evenly among the teams.
Eliminate the American and National leagues and just have six 5-team divisions.
All teams will have one scheduled Saturday home doubleheader with 10,000 tickets available for $10 the day of game.
Third foul ball on a two-strike count is a strikeout.
Teams not spending between 50 and 200 percent of the average team payroll are penalized financially.
Team blackout areas for MLB.tv and MLBEI updated to reflect distribution of teams' primary channels (can't be blacked out for the Cubs in Iowa if Marquee not available in your area).
Basketball
Metrics will be used to rank the top 90 players from the previous season. Teams with at least 2 players in the top 30 may not acquire any more. Teams with at least 3 players in the top 60 may not acquire any more. Teams with at least 4 players in the top 90 may not acquire any more. Teams may always keep/re-sign current players.
In the 4th quarter and overtime, free throws are "three to make two" instead of two.
Why does football have to have its games on certain days of the week only if baseball, basketball, and hockey don't care at all what day of the week it is?
Quote from: 1 on February 13, 2023, 12:31:35 PM
Why does football have to have its games on certain days of the week only if baseball, basketball, and hockey don't care at all what day of the week it is?
Recovery time. Confining games to Sunday-Monday gives teams better chance to recover and be prepared. Thursday night games are some of the worst-played games of the season.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 12:46:45 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 13, 2023, 12:31:35 PM
Why does football have to have its games on certain days of the week only if baseball, basketball, and hockey don't care at all what day of the week it is?
Recovery time. Confining games to Sunday-Monday gives teams better chance to recover and be prepared. Thursday night games are some of the worst-played games of the season.
Why not "any day of the week, but must be at least 5 days apart (and 6 unless the scheduling wouldn't work without a 5)"? This would eliminate the really bad 4-day games. For example, ignoring the day of the week entirely, games could be 6, 8, 9, 6, 10, 7, 6, 8, 7, etc. days apart for a specific team. Instead of a bye week, just push the average closer to 7.5 instead of 7.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 11:19:06 AM
Football
NFL regular season would be expanded to 25 games, beginning in early August and ending in late February. There would be 16-team playoffs without reseeding and Super Bowl in late March.
I think this would and should be a non-starter. Previously 16, and now 17 game seasons take a lot out of the human body, and the NFL, while better, still isn't treating player health with the level of seriousness required. 25 games (up to 29 for the Super Bowl contenders) would just lead to even more injury as the season will go more than half the year with no chance for bodies to recuperate.
Quote from: zzcarp on February 13, 2023, 01:10:36 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 11:19:06 AM
Football
NFL regular season would be expanded to 25 games, beginning in early August and ending in late February. There would be 16-team playoffs without reseeding and Super Bowl in late March.
I think this would and should be a non-starter. Previously 16, and now 17 game seasons take a lot out of the human body, and the NFL, while better, still isn't treating player health with the level of seriousness required. 25 games (up to 29 for the Super Bowl contenders) would just lead to even more injury as the season will go more than half the year with no chance for bodies to recuperate.
Or
midweek rounds with games played on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays with same start and end date as now.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 11:19:06 AM
These are my proposed changes to major North American sports leagues.
Basketball
In NBA, two breaks would be set around FIBA international match days. They occur in late November and late February. The last games before break would be played on Sunday before break and first games after the break woud be played on Thursday after break.
An in-season tournament, called NBA Cup, would be played. It would have all 30 NBA teams, plus two guest teams from Europe. NBA Cup would consist a group stage (8 groups of 4 teams, played before start of regular season, and playoffs of 16 teams after it. The first two rounds would be best-of-three and last two would be played between end of regular season and start of playoffs in a "Super Four". It would also have a 3rd place game.
Football
NFL regular season would be expanded to 25 games, beginning in early August and ending in late February. There would be 16-team playoffs without reseeding and Super Bowl in late March.
Baseball
MLB would expand to 32 teams with new divisions (8 4-team divisions, four in each conference) and expand playoffs to 16 teams with all rounds best-of-seven. MLB would also start to use game clock.
MLB would start to use promotion and relegation with sub league called MLB 2.
Hockey
NHL season would be expanded to 90 games with Stanley Cup finals would extended to best-of-nine.
please stop
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on February 13, 2023, 01:23:04 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 11:19:06 AM
These are my proposed changes to major North American sports leagues.
Basketball
In NBA, two breaks would be set around FIBA international match days. They occur in late November and late February. The last games before break would be played on Sunday before break and first games after the break woud be played on Thursday after break.
An in-season tournament, called NBA Cup, would be played. It would have all 30 NBA teams, plus two guest teams from Europe. NBA Cup would consist a group stage (8 groups of 4 teams, played before start of regular season, and playoffs of 16 teams after it. The first two rounds would be best-of-three and last two would be played between end of regular season and start of playoffs in a "Super Four". It would also have a 3rd place game.
Football
NFL regular season would be expanded to 25 games, beginning in early August and ending in late February. There would be 16-team playoffs without reseeding and Super Bowl in late March.
Baseball
MLB would expand to 32 teams with new divisions (8 4-team divisions, four in each conference) and expand playoffs to 16 teams with all rounds best-of-seven. MLB would also start to use game clock.
MLB would start to use promotion and relegation with sub league called MLB 2.
Hockey
NHL season would be expanded to 90 games with Stanley Cup finals would extended to best-of-nine.
please stop
MLB should expand, NBA should expand, NFL should expand, These have not yet expanded in my lifetime. NHL has expanded. Seattle should get NBA team and Montreal MLB team.
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on February 13, 2023, 11:28:42 AM
Basketball
Fouling a player to gain an advantage, especially at the end of the game, would somehow be made unfeasible.
Elam Ending.
Yes to Seattle NBA team, to Montreal MLB team, to St. Louis NFL team. All Big Four leagues and MLS should have at least 40 teams.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 01:59:23 PM
All Big Four leagues and MLS should have at least 40 teams.
Even better, Tier 1 and Tier 2 with promotion and relegation. Tier 1 doesn't need 40, but combined they could have 40 or even more.
Quote from: 1 on February 13, 2023, 02:00:15 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 01:59:23 PM
All Big Four leagues and MLS should have at least 40 teams.
Even better, Tier 1 and Tier 2 with promotion and relegation. Tier 1 doesn't need 40, but combined they could have 40 or even more.
This would work:
NBA 20 teams (playing 4x with 76 games). No divisions or conferences. 8-team 7-7-7 playoffs. Bottom two relegated.
ABA 22 teams (playing 3x with 63 games). No divisions or conferences. 1st places team promoted automatically. 2nd to 9th go 5-7-7 promotion playoffs with winners promoted. Bottom three relegated.
USBA 54 teams (playing 4x with 68 games). Three groups, West, Central and East. 8-team 5-5-7 playoffs in each group. Playoff winners promoted.
There is a qualification between lowest placed teams in USBA groups and willing winners of state basketball leagues. State pyramids have several levels and there is automatic promotion and relegation between levels.
Quote from: 1 on February 13, 2023, 12:51:55 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 12:46:45 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 13, 2023, 12:31:35 PM
Why does football have to have its games on certain days of the week only if baseball, basketball, and hockey don't care at all what day of the week it is?
Recovery time. Confining games to Sunday-Monday gives teams better chance to recover and be prepared. Thursday night games are some of the worst-played games of the season.
Why not "any day of the week, but must be at least 5 days apart (and 6 unless the scheduling wouldn't work without a 5)"? This would eliminate the really bad 4-day games. For example, ignoring the day of the week entirely, games could be 6, 8, 9, 6, 10, 7, 6, 8, 7, etc. days apart for a specific team. Instead of a bye week, just push the average closer to 7.5 instead of 7.
One problem with this: NFL games (except for emergency rescheduling) cannot be televised on Friday and Saturday until mid-December in order to protect high school and college games.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 12:24:30 PM
Football
.... (Scoreless ties give each team one point.)
....
Just to make sure you're aware, there has not been a scoreless tie in the NFL since the Giants and the Lions played to one on November 7, 1943.
25 game NFL? Do you want Chad Henne vs Gardner Minshew to be the super bowl every year?
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 13, 2023, 03:27:40 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 13, 2023, 12:24:30 PM
Football
.... (Scoreless ties give each team one point.)
....
Just to make sure you're aware, there has not been a scoreless tie in the NFL since the Giants and the Lions played to one on November 7, 1943.
I know, but it still needs to be in the rules just in case.
We should relocate the Yankees to North Korea cuz I don't like them
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 11:19:06 AM
Football
NFL regular season would be expanded to 25 games, beginning in early August and ending in late February. There would be 16-team playoffs without reseeding and Super Bowl in late March.
Sure hope not.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 01:59:23 PM
Yes to Seattle NBA team, to Montreal MLB team, to St. Louis NFL team. All Big Four leagues and MLS should have at least 40 teams.
What would be the 2nd team you would add for the NBA, MLB and NFL? Because you have to have an even number of teams.
Quote from: dvferyance on February 13, 2023, 04:43:15 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 01:59:23 PM
Yes to Seattle NBA team, to Montreal MLB team, to St. Louis NFL team. All Big Four leagues and MLS should have at least 40 teams.
What would be the 2nd team you would add for the NBA, MLB and NFL? Because you have to have an even number of teams.
Vegas for NBA. Kansas City in the running, tho
Charlotte for MLB
San Diego for NFL
Quote from: dvferyance on February 13, 2023, 04:43:15 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 01:59:23 PM
Yes to Seattle NBA team, to Montreal MLB team, to St. Louis NFL team. All Big Four leagues and MLS should have at least 40 teams.
What would be the 2nd team you would add for the NBA, MLB and NFL? Because you have to have an even number of teams.
The NFL had 31 teams 1999-2001
The NBA and MLB don't matter as much because lots of days some teams have the night off. Drawback would be that on days where every team should be playing, one wouldn't be.
No overtimes or extra innings in any sport. In the event of a tie, the visiting coach spins a wheel to decide which other sport the teams will play to determine the winner.
Game knotted after 9 innings? Get ready to lace 'em up boys, cuz Coach just spun "hockey" on the wheel!
Let's see Joe Burrow's jump shot!
And everyone would pay to see a WNBA game decided on the gridiron.
:popcorn:
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 11:19:06 AM
Football
NFL regular season would be expanded to 25 games, beginning in early August and ending in late February. There would be 16-team playoffs without reseeding and Super Bowl in late March.
25 games is too many. I would prefer an even number of games, so I'd be OK with either 18 or 20, but no more than that (16 games was fine too, but there's no way the NFL would ever reduce the number of games).
I've actually thought a little bit about whether 20 games would work. You could add the last two same-place finishers that each team isn't already playing to get to 19 games, and the 20th game (or 18th game, if you leave out my previous suggestion) could be a rivalry game that loosely parallels college. It would preferably be a non-division team, so you could have matchups of teams that are near each other but don't play every year, such as Bills-Steelers or Eagles-Ravens, or it could fluctuate year to year to include current rivalries like Chiefs-Bengals (which could mean they play twice a season - all the better!)
I don't think the Super Bowl should be any later than it is already, plus "January=playoffs; February=Super Bowl" is pretty much engrained in the fabric of the NFL, so the season would instead start sometime in August, with two byes per team. For a 22-week season, each team would have their first bye in weeks 6-9 and their second bye in weeks 14-17.
My ideas for basketball:
- Whenever one team gets a bonus, instead of shooting two free throws on a shooting foul, they get one point automatically and one free throw attempt. On any other kind of foul, they shoot two free throws (not one-and-one). On a double bonus, any foul received automatically nets a point and a free throw attempt, but a shooting foul gives the free point plus two 'one-and-one' free throw attempts.
For three pointers, the one point would be given and two free throw attempts would be awarded to the fouled team. There would be no changes if the ball went in on the shot. This would hopefully cut down on Hack-A-Shaq and excessive fouling at the end of the game.
- Remove the defensive three-second violation. This should make playing defense an actual aspect of the game again.
- Make women's and men's college basketball have the same amount of time periods. I don't care if it's four quarters or two halves, but make them the same across both genders.
Quote from: ilpt4u on February 13, 2023, 04:56:56 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on February 13, 2023, 04:43:15 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 01:59:23 PM
Yes to Seattle NBA team, to Montreal MLB team, to St. Louis NFL team. All Big Four leagues and MLS should have at least 40 teams.
What would be the 2nd team you would add for the NBA, MLB and NFL? Because you have to have an even number of teams.
Vegas for NBA. Kansas City in the running, tho
Charlotte for MLB
San Diego for NFL
After the stadium debacles in the former home cities of the now-L.A. teams, I doubt either one will welcome the NFL back again. In fact, "Kroenke sucks" is the most-often heard refrain in St. Louis, so much that you'll even hear it at Blues and Cardinals games too.
But if the league were to expand (which is extremely unlikely), I'd love to see teams in Toronto and San Antonio.
Seattle and Las Vegas are great choices for NBA cities, with Kansas City, Louisville and Norfolk/Virginia Beach being good fits as well.
MLB is probably going to expand to Nashville and Portland, but I like Charlotte and Montreal too. If the A's don't move to Las Vegas, I can see that city get its own team anyway; it's a wait-and-see for the time being.
Every sport should have a way for both teams to lose (not tie, but actually lose like a double overbid on The Price Is Right, where nobody gets anything). This would be useful to give you something to root for when two teams you hate play each other.
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 13, 2023, 06:02:40 PM
- Make women's and men's college basketball have the same amount of time periods. I don't care if it's four quarters or two halves, but make them the same across both genders.
I would be perfectly fine with men's and women's college basketball having four 10-minute quarters. Pretty much every other code of basketball uses quarters, and the women's game honestly flows better than the men's game does.
I don't see a need to expand the major sports leagues.
I could, however, get behind introducing the concepts of promotion and relegation to American sports.
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on February 13, 2023, 09:52:57 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 13, 2023, 06:02:40 PM
- Make women's and men's college basketball have the same amount of time periods. I don't care if it's four quarters or two halves, but make them the same across both genders.
I would be perfectly fine with men's and women's college basketball having four 10-minute quarters. Pretty much every other code of basketball uses quarters, and the women's game honestly flows better than the men's game does.
TV contracts is why the NCAA Men's game hasn't adopted Quarters
The TV TOs every 4 minutes of Regulation do not translate to 10 min quarters very well, but fit very neatly in 20 min halves
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 13, 2023, 07:52:04 PM
Every sport should have a way for both teams to lose (not tie, but actually lose like a double overbid on The Price Is Right, where nobody gets anything). This would be useful to give you something to root for when two teams you hate play each other.
How would that work in Football or Basketball?
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 13, 2023, 05:46:44 PM
No overtimes or extra innings in any sport. In the event of a tie, the visiting coach spins a wheel to decide which other sport the teams will play to determine the winner.
Game knotted after 9 innings? Get ready to lace 'em up boys, cuz Coach just spun "hockey" on the wheel!
Let's see Joe Burrow's jump shot!
And everyone would pay to see a WNBA game decided on the gridiron.
:popcorn:
Uh oh, July baseball just spun cross-country skiing. This game's gonna take a while...
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 13, 2023, 10:33:21 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 13, 2023, 05:46:44 PM
No overtimes or extra innings in any sport. In the event of a tie, the visiting coach spins a wheel to decide which other sport the teams will play to determine the winner.
Game knotted after 9 innings? Get ready to lace 'em up boys, cuz Coach just spun "hockey" on the wheel!
Let's see Joe Burrow's jump shot!
And everyone would pay to see a WNBA game decided on the gridiron.
:popcorn:
Uh oh, July baseball just spun cross-country skiing. This game's gonna take a while...
Just go to Souky. Plenty of skiing there.
Quote from: ilpt4u on February 13, 2023, 04:56:56 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on February 13, 2023, 04:43:15 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 01:59:23 PM
Yes to Seattle NBA team, to Montreal MLB team, to St. Louis NFL team. All Big Four leagues and MLS should have at least 40 teams.
What would be the 2nd team you would add for the NBA, MLB and NFL? Because you have to have an even number of teams.
Vegas for NBA. Kansas City in the running, tho
Charlotte for MLB
San Diego for NFL
I would love an NBA team here in KC!
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 13, 2023, 10:33:07 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 13, 2023, 07:52:04 PM
Every sport should have a way for both teams to lose (not tie, but actually lose like a double overbid on The Price Is Right, where nobody gets anything). This would be useful to give you something to root for when two teams you hate play each other.
How would that work in Football or Basketball?
I dunno, you watch sports more than me, you figure it out.
Quote from: thspfc on February 13, 2023, 04:24:46 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 11:19:06 AM
Football
NFL regular season would be expanded to 25 games, beginning in early August and ending in late February. There would be 16-team playoffs without reseeding and Super Bowl in late March.
Sure hope not.
The max games should be 18--no more (and even that is pushing it, I have thought 16 was enough). If there was a 25 game season, the chances are that an 11-14 or 12-13 team may win the Super Bowl if they are the team least decimated by injuries. More than likely one of the divisions will have a team win it with a losing record.
I know the NFL is popular, but 7 months of the season will have the possibility of an overload of football. Then there would be less time for player movement (trades, free agency), for college player evaluations, for the draft, and for practice.
Speaking of practice, with the collective bargaining agreements recently approved, the times spent for physical practice have decreased. Film/videotape and playbook study have increased because of the newer technology in place now than it was in the 1960's-1980's. However, it seems to me that more injuries have occurred with the lessened practice time. Yes, some are due to some of the fields that are played on (Fieldturf) which seem to cause many knee injuries (ACL, MCL tears), however, with the lessened physical contact in practice, it seems that many players aren't ready for a hit during a game. I also know that this is anecdotal and would have to look up injury reports now verses then to see if my opinion is correct or not. What do some of you other members think about this?
As far as games played, let me use the Buffalo Bills of 1990-93 as an example of this take. Those are the years they went to four straight Super Bowls, unfortunately losing all four of them. So, they played 16 regular season games, either 2 or 3 conference playoff games, and then the Super Bowl. So, they would play 19 or 20 games over the course of those seasons. After four years, with the assumption that most of the team stayed intact, they have played enough games for
five seasons. After these seasons, they were not the dominant team in the AFC East even though they still had seasons in which they made the playoffs. The point is the team aged five years in four years. If there was a 25-game season, this would be the equivalent of 1.5 seasons compared to now. If the schedule was increased to that, there aren't going to be many players having a 12-year career, it would probably be closer to an 8-year career. And if one team continually made the playoffs, the team would age two years for every one.
No, the season is long enough, 16 was good enough, however, with the lure of $$$,$$$,$$$,$$$, it appears that the NFL will see an 18-game season soon. Not like it hasn't been done before. The CFL has played 18-game seasons, the USFL had 18-game seasons, and the WFL had a 20-game season in 1974. Even with an 18-game season the USFL had, there were only five accomplishments that would have broken the then-NFL records: Points scored season, 618-Houston Gamblers 1984; Completed passes season, 370- Jim Kelly, Houston Gamblers 1984; Yards passing season, 5,219-Jim Kelly, Houston Gamblers 1984; Receptions season, 115-Richard Johnson, Houston Gamblers 1984; Yards rushing season, 2,411-Herschel Walker, New Jersey Generals 1985.
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 13, 2023, 07:52:04 PM
This would be useful to give you something to root for when two teams you hate play each other.
I mean, if you hate both teams, are you even going to be watching the game in the first place, unless it's some kind of final?
Quote from: interstatefan990 on February 14, 2023, 12:39:10 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 13, 2023, 07:52:04 PM
This would be useful to give you something to root for when two teams you hate play each other.
I mean, if you hate both teams, are you even going to be watching the game in the first place, unless it's some kind of final?
Sometimes you have to be somewhere (family event, work, Oklahoma) and someone has a game on.
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 14, 2023, 12:45:02 AM
Quote from: interstatefan990 on February 14, 2023, 12:39:10 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 13, 2023, 07:52:04 PM
This would be useful to give you something to root for when two teams you hate play each other.
I mean, if you hate both teams, are you even going to be watching the game in the first place, unless it's some kind of final?
Sometimes you have to be somewhere (family event, work, Oklahoma) and someone has a game on.
True, I didn't think about that. That's usually when I pick a team at random or based on some unrelated factor and "root" for them just for kicks. I dislike the Philadelphia 76ers, but if they played against the Minnesota Timberwolves, I'd go with the 76ers simply because they're fellow Northeasterners.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on February 13, 2023, 10:57:06 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on February 13, 2023, 04:56:56 PM
Quote from: dvferyance on February 13, 2023, 04:43:15 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 01:59:23 PM
Yes to Seattle NBA team, to Montreal MLB team, to St. Louis NFL team. All Big Four leagues and MLS should have at least 40 teams.
What would be the 2nd team you would add for the NBA, MLB and NFL? Because you have to have an even number of teams.
Vegas for NBA. Kansas City in the running, tho
Charlotte for MLB
San Diego for NFL
I would love an NBA team here in KC!
Kansas City had an NBA team from 1972-85. First known as the Kansas City-Omaha Kings until 1975 when they started playing their home games at the Kemper Arena and then became the Kansas City Kings. They were a decent team, making the playoffs for some of the years there. They also had some good players, most notably Nate "Tiny" Archibald, a (listed) 6'1'' point guard (probably closer to 5'11'') who was the first player in NBA history to lead the league in scoring (34.0 ppg) and assists (11.4 apg) in the same season (1972-73). Poor attendance (only one season with average attendance over 10,000 fans) and an issue with the Kemper Arena roof one season forced a sale of the team and a move to Sacramento.
That was interesting in the 1970's and early 1980's to have teams called the Kings and the Royals in the same city.
Quote from: amroad17 on February 14, 2023, 12:55:49 AM
That was interesting in the 1970's and early 1980's to have teams called the Kings and the Royals in the same city.
Even more interesting is that the Kings franchise was known as the Royals prior to moving to Kansas City during their days in Cincinnati and before that, Rochester. They voluntarily changed the name to avoid confusion with the baseball franchise because of the KC/Omaha split affiliation. So they might have had the baseball and basketball Royals (like it's cross-state sibling with the baseball and football Cardinals at the time) had they skipped the Omaha part.
Since many replies are being posted in this topic, I will address some of the others here.
If the NBA went to 32 teams, the front runners would be Seattle and Las Vegas. The next tier would be Kansas City, Louisville, and St. Louis. Unfortunately, Norfolk/Virginia Beach would not be in this, unless this was an ABA-like team as mentioned above. They had the Squires in the ABA from 1970-76, and they did not draw well, did not play well (especially after trading/selling Julius Erving to the New York Nets and selling George Gervin to the San Antonio Spurs resulting in 15-69 and 15-68 seasons the last two years the ABA was in existence), and did not have the financial resources needed to run a basketball team. I lived there for 22 years and it seemed that the area in the 1960's through the early 1990's was in four different sections: Norfolk and Virginia Beach was one, Portsmouth and Chesapeake was another, the Peninsula (Newport News and Hampton) was another, and Suffolk was considered country belonging with Isle of Wight County and Southampton County. Since 1994, it seems the area has become one, however, I don't know if the residents would be into having an NBA team nor if they would want to support one. Perhaps sprjus4 could shed some light on this.
Louisville had the Kentucky Colonels, one of the three teams (the others being the Indiana Pacers and the Denver Rockets/Nuggets) that played in the same city every year in the ABA's nine year existence. They drew well, had some good players (Hall of Famers Artis Gilmore and Dan Issel and shooting guard Louie Dampier), and won one championship (1975). The only reason they did not enter the NBA in 1976 is that the Chicago Bulls wanted Artis Gilmore, a 7'2" center--the best in ABA history, and would negate any plan that would allow the Colonels into the NBA. So, the owner, John Y. Brown, accepted a $3 million buyout to fold the team.
St. Louis had an NBA team (the Hawks in the 1950's through the late 1960's when they moved to Atlanta) then had an ABA team (Spirits of St. Louis) from 1974-76. The ABA team was a remnant from the Carolina Cougars team. The ABA team did not draw well, however, they had the most characters of any team in ABA history, and a rookie radio announcer by the name of Bob Costas. There is an ESPN 30 for 30 detailing that team called "Free Spirits". When the Kansas City Kings played some games in St. Louis in the early 1980's, they drew well, so there could be some hope there.
I believe that any of our North American professional sports leagues should be capped at 32 teams. Maybe having second- and third-tier teams may be the wave of the future. It could work, even though it would take getting used to by our American fans.
As an aside, concerning the thought of two teams playing each other and both losing (snicker, snicker, :rofl:), maybe saying that if the over/under is 51 and the score of the game is under that, then both teams lose ( :-D :bigass:). It shouldn't change the over/under betting or point spread betting, just the records of the teams. (Crazy thought intended :-P)
Yes, jp the roadgeek, that is true. Maybe they should have kept the Royals name. You could hear sports announcers saying the Kansas City Baseball Royals or the Kansas City Basketball Royals like they used to have to differentiate between the New York Football Giants and the New York Baseball Giants.
Quote from: SP Cook on February 13, 2023, 01:26:37 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on February 13, 2023, 11:28:42 AM
Basketball
Fouling a player to gain an advantage, especially at the end of the game, would somehow be made unfeasible.
Elam Ending.
I'm kind of iffy on the Elam Ending. I've watched plenty of TBT games and it's kind of a buzzkill when a game ends on a made free throw. Unfortunately there really isn't much of a way to fix that, though tweaks have been made.
That being said, the Elam Ending *does* do a good job of generating excitement when it works, and the NBA G League has been using it for overtime this season and has had a few exciting finishes because of it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5ho7blVhU4
While I'm generally a fan of "team most recently ahead wins" in sports that aren't in the single digits, basketball scores frequently enough that "continue playing until the score is no longer tied" also works. While the team that scored to tie the game is at a disadvantage because the other team has the ball, this isn't a problem because "team most recently ahead wins" would have that same team automatically lose. (To clarify, I'm fine either way.)
Here is my proposal for a 60-team league where 20 are in Tier 1 and 40 are in Tier 2. The cities are just listed as we have no idea which ones belong in which tier until they play. This isn't for a particular sport but rather in general. Some of the teams (e.g. Minnesota) could be named after the entire state rather than the city.
Seattle
Portland
San Francisco
San Jose
Sacramento
Fresno
Los Angeles
Orange County
San Diego
Phoenix
Las Vegas
Salt Lake City
Boise
Denver
Albuquerque
El Paso
Brownsville
San Antonio
Austin
Houston
DFW
Oklahoma City
Northwest Arkansas
Kansas City
Omaha (possibly named Iowa and just across the border for a larger market)
Minneapolis
Milwaukee
Chicago, northern half
Chicago, southern half
St. Louis
Memphis
Nashville
New Orleans
Birmingham
Atlanta
Jacksonville
Tampa
Orlando
Miami
Columbia (Upstate SC is too close to Charlotte)
Charlotte
Raleigh or halfway between Raleigh and Greensboro
Louisville
Indianapolis
Grand Rapids
Detroit
Cincinnati
Columbus
Cleveland
Pittsburgh
Buffalo
Virginia Beach
DC
Baltimore
Philadelphia
NYC-area New Jersey (first of three NYC-area teams)
Western Long Island
Bronx or Westchester County
Hartford
Boston
Adding new teams ('expansion') is very simple and easy in a promotion and relegation system - you join at the very lowest level and 'promote' every year afterwards (based solely on your team's game play performance). After a few seasons, your new team is then playing at their proper strength level. New strength level divisions are also added as the number of teams warrants. Financially weak teams can also easily 'fold' and are then replaced with further needed promotions.
Mike
Promotion/relegation will never happen in North American sports no matter how much people try to build the infrastructure to support it. No current major professional team will ever agree to risk the embarrassment for its implementation.
Promotion in relegation in Europe has been in place for many years. Trying to implement in America would be chaos and would never work. A fun experiment for OOTP though
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 14, 2023, 03:15:13 PM
Promotion/relegation will never happen in North American sports no matter how much people try to build the infrastructure to support it. No current major professional team will ever agree to risk the embarrassment for its implementation.
The team could get bad and the fans would flee, anyways.
Mike
The franchise fee required to buy an expansion team in the four biggest leagues (I don't know what MLS franchise fees are these days) are a major reason why you won't see promotion and relegation. Consider the most recent expansion team, the NHL's Seattle Kraken. They paid a $650 million franchise fee. No doubt the NFL and MLB would both impose higher fees than that. No owner in his right mind would pay that fee and then risk being relegated right out of the gate (given that traditionally expansion franchises don't do well in their first season, though there have been some notable exceptions like the Vegas Golden Knights and the Carolina Panthers).
Copied from the NFL Reddit, here are some of my stupid NFL rule change ideas:
Moving touchbacks back to the 1 yard line. That would radically change how the return game would work. I thought about that because I like seeing returns as they are fun. Suddenly having a good returner would be so much more valuable and star players might start returning kicks. Would increase injuries, however.
Each team gets 102 timeouts for the entire season. Use them wisely! For the playoffs, each team gets 12. Need to burn them all to eek out a wildcard win? Goodluck with no timeouts for the rest of your run. Can do the same with challenges.
Power plays: If a team commits a major penalty that could cause serious injury, like a helmet hit, the team has to remove that player from the field with no replacement for a set amount of plays, making it like a power play in hockey.
Extra point madness- for every touchdown scored, the player that scores it has to kick the extra point.
Kicker shootout- if a game is in third OT with no points, the kickers have a shootout, starting with a 15 yard field goal, than a 25 yarder, 35 yarder, 45 yarder, 55 yarder, until a team wins.
Player loans
Teams are allowed to rent players from other teams for the playoffs for draft picks.
Player thief
After a team wins a playoff game, they can steal one player from the opponent. Each player can only be stolen once. Cowboys fans explode with debate on whether to steal Tom Brady or stick with Dak.
No Trade Dealine-
You get the point
No FA announcements during offseason, everything kept secret until week 1
OH NO WHY IS TOM BRADY NOT RUNNING OUT WHY IS CAM NEWTON HERE
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 15, 2023, 11:47:43 AM
Copied from the NFL Reddit, here are some of my stupid NFL rule change ideas:
Power plays: If a team commits a major penalty that could cause serious injury, like a helmet hit, the team has to remove that player from the field with no replacement for a set amount of plays, making it like a power play in hockey.
I have been saying for quite a few years now that the NFL should fully adopt the yellow card/red card rules of fútbol, with a personal foul or unsportsmanlike conduct call being at minimum a 'yellow card'. The looming specter of a team having to play the rest of a game at least a player short would be a HUGE incentive for everyone on the field to behave.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on February 16, 2023, 12:40:16 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 15, 2023, 11:47:43 AM
Copied from the NFL Reddit, here are some of my stupid NFL rule change ideas:
Power plays: If a team commits a major penalty that could cause serious injury, like a helmet hit, the team has to remove that player from the field with no replacement for a set amount of plays, making it like a power play in hockey.
I have been saying for quite a few years now that the NFL should fully adopt the yellow card/red card rules of fútbol, with a personal foul or unsportsmanlike conduct call being at minimum a 'yellow card'. The looming specter of a team having to play the rest of a game at least a player short would be a HUGE incentive for everyone on the field to behave.
Mike
IMO unsportsmanlike conduct shouldn't be a penalty. These are millionare players, grow up and take the taunting.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 15, 2023, 11:47:43 AM
Copied from the NFL Reddit, here are some of my stupid NFL rule change ideas:
Moving touchbacks back to the 1 yard line. That would radically change how the return game would work. I thought about that because I like seeing returns as they are fun. Suddenly having a good returner would be so much more valuable and star players might start returning kicks. Would increase injuries, however.
Each team gets 102 timeouts for the entire season. Use them wisely! For the playoffs, each team gets 12. Need to burn them all to eek out a wildcard win? Goodluck with no timeouts for the rest of your run. Can do the same with challenges.
Power plays: If a team commits a major penalty that could cause serious injury, like a helmet hit, the team has to remove that player from the field with no replacement for a set amount of plays, making it like a power play in hockey.
Extra point madness- for every touchdown scored, the player that scores it has to kick the extra point.
Kicker shootout- if a game is in third OT with no points, the kickers have a shootout, starting with a 15 yard field goal, than a 25 yarder, 35 yarder, 45 yarder, 55 yarder, until a team wins.
Player loans
Teams are allowed to rent players from other teams for the playoffs for draft picks.
Player thief
After a team wins a playoff game, they can steal one player from the opponent. Each player can only be stolen once. Cowboys fans explode with debate on whether to steal Tom Brady or stick with Dak.
No Trade Dealine-
You get the point
No FA announcements during offseason, everything kept secret until week 1
OH NO WHY IS TOM BRADY NOT RUNNING OUT WHY IS CAM NEWTON HERE
I wish kickoffs were from the 15 to get rid of the stupid kicks into the end zone.
No more kicking extra points but 1, 2, 3 you could go for.
How about the team to score last starts overtime on defense? Then when they play for the tie instead of the win, they'd be at a disadvantage and more teams would try to win in regulation.
Player gets hurt he has to stay out the rest of the drive. Thus no fake injury time outs.
How about if punts go out of bounds the other team gets the ball at the line of scrimmage?
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on February 13, 2023, 11:28:42 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 13, 2023, 11:19:06 AM
These are my proposed changes to major North American sports leagues.
Basketball
In NBA, two breaks would be set around FIBA international match days.
That's not the change I would make. I would do something more like:
Basketball
Fouling a player to gain an advantage, especially at the end of the game, would somehow be made unfeasible.
Automatic 2 points to the fouled team, and they get the ball too.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 15, 2023, 11:34:16 AM
The franchise fee required to buy an expansion team in the four biggest leagues (I don't know what MLS franchise fees are these days) are a major reason why you won't see promotion and relegation. Consider the most recent expansion team, the NHL's Seattle Kraken. They paid a $650 million franchise fee. No doubt the NFL and MLB would both impose higher fees than that. No owner in his right mind would pay that fee and then risk being relegated right out of the gate (given that traditionally expansion franchises don't do well in their first season, though there have been some notable exceptions like the Vegas Golden Knights and the Carolina Panthers).
Charlotte FC paid $325 million. St. Louis paid $200 million and had to wait a bit longer.
The next round is rumored to be in the $600 million range, since MLS is likely to stop expanding when it reaches 32 teams. It's already really hard to schedule games due to distance and required recovery time, and soccer fans are not pleased at being unable to play every other team in the league at least once a year.
How about this for hockey? Instead of the fake OT losses, if you win in regulation you get 3, loser gets 0 points. If you win in overtime, you get 2, the loser gets 1. Every game is still 3 points regardless.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 16, 2023, 01:01:27 AM
IMO unsportsmanlike conduct shouldn't be a penalty. These are millionare players, grow up and take the taunting.
Unsportsmanlike conduct absolutely needs to exist as a penalty, I think what you're getting at is that maybe taunting shouldn't qualify for that penalty.
Quote from: texaskdog on February 16, 2023, 01:25:59 AM
How about this for hockey? Instead of the fake OT losses, if you win in regulation you get 3, loser gets 0 points. If you win in overtime, you get 2, the loser gets 1. Every game is still 3 points regardless.
Lots of people have suggested that. The league has resisted so far on the basis that three for a win would "distort" the standings as compared to historical records. But that's a somewhat bogus argument because the phantom OTL point already has that effect, as does the rules change of every game having a winner and a loser (versus before when games ended in ties). Standings point totals are already higher, on the whole, than they were before.
The problem with the NHL's current system is that it makes some games worth more than others, statistically, but there's no way to know before a given game whether it will fall into that category–the third point just appears out of the ether if a game goes to overtime. No regular-season game should be worth more than any other game on a statistical basis. Certainly we all know some games can matter more for various reasons–a team can need to break out of a slump, or a game against a heated rival carries emotional weight, or it's late in the season and the playoff race is tight and a team needs every point it can get–and that's fine, but it's not right that random games wind up counting for more in the standings than other games do.
Quote from: webny99 on February 16, 2023, 08:22:25 AM
....
Unsportsmanlike conduct absolutely needs to exist as a penalty, I think what you're getting at is that maybe taunting shouldn't qualify for that penalty.
An excellent example of when it should be a penalty was seen in a Capitals game earlier this season (Dec. 23–I was at the game) against Winnipeg, when the Jets got called for icing and a Jets player didn't like the call and slammed the puck down the ice right as the linesman was going to pick it up. Immediate (and justified) unsportsmanlike conduct call.
Quote from: webny99 on February 16, 2023, 08:22:25 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 16, 2023, 01:01:27 AM
IMO unsportsmanlike conduct shouldn't be a penalty. These are millionare players, grow up and take the taunting.
Unsportsmanlike conduct absolutely needs to exist as a penalty, I think what you're getting at is that maybe taunting shouldn't qualify for that penalty.
Was more talking about taunting. Taunting is a joke to have in pro sports. Unsportsmanlike conduct should exist but somewhat more limited.
Promotion and relegation work in single-country European soccer because a European country is a much smaller geographic entity than the USA, and the major cities all have multiple teams. Networks don't want to be told that Chicago is going to AAA and Boise is taking their place.
The change I would like to see is in college basketball. Adopt the same rule as baseball has. A player can go pro right out of high school, or commit to playing for a college for at least 3 years before again being eligible for the draft.
Quote from: SP Cook on February 16, 2023, 11:21:33 AM
Promotion and relegation work in single-country European soccer because a European country is a much smaller geographic entity than the USA, and the major cities all have multiple teams. Networks don't want to be told that Chicago is going to AAA and Boise is taking their place.
The change I would like to see is in college basketball. Adopt the same rule as baseball has. A player can go pro right out of high school, or commit to playing for a college for at least 3 years before again being eligible for the draft.
Some of the strongest TV ratings for Super Bowls were with games involving smaller home markets. A few years ago when it was the packers and the Steelers, the game drew some of the strongest TV numbers ever.
As for the colleges and the NCAA, with the way that things are going in all aspects of the university scene, I'm thinking that the most likely long-term outcome is the complete implosion of inter-collegiate sports. then what?
Mike
Quote from: texaskdog on February 16, 2023, 01:25:59 AM
How about this for hockey? Instead of the fake OT losses, if you win in regulation you get 3, loser gets 0 points. If you win in overtime, you get 2, the loser gets 1. Every game is still 3 points regardless.
Yes, yes, and YES!!
NFL could also go to draft lottery.
Quote from: SP Cook on February 16, 2023, 11:21:33 AM
Promotion and relegation work in single-country European soccer because a European country is a much smaller geographic entity than the USA, and the major cities all have multiple teams. Networks don't want to be told that Chicago is going to AAA and Boise is taking their place.
The change I would like to see is in college basketball. Adopt the same rule as baseball has. A player can go pro right out of high school, or commit to playing for a college for at least 3 years before again being eligible for the draft.
Minor leagues could have a well-established promotion and relegation. There could be promotion/relegation play-outs between levels and league pyramids with over 10 levels (England's soccer pyramid has 22 levels). Could work in e.g. baseball.
Quote from: mgk920 on February 16, 2023, 01:10:55 PM
As for the colleges and the NCAA, with the way that things are going in all aspects of the university scene, I'm thinking that the most likely long-term outcome is the complete implosion of inter-collegiate sports. then what?
ESPN, the focus of evil in the sports world, is about 10 years from destroying college sports. The 100% centric focus on one champion, and everybody else is a POS, will eventually destroy college football, because, at the end of the day, there are really only about 15 programs that will EVER have a chance at the title. There was a time when going to a bowl game and winning a bowl game was considered a great season at many places.
Quote from: SP Cook on February 16, 2023, 03:03:48 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 16, 2023, 01:10:55 PM
As for the colleges and the NCAA, with the way that things are going in all aspects of the university scene, I'm thinking that the most likely long-term outcome is the complete implosion of inter-collegiate sports. then what?
ESPN, the focus of evil in the sports world, is about 10 years from destroying college sports. The 100% centric focus on one champion, and everybody else is a POS, will eventually destroy college football, because, at the end of the day, there are really only about 15 programs that will EVER have a chance at the title. There was a time when going to a bowl game and winning a bowl game was considered a great season at many places.
The money in conference reaglinment is destroying college football. About 0% of people wanted UCLA in the Big 10. That's insane.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 16, 2023, 03:08:01 PM
Quote from: SP Cook on February 16, 2023, 03:03:48 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 16, 2023, 01:10:55 PM
As for the colleges and the NCAA, with the way that things are going in all aspects of the university scene, I'm thinking that the most likely long-term outcome is the complete implosion of inter-collegiate sports. then what?
ESPN, the focus of evil in the sports world, is about 10 years from destroying college sports. The 100% centric focus on one champion, and everybody else is a POS, will eventually destroy college football, because, at the end of the day, there are really only about 15 programs that will EVER have a chance at the title. There was a time when going to a bowl game and winning a bowl game was considered a great season at many places.
The money in conference reaglinment is destroying college football. About 0% of people wanted UCLA in the Big 10. That's insane.
UCLA playing a conference game in whatever sport v. Rutgers or Maryland....
<rolleyes>
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on February 16, 2023, 07:40:36 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 16, 2023, 03:08:01 PM
Quote from: SP Cook on February 16, 2023, 03:03:48 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 16, 2023, 01:10:55 PM
As for the colleges and the NCAA, with the way that things are going in all aspects of the university scene, I'm thinking that the most likely long-term outcome is the complete implosion of inter-collegiate sports. then what?
ESPN, the focus of evil in the sports world, is about 10 years from destroying college sports. The 100% centric focus on one champion, and everybody else is a POS, will eventually destroy college football, because, at the end of the day, there are really only about 15 programs that will EVER have a chance at the title. There was a time when going to a bowl game and winning a bowl game was considered a great season at many places.
The money in conference reaglinment is destroying college football. About 0% of people wanted UCLA in the Big 10. That's insane.
UCLA playing a conference game in whatever sport v. Rutgers or Maryland....
<rolleyes>
Mike
Then Oregon and Washington will join the Big 10, fucking UNC will join the Big 10, Clemson will join the SEC, the Big 12 will stretch from Boston College to Arizona State, and college football will even more be ruined. I will donate serious money to a political candidate who campaigns on nationalizing the NCAA and ending this nonsense.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 16, 2023, 08:40:23 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 16, 2023, 07:40:36 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 16, 2023, 03:08:01 PM
Quote from: SP Cook on February 16, 2023, 03:03:48 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 16, 2023, 01:10:55 PM
As for the colleges and the NCAA, with the way that things are going in all aspects of the university scene, I'm thinking that the most likely long-term outcome is the complete implosion of inter-collegiate sports. then what?
ESPN, the focus of evil in the sports world, is about 10 years from destroying college sports. The 100% centric focus on one champion, and everybody else is a POS, will eventually destroy college football, because, at the end of the day, there are really only about 15 programs that will EVER have a chance at the title. There was a time when going to a bowl game and winning a bowl game was considered a great season at many places.
The money in conference reaglinment is destroying college football. About 0% of people wanted UCLA in the Big 10. That's insane.
UCLA playing a conference game in whatever sport v. Rutgers or Maryland....
<rolleyes>
Mike
Then Oregon and Washington will join the Big 10, fucking UNC will join the Big 10, Clemson will join the SEC, the Big 12 will stretch from Boston College to Arizona State, and college football will even more be ruined. I will donate serious money to a political candidate who campaigns on nationalizing the NCAA and ending this nonsense.
I'm expecting the entire university thing, including research and academics, to implode from all of the current madnesses, the only real question is 'When?'. after that, the remnants will become European style 'private sports clubs', with all of the marks, colors, traditions and even the facilities of the old universities, but in a promotion and relegation system that will fairly quickly absorb the major leagues (especially the NHL and NBA) as their 'first divisions'.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on February 16, 2023, 07:40:36 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 16, 2023, 03:08:01 PM
Quote from: SP Cook on February 16, 2023, 03:03:48 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on February 16, 2023, 01:10:55 PM
As for the colleges and the NCAA, with the way that things are going in all aspects of the university scene, I'm thinking that the most likely long-term outcome is the complete implosion of inter-collegiate sports. then what?
ESPN, the focus of evil in the sports world, is about 10 years from destroying college sports. The 100% centric focus on one champion, and everybody else is a POS, will eventually destroy college football, because, at the end of the day, there are really only about 15 programs that will EVER have a chance at the title. There was a time when going to a bowl game and winning a bowl game was considered a great season at many places.
The money in conference reaglinment is destroying college football. About 0% of people wanted UCLA in the Big 10. That's insane.
UCLA playing a conference game in whatever sport v. Rutgers or Maryland....
<rolleyes>
Mike
Not such a big deal for football but what about smaller sports? West Virginia's non football teams have to travel hundreds of miles for every non conference game. Football should have it's own conferences and make the rest regional.
MLB could realign its divisions so that Phillies and Pirates would play in same division.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 17, 2023, 08:36:32 AM
MLB could realign its divisions so that Phillies and Pirates would play in same division.
Knocking out the Braves to another Division? I'll be ok with that!
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 17, 2023, 08:36:32 AM
MLB could realign its divisions so that Phillies and Pirates would play in same division.
It probably doesn't really matter with the changes they're making to the scheduling model. Divisional play will be severely reduced.
Speaking of a change of which I just recently became aware, am I alone in thinking banning the defensive shift in baseball is one of the stupidest things ever?
Maybe batters should learn how to hit to the opposite field if they want to get on base, instead of banning the defense from shifting to playing against known pull hitters.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 17, 2023, 10:45:03 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 17, 2023, 08:36:32 AM
MLB could realign its divisions so that Phillies and Pirates would play in same division.
It probably doesn't really matter with the changes they're making to the scheduling model. Divisional play will be severely reduced.
It seems to me like the Brewers and Cubs play each other like every other week (in reality it is not THAT often), nut I do appreciate them being in the same division.
:nod:
Mike
The change that should be made to MLB is that Texas Rangers and Arizona Diamondbacks should swap leagues, so their "natural rivals" would be Astros and Rockies.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 21, 2023, 10:57:52 AM
The change that should be made to MLB is that Texas Rangers and Arizona Diamondbacks should swap leagues, so their "natural rivals" would be Astros and Rockies.
Wut? This makes absolutely zero sense. Please elaborate.
Quote from: cockroachking on February 21, 2023, 10:10:02 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 21, 2023, 10:57:52 AM
The change that should be made to MLB is that Texas Rangers and Arizona Diamondbacks should swap leagues, so their "natural rivals" would be Astros and Rockies.
Wut? This makes absolutely zero sense. Please elaborate repeat.
FIFY.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 21, 2023, 10:57:52 AM
The change that should be made to MLB is that Texas Rangers and Arizona Diamondbacks should swap leagues, so their "natural rivals" would be Astros and Rockies.
AL and NL are going to go away before too long anyway. Just need a few more of the old school owners who are against it to sell/die.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 22, 2023, 07:52:41 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 21, 2023, 10:57:52 AM
The change that should be made to MLB is that Texas Rangers and Arizona Diamondbacks should swap leagues, so their "natural rivals" would be Astros and Rockies.
AL and NL are going to go away before too long anyway. Just need a few more of the old school owners who are against it to sell/die.
I wouldn't count on that. The two leagues have been competing against each other for 120 years, and it's worked well, so why mess with the formula? It would be like the NFL getting rid of the NFC and AFC, which I don't see happening anytime soon either. IOW, leave them as they are.
Quote from: Henry on February 22, 2023, 10:37:45 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 22, 2023, 07:52:41 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 21, 2023, 10:57:52 AM
The change that should be made to MLB is that Texas Rangers and Arizona Diamondbacks should swap leagues, so their "natural rivals" would be Astros and Rockies.
AL and NL are going to go away before too long anyway. Just need a few more of the old school owners who are against it to sell/die.
I wouldn't count on that. The two leagues have been competing against each other for 120 years, and it's worked well, so why mess with the formula? It would be like the NFL getting rid of the NFC and AFC, which I don't see happening anytime soon either. IOW, leave them as they are.
But Rangers and Astros shouldn't be in same division.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 22, 2023, 11:58:48 AM
Quote from: Henry on February 22, 2023, 10:37:45 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 22, 2023, 07:52:41 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 21, 2023, 10:57:52 AM
The change that should be made to MLB is that Texas Rangers and Arizona Diamondbacks should swap leagues, so their "natural rivals" would be Astros and Rockies.
AL and NL are going to go away before too long anyway. Just need a few more of the old school owners who are against it to sell/die.
I wouldn't count on that. The two leagues have been competing against each other for 120 years, and it's worked well, so why mess with the formula? It would be like the NFL getting rid of the NFC and AFC, which I don't see happening anytime soon either. IOW, leave them as they are.
But Rangers and Astros shouldn't be in same division.
They shouldn't be in the same LEAGUE. The Astros were a National League team for many years. I'm not a fan of this business of moving teams between leagues just to suit the commissioner's whims.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 22, 2023, 12:32:12 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 22, 2023, 11:58:48 AM
Quote from: Henry on February 22, 2023, 10:37:45 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 22, 2023, 07:52:41 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 21, 2023, 10:57:52 AM
The change that should be made to MLB is that Texas Rangers and Arizona Diamondbacks should swap leagues, so their "natural rivals" would be Astros and Rockies.
AL and NL are going to go away before too long anyway. Just need a few more of the old school owners who are against it to sell/die.
I wouldn't count on that. The two leagues have been competing against each other for 120 years, and it's worked well, so why mess with the formula? It would be like the NFL getting rid of the NFC and AFC, which I don't see happening anytime soon either. IOW, leave them as they are.
But Rangers and Astros shouldn't be in same division.
They shouldn't be in the same LEAGUE. The Astros were a National League team for many years. I'm not a fan of this business of moving teams between leagues just to suit the commissioner's whims.
Expansions and divisional changes should happen more frequently, especially in MLB. It is too boring to have same 30 MLB teams in same divisions in every year.
If teams play closer teams more often (which is done currently but would be eliminated in your proposal), it cuts down on travel time, which is beneficial.
Quote from: Henry on February 22, 2023, 10:37:45 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 22, 2023, 07:52:41 AM
AL and NL are going to go away before too long anyway. Just need a few more of the old school owners who are against it to sell/die.
I wouldn't count on that. The two leagues have been competing against each other for 120 years, and it's worked well, so why mess with the formula? It would be like the NFL getting rid of the NFC and AFC, which I don't see happening anytime soon either. IOW, leave them as they are.
If it's worked so well, then why has baseball been hemorrhaging fans for the last 30 years?
(I personally pin most of it on the rise of an impatient, instant gratification culture in that time period.)
This season is going to take us another step in the direction of AL/NL being closer to a formality to sort playoff teams.
Uh, why the heck would you separate the Rangers and Astros? They are natural rivals (in fact, I would say that they are our biggest rivals). It just doesn't seem like it right now since the Astros have been so dominant for the past several years and the Rangers, uh, have not.
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 22, 2023, 05:03:42 PM
Uh, why the heck would you separate the Rangers and Astros? They are natural rivals (in fact, I would say that they are our biggest rivals). It just doesn't seem like it right now since the Astros have been so dominant for the past several years and the Rangers, uh, have not.
The same reason the Yankees were separated from the Giants and the Dodgers, the Cubs were separated from the White Sox, the Cardinals were separated from the Browns, the Phillies were separated from the Athletics, the Red Sox from the Braves....because that's how the leagues developed. Something significant was lost when the World Series no longer matched up two teams that hadn't met during the season.
The Astros originally landed in the National League, BTW, because the American League had expanded the year before and added Washington (to replace the departed Senators who became the Twins) and Los Angeles (the Angels, because the AL owners weren't going to let the NL have California all to itself). The NL added Houston and the New York Mets (to replace the Dodgers and Giants). The same sort of reasoning that applied to the AL adding the Angels is part of the reason why the 1998 expansion placed the Devil Rays in the AL–the 1993 expansion put the Marlins in the NL (because that league had two fewer teams than the AL did) and the AL owners didn't want the NL having Florida to itself.
Quote from: hbelkins on February 17, 2023, 11:06:06 PM
Speaking of a change of which I just recently became aware, am I alone in thinking banning the defensive shift in baseball is one of the stupidest things ever?
Maybe batters should learn how to hit to the opposite field if they want to get on base, instead of banning the defense from shifting to playing against known pull hitters.
Nope you aren't alone at all there.
I'm happy the Tigers and White Sox play in the same division. Then I can go do a baseball road trip in Detroit to see the Sox play.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 22, 2023, 07:52:41 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 21, 2023, 10:57:52 AM
The change that should be made to MLB is that Texas Rangers and Arizona Diamondbacks should swap leagues, so their "natural rivals" would be Astros and Rockies.
AL and NL are going to go away before too long anyway. Just need a few more of the old school owners who are against it to sell/die.
Speaking of old school owners I can't wait until Jerry Reinsdorf no longer owns the White Sox. He is one of the worst owners in sports. Just look at the White Sox most recent offseason, talk about going from rebuild to nothing quickly.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 22, 2023, 05:13:35 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 22, 2023, 05:03:42 PM
Uh, why the heck would you separate the Rangers and Astros? They are natural rivals (in fact, I would say that they are our biggest rivals). It just doesn't seem like it right now since the Astros have been so dominant for the past several years and the Rangers, uh, have not.
The same reason the Yankees were separated from the Giants and the Dodgers, the Cubs were separated from the White Sox, the Cardinals were separated from the Browns, the Phillies were separated from the Athletics, the Red Sox from the Braves....because that's how the leagues developed. Something significant was lost when the World Series no longer matched up two teams that hadn't met during the season.
The Astros originally landed in the National League, BTW, because the American League had expanded the year before and added Washington (to replace the departed Senators who became the Twins) and Los Angeles (the Angels, because the AL owners weren't going to let the NL have California all to itself). The NL added Houston and the New York Mets (to replace the Dodgers and Giants). The same sort of reasoning that applied to the AL adding the Angels is part of the reason why the 1998 expansion placed the Devil Rays in the AL–the 1993 expansion put the Marlins in the NL (because that league had two fewer teams than the AL did) and the AL owners didn't want the NL having Florida to itself.
I do not want to sound rude, but I don't really see your point. Are you saying that the Astros should have never moved to the AL West?
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 22, 2023, 05:13:35 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 22, 2023, 05:03:42 PM
Uh, why the heck would you separate the Rangers and Astros? They are natural rivals (in fact, I would say that they are our biggest rivals). It just doesn't seem like it right now since the Astros have been so dominant for the past several years and the Rangers, uh, have not.
The same reason the Yankees were separated from the Giants and the Dodgers, the Cubs were separated from the White Sox, the Cardinals were separated from the Browns, the Phillies were separated from the Athletics, the Red Sox from the Braves....because that's how the leagues developed. Something significant was lost when the World Series no longer matched up two teams that hadn't met during the season.
The Astros originally landed in the National League, BTW, because the American League had expanded the year before and added Washington (to replace the departed Senators who became the Twins) and Los Angeles (the Angels, because the AL owners weren't going to let the NL have California all to itself). The NL added Houston and the New York Mets (to replace the Dodgers and Giants). The same sort of reasoning that applied to the AL adding the Angels is part of the reason why the 1998 expansion placed the Devil Rays in the AL–the 1993 expansion put the Marlins in the NL (because that league had two fewer teams than the AL did) and the AL owners didn't want the NL having Florida to itself.
Those examples you gave though are from two teams in one city. Arlington and Houston are 4 hours from each other by car in normal traffic. They are further apart than NYC and Boston are.
In an effort to reduce travel costs and fatigue, I wish the NFL would divide the conferences to East and West. Also New Jersey is one of the tiniest states in the country and does not need two teams; move one of them to a city in the Mountain or Pacific Time Zone.
Northeast Division: Boston, Buffalo, Philadelphia, and (Giants or Jets)
Mid-Atlantic Division: Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Carolina, Washington
Great Lakes Division: Cleveland, Cinncinati, Detroit, Indianapolis,
Southeast Division: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa
North Central Division: Chicago, Kansas City, Minnesota, Green Bay
South Central Division: Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Tennessee
Southwest Division: Los Angeles (Rams), Las Vegas, Phoenix, San Diego (Chargers)
Northwest Division: Denver, San Francisco, Seattle, and (Giants or Jets)
And also go by actual city name instead of state name especially baseball. What's wrong with calling them Denver Rockies?
Quote from: jgb191 on February 22, 2023, 05:44:53 PM
In an effort to reduce travel costs and fatigue, I wish the NFL would divide the conferences to East and West. Also New Jersey is one of the tiniest states in the country and does not need two teams; move one of them to a city in the Mountain or Pacific Time Zone.
Northeast Division: Boston, Buffalo, Philadelphia, and (Giants or Jets)
Mid-Atlantic Division: Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Carolina, Washington
Great Lakes Division: Cleveland, Cinncinati, Detroit, Indianapolis,
Southeast Division: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa
North Central Division: Chicago, Kansas City, Minnesota, Green Bay
South Central Division: Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Tennessee
Southwest Division: Los Angeles (Rams), Las Vegas, Phoenix, San Diego (Chargers)
Northwest Division: Denver, San Francisco, Seattle, and (Giants or Jets)
And also go by actual city name instead of state name especially baseball. What's wrong with calling them Denver Rockies?
Do not make us play the Eagles twice a year along with the Bills please. And these names suck, go back to original names. Boston Patriots died in 1970. And why are the Giants or Jets in the NORTHWEST Division? That makes no sense!
This would be more logical, plus save some rivalries:
Northeast: Pats, Jets, Giants, Bills
Atlantic: Eagles, Steelers, Ravens, Washington
Southeast: Dolphins, Bucs, Jags, Falcons
Mideast: Colts, Panthers, Browns, Bengals
North: Bears, Vikings, Packers, Lions
South: Saints, Texans, Cowboys, Titans
Southwest: Raiders, Cardinals, Rams, Chargers
Northwest: Broncos, Seahawks, Niners, Chiefs
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 22, 2023, 06:23:48 PM
This would be more logical, plus save some rivalries:
Northeast: Pats, Jets, Giants, Bills
Atlantic: Eagles, Steelers, Ravens, Washington
Southeast: Dolphins, Bucs, Jags, Falcons
Mideast: Colts, Panthers, Browns, Bengals
North: Bears, Vikings, Packers, Lions
South: Saints, Texans, Cowboys, Titans
Southwest: Raiders, Cardinals, Rams, Chargers
Northwest: Broncos, Seahawks, Niners, Chiefs
Would love to humble the NJ Teams 4x a year.
I'd flipflop Cardinals/Raiders for Niners & Seahawks and flipflop Lions for Colts
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 22, 2023, 12:32:12 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 22, 2023, 11:58:48 AM
Quote from: Henry on February 22, 2023, 10:37:45 AM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 22, 2023, 07:52:41 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 21, 2023, 10:57:52 AM
The change that should be made to MLB is that Texas Rangers and Arizona Diamondbacks should swap leagues, so their "natural rivals" would be Astros and Rockies.
AL and NL are going to go away before too long anyway. Just need a few more of the old school owners who are against it to sell/die.
I wouldn't count on that. The two leagues have been competing against each other for 120 years, and it's worked well, so why mess with the formula? It would be like the NFL getting rid of the NFC and AFC, which I don't see happening anytime soon either. IOW, leave them as they are.
But Rangers and Astros shouldn't be in same division.
They shouldn't be in the same LEAGUE. The Astros were a National League team for many years. I'm not a fan of this business of moving teams between leagues just to suit the commissioner's whims.
Yes they should. Divisions should be the teams that are closest together. Everyone plays everyone, there are no leagues anymore just conferences. Yankees & Mets should play each other a lot too. Make the playoffs seeded regardless of league so the best two teams can play.
Quote from: hbelkins on February 17, 2023, 11:06:06 PM
Speaking of a change of which I just recently became aware, am I alone in thinking banning the defensive shift in baseball is one of the stupidest things ever?
Maybe batters should learn how to hit to the opposite field if they want to get on base, instead of banning the defense from shifting to playing against known pull hitters.
Smartest thing I've read all day. if the hitter is that good he could just hit it where they aint!
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 22, 2023, 05:59:58 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 22, 2023, 05:44:53 PM
In an effort to reduce travel costs and fatigue, I wish the NFL would divide the conferences to East and West. Also New Jersey is one of the tiniest states in the country and does not need two teams; move one of them to a city in the Mountain or Pacific Time Zone.
Northeast Division: Boston, Buffalo, Philadelphia, and (Giants or Jets)
Mid-Atlantic Division: Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Carolina, Washington
Great Lakes Division: Cleveland, Cinncinati, Detroit, Indianapolis,
Southeast Division: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa
North Central Division: Chicago, Kansas City, Minnesota, Green Bay
South Central Division: Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Tennessee
Southwest Division: Los Angeles (Rams), Las Vegas, Phoenix, San Diego (Chargers)
Northwest Division: Denver, San Francisco, Seattle, and (Giants or Jets)
And also go by actual city name instead of state name especially baseball. What's wrong with calling them Denver Rockies?
Do not make us play the Eagles twice a year along with the Bills please. And these names suck, go back to original names. Boston Patriots died in 1970. And why are the Giants or Jets in the NORTHWEST Division? That makes no sense!
He just said move them to Portland :)
Quote from: texaskdog on February 22, 2023, 07:45:24 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 22, 2023, 05:59:58 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 22, 2023, 05:44:53 PM
In an effort to reduce travel costs and fatigue, I wish the NFL would divide the conferences to East and West. Also New Jersey is one of the tiniest states in the country and does not need two teams; move one of them to a city in the Mountain or Pacific Time Zone.
Northeast Division: Boston, Buffalo, Philadelphia, and (Giants or Jets)
Mid-Atlantic Division: Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Carolina, Washington
Great Lakes Division: Cleveland, Cinncinati, Detroit, Indianapolis,
Southeast Division: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa
North Central Division: Chicago, Kansas City, Minnesota, Green Bay
South Central Division: Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Tennessee
Southwest Division: Los Angeles (Rams), Las Vegas, Phoenix, San Diego (Chargers)
Northwest Division: Denver, San Francisco, Seattle, and (Giants or Jets)
And also go by actual city name instead of state name especially baseball. What's wrong with calling them Denver Rockies?
Do not make us play the Eagles twice a year along with the Bills please. And these names suck, go back to original names. Boston Patriots died in 1970. And why are the Giants or Jets in the NORTHWEST Division? That makes no sense!
He just said move them to Portland :)
Nobodys moving a team from NYC to Goddamn Portland.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 22, 2023, 08:23:17 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 22, 2023, 07:45:24 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 22, 2023, 05:59:58 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 22, 2023, 05:44:53 PM
In an effort to reduce travel costs and fatigue, I wish the NFL would divide the conferences to East and West. Also New Jersey is one of the tiniest states in the country and does not need two teams; move one of them to a city in the Mountain or Pacific Time Zone.
Northeast Division: Boston, Buffalo, Philadelphia, and (Giants or Jets)
Mid-Atlantic Division: Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Carolina, Washington
Great Lakes Division: Cleveland, Cinncinati, Detroit, Indianapolis,
Southeast Division: Atlanta, Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa
North Central Division: Chicago, Kansas City, Minnesota, Green Bay
South Central Division: Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Tennessee
Southwest Division: Los Angeles (Rams), Las Vegas, Phoenix, San Diego (Chargers)
Northwest Division: Denver, San Francisco, Seattle, and (Giants or Jets)
And also go by actual city name instead of state name especially baseball. What's wrong with calling them Denver Rockies?
Do not make us play the Eagles twice a year along with the Bills please. And these names suck, go back to original names. Boston Patriots died in 1970. And why are the Giants or Jets in the NORTHWEST Division? That makes no sense!
He just said move them to Portland :)
Nobodys moving a team from NYC to Goddamn Portland.
It didn't work when Hello Larry did it either.
It might not have to be Portland, but it is the largest city west of the Great Plains with only one sports team, something that could complement the Blazers and the Northwest rivalry with Sea-Hawks just up the road in Seattle, and Nike is HQ'ed in Oregon!
I believe Sacramento is the second largest such city; possibly rival the Niners? Or maybe Salt Lake? All I know is New Jersey need not two teams, with another just outside the state across the Delaware River. And neither the Giants nor the Jets are in NYC, both are somewhere in New Jersey.
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:38:38 AM
It might not have to be Portland, but it is the largest city west of the Great Plains with only one sports team, something that could complement the Blazers and the Northwest rivalry with Sea-Hawks just up the road in Seattle, and Nike is HQ'ed in Oregon!
I believe Sacramento is the second largest such city; possibly rival the Niners? Or maybe Salt Lake? All I know is New Jersey need not two teams, with another just outside the state across the Delaware River. And neither the Giants nor the Jets are in NYC, both are somewhere in New Jersey.
Portland has two teams; no matter what one thinks of MLS nationally, in the Northwest it is a major league and has a significant following.
Salt Lake City also has two teams. And so would Sacramento had their MLS bid not been torpedoed.
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:38:38 AM
It might not have to be Portland, but it is the largest city west of the Great Plains with only one sports team, something that could complement the Blazers and the Northwest rivalry with Sea-Hawks just up the road in Seattle, and Nike is HQ'ed in Oregon!
I believe Sacramento is the second largest such city; possibly rival the Niners? Or maybe Salt Lake? All I know is New Jersey need not two teams, with another just outside the state across the Delaware River. And neither the Giants nor the Jets are in NYC, both are somewhere in New Jersey.
The Giants and Jets both play within the NYC Metro area. Just because they happen to be located in New Jersey doesn't make them less of a NYC team, they are indeed within their metro area. That other city just across the state is also one of the largest metro areas in the country. I think you are underestimating the population of the east coast.
Wasn't there a movie a couple decades ago where one of the plot points was the scheming going into some dude trying to build a new stadium for the Giants in NYC proper? This would've been before MetLife was built and it was still the old Meadowlands.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 23, 2023, 10:41:25 AM
Wasn't there a movie a couple decades ago where one of the plot points was the scheming going into some dude trying to build a new stadium for the Giants in NYC proper? This would've been before MetLife was built and it was still the old Meadowlands.
It was actually the Jets, and Kevin James brought it up in Hitch. They were trying to build a stadium on the West Side of Manhattan that would've been one of the sites for the 2012 Olympics had New York been awarded them. But London killed those plans, and the two teams stayed across the river to build their shared stadium.
While we're on the subject of the AL and NL getting dumped, this would be a fun new take on the future of MLB:
EASTERN LEAGUENortheast: Red Sox, Mets, Yankees, Phillies, Pirates
Great Lakes: Reds, Guardians, Tigers, Brewers, Blue Jays
Southeast: Braves, Orioles, Marlins, Rays, Nationals
WESTERN LEAGUEMidwest: Cubs, White Sox, Royals, Twins, Cardinals
Southwest: Diamondbacks, Rockies, Astros, Athletics, Rangers
Pacific: Angels, Dodgers, Padres, Giants, Mariners
Most of the existing rivalries would be preserved, and a lot less travel would be needed, since the teams are much closer together.
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 23, 2023, 04:16:16 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:38:38 AM
It might not have to be Portland, but it is the largest city west of the Great Plains with only one sports team, something that could complement the Blazers and the Northwest rivalry with Sea-Hawks just up the road in Seattle, and Nike is HQ'ed in Oregon!
I believe Sacramento is the second largest such city; possibly rival the Niners? Or maybe Salt Lake? All I know is New Jersey need not two teams, with another just outside the state across the Delaware River. And neither the Giants nor the Jets are in NYC, both are somewhere in New Jersey.
The Giants and Jets both play within the NYC Metro area. Just because they happen to be located in New Jersey doesn't make them less of a NYC team, they are indeed within their metro area. That other city just across the state is also one of the largest metro areas in the country. I think you are underestimating the population of the east coast.
The only thing I disagree with is two teams somewhere in the NYC metro. I completely agree with Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, NYC, and Boston each having one team in a single league -- that's five teams in about a 400-mile stretch, similar to the distance between SF and LA or from KC to MSP or from NO to DFW.
I really believe that Portland and Seattle, especially in the NFL, rivalry could generate lots of interest in the Pacific NW and much of the country. And it would make the divisions I planned out work.
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:14:45 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 23, 2023, 04:16:16 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:38:38 AM
It might not have to be Portland, but it is the largest city west of the Great Plains with only one sports team, something that could complement the Blazers and the Northwest rivalry with Sea-Hawks just up the road in Seattle, and Nike is HQ'ed in Oregon!
I believe Sacramento is the second largest such city; possibly rival the Niners? Or maybe Salt Lake? All I know is New Jersey need not two teams, with another just outside the state across the Delaware River. And neither the Giants nor the Jets are in NYC, both are somewhere in New Jersey.
The Giants and Jets both play within the NYC Metro area. Just because they happen to be located in New Jersey doesn't make them less of a NYC team, they are indeed within their metro area. That other city just across the state is also one of the largest metro areas in the country. I think you are underestimating the population of the east coast.
The only thing I disagree with is two teams somewhere in the NYC metro. I completely agree with Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, NYC, and Boston each having one team in a single league -- that's five teams in about a 400-mile stretch, similar to the distance between SF and LA or from KC to MSP or from NO to DFW.
I really believe that Portland and Seattle, especially in the NFL, rivalry could generate lots of interest in the Pacific NW and much of the country. And it would make the divisions I planned out work.
NYC has so many people that two teams are warrented. And the Jets and Giants both have diehard fanbases and decades of history.
Quote from: texaskdog on February 22, 2023, 07:42:41 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on February 17, 2023, 11:06:06 PM
Speaking of a change of which I just recently became aware, am I alone in thinking banning the defensive shift in baseball is one of the stupidest things ever?
Maybe batters should learn how to hit to the opposite field if they want to get on base, instead of banning the defense from shifting to playing against known pull hitters.
Smartest thing I've read all day. if the hitter is that good he could just hit it where they aint!
The hitter doesn't even have to do that. Just lay a bunt down along the third-base line and it's an automatic single.
Quote from: hbelkins on February 23, 2023, 07:28:14 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 22, 2023, 07:42:41 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on February 17, 2023, 11:06:06 PM
Speaking of a change of which I just recently became aware, am I alone in thinking banning the defensive shift in baseball is one of the stupidest things ever?
Maybe batters should learn how to hit to the opposite field if they want to get on base, instead of banning the defense from shifting to playing against known pull hitters.
Smartest thing I've read all day. if the hitter is that good he could just hit it where they aint!
The hitter doesn't even have to do that. Just lay a bunt down along the third-base line and it's an automatic single.
That bunt does have to get right down the line (to stay away from the pitcher) and far enough away from the catcher, but yes.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 23, 2023, 12:32:51 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:14:45 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 23, 2023, 04:16:16 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:38:38 AM
It might not have to be Portland, but it is the largest city west of the Great Plains with only one sports team, something that could complement the Blazers and the Northwest rivalry with Sea-Hawks just up the road in Seattle, and Nike is HQ'ed in Oregon!
I believe Sacramento is the second largest such city; possibly rival the Niners? Or maybe Salt Lake? All I know is New Jersey need not two teams, with another just outside the state across the Delaware River. And neither the Giants nor the Jets are in NYC, both are somewhere in New Jersey.
The Giants and Jets both play within the NYC Metro area. Just because they happen to be located in New Jersey doesn't make them less of a NYC team, they are indeed within their metro area. That other city just across the state is also one of the largest metro areas in the country. I think you are underestimating the population of the east coast.
The only thing I disagree with is two teams somewhere in the NYC metro. I completely agree with Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, NYC, and Boston each having one team in a single league -- that's five teams in about a 400-mile stretch, similar to the distance between SF and LA or from KC to MSP or from NO to DFW.
I really believe that Portland and Seattle, especially in the NFL, rivalry could generate lots of interest in the Pacific NW and much of the country. And it would make the divisions I planned out work.
NYC has so many people that two teams are warrented. And the Jets and Giants both have diehard fanbases and decades of history.
Yes but I don't agree LA needs two teams, after all those years with none
Quote from: texaskdog on February 23, 2023, 07:45:36 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 23, 2023, 12:32:51 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:14:45 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 23, 2023, 04:16:16 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:38:38 AM
It might not have to be Portland, but it is the largest city west of the Great Plains with only one sports team, something that could complement the Blazers and the Northwest rivalry with Sea-Hawks just up the road in Seattle, and Nike is HQ'ed in Oregon!
I believe Sacramento is the second largest such city; possibly rival the Niners? Or maybe Salt Lake? All I know is New Jersey need not two teams, with another just outside the state across the Delaware River. And neither the Giants nor the Jets are in NYC, both are somewhere in New Jersey.
The Giants and Jets both play within the NYC Metro area. Just because they happen to be located in New Jersey doesn't make them less of a NYC team, they are indeed within their metro area. That other city just across the state is also one of the largest metro areas in the country. I think you are underestimating the population of the east coast.
The only thing I disagree with is two teams somewhere in the NYC metro. I completely agree with Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, NYC, and Boston each having one team in a single league -- that's five teams in about a 400-mile stretch, similar to the distance between SF and LA or from KC to MSP or from NO to DFW.
I really believe that Portland and Seattle, especially in the NFL, rivalry could generate lots of interest in the Pacific NW and much of the country. And it would make the divisions I planned out work.
NYC has so many people that two teams are warrented. And the Jets and Giants both have diehard fanbases and decades of history.
Yes but I don't agree LA needs two teams, after all those years with none
I think that the Rams should be in St. Louis or LA, the Raiders in LA, and the Chargers in San Diego or if not possible, Vegas.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 23, 2023, 07:49:41 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 23, 2023, 07:45:36 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 23, 2023, 12:32:51 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:14:45 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 23, 2023, 04:16:16 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:38:38 AM
It might not have to be Portland, but it is the largest city west of the Great Plains with only one sports team, something that could complement the Blazers and the Northwest rivalry with Sea-Hawks just up the road in Seattle, and Nike is HQ'ed in Oregon!
I believe Sacramento is the second largest such city; possibly rival the Niners? Or maybe Salt Lake? All I know is New Jersey need not two teams, with another just outside the state across the Delaware River. And neither the Giants nor the Jets are in NYC, both are somewhere in New Jersey.
The Giants and Jets both play within the NYC Metro area. Just because they happen to be located in New Jersey doesn't make them less of a NYC team, they are indeed within their metro area. That other city just across the state is also one of the largest metro areas in the country. I think you are underestimating the population of the east coast.
The only thing I disagree with is two teams somewhere in the NYC metro. I completely agree with Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, NYC, and Boston each having one team in a single league -- that's five teams in about a 400-mile stretch, similar to the distance between SF and LA or from KC to MSP or from NO to DFW.
I really believe that Portland and Seattle, especially in the NFL, rivalry could generate lots of interest in the Pacific NW and much of the country. And it would make the divisions I planned out work.
NYC has so many people that two teams are warrented. And the Jets and Giants both have diehard fanbases and decades of history.
Yes but I don't agree LA needs two teams, after all those years with none
I think that the Rams should be in St. Louis or LA, the Raiders in LA, and the Chargers in San Diego or if not possible, Vegas.
Rams are the chosen ones. Put the Chargers back in San Diego or Saint Louis.
Quote from: texaskdog on February 23, 2023, 08:05:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 23, 2023, 07:49:41 PM
Quote from: texaskdog on February 23, 2023, 07:45:36 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 23, 2023, 12:32:51 PM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:14:45 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 23, 2023, 04:16:16 AM
Quote from: jgb191 on February 23, 2023, 12:38:38 AM
It might not have to be Portland, but it is the largest city west of the Great Plains with only one sports team, something that could complement the Blazers and the Northwest rivalry with Sea-Hawks just up the road in Seattle, and Nike is HQ'ed in Oregon!
I believe Sacramento is the second largest such city; possibly rival the Niners? Or maybe Salt Lake? All I know is New Jersey need not two teams, with another just outside the state across the Delaware River. And neither the Giants nor the Jets are in NYC, both are somewhere in New Jersey.
The Giants and Jets both play within the NYC Metro area. Just because they happen to be located in New Jersey doesn't make them less of a NYC team, they are indeed within their metro area. That other city just across the state is also one of the largest metro areas in the country. I think you are underestimating the population of the east coast.
The only thing I disagree with is two teams somewhere in the NYC metro. I completely agree with Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, NYC, and Boston each having one team in a single league -- that's five teams in about a 400-mile stretch, similar to the distance between SF and LA or from KC to MSP or from NO to DFW.
I really believe that Portland and Seattle, especially in the NFL, rivalry could generate lots of interest in the Pacific NW and much of the country. And it would make the divisions I planned out work.
NYC has so many people that two teams are warrented. And the Jets and Giants both have diehard fanbases and decades of history.
Yes but I don't agree LA needs two teams, after all those years with none
I think that the Rams should be in St. Louis or LA, the Raiders in LA, and the Chargers in San Diego or if not possible, Vegas.
Rams are the chosen ones. Put the Chargers back in San Diego or Saint Louis.
LA can support 2 NFL teams. It has 2 teams in every other sport. I just think that it should be the Rams and Raiders, not the Chargers.
MLB promotion and relegation:
Six poor-performing teams (three from each league) are selected as challenger teams which can face relegation. At the end of regular season, the worst challenger team from each league play best-of-seven playout whose loser is relegated to AAA. The team is replaced by winner of playoff between IL and PCL champions.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 24, 2023, 04:51:54 AM
MLB promotion and relegation:
Six poor-performing teams (three from each league) are selected as challenger teams which can face relegation. At the end of regular season, the worst challenger team from each league play best-of-seven playout whose loser is relegated to AAA. The team is replaced by winner of playoff between IL and PCL champions.
Which will happen first: Poiponen's promotion and relegation or MMM's water highways?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 24, 2023, 05:03:24 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 24, 2023, 04:51:54 AM
MLB promotion and relegation:
Six poor-performing teams (three from each league) are selected as challenger teams which can face relegation. At the end of regular season, the worst challenger team from each league play best-of-seven playout whose loser is relegated to AAA. The team is replaced by winner of playoff between IL and PCL champions.
Which will happen first: Poiponen's promotion and relegation or MMM's water highways?
Promotion and relagation.
Does everybody advocating for promotion/relegation in MLB understand how the minors work? Most teams, including all of AAA, are affiliated with major league clubs, with the players belonging to the major league clubs.
If you relegated Oakland and Washington after the 2022 season and promoted Durham and Reno, you'd have two MLB teams controlled by Tampa and Arizona. That can't work.
One change I'd love to see in MLB is a new owner for the Chicago White Sox.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 24, 2023, 07:20:19 AM
Does everybody advocating for promotion/relegation in MLB understand how the minors work? Most teams, including all of AAA, are affiliated with major league clubs, with the players belonging to the major league clubs.
If you relegated Oakland and Washington after the 2022 season and promoted Durham and Reno, you'd have two MLB teams controlled by Tampa and Arizona. That can't work.
We've tried. He won't listen.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 24, 2023, 04:51:54 AM
MLB promotion and relegation:
Six poor-performing teams (three from each league) are selected as challenger teams which can face relegation. At the end of regular season, the worst challenger team from each league play best-of-seven playout whose loser is relegated to AAA. The team is replaced by winner of playoff between IL and PCL champions.
How MLB promotion works: A guy in a suit gets a promotion and ends up with several million dollars he didn't have previously. Also, several products are promoted during the game.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 24, 2023, 07:20:19 AM
Does everybody advocating for promotion/relegation in MLB understand how the minors work? Most teams, including all of AAA, are affiliated with major league clubs, with the players belonging to the major league clubs.
If you relegated Oakland and Washington after the 2022 season and promoted Durham and Reno, you'd have two MLB teams controlled by Tampa and Arizona. That can't work.
Not all AAA teams would be affiliated. Some would be independent. The MLB team's farm teams would be designated with Roman Numeral and MLB team's name, like New York Yankees II.
So the Yankees II could get promoted and play against the regular Yankees?
Also a possible pun: Gen II. While it looks like it means Generation 2, "genii" is the plural of the historical meaning (but not the current meaning) of "genius", the Roman mythology meaning.
Quote from: 1 on February 25, 2023, 10:06:23 AM
So the Yankees II could get promoted and play against the regular Yankees?
NO! Reserves would not be allowed to be promoted, like they are not allowed to promote in countries where reserves in different sports play in main system (e.g. Germany, Spain).
Well, to make pro-rel work in Baseball, you would first have to sever all of the affiliations and other business connections between the Major League teams and the minor league teams. :wow:
Mike
We should have Aaroads promotion and relegation. If your posts are shitty you get relegated to Aaroads 2, a worse version of Aaroads.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 10:07:29 AM
Quote from: 1 on February 25, 2023, 10:06:23 AM
So the Yankees II could get promoted and play against the regular Yankees?
NO! Reserves would not be allowed to be promoted, like they are not allowed to promote in countries where reserves in different sports play in main system (e.g. Germany, Spain).
So then you're agreeing that none of the minor league teams can be promoted, because they're all affiliated with a MLB team.
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 02:23:37 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 10:07:29 AM
Quote from: 1 on February 25, 2023, 10:06:23 AM
So the Yankees II could get promoted and play against the regular Yankees?
NO! Reserves would not be allowed to be promoted, like they are not allowed to promote in countries where reserves in different sports play in main system (e.g. Germany, Spain).
So then you're agreeing that none of the minor league teams can be promoted, because they're all affiliated with a MLB team.
You don't understand. There would also be independent teams in AAA. They could be promoted.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 02:29:24 PM
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 02:23:37 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 10:07:29 AM
Quote from: 1 on February 25, 2023, 10:06:23 AM
So the Yankees II could get promoted and play against the regular Yankees?
NO! Reserves would not be allowed to be promoted, like they are not allowed to promote in countries where reserves in different sports play in main system (e.g. Germany, Spain).
So then you're agreeing that none of the minor league teams can be promoted, because they're all affiliated with a MLB team.
You don't understand. There would also be independent teams in AAA. They could be promoted.
No, I understand perfectly. There wouldn't be any independent AAA teams, because the current owners would never allow it.
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 02:30:29 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 02:29:24 PM
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 02:23:37 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 10:07:29 AM
Quote from: 1 on February 25, 2023, 10:06:23 AM
So the Yankees II could get promoted and play against the regular Yankees?
NO! Reserves would not be allowed to be promoted, like they are not allowed to promote in countries where reserves in different sports play in main system (e.g. Germany, Spain).
So then you're agreeing that none of the minor league teams can be promoted, because they're all affiliated with a MLB team.
You don't understand. There would also be independent teams in AAA. They could be promoted.
No, I understand perfectly. There wouldn't be any independent AAA teams, because the current owners would never allow it.
Then an independent second league would be formed. It would have promotion to and relegation from MLB.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 03:21:20 PM
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 02:30:29 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 02:29:24 PM
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 02:23:37 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 10:07:29 AM
Quote from: 1 on February 25, 2023, 10:06:23 AM
So the Yankees II could get promoted and play against the regular Yankees?
NO! Reserves would not be allowed to be promoted, like they are not allowed to promote in countries where reserves in different sports play in main system (e.g. Germany, Spain).
So then you're agreeing that none of the minor league teams can be promoted, because they're all affiliated with a MLB team.
You don't understand. There would also be independent teams in AAA. They could be promoted.
No, I understand perfectly. There wouldn't be any independent AAA teams, because the current owners would never allow it.
Then an independent second league would be formed. It would have promotion to and relegation from MLB.
Again, something the current owners would never allow.
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 03:25:30 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 03:21:20 PM
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 02:30:29 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 02:29:24 PM
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 02:23:37 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 10:07:29 AM
Quote from: 1 on February 25, 2023, 10:06:23 AM
So the Yankees II could get promoted and play against the regular Yankees?
NO! Reserves would not be allowed to be promoted, like they are not allowed to promote in countries where reserves in different sports play in main system (e.g. Germany, Spain).
So then you're agreeing that none of the minor league teams can be promoted, because they're all affiliated with a MLB team.
You don't understand. There would also be independent teams in AAA. They could be promoted.
No, I understand perfectly. There wouldn't be any independent AAA teams, because the current owners would never allow it.
Then an independent second league would be formed. It would have promotion to and relegation from MLB.
Again, something the current owners would never allow.
Should allow.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 03:49:45 PM
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 03:25:30 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 03:21:20 PM
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 02:30:29 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 02:29:24 PM
Quote from: GaryV on February 25, 2023, 02:23:37 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 25, 2023, 10:07:29 AM
Quote from: 1 on February 25, 2023, 10:06:23 AM
So the Yankees II could get promoted and play against the regular Yankees?
NO! Reserves would not be allowed to be promoted, like they are not allowed to promote in countries where reserves in different sports play in main system (e.g. Germany, Spain).
So then you're agreeing that none of the minor league teams can be promoted, because they're all affiliated with a MLB team.
You don't understand. There would also be independent teams in AAA. They could be promoted.
No, I understand perfectly. There wouldn't be any independent AAA teams, because the current owners would never allow it.
Then an independent second league would be formed. It would have promotion to and relegation from MLB.
Again, something the current owners would never allow.
Should allow.
Go ahead, try to convince them. I'll not be holding my breath.
Poiponen apparently doesn't know what a rich person is.
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 24, 2023, 08:06:23 AM
One change I'd love to see in MLB is a new owner for the Chicago White Sox.
We've been wanting that for 40 years. Reinsdorf should sell both the Sox and the Bulls. And soon.
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 25, 2023, 09:08:02 PM
Poiponen apparently doesn't know what a rich person is.
In the communist utopia of Souky, there are no rich people.
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on February 25, 2023, 09:29:36 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 24, 2023, 08:06:23 AM
One change I'd love to see in MLB is a new owner for the Chicago White Sox.
We've been wanting that for 40 years. Reinsdorf should sell both the Sox and the Bulls. And soon.
I think just about the entire fan base for both teams is on board for him to sell. My theory is that if you don't want to invest in the product on the field then you shouldn't be owning a sports team.
One I just thought of: with every level of basketball now having a shot clock, eliminate the 10-second and over-and-back rules. There's now a built-in disincentive to stall in the backcourt.
Major water polo league, there should be a one. It would have promotion and relegation and 12 teams without conferences or divisions.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 27, 2023, 02:00:43 PM
Major water polo league, there should be a one. It would have promotion and relegation and 12 teams without conferences or divisions.
I agree that there should be a league, but if there are only 12 teams, they can all be at the same level.
Quote from: 1 on February 27, 2023, 02:01:57 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 27, 2023, 02:00:43 PM
Major water polo league, there should be a one. It would have promotion and relegation and 12 teams without conferences or divisions.
I agree that there should be a league, but if there are only 12 teams, they can all be at the same level.
There would be various lower levels. A promotion could be possible to major league from there.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 27, 2023, 02:31:13 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 27, 2023, 02:01:57 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 27, 2023, 02:00:43 PM
Major water polo league, there should be a one. It would have promotion and relegation and 12 teams without conferences or divisions.
I agree that there should be a league, but if there are only 12 teams, they can all be at the same level.
There would be various lower levels. A promotion could be possible to major league from there.
For someone who created the socialist Republic of Souky, you are proposing a very capitalistic system of promotion and relegation.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 02:37:07 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 27, 2023, 02:31:13 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 27, 2023, 02:01:57 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 27, 2023, 02:00:43 PM
Major water polo league, there should be a one. It would have promotion and relegation and 12 teams without conferences or divisions.
I agree that there should be a league, but if there are only 12 teams, they can all be at the same level.
There would be various lower levels. A promotion could be possible to major league from there.
For someone who created the socialist Republic of Souky, you are proposing a very capitalistic system of promotion and relegation.
What? A normal promotion and relegation.
Bring back the jump ball in mens' college basketball. No more possession arrow that only rewards the defensive team 50% of the time. It's fine in the womens' game where there's not as much contact and jumping, but the men should do it.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 27, 2023, 02:44:22 PM
Bring back the jump ball in mens' college basketball. No more possession arrow that only rewards the defensive team 50% of the time. It's fine in the womens' game where there's not as much contact and jumping, but the men should do it.
I agree! I've been watching college bball for a few years and still don't understand the possession arrow. It's so lame when two players are fighting for the ball and for one team, it turns out just being like a turnover.
Get rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It's stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 04:00:22 PM
Get rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It's stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
I can relate, especially for the mid-major conferences that will only get one team in the tournament. It's hard for me to believe that the Ohio Valley Conference tournament in Evansville is going to be a big revenue producer.
My alma mater just won the OVC regular season championship outright since 1984. Morehead State has made a couple of NCAA tournaments in the intervening years, and the Eagles were lucky enough to win both the regular season and conference tournament championships in '84 after winning the OVC tournament the year prior, but it's entirely possible this year that the team could slip up in the tournament and then not even get an NIT bid.
Surely the TV money the OVC will get paid for the championship game being on one of the ESPN channels can't bring in THAT much money to justify a conference tournament.
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 04:00:22 PM
Get rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It’s stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
I disagree. Conference tournaments give fans of meh/bad teams something to cheer for in the end of the season. Without them a game between 2 middling mid major teams in one bid leagues in Janurary would mean jack shit. Also if a mid major has a VERY good year which would make the tournament anyone as an at large, it gives smaller conferences an ability to get 2 teams in when they wouldn't normally. See Richmond and Davidson last year.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:14:46 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 04:00:22 PM
Get rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It's stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
I disagree. Conference tournaments give fans of meh/bad teams something to cheer for in the end of the season. Without them a game between 2 middling mid major teams in one bid leagues in Janurary would mean jack shit.
There is a proposal to expand the NCAA tournament to 96 teams and guarantee each conference two bids. One each to the regular season and tournament champs. If the same team wins both, the 2nd place regular season team gets the second bid.
^^ Didn't the NIT a couple of years ago grant an automatic spot to regular-season winners who lost in the conference tournament?
Quote from: Big John on February 27, 2023, 04:17:43 PM
^^ Didn't the NIT a couple of years ago grant an automatic spot to regular-season winners who lost in the conference tournament?
It still does.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:18:38 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 27, 2023, 04:17:43 PM
^^ Didn't the NIT a couple of years ago grant an automatic spot to regular-season winners who lost in the conference tournament?
It still does.
Yes, but;
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 27, 2023, 04:17:02 PM
There is a proposal to expand the NCAA tournament to 96 teams and guarantee each conference two bids. One each to the regular season and tournament champs. If the same team wins both, the 2nd place regular season team gets the second bid.
this. ^^^
My team has dominated its conference all year but if they screw up in the conference championship, then no March for them.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:14:46 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 04:00:22 PM
Get rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It's stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
I disagree. Conference tournaments give fans of meh/bad teams something to cheer for in the end of the season.
That's a fair point, but the negatives outweigh the positives.
QuoteWithout them a game between 2 middling mid major teams in one bid leagues in Janurary would mean jack shit.
It means even less as is because neither of the teams can do anything in the regular season that gives them a chance to make the tournament. Besides fight for a marginally better seed in the conference tournament, but in the end, it doesn't matter who is the 4 seed and who is the 5 seed if the 5 seed is better at basketball. With autobids for regular season champs, those teams would have hope alive that they could make the tournament by winning x number of x remaining games.
QuoteAlso if a mid major has a VERY good year which would make the tournament anyone as an at large, it gives smaller conferences an ability to get 2 teams in when they wouldn't normally. See Richmond and Davidson last year.
It's very rare that small conferences get multiple bids. Most consider the power conferences to be the Big Ten, SEC, ACC, Big 12, Big East, and Pac-12. The WCC, AAC, Mountain West, and A-10 typically receive multiple bids, which would be unlikely to change with no conference tournament.
None of the remaining 22 conferences received multiple bids in 2022. Only one of 21 did in 2021.
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 27, 2023, 04:34:20 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:18:38 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 27, 2023, 04:17:43 PM
^^ Didn't the NIT a couple of years ago grant an automatic spot to regular-season winners who lost in the conference tournament?
It still does.
Yes, but;
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 27, 2023, 04:17:02 PM
There is a proposal to expand the NCAA tournament to 96 teams and guarantee each conference two bids. One each to the regular season and tournament champs. If the same team wins both, the 2nd place regular season team gets the second bid.
this. ^^^
My team has dominated its conference all year but if they screw up in the conference championship, then no March for them.
The Summit League is very weak. They currently have a strong at-large resume at the moment that
could put them in if they lose in the Summit League tournament. But if they lose in the tourney, they will have a quad 3 loss (to SDSU) or maybe even a lower quad loss. If conference tourneys went away every single other Summit League team would be playing for nothing at this point, as ORU would have clinched the at large bit like a month ago. Also for neutral fans conference tournaments are very exciting- for small conferences, it's like March Madness starts a week early. I do totally get the argument aganist them though- in Womens BBall, UMass tied for the A10 regular season title with Rhode Island. It would be very annoying to see them randomly lose to the 8th seed and miss the tournament, and sometimes I wish that we would just play one game against Rhode Island to see who makes it to March. But if I was a fan of another non UMass/URI A10 team, I would want a chance to pull off upsets and make March.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 27, 2023, 04:17:02 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:14:46 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 04:00:22 PM
Get rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It's stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
I disagree. Conference tournaments give fans of meh/bad teams something to cheer for in the end of the season. Without them a game between 2 middling mid major teams in one bid leagues in Janurary would mean jack shit.
There is a proposal to expand the NCAA tournament to 96 teams and guarantee each conference two bids. One each to the regular season and tournament champs. If the same team wins both, the 2nd place regular season team gets the second bid.
As much as I don't like the idea of nearly half the D1 teams getting in, that proposal makes sense if they're hoping to balance the conferences a little more and increase engagement (and therefore $$$) for mid-major teams. That would be 52 teams, or 54% of the field, receiving autobids as members of non-power conferences (44 of which would be members of conferences that are typically single-bid as of now). The path to the tournament would become a lot easier for mid-major schools, who currently have it the hardest. That would draw a lot of recruits to mid-majors from power conference schools - but, likely, only middling to below average power conference schools who often find themselves fighting for an at-large with a close to .500 record. The blue bloods would still get the top players, and with less competition within the conference, their dominance would probably increase. Is that what we want?
And 64 is perfect anyway.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:56:51 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 27, 2023, 04:34:20 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:18:38 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 27, 2023, 04:17:43 PM
^^ Didn't the NIT a couple of years ago grant an automatic spot to regular-season winners who lost in the conference tournament?
It still does.
Yes, but;
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 27, 2023, 04:17:02 PM
There is a proposal to expand the NCAA tournament to 96 teams and guarantee each conference two bids. One each to the regular season and tournament champs. If the same team wins both, the 2nd place regular season team gets the second bid.
this. ^^^
My team has dominated its conference all year but if they screw up in the conference championship, then no March for them.
If conference tourneys went away every single other Summit League team would be playing for nothing at this point, as ORU would have clinched the at large bit like a month ago.
As I said above, they're not playing for anything right now as is. There's nothing they can do in the regular season that gives them a chance to make the tournament. It's either win the conference tourney or they're out. And here's why regular season autobids are better: that's how it's been for them the entire season. No amount of regular season success (beyond going undefeated or nearly undefeated, which is extremely hard to do in basketball) will get them in the tournament. If there were regular season autobids, even the bad teams would have that to play for for the majority of the year. And let's not act like it would be the only sport where teams get eliminated from postseason play before the season is over; that happens in every professional league and college football.
Quote from: thspfc link=topic=32888.msg2822268#msg2822268
And 64 is perfect anyway.
already overdoing it at 68.
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 05:21:12 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:56:51 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 27, 2023, 04:34:20 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:18:38 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 27, 2023, 04:17:43 PM
^^ Didn't the NIT a couple of years ago grant an automatic spot to regular-season winners who lost in the conference tournament?
It still does.
Yes, but;
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 27, 2023, 04:17:02 PM
There is a proposal to expand the NCAA tournament to 96 teams and guarantee each conference two bids. One each to the regular season and tournament champs. If the same team wins both, the 2nd place regular season team gets the second bid.
this. ^^^
My team has dominated its conference all year but if they screw up in the conference championship, then no March for them.
If conference tourneys went away every single other Summit League team would be playing for nothing at this point, as ORU would have clinched the at large bit like a month ago.
As I said above, they're not playing for anything right now as is. There's nothing they can do in the regular season that gives them a chance to make the tournament. It's either win the conference tourney or they're out. And here's why regular season autobids are better: that's how it's been for them the entire season. No amount of regular season success (beyond going undefeated or nearly undefeated, which is extremely hard to do in basketball) will get them in the tournament. If there were regular season autobids, even the bad teams would have that to play for for the majority of the year. And let's not act like it would be the only sport where teams get eliminated from postseason play before the season is over; that happens in every professional league and college football.
In many conference tournaments, seeding is important. Many conferences have instituted double byes for teams who do good in the regular season to make it easier for their top teams to make it. So the best team in the conference would have to play 2 fewer games in the conference tournament to win it than the worst team.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 06:53:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 05:21:12 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:56:51 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 27, 2023, 04:34:20 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:18:38 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 27, 2023, 04:17:43 PM
^^ Didn't the NIT a couple of years ago grant an automatic spot to regular-season winners who lost in the conference tournament?
It still does.
Yes, but;
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 27, 2023, 04:17:02 PM
There is a proposal to expand the NCAA tournament to 96 teams and guarantee each conference two bids. One each to the regular season and tournament champs. If the same team wins both, the 2nd place regular season team gets the second bid.
this. ^^^
My team has dominated its conference all year but if they screw up in the conference championship, then no March for them.
If conference tourneys went away every single other Summit League team would be playing for nothing at this point, as ORU would have clinched the at large bit like a month ago.
As I said above, they're not playing for anything right now as is. There's nothing they can do in the regular season that gives them a chance to make the tournament. It's either win the conference tourney or they're out. And here's why regular season autobids are better: that's how it's been for them the entire season. No amount of regular season success (beyond going undefeated or nearly undefeated, which is extremely hard to do in basketball) will get them in the tournament. If there were regular season autobids, even the bad teams would have that to play for for the majority of the year. And let's not act like it would be the only sport where teams get eliminated from postseason play before the season is over; that happens in every professional league and college football.
In many conference tournaments, seeding is important. Many conferences have instituted double byes for teams who do good in the regular season to make it easier for their top teams to make it. So the best team in the conference would have to play 2 fewer games in the conference tournament to win it than the worst team.
But the teams that are in contention for those byes are the teams that would be in contention for the NCAA bid throughout the season . . .
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 07:35:31 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 06:53:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 05:21:12 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:56:51 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 27, 2023, 04:34:20 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:18:38 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 27, 2023, 04:17:43 PM
^^ Didn't the NIT a couple of years ago grant an automatic spot to regular-season winners who lost in the conference tournament?
It still does.
Yes, but;
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 27, 2023, 04:17:02 PM
There is a proposal to expand the NCAA tournament to 96 teams and guarantee each conference two bids. One each to the regular season and tournament champs. If the same team wins both, the 2nd place regular season team gets the second bid.
this. ^^^
My team has dominated its conference all year but if they screw up in the conference championship, then no March for them.
If conference tourneys went away every single other Summit League team would be playing for nothing at this point, as ORU would have clinched the at large bit like a month ago.
As I said above, they're not playing for anything right now as is. There's nothing they can do in the regular season that gives them a chance to make the tournament. It's either win the conference tourney or they're out. And here's why regular season autobids are better: that's how it's been for them the entire season. No amount of regular season success (beyond going undefeated or nearly undefeated, which is extremely hard to do in basketball) will get them in the tournament. If there were regular season autobids, even the bad teams would have that to play for for the majority of the year. And let's not act like it would be the only sport where teams get eliminated from postseason play before the season is over; that happens in every professional league and college football.
In many conference tournaments, seeding is important. Many conferences have instituted double byes for teams who do good in the regular season to make it easier for their top teams to make it. So the best team in the conference would have to play 2 fewer games in the conference tournament to win it than the worst team.
But the teams that are in contention for those byes are the teams that would be in contention for the NCAA bid throughout the season . . .
Not always. In the A10 womens basketball, the top 4 seeds in the conference get a double bye. UMass, URI, Fordham, and St Louis. UMass and URI went 14-2 in conference, Fordham and St. Louis went 10-6. Both Fordham and St. Louis upset URI and UMass respectivly in exciting games. These wins were crucial in getting both teams a double bye. Without the tournament, the upsets would have little meaning as both teams would be eliminated from March already. Also, only sending the regular season winner would be very unfair to Rhode Island, who finished with the same record as UMass and tied the season series. The two teams were declared co regular season champs. UMass got the 1st seed in the conference tournament off of a tiebreaker. This would put UMass in the tournament and Rhode Island at home over a tiebreaker, even though both teams went 24/23-5 and 14-2 in A10 play. Obviously different senarios will come up every year in every conference. Also these are college kids not pros, and for the seniors it's nice to just have more games for them to play before they graduate.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 07:44:35 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 07:35:31 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 06:53:39 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 05:21:12 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:56:51 PM
Quote from: CoreySamson on February 27, 2023, 04:34:20 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 27, 2023, 04:18:38 PM
Quote from: Big John on February 27, 2023, 04:17:43 PM
^^ Didn't the NIT a couple of years ago grant an automatic spot to regular-season winners who lost in the conference tournament?
It still does.
Yes, but;
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on February 27, 2023, 04:17:02 PM
There is a proposal to expand the NCAA tournament to 96 teams and guarantee each conference two bids. One each to the regular season and tournament champs. If the same team wins both, the 2nd place regular season team gets the second bid.
this. ^^^
My team has dominated its conference all year but if they screw up in the conference championship, then no March for them.
If conference tourneys went away every single other Summit League team would be playing for nothing at this point, as ORU would have clinched the at large bit like a month ago.
As I said above, they're not playing for anything right now as is. There's nothing they can do in the regular season that gives them a chance to make the tournament. It's either win the conference tourney or they're out. And here's why regular season autobids are better: that's how it's been for them the entire season. No amount of regular season success (beyond going undefeated or nearly undefeated, which is extremely hard to do in basketball) will get them in the tournament. If there were regular season autobids, even the bad teams would have that to play for for the majority of the year. And let's not act like it would be the only sport where teams get eliminated from postseason play before the season is over; that happens in every professional league and college football.
In many conference tournaments, seeding is important. Many conferences have instituted double byes for teams who do good in the regular season to make it easier for their top teams to make it. So the best team in the conference would have to play 2 fewer games in the conference tournament to win it than the worst team.
But the teams that are in contention for those byes are the teams that would be in contention for the NCAA bid throughout the season . . .
Not always
Usually.
There should be college judo and boxing.
Quote from: 1 on February 27, 2023, 02:01:57 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 27, 2023, 02:00:43 PM
Major water polo league, there should be a one. It would have promotion and relegation and 12 teams without conferences or divisions.
I agree that there should be a league, but if there are only 12 teams, they can all be at the same level.
Captain Archer would approve.
(https://media.tenor.com/nT85LDylhNEAAAAC/scott-bakula-star-trek-enterprise.gif)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 28, 2023, 11:55:16 AM
Quote from: 1 on February 27, 2023, 02:01:57 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on February 27, 2023, 02:00:43 PM
Major water polo league, there should be a one. It would have promotion and relegation and 12 teams without conferences or divisions.
I agree that there should be a league, but if there are only 12 teams, they can all be at the same level.
Captain Archer would approve.
If they're not all at the same level, wouldn't some of them drown?
College basketball, IMHO.
- The jump ball should at least start the second half. They have been doing this for 30 years and it still seems unnatural.
- It is patronizing that women's basketball has quarters rather than halves like the men do. Like they need an extra break.
- The play in games for the NCAA tournament are stupid. The original deal was they took the bottom four conferences and made them play off for 2 spots, because there was this supposed limit on the number of automatic bids. No one watched, so they broke it up to two nights and added two more games where four big conference losers play for two spots. Just go with 64. That eliminates four big conference losers (two of the teams playing for the 11 seed, and two teams that get bumped because every conference gets a full equal place). Too bad. Win more games next time.
- Bring back the regional to the regionals. Yes, they have to move a few teams to balance things out, but do that with the big teams. Smaller conference champions need to be placed near to their locations.
- Ideas about expanding to 96 and such are just greed. The idea that they will take more "mid-majors" is a load of crap. They will always take another loser from a big name conference. Heck, they are talking about taking the entire Big 12 conference this year. Teams barely with a .500 record. A joke. Reminds me of the old Louisville coach Denny Crum who would always moan about all the great teams he lost too. Billy Packer finally had enough and said that he could get the worst team in the country and lose to the very same teams Crum lost to.
- All of the "bracketology" nonsense should not be taken seriously. Most of these guys just fill out brackets based on past results. None of them could tell you one thing about more than the top 30 of so teams.
- Baseball should go back to Opening Day being on the Monday the final game of the NCAA tournament was played. It had symmetry.
^^ I don't know how breaks are allotted in women's basketball but men's basketball has a break every 4 minutes.
Quote from: Big John on February 28, 2023, 03:32:56 PM
^^ I don't know how breaks are allotted in women's basketball but men's basketball has a break every 4 minutes.
The WBB quarter breaks are not long breaks, they are like quarter breaks in other sports like NFL/NBA.
Don't support the 96 either, but . . .
Quote from: SP Cook on February 28, 2023, 02:35:39 PM
The idea that they will take more "mid-majors" is a load of crap.
If there's two autobids for each mid-major conference, then no, it's not a load of crap.
QuoteThey will always take another loser from a big name conference. Heck, they are talking about taking the entire Big 12 conference this year. Teams barely with a .500 record. A joke.
Hear me out: 1), they're not going to take the entire big 12, and 2), what if they're, oh I don't know, trying to pick the 68 best college basketball teams in America?
You know what is
actually a joke? Rewarding teams for playing chicken schedules. It blows my mind that some people seriously believe that a, for example, 22-8 team from the worst conference is better than a 17-13 team from the best conference. It's harder to beat good teams than it is to beat bad teams. And if you don't take that into account, you're essentially rewarding teams who play cupcakes and punishing teams who play competitive games.
Quote from: SP Cook on February 28, 2023, 02:35:39 PM
College basketball, IMHO.
- The jump ball should at least start the second half. They have been doing this for 30 years and it still seems unnatural.
- It is patronizing that women's basketball has quarters rather than halves like the men do. Like they need an extra break.
- The play in games for the NCAA tournament are stupid. The original deal was they took the bottom four conferences and made them play off for 2 spots, because there was this supposed limit on the number of automatic bids. No one watched, so they broke it up to two nights and added two more games where four big conference losers play for two spots. Just go with 64. That eliminates four big conference losers (two of the teams playing for the 11 seed, and two teams that get bumped because every conference gets a full equal place). Too bad. Win more games next time.
- Bring back the regional to the regionals. Yes, they have to move a few teams to balance things out, but do that with the big teams. Smaller conference champions need to be placed near to their locations.
- Ideas about expanding to 96 and such are just greed. The idea that they will take more "mid-majors" is a load of crap. They will always take another loser from a big name conference. Heck, they are talking about taking the entire Big 12 conference this year. Teams barely with a .500 record. A joke. Reminds me of the old Louisville coach Denny Crum who would always moan about all the great teams he lost too. Billy Packer finally had enough and said that he could get the worst team in the country and lose to the very same teams Crum lost to.
- All of the "bracketology" nonsense should not be taken seriously. Most of these guys just fill out brackets based on past results. None of them could tell you one thing about more than the top 30 of so teams.
- Baseball should go back to Opening Day being on the Monday the final game of the NCAA tournament was played. It had symmetry.
In 1984, Morehead State won the OVC regular season and tournament championship, but had to play the play-in game in Dayton. The Eagles beat NC A&T on a last-second dunk by Guy Minnifield (a cousin to UK's Dirk Minniefield, although the names are spelled different, and a brother to Frank Minnifield who played for the first-generation Cleveland Browns). That won them the right to play Louisville, which had drilled them during the regular season but won only by 13 in the tournament. There were 53 teams selected and for some reason, although MSU had dominated the OVC in the regular season and the conference championship, Morehead had to play in the play-in game.
(Note: I had to use Wikipedia to confirm some of my memories, and some of the pages I saw are riddled with mistakes. For instance, one page states that the 1984 OVC tournament was played at Diddle Arena in Bowling Green, and Middle Tennessee won the conference championship. Neither is true. I attended both nights of the tournament in Morehead, and Morehead won the tournament.)
The expectation this year is that if MSU wins the OVC tournament from its position as the regular season champ, it will have to play a play-in game in Dayton. That's not a bad thing, because Dayton is only like a 2.5-hour drive from Morehead and there should be a good fan turnout.
As for rule differences, I remember when women's basketball didn't have an over-and-back rule. I watched in amazement one game when Morehead's point guard dribbled around the center circle several times running out the clock without being called for a backcourt violation. I had no idea that rule didn't exist in women's college basketball.
There are all sorts of rules now about where teams can go. Back in 1984, Rupp Arena was the host of the Mideast Regional (as it was known then instead of Southeast as it is now) and UK played the regional semis and finals on the home floor. The PA announcer had to play it like it was a neutral floor but it was widely thought that UK got a home-court advantage. Now, if Rupp hosts a tournament round, not only can UK not play there, but the Wildcats can't play on one of the days that Rupp hosts a tournament round.
At least they have changed things to allow smaller conferences to play games closer to home and don't have the first two rounds tightly grouped into geographic areas. A first-round site can theoretically host one game from each of the four regional brackets.
NBA should have 2 development leagues.
Quote from: hbelkins on February 28, 2023, 04:38:25 PM
In 1984, Morehead State won the OVC regular season and tournament championship, but had to play the play-in game in Dayton. The Eagles beat NC A&T on a last-second dunk by Guy Minnifield (a cousin to UK's Dirk Minniefield, although the names are spelled different, and a brother to Frank Minnifield who played for the first-generation Cleveland Browns). That won them the right to play Louisville, which had drilled them during the regular season but won only by 13 in the tournament. There were 53 teams selected and for some reason, although MSU had dominated the OVC in the regular season and the conference championship, Morehead had to play in the play-in game.
You are correct. Although they really didn't call them "play in games" back then.
The tournament had a weird system in 1983 and 1984. It was basically a 48 team tournament, as it had been since 1980, teams seeded 1-2 in four regions. So two teams played for the right to play a ranked team. Then for greed reasons they made the bottom 8 conference champions play each other for the 12th seed in 83 and then added yet another game, with two more champions playing for one of the 11 seeds in 84.
In 1985 they went to a full 64 team field, which lasted until 2001, when the long forgotten Great Midwest conference was formed. They added one "play in game" in Dayton, where the bottom two conference champions played off to be the 16th seed in the best region, because they didn't want to cut out a major conference loser to give the GMC an automatic bid. It was unfair, and unpopular. In 2011, they went to the current system of two #16 play in games, where the bottom four conference champions play for two 16 seeds, and then two #11 play in games, where losers from "major" conferences play off for an 11th seed.
Its silly. Show me the fifth or sixth or now even the seventh or eight team in a conference and I will show you a loser. Enjoy the NIT, and try to in more games next year.
Quote
There are all sorts of rules now about where teams can go. Back in 1984, Rupp Arena was the host of the Mideast Regional (as it was known then instead of Southeast as it is now) and UK played the regional semis and finals on the home floor. The PA announcer had to play it like it was a neutral floor but it was widely thought that UK got a home-court advantage. Now, if Rupp hosts a tournament round, not only can UK not play there, but the Wildcats can't play on one of the days that Rupp hosts a tournament round.
I remember when they brought that in. I have no real problem with that one. It is supposed to be a tournament. Should not be on a home floor. As to UK, if they perform they are usually sent to a nearby location, they almost always being games in some combination of Columbus, Louisville, and Nashville.
This would be my NCAA tournament proposal:
32 automatic bids to conference tournament winners
32 automatic bids to conference regular season winners [2nd place if regular season winner also wins tournament]
32 at-large bids
Tournament winners seeded 1-32
All other teams seeded 33-96
Seeds 1-32 [tournament winners] get a bye and host a 3-team pod, with #1 playing the winner of #64 vs #65, #2 playing the winner of #63 vs #66, etc.
Then the 32 remaining teams get bracketed and play down to a winner.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on March 01, 2023, 01:57:23 PM
This would be my NCAA tournament proposal:
32 automatic bids to conference tournament winners
32 automatic bids to conference regular season winners [2nd place if regular season winner also wins tournament]
32 at-large bids
Tournament winners seeded 1-32
All other teams seeded 33-96
Seeds 1-32 [tournament winners] get a bye and host a 3-team pod, with #1 playing the winner of #64 vs #65, #2 playing the winner of #63 vs #66, etc.
Then the 32 remaining teams get bracketed and play down to a winner.
Small-conference tournament winners are usually seeded low, and more often than not, they lose in the first round. Seeding a bunch of superior teams below them would ruin the excitement of upsets, which are the main appeal of the tournament to begin with.
Quote from: thspfc on March 01, 2023, 02:42:48 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on March 01, 2023, 01:57:23 PM
This would be my NCAA tournament proposal:
32 automatic bids to conference tournament winners
32 automatic bids to conference regular season winners [2nd place if regular season winner also wins tournament]
32 at-large bids
Tournament winners seeded 1-32
All other teams seeded 33-96
Seeds 1-32 [tournament winners] get a bye and host a 3-team pod, with #1 playing the winner of #64 vs #65, #2 playing the winner of #63 vs #66, etc.
Then the 32 remaining teams get bracketed and play down to a winner.
Small-conference tournament winners are usually seeded low, and more often than not, they lose in the first round. Seeding a bunch of superior teams below them would ruin the excitement of upsets, which are the main appeal of the tournament to begin with.
The idea is to give the conference tournament winners 1) a bye and 2) home court advantage. If the third place team in the Big Ten wants to beat the Horizon tournament champion, they're going to have to win a game first and then beat the Horizon champ on their home floor. Making it easier for the small conference guys to advance.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on March 01, 2023, 02:54:33 PM
Quote from: thspfc on March 01, 2023, 02:42:48 PM
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on March 01, 2023, 01:57:23 PM
This would be my NCAA tournament proposal:
32 automatic bids to conference tournament winners
32 automatic bids to conference regular season winners [2nd place if regular season winner also wins tournament]
32 at-large bids
Tournament winners seeded 1-32
All other teams seeded 33-96
Seeds 1-32 [tournament winners] get a bye and host a 3-team pod, with #1 playing the winner of #64 vs #65, #2 playing the winner of #63 vs #66, etc.
Then the 32 remaining teams get bracketed and play down to a winner.
Small-conference tournament winners are usually seeded low, and more often than not, they lose in the first round. Seeding a bunch of superior teams below them would ruin the excitement of upsets, which are the main appeal of the tournament to begin with.
The idea is to give the conference tournament winners 1) a bye and 2) home court advantage. If the third place team in the Big Ten wants to beat the Horizon tournament champion, they're going to have to win a game first and then beat the Horizon champ on their home floor. Making it easier for the small conference guys to advance.
If it's easier for the underdogs to advance, are they really underdogs? A small conference team making a sweet 16 run is not interesting if they have to win fewer games than 90% of the big conference teams to make it that far. Not to mention that this is just blatantly unfair to the many big-conference teams that would be seeded below teams that they are clearly far better than. That by itself is not a deal-breaker as it's already kind of "unfair" as is with small conferences getting autobids over better at-large teams, but that rule is good for the tournament and the sport. This seeding format would not be.
I think that there should be indoor baseball and outdoor basketball, because there should be opportunity for baseball players to play in offseasons and to have more outdoor basketball.
How does indoor baseball work with fly balls?
Quote from: 1 on March 06, 2023, 05:19:31 PM
How does indoor baseball work with fly balls?
There is an indoor baseball field. Tropicana Park in St. Petersburg.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 06, 2023, 05:22:13 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 06, 2023, 05:19:31 PM
How does indoor baseball work with fly balls?
There is an indoor baseball field. Tropicana Park in St. Petersburg.
And look at its attendance figures.
Quote from: Takumi on March 06, 2023, 08:37:20 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 06, 2023, 05:22:13 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 06, 2023, 05:19:31 PM
How does indoor baseball work with fly balls?
There is an indoor baseball field. Tropicana Park in St. Petersburg.
And look at its attendance figures.
I would say some of that has to do with the location of the ballpark more than anything. The team has been pretty good the last 15 or so years so it's not the quality of the product on the field. I think if they had a stadium in Tampa it would be better.
I always tried to imagine playing baseball on a 200 x 85 hockey rink. You'd have to have 40-foot basepaths, and 70-foot plexiglass walls to keep fly balls in play.
Quote from: Flint1979 on March 06, 2023, 08:41:36 PM
Quote from: Takumi on March 06, 2023, 08:37:20 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 06, 2023, 05:22:13 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 06, 2023, 05:19:31 PM
How does indoor baseball work with fly balls?
There is an indoor baseball field. Tropicana Park in St. Petersburg.
And look at its attendance figures.
I would say some of that has to do with the location of the ballpark more than anything. The team has been pretty good the last 15 or so years so it's not the quality of the product on the field. I think if they had a stadium in Tampa it would be better.
It is, but everyone I know that's been to the Trop has said it's a dump and they're one and done with it. (It's also one of the oldest stadiums in the league, being built well before the Rays were even a concept. Even New Comiskey and Camden are newer.)
Quote from: Takumi on March 06, 2023, 11:36:18 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on March 06, 2023, 08:41:36 PM
Quote from: Takumi on March 06, 2023, 08:37:20 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 06, 2023, 05:22:13 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 06, 2023, 05:19:31 PM
How does indoor baseball work with fly balls?
There is an indoor baseball field. Tropicana Park in St. Petersburg.
And look at its attendance figures.
I would say some of that has to do with the location of the ballpark more than anything. The team has been pretty good the last 15 or so years so it's not the quality of the product on the field. I think if they had a stadium in Tampa it would be better.
It is, but everyone I know that's been to the Trop has said it's a dump and they're one and done with it. (It's also one of the oldest stadiums in the league, being built well before the Rays were even a concept. Even New Comiskey and Camden are newer.)
It sure does look like a dump on TV.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 06, 2023, 05:22:13 PM
Quote from: 1 on March 06, 2023, 05:19:31 PM
How does indoor baseball work with fly balls?
There is an indoor baseball field. Tropicana Park in St. Petersburg.
There's also the Houston Astrodome, MinuteMaid Park, Toronto Skydome, Miami Marlin's domed ballpark, and others that have been used throughout the past 60 years
With fly balls, usually the roof is high enough to avoid most of them. If something is hit, the park's ground rules apply, being either a dead ball or ground rule double.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on March 06, 2023, 01:01:51 PM
...because there should be opportunity for baseball players to play in offseasons...
Some ballplayers will go to Japan and other countries where they play baseball opposite the MLB's regular season.
I personally don't mind the retractable domes, you can play outside at times and if there's inclement weather you can close the roof. I remember when the skydome opened in Toronto I think it was like in June it didn't open for the start of the 1989 season.
Baseball is the only sport where it's worthwhile to have a retractable roof. There are enough games in the season where the team is bound to encounter both inclement weather and great weather, the sport is one where they don't play when it rains too hard, and the season begins early enough in spring to where some regions are stuck with cold temperatures.
I contrast that with football where the stadiums easily exceed a billion dollars now when they put in a retractable roof, and then they rarely play with the roof open. Even in a sunny-ass place like Phoenix, that roof is still closed most of the time. When the team only hosts 8 (or maybe 9 now) games per year, that's a tremendous waste of money if that stupid roof is only open for like one of those games. Football stadiums should either be all indoor or all outdoor. Some of these NFL retractable roofs are just ridiculous. Just look at the Anus Dome in Georgia. What's the point in having a tiny opening like that at all? What a waste!
Quote from: Poiponen13 on March 06, 2023, 01:01:51 PM
I think that there should be indoor baseball and outdoor basketball, because there should be opportunity for baseball players to play in offseasons and to have more outdoor basketball.
Also for the offseason, MLB players have to play almost every day from April-September or October. I think that they probably want a break.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 07, 2023, 10:17:04 AM
Baseball is the only sport where it's worthwhile to have a retractable roof. There are enough games in the season where the team is bound to encounter both inclement weather and great weather, the sport is one where they don't play when it rains too hard, and the season begins early enough in spring to where some regions are stuck with cold temperatures.
I contrast that with football where the stadiums easily exceed a billion dollars now when they put in a retractable roof, and then they rarely play with the roof open. Even in a sunny-ass place like Phoenix, that roof is still closed most of the time. When the team only hosts 8 (or maybe 9 now) games per year, that's a tremendous waste of money if that stupid roof is only open for like one of those games. Football stadiums should either be all indoor or all outdoor. Some of these NFL retractable roofs are just ridiculous. Just look at the Anus Dome in Georgia. What's the point in having a tiny opening like that at all? What a waste!
The last baseball ballpark to be built, Globe Life Field for the Texas Rangers, cost $1.2 Billion. It's a domed stadium.
I think Ford Field in Detroit was built right. Not only does it host Lions games but it has hosted college basketball games including the Final Four. They say that Detroit is the only sports city in America that has all of its sports stadiums downtown.
Tampa Bay. IMHO, it was a mistake to expand MLB to Arizona and Florida. Much of the population is retires who have loyalties to their lifelong home teams, and even people who move there earlier in life often follow teams from "back home". And the stadium is not only generic, it is misplaced within the metro area. But both of those things aside, it is possible to watch 1000s of spring training games for far less money, picking and choosing what teams you watch.
Retractable domes. I get baseball doing this. Watching a game indoors when its beautiful outside is bad. Watching a game outdoors when it is cold or rainy is bad. So, best of both worlds. Football I don't understand. Its 8 games a year. Its generally a sell out every time. Either have a dome or don't. Don't understand spending extra to have a retractable one in the NFL.
Globe Life. A new stadium to replace a new stadium. Stadiums should last multiple generations.
Quote from: SP Cook on March 07, 2023, 01:10:18 PM
Tampa Bay. IMHO, it was a mistake to expand MLB to Arizona and Florida. Much of the population is retires who have loyalties to their lifelong home teams, and even people who move there earlier in life often follow teams from "back home". And the stadium is not only generic, it is misplaced within the metro area. But both of those things aside, it is possible to watch 1000s of spring training games for far less money, picking and choosing what teams you watch.
Retractable domes. I get baseball doing this. Watching a game indoors when its beautiful outside is bad. Watching a game outdoors when it is cold or rainy is bad. So, best of both worlds. Football I don't understand. Its 8 games a year. Its generally a sell out every time. Either have a dome or don't. Don't understand spending extra to have a retractable one in the NFL.
Globe Life. A new stadium to replace a new stadium. Stadiums should last multiple generations.
The NFL and NBA have been able to thrive in those markets, especially when the teams are good. Even the Tampa Bay Lighning have a rabid fanbase in the area.
The economics of arena sports (half the number of home games, half the number of seats in the venue, hard salary cap) are totally different from MLB.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 07, 2023, 10:17:04 AM
Baseball is the only sport where it's worthwhile to have a retractable roof.
Soccer as well, though some of the newer megabuilds/renovations have opted for a field that retracts instead. It can be played in heavy rain or snow, but it's far from comfortable and sometimes can be unsafe for players.
Quote from: Flint1979 on March 07, 2023, 12:16:22 PM
I think Ford Field in Detroit was built right. Not only does it host Lions games but it has hosted college basketball games including the Final Four. They say that Detroit is the only sports city in America that has all of its sports stadiums downtown.
Seattle's 3 major league stadiums are all in the greater downtown area. The only pro team that doesn't play in downtown now is the Seawolves of MLR.
Quote from: Bruce on March 07, 2023, 02:46:15 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on March 07, 2023, 10:17:04 AM
Baseball is the only sport where it's worthwhile to have a retractable roof.
Soccer as well, though some of the newer megabuilds/renovations have opted for a field that retracts instead. It can be played in heavy rain or snow, but it's far from comfortable and sometimes can be unsafe for players.
Hmm, I thought they were like football and they play regardless of weather (minus like lightening or whatever).
Isn't a rule that they HAVE to play on real grass? I thought I heard that at some point but don't know for sure because, well, I don't care about soccer.
^ The men's World Cup has to be on grass (2019 women's world cup in Canada was all artificial turf) Otherwise FIFA doesn't have a grass manndate.
Quote from: Flint1979 on March 07, 2023, 12:16:22 PM
I think Ford Field in Detroit was built right. Not only does it host Lions games but it has hosted college basketball games including the Final Four. They say that Detroit is the only sports city in America that has all of its sports stadiums downtown.
Aaron Rodgers nearly hit Ford Field's roof structure on a pass play against the Lions a few seasons ago.
Mike
Quote from: hbelkins on February 27, 2023, 04:14:03 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 04:00:22 PM
Get rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It's stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
I can relate, especially for the mid-major conferences that will only get one team in the tournament. It's hard for me to believe that the Ohio Valley Conference tournament in Evansville is going to be a big revenue producer.
My alma mater just won the OVC regular season championship outright since 1984. Morehead State has made a couple of NCAA tournaments in the intervening years, and the Eagles were lucky enough to win both the regular season and conference tournament championships in '84 after winning the OVC tournament the year prior, but it's entirely possible this year that the team could slip up in the tournament and then not even get an NIT bid.
Surely the TV money the OVC will get paid for the championship game being on one of the ESPN channels can't bring in THAT much money to justify a conference tournament.
And as I feared, my MSU Eagles lost in the OVC Tournament, and the reward for a regular-season championship is a date in the NIT, probably to go be cannon fodder for some major conference team's home tourney opener (NIT games are played at host school sites up until the semi-finals and finals at MSG in NYC).
Quote from: hbelkins on March 08, 2023, 02:18:25 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on February 27, 2023, 04:14:03 PM
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 04:00:22 PM
Get rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It's stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
I can relate, especially for the mid-major conferences that will only get one team in the tournament. It's hard for me to believe that the Ohio Valley Conference tournament in Evansville is going to be a big revenue producer.
My alma mater just won the OVC regular season championship outright since 1984. Morehead State has made a couple of NCAA tournaments in the intervening years, and the Eagles were lucky enough to win both the regular season and conference tournament championships in '84 after winning the OVC tournament the year prior, but it's entirely possible this year that the team could slip up in the tournament and then not even get an NIT bid.
Surely the TV money the OVC will get paid for the championship game being on one of the ESPN channels can't bring in THAT much money to justify a conference tournament.
And as I feared, my MSU Eagles lost in the OVC Tournament, and the reward for a regular-season championship is a date in the NIT, probably to go be cannon fodder for some major conference team's home tourney opener (NIT games are played at host school sites up until the semi-finals and finals at MSG in NYC).
MSU was 21-11. Not exactly a world beater.
This would be interesting:
There would be played every year a MLB Game in purpose-built baseball stadium in Inuvik on summer solstice. This game would be called MLB at Midnight Sun and take place at 10.00pm local time. And there would be NHL game on same place on winter solstice, called NHL at Polar Night.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 20, 2023, 11:47:03 AM
This would be interesting:
There would be played every year a MLB Game in purpose-built baseball stadium in Inuvik on summer solstice. This game would be called MLB at Midnight Sun and take place at 10.00pm local time. And there would be NHL game on same place on winter solstice, called NHL at Polar Night.
what
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on June 20, 2023, 12:34:47 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 20, 2023, 11:47:03 AM
This would be interesting:
There would be played every year a MLB Game in purpose-built baseball stadium in Inuvik on summer solstice. This game would be called MLB at Midnight Sun and take place at 10.00pm local time. And there would be NHL game on same place on winter solstice, called NHL at Polar Night.
what
To have late-night game under bright skies north of Arctic Circle.
FWIW...
https://spectacularnwt.com/events/billy-joss-open-celebrity-golf-tournament
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 20, 2023, 12:36:37 PM
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on June 20, 2023, 12:34:47 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 20, 2023, 11:47:03 AM
This would be interesting:
There would be played every year a MLB Game in purpose-built baseball stadium in Inuvik on summer solstice. This game would be called MLB at Midnight Sun and take place at 10.00pm local time. And there would be NHL game on same place on winter solstice, called NHL at Polar Night.
what
To have late-night game under bright skies north of Arctic Circle.
but why
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on June 20, 2023, 01:04:33 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 20, 2023, 12:36:37 PM
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on June 20, 2023, 12:34:47 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 20, 2023, 11:47:03 AM
This would be interesting:
There would be played every year a MLB Game in purpose-built baseball stadium in Inuvik on summer solstice. This game would be called MLB at Midnight Sun and take place at 10.00pm local time. And there would be NHL game on same place on winter solstice, called NHL at Polar Night.
what
To have late-night game under bright skies north of Arctic Circle.
but why
Because the game would be sellout.
Walruses love baseball.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 20, 2023, 01:17:04 PM
Walruses love baseball.
What does that mean? Inuvik game would be good.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 20, 2023, 01:12:42 PM
Because the game would be sellout.
If you build the stadium with only 1000 seats, then maybe.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 20, 2023, 01:21:02 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 20, 2023, 01:17:04 PM
Walruses love baseball.
What does that mean? Inuvik game would be good.
A typical baseball stadium, such as what was recently built in Wichita, would have enough seating for nearly the entire population of Iqaluit. |triplemultiplex| is assuming that some people would, you know, go to work or something like that instead. Therefore, for it to be a sellout, the rest of the seats would need to be occupied by walruses.
Speaking of that, it's almost time for the annual Midnight Sun baseball game in Fairbanks, AK, first pitch at 00:01.
:cool:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on June 20, 2023, 01:51:51 PM
Speaking of that, it's almost time for the annual Midnight Sun baseball game in Fairbanks, AK, first pitch at 00:01.
:cool:
Mike
There's 2 hours of night in Fairbanks tonight. They should move this north to the Circle.
Quote from: Alps on June 20, 2023, 09:18:56 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on June 20, 2023, 01:51:51 PM
Speaking of that, it's almost time for the annual Midnight Sun baseball game in Fairbanks, AK, first pitch at 00:01.
:cool:
Mike
There's 2 hours of night in Fairbanks tonight. They should move this north to the Circle.
Sunset is at 00:47 and sunrise at 02:57, if the game is long enough, it could start in daylight, play through the entire "night" and end in daylight.
Football: some lower leagues would play midweek rounds.
Soccer: there would be leagues of 24 teams playing 46 games. These leagues would play in winter and play many midweek rounds. US Open Cup would be played on weekends.
Baseball should play just twice in a week, in some weeks just once. There would be 50 games in MLB regular season.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 26, 2023, 10:30:55 AM
Baseball should play just twice in a week, in some weeks just once. There would be 50 games in MLB regular season.
This is probably your best suggestion ever, but it will never happen due to $$$. As is, there are simply way too many games to make any individual game worth watching.
"Crushing loss last night for the Red Sox, as they fall 4 games back in the wild card race. They've only got 83 more chances to make up for it."
Quote from: thspfc on June 26, 2023, 11:51:22 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 26, 2023, 10:30:55 AM
Baseball should play just twice in a week, in some weeks just once. There would be 50 games in MLB regular season.
This is probably your best suggestion ever, but it will never happen due to $$$. As is, there are simply way too many games to make any individual game worth watching.
"Crushing loss last night for the Red Sox, as they fall 4 games back in the wild card race. They've only got 83 more chances to make up for it."
MLB should take some "cooldown" breaks in season when there are few consecutive days without games and the players are in their homes. Also, there should be single-table round-robin minor baseball leagues where teams play in e.g. 12 team league every other team 11 times for a total of 132 games.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 24, 2023, 12:41:13 PM
Football: some lower leagues would play midweek rounds.
Soccer: there would be leagues of 24 teams playing 46 games. These leagues would play in winter and play many midweek rounds. US Open Cup would be played on weekends.
Considering that the current MLS schedule (34 reg season + at least 2 LC + at least 1 USOC) is already taxing enough...are you trying to kill these players? The league already has to play through international breaks to make the schedule work, so a lot of teams would suffer.
And playing through winter is dumb. We've got snowy cities and outdoor stadiums.
Quote from: Bruce on June 27, 2023, 06:30:31 PM
And playing through winter is dumb. We've got snowy cities and outdoor stadiums.
The Buffalo Bills are having a good chuckle over that.
Quote from: kphoger on June 27, 2023, 08:56:28 PM
Quote from: Bruce on June 27, 2023, 06:30:31 PM
And playing through winter is dumb. We've got snowy cities and outdoor stadiums.
The Buffalo Bills are having a good chuckle over that.
Wrong football...
Quote from: SectorZ on June 27, 2023, 09:05:56 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 27, 2023, 08:56:28 PM
Quote from: Bruce on June 27, 2023, 06:30:31 PM
And playing through winter is dumb. We've got snowy cities and outdoor stadiums.
The Buffalo Bills are having a good chuckle over that.
Wrong football...
That's why they're laughing so hard.
A game played primarily on the ground definitely suffers in the snow. Almost as if we should call it foot-ball. :)
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 26, 2023, 12:01:44 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 26, 2023, 11:51:22 AM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 26, 2023, 10:30:55 AM
Baseball should play just twice in a week, in some weeks just once. There would be 50 games in MLB regular season.
This is probably your best suggestion ever, but it will never happen due to $$$. As is, there are simply way too many games to make any individual game worth watching.
"Crushing loss last night for the Red Sox, as they fall 4 games back in the wild card race. They've only got 83 more chances to make up for it."
MLB should take some "cooldown" breaks in season when there are few consecutive days without games and the players are in their homes. Also, there should be single-table round-robin minor baseball leagues where teams play in e.g. 12 team league every other team 11 times for a total of 132 games.
Having MLB play only twice a week is an absurd idea. This would make it resemble the NFL.
However, I can get behind the round-robin idea in the minor leagues.
Quote from: Bruce on June 27, 2023, 06:30:31 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 24, 2023, 12:41:13 PM
Football: some lower leagues would play midweek rounds.
Soccer: there would be leagues of 24 teams playing 46 games. These leagues would play in winter and play many midweek rounds. US Open Cup would be played on weekends.
Considering that the current MLS schedule (34 reg season + at least 2 LC + at least 1 USOC) is already taxing enough...are you trying to kill these players? The league already has to play through international breaks to make the schedule work, so a lot of teams would suffer.
And playing through winter is dumb. We've got snowy cities and outdoor stadiums.
Some European federations take a few weeks off during winter. If the normal 'international' schedule (October through May regular season) is done in North America, I would reasonably expect that more northerly teams will play most of their home games early and late in the season and more southerly teams will play most of their home games during the mid season.
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on June 27, 2023, 11:29:53 PM
Quote from: Bruce on June 27, 2023, 06:30:31 PM
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 24, 2023, 12:41:13 PM
Football: some lower leagues would play midweek rounds.
Soccer: there would be leagues of 24 teams playing 46 games. These leagues would play in winter and play many midweek rounds. US Open Cup would be played on weekends.
Considering that the current MLS schedule (34 reg season + at least 2 LC + at least 1 USOC) is already taxing enough...are you trying to kill these players? The league already has to play through international breaks to make the schedule work, so a lot of teams would suffer.
And playing through winter is dumb. We've got snowy cities and outdoor stadiums.
Some European federations take a few weeks off during winter. If the normal 'international' schedule (October through May regular season) is done in North America, I would reasonably expect that more northerly teams will play most of their home games early and late in the season and more southerly teams will play most of their home games during the mid season.
Mike
Long road trips are terrible for soccer. MLS is very reliant on home-field advantage, so teams that have been on long roadstands (mostly for stadium construction that bleeds over from the offseason) have had horrible starts to the season that they never recover from.
I think that MLS should not play during international breaks because too many palyers would be left off from their teams. MLS should instead play some midweeek rounds to get the schedule work.
Quote from: Poiponen13 on June 29, 2023, 09:34:06 AM
I think that MLS should not play during international breaks because too many palyers would be left off from their teams. MLS should instead play some midweeek rounds to get the schedule work.
Take a look at the schedule. MLS is already playing too many midweek games, plus they have to leave room for potential CCL/CCC and USOC games that also take place in the middle of the week.
The hottest states, Arizona and New Mexico, should definitely play in winter to avoid summer heat. The season would start in late August and end in early May. And if soccer were played through midwinter, always a game can be postponed if pitch is waterlogged or snow-covered. In Englang, many games are postponed due to this every winter.
Could college sports venues be used in minor professional leagues' games when the college sports are in offseason? At least my proposed minor league football teams would play in the spring on college football stadiums.
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 06, 2023, 03:31:46 PM
AFC is too strong and NFC is so weak that anyone could make it.
Eliminate divisions and conferences. Top X (12?) teams make it to the playoffs.
Quote from: 1 on September 06, 2023, 03:33:41 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 06, 2023, 03:31:46 PM
AFC is too strong and NFC is so weak that anyone could make it.
Eliminate divisions and conferences. Top X (12?) teams make it to the playoffs.
Wouldn't eliminate divisions but would eliminate conferences.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on September 06, 2023, 04:16:59 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 06, 2023, 03:33:41 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on September 06, 2023, 03:31:46 PM
AFC is too strong and NFC is so weak that anyone could make it.
Eliminate divisions and conferences. Top X (12?) teams make it to the playoffs.
Wouldn't eliminate divisions but would eliminate conferences.
Super bowls would be much better that way. two best teams! I'd love a Chiefs vs Bills Super Bowl
Quote repaired. --J N Winkler
Is basketball the most popular sport in China? And baseball in South Korea?
Quote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 04:00:22 PMGet rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It's stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
I saw the Sun Belt tournament bracket today and was reminded of this post.
https://sunbeltsports.org/documents/2024/10/25/2025_Men_s_Basketball_Championship_Bracket.pdf
This is stupid. This is not a real tournament. If we are willing to go to this extent to favor the top-seeded teams in the conference tournament, why do we have conference tournaments at all? Because if we want to be fair to the best regular season teams by giving them a more direct path to the tournament, I have an idea: regular season champs go straight to the tournament, so the regular season actually matters!
Obviously the NCAA tournament itself is not known for being the best way to crown the best team as champion, but that's a flaw that I accept because of how entertaining it is. For most conferences, the conference tournament is a crazy and twisted way of determining
who gets to play in the NCAA tournament, which is also a twisted way of determining a champion, but at least a champion is indeed crowned at the end.
Quote from: thspfc on March 07, 2025, 05:09:53 PMQuote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 04:00:22 PMGet rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It's stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
I saw the Sun Belt tournament bracket today and was reminded of this post.
https://sunbeltsports.org/documents/2024/10/25/2025_Men_s_Basketball_Championship_Bracket.pdf
This is stupid. This is not a real tournament. If we are willing to go to this extent to favor the top-seeded teams in the conference tournament, why do we have conference tournaments at all? Because if we want to be fair to the best regular season teams by giving them a more direct path to the tournament, I have an idea: regular season champs go straight to the tournament, so the regular season actually matters!
Obviously the NCAA tournament itself is not known for being the best way to crown the best team as champion, but that's a flaw that I accept because of how entertaining it is. For most conferences, the conference tournament is a crazy and twisted way of determining who gets to play in the NCAA tournament, which is also a twisted way of determining a champion, but at least a champion is indeed crowned at the end.
Conference tournaments would make a tiny fraction of the money they make now if an autobid wasn't on the line. I'm good with brackets that favor the best teams, but that has gone way too far.
Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on March 07, 2025, 05:44:08 PMQuote from: thspfc on March 07, 2025, 05:09:53 PMQuote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 04:00:22 PMGet rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It's stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
I saw the Sun Belt tournament bracket today and was reminded of this post.
https://sunbeltsports.org/documents/2024/10/25/2025_Men_s_Basketball_Championship_Bracket.pdf
This is stupid. This is not a real tournament. If we are willing to go to this extent to favor the top-seeded teams in the conference tournament, why do we have conference tournaments at all? Because if we want to be fair to the best regular season teams by giving them a more direct path to the tournament, I have an idea: regular season champs go straight to the tournament, so the regular season actually matters!
Obviously the NCAA tournament itself is not known for being the best way to crown the best team as champion, but that's a flaw that I accept because of how entertaining it is. For most conferences, the conference tournament is a crazy and twisted way of determining who gets to play in the NCAA tournament, which is also a twisted way of determining a champion, but at least a champion is indeed crowned at the end.
Conference tournaments would make a tiny fraction of the money they make now if an autobid wasn't on the line. I'm good with brackets that favor the best teams, but that has gone way too far.
Correct. Networks love the one-game takes all of the minor conferences. They pay more money for that than they will get for their entire regular season. The odd brackets are a way for those conferences to at least reward teams for regular season success.
I know it's great for the networks. Doesn't change my opinion.
Quote from: thspfc on March 07, 2025, 05:09:53 PMQuote from: thspfc on February 27, 2023, 04:00:22 PMGet rid of conference tournaments in college basketball. NCAA tournament autobids go to regular season champs. It's stupid that a team from a small conference can dominate all year, but one bad game in the conference tourney denies them a bid in favor of a team that might as well have intentionally lost all their games in the regular season. Make the games matter.
I saw the Sun Belt tournament bracket today and was reminded of this post.
https://sunbeltsports.org/documents/2024/10/25/2025_Men_s_Basketball_Championship_Bracket.pdf
This is stupid. This is not a real tournament. If we are willing to go to this extent to favor the top-seeded teams in the conference tournament, why do we have conference tournaments at all? Because if we want to be fair to the best regular season teams by giving them a more direct path to the tournament, I have an idea: regular season champs go straight to the tournament, so the regular season actually matters!
Obviously the NCAA tournament itself is not known for being the best way to crown the best team as champion, but that's a flaw that I accept because of how entertaining it is. For most conferences, the conference tournament is a crazy and twisted way of determining who gets to play in the NCAA tournament, which is also a twisted way of determining a champion, but at least a champion is indeed crowned at the end.
The conference earns a LOT of money if one of their members advances in the tournament, therefore it behooves the conference to make sure its best team is the one that makes the tournament in the first place.
Quote from: thspfc on March 07, 2025, 06:14:48 PMI know it's great for the networks. Doesn't change my opinion.
Then why did you ask the question "why do we have conference tournaments at all?"
Quote from: SEWIGuy on March 08, 2025, 07:03:59 AMQuote from: thspfc on March 07, 2025, 06:14:48 PMI know it's great for the networks. Doesn't change my opinion.
Then why did you ask the question "why do we have conference tournaments at all?"
Fair point. May I revise my opinion to be "I understand why we have conference tournaments, but I believe that they hurt the integrity of the sport"?
Quote from: thspfc on March 08, 2025, 10:51:41 AMQuote from: SEWIGuy on March 08, 2025, 07:03:59 AMQuote from: thspfc on March 07, 2025, 06:14:48 PMI know it's great for the networks. Doesn't change my opinion.
Then why did you ask the question "why do we have conference tournaments at all?"
Fair point. May I revise my opinion to be "I understand why we have conference tournaments, but I believe that they hurt the integrity of the sport"?
Conference tournaments have been going on for five plus decades. I don't think it has any impact on the integrity of the sport.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on March 08, 2025, 11:56:43 AMQuote from: thspfc on March 08, 2025, 10:51:41 AMQuote from: SEWIGuy on March 08, 2025, 07:03:59 AMQuote from: thspfc on March 07, 2025, 06:14:48 PMI know it's great for the networks. Doesn't change my opinion.
Then why did you ask the question "why do we have conference tournaments at all?"
Fair point. May I revise my opinion to be "I understand why we have conference tournaments, but I believe that they hurt the integrity of the sport"?
Conference tournaments have been going on for five plus decades. I don't think it has any impact on the integrity of the sport.
Referee mistakes have been going on in every sport for five plus decades. Do you believe referee mistakes impact the integrity of a sport?
Quote from: thspfc on March 08, 2025, 12:49:12 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on March 08, 2025, 11:56:43 AMQuote from: thspfc on March 08, 2025, 10:51:41 AMQuote from: SEWIGuy on March 08, 2025, 07:03:59 AMQuote from: thspfc on March 07, 2025, 06:14:48 PMI know it's great for the networks. Doesn't change my opinion.
Then why did you ask the question "why do we have conference tournaments at all?"
Fair point. May I revise my opinion to be "I understand why we have conference tournaments, but I believe that they hurt the integrity of the sport"?
Conference tournaments have been going on for five plus decades. I don't think it has any impact on the integrity of the sport.
Referee mistakes have been going on in every sport for five plus decades. Do you believe referee mistakes impact the integrity of a sport?
No. It's human error, which has been part of sport for time eternal.
Conference tournaments. The NCAA can roughly be divided into two groups. The "one bid" conferences, where the tournament is the be all and end all of the season; and the "major" conferences, where loser after loser after loser are given yet one more chance to not be a loser year again, despite a 7th or 8th or 9th place finish.
The networks, both ESPN, which shows most of the conference tournaments, and CBS/WBD, which shows the NCAA tournament, like the mythos that somehow Abilene Christian and Kentucky are on the same level, and this "one more night" and "one shining moment" stuff. When, in fact, most players at the true top level have as much loyalty to their SEC/ACC/B10 teams as a minor league baseball player has to the Columbus Clippers or Dayton Dragons where they did a year on the way up.
As such, the SBC tournament is just fine. ALL that matters in a league like that is winning the tournament and getting a 14 to 16 seed in the NCAA (in fact, the NCAA is considering going to 72 or 84 teams, which just means more losers from the "major" conferences, they will always take the 14th team from the SEC over the second place team in the SBC). The SBC tournament advantages the regular season good teams, and thus makes these games matter.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on March 08, 2025, 01:22:10 PMQuote from: thspfc on March 08, 2025, 12:49:12 PMQuote from: SEWIGuy on March 08, 2025, 11:56:43 AMQuote from: thspfc on March 08, 2025, 10:51:41 AMQuote from: SEWIGuy on March 08, 2025, 07:03:59 AMQuote from: thspfc on March 07, 2025, 06:14:48 PMI know it's great for the networks. Doesn't change my opinion.
Then why did you ask the question "why do we have conference tournaments at all?"
Fair point. May I revise my opinion to be "I understand why we have conference tournaments, but I believe that they hurt the integrity of the sport"?
Conference tournaments have been going on for five plus decades. I don't think it has any impact on the integrity of the sport.
Referee mistakes have been going on in every sport for five plus decades. Do you believe referee mistakes impact the integrity of a sport?
No. It's human error, which has been part of sport for time eternal.
I guess we're agreeing to disagree then.
Somewhat perversely, there's a sense in which the conference tournaments have more legitimacy now than they did in the old days, and the reason is that all the realignment has resulted in the death of balanced schedules. That is, as much as it pains me to agree with Dean Smith and Gary Williams, when everyone in the league plays a double round-robin and one team finishes in first place, there isn't really a need (apart from TV dollars, of course, and I certainly recognize the importance of that factor) for a tournament that overturns a full season of play in a period of three or four days. Now that many conferences have gotten too big for the double round-robin, such that members don't play the same in-conference schedules as each other, a playoff is actually a more legitimate way of deciding the champion.
There was a 4-way tie for the Sun Belt regular season championship among Arkansas State, James Madison, South Alabama and Troy. Arkansas State is the highest-rated team in KenPom but are seeded fourth and will play fifth-seeded Marshall today.
The Sun Belt is very top-heavy this year with about 5 solid mid-majors and a LOT of bad teams at the bottom. I think a traditional 14-team bracket (with 2 byes) would've been fine, but hey, it's an interesting gimmick.
Quote from: Road Hog on March 08, 2025, 05:20:37 PMThere was a 4-way tie for the Sun Belt regular season championship among Arkansas State, James Madison, South Alabama and Troy. Arkansas State is the highest-rated team in KenPom but are seeded fourth and will play fifth-seeded Marshall today.
The Sun Belt is very top-heavy this year with about 5 solid mid-majors and a LOT of bad teams at the bottom. I think a traditional 14-team bracket (with 2 byes) would've been fine, but hey, it's an interesting gimmick.
The WCC for instance (with Gonzaga and St. Marys) has had this type of format for as long as I remember. I just think the Sun Belt looks extreme because it has 14 teams.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on March 08, 2025, 01:22:10 PMNo. It's human error, which has been part of sport for time eternal.
Small asterisk: Slo-mo instant replays have not been.
My god, has a P13 thread actually become legitimatized?
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 10, 2025, 11:23:12 AMMy god, has a P13 thread actually become legitimatized?
You take that back. Seriously, not cool.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 10, 2025, 11:23:12 AMMy god, has a P13 thread actually become legitimatized?
I was just about to post my proposed schedule for the 2054-55 Premier League season.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on March 10, 2025, 11:41:48 AMI was just about to post my proposed schedule for the 2054-55 Premier League season.
Well, I guess that settles the question of demon possession.
Going back to the basketball tournament discussion, Delaware was the 12 seed in the Coastal tournament, won four games in a row, and are a game away from the title.
https://bsky.app/profile/sickoscommittee.org/post/3lk43rta5xg2k