View Full Version : League realignment
Hitman23
09-13-10, 11:23 AM
Looks like we have at least enough support to start the discussion about league realignment.
So far we're looking at 5 divisions with 4 teams, and a WC spot decided by most points as the leading candidate for realignment.
The purpose is to get a 2 week Championship round and keeping a schedule which has every team playing the team within their division twice and each team outside their division once.
Nominees for the division name so far: [updated]
Jeter
Munson
Berra
Steinbrenner
Mattingly
Ford
Guidry
Let's get this discussion going seriously now. Not sure how much work it will be to decide everything and then get a proper schedule so the sooner the better.
Looks like the possible polls put up for voting on realignment, so far, should be:
-Are you in favor of realignment to 5 divisions in place of 4
-new division name
-6 or 7 playoff teams (meaning 5 division winners and 1 or 2 wild cards)
ruthianblast
09-13-10, 11:47 AM
Looks like we have at least enough support to start the discussion about league realignment.
So far we're looking at 5 divisions with 4 teams, and a WC spot decided by most points as the leading candidate for realignment.
The purpose is to get a 2 week Championship round and keeping a schedule which has every team playing the team within their division twice and each team outside their division once.
Nominees for the division name so far:
Jeter
Munson
Berra
Steinbrenner
Let's get this discussion going seriously now. Not sure how much work it will be to decide everything and then get a proper schedule so the sooner the better.
I'm definitely for re-alignment into 5 divisions; playing the other three teams in the division twice. 2 WC with division winner with most points getting a bye.
Hitman23
09-13-10, 11:51 AM
It would only be 1 wild card team. The other 5 playoff teams would be division winners.
Hitman23
09-13-10, 11:52 AM
So in this format, the two best division winners get the bye week - but how is this decided? By record or points? I say record first then points as a tie breaker. If record wins a division, then the best division winners should follow the same.
ruthianblast
09-13-10, 12:14 PM
So in this format, the two best division winners get the bye week - but how is this decided? By record or points? I say record first then points as a tie breaker. If record wins a division, then the best division winners should follow the same.
As much as possible should be points based
5 teams + 1 WC
1st & 2nd Bye
3rd v. Most Pts WC
4th v. 5th
1st plays lowest ranked of the winners
2nd plays other
Championship = 2weeks.
Hitman23
09-13-10, 01:05 PM
Here is another suggestion that Eric came up with to keep 2 WC teams.
ONE other possibility....
20 teams, 5 divisions, 4 teams per division
Play each team in your division twice (6 games) and each team in other divisions once (16 games). Total 22 regular season games, including All Star week. Best team (points) not to win the division gets Wild Card, AND best record (W/L) to not win their division get Wild Card resulting in 7 playoff teams. Then 1 week for rounds 1 and 2, and 2 weeks for round 3, with the best division winner getting a bye in round 1.
Round one: Team 2 vs Team 7 (GAME ONE); Team 3 vs Team 6 (GAME TWO); Team 4 vs Team 5 (GAME THREE).
Round two: Team 1 vs GAME ONE winner; GAME TWO winner vs GAME THREE winner
Round three: CHAMPJONSHIP (Two Weeks)
this keeps the TWO WC slots in tact.
Hitman23
09-13-10, 01:08 PM
Also, regarding the division names... I'd like to toss out there that we already have 4 retro names for the divisions. Jeter deserves to be named with those guys and not everything needs to be about what happened a hundred years ago. :lol:
If that didn't work, I will attempt to use the Jedi mind trick on you all.
Stupid Flanders
09-13-10, 03:12 PM
As much as possible should be points based
5 teams + 1 WC
1st & 2nd Bye
3rd v. Most Pts WC
4th v. 5th
1st plays lowest ranked of the winners
2nd plays other
Championship = 2weeks.We have always gone with record and points as the tie breaker. I see no reason why we should change that now. MLB does it by record, not by points differentials.
Stupid Flanders
09-13-10, 03:14 PM
I think Jeter is the worst of the choices. I'd even rather Mattingly. You shouldn't name a division for a current player. That's like retiring a number.
Even Rivera would be better for current players but I think Munson is the best choice of those given.
I'd prefer to vote from:
Munson
Mattingly
Ford
Guidry
Berra
Hitman23
09-13-10, 03:34 PM
Well with the way we have it now, just having someone alive will be a treat. :lol:
Do you guys mean the Munson from Kingpin?
BrianNYYanks
09-13-10, 05:32 PM
I'll vote for a 5 division realignment.
How would we decide who moves where? Random number assignment?
I would vote for
Berra
I propose me and E stay in the same division - arch rivals and all....
I'll vote for a 5 division realignment.
I would vote for
Berra
I propose me and E stay in the same division - arch rivals and all....
Works for me. :)
Besides, the LOU'S have to be in the GEHRIG division...
Works for me. :)
Besides, the LOU'S have to be in the GEHRIG division...
...unless we have a tifoso Division.
Hitman23
09-14-10, 06:47 AM
For everyone's convenience and for the commissioner that will be handling this issue, I've been updating the first post with info like division name nominations and how many playoff seeds there should be. Should anything else come up I will continue to update. If I've missed anything let me know.
Hitman23
09-14-10, 06:51 AM
Sax offered this option which I also like:
20 teams, 2 leagues, 2 divisions per league
Play each team in your league twice (18 games) and three or four teams in the other league once (3/4 games), rotating each year. 21 or 22 games per year, with or without the Wild Card week, depending on the interleague games. Wild Card and playoffs work as per 2010, except that extra week is available for Chamjonship round.
Sax offered this option which I also like:
20 teams, 2 leagues, 2 divisions per league
Play each team in your league twice (18 games) and three or four teams in the other league once (3/4 games), rotating each year. 21 or 22 games per year, with or without the Wild Card week, depending on the interleague games. Wild Card and playoffs work as per 2010, except that extra week is available for Chamjonship round.
Except when a full moon falls on a Tuesday during the month of August and it rains in Poughkeepsie while a baby cries in the Bronx...
ChrisRo
09-14-10, 08:45 AM
Looks like the possible polls put up for voting on realignment, so far, should be:
-Are you in favor of realignment to 5 divisions in place of 4
-new division name
-6 or 7 playoff teams (meaning 5 division winners and 1 or 2 wild cards)
The third question should only matter if the first question is voted "yes". If we stick to 4 divisions, 6 playoff teams are enough.
However, I would vote "yes" on 5 divisions only if it implies 7 playoff teams - so we don't lose the "best record" WC spot.
The poll should contain a combination of these options.
Hitman23
09-14-10, 09:15 AM
Well we would just need to run a poll about the change first. Once we decide if a change will be made, then we can do the different options. Like how many wild cards, how many divisions, if we make two leagues like Sax suggested, ect. I think the first poll should just be "do you want a change or not
ChrisRo
09-14-10, 09:27 AM
Well we would just need to run a poll about the change first. Once we decide if a change will be made, then we can do the different options. Like how many wild cards, how many divisions, if we make two leagues like Sax suggested, ect. I think the first poll should just be "do you want a change or not
I still think the two should be somehow related. To me at least, going with 4 or 5 divisions depends whether or not we will have 6 or 7 playoff teams.
Hitman23
09-14-10, 09:32 AM
Well I don't want the votes to go wasted. Here's the possible problem:
Poll:
Do you want division expansion?
- No, leave as is with 4 divisions/5 teams
- Yes, expand to 5 divisions/4 teams in each/2 wild cards
- Yes, expand to 5 divisions/4 teams in each/1 wild card
Now if you lose votes to "NO, leave as is...." you don't get a true vote on which option to change it to if changing wins. If people who vote "No" lose and are forced to vote for a change, we get a truer indication of how the league wants the change because there is no "no" option to vote for once a change is decided.
SO I say we should decide if the majority of the league wants a change or not, then go with a secondary poll to decide which change is more popular if it's decided.
make sense? It does in my head. :lol:
Hitman23
09-14-10, 09:35 AM
People know what the possible options are by now, at least those who are paying attention. So no need to bring up what they are just yet.
I dunno, this is what I'd do just to make sure. You don't want someone who voted no change but since they are forced to deal with a change saying "well if I had to I'd vote for the other one"
ruthianblast
09-14-10, 10:07 AM
People know what the possible options are by now, at least those who are paying attention. So no need to bring up what they are just yet.
I dunno, this is what I'd do just to make sure. You don't want someone who voted no change but since they are forced to deal with a change saying "well if I had to I'd vote for the other one"
I think the best way is as stated previously; vote for a change to occur. Then vote on the name of change and the type of change that will be made separately.
Hitman23
09-14-10, 10:21 AM
Yeah that's what I was saying. Sorry I thought you were saying the yes or no and the options answers should be together in 1 poll.
You could try it as one poll, such as:
Poll:
Do you want division expansion?
- No, leave as is with 4 divisions/5 teams (CHOICE ONE)
- Yes, expand to 5 divisions/4 teams in each/2 wild cards (CHOICE TWO)
- Yes, expand to 5 divisions/4 teams in each/1 wild card (CHOICE THREE)
If 11 of the 20 teams vote for one of the choices, case closed. A majority of the league has spoken.
If the vote is say:
Choice One: 9 votes
Choice Two: 6 votes
Choice Three: 5 votes
Then the league clearly favors expansion (11-9), and a re-vote is taken between the two expansion choices. This way, even the "No" people can make a choice as to which plan.
If the vote is 10-10, then there's no expansion. (10 NO, and a combination of 10 votes for the two YES choices).
I think leaving the three choices for the first vote is the best option, because you have a chance of not needing a second vote.
Hitman23
09-14-10, 03:23 PM
Eric I just think you enjoy disagreeing with me. :lol:
Eric I just think you enjoy disagreeing with me. :lol:
no I don't. ;)
PLEASE CHECK OUT THIS THREAD:
http://forums.nyyfans.com/showthread.php?t=125037
It appears that the 2011 MLB season will start on FRIDAY, APRIL 1, 2011 and end on WENDESDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2010.
This increases the urgency to have a 2-week championship series (which would really only be 10 days), because otherwise, with our weeks running from Monday to Sunday, we would only have a 3-day championship week!
Hitman23
09-15-10, 09:22 AM
Eric... the thing is I anticipate votes being cast for all 3, and probably very close. So why even waste time hoping it could be decided in the 1st vote. Even if 3 people vote no and the other two are close, we'd have to have a re-vote anyway. We can do it your way, I just think it will turn out with 2 polls regardless.
Eric... the thing is I anticipate votes being cast for all 3, and probably very close. So why even waste time hoping it could be decided in the 1st vote. Even if 3 people vote no and the other two are close, we'd have to have a re-vote anyway. We can do it your way, I just think it will turn out with 2 polls regardless.
Either way...fine with me.
I think (or hope) Choice TWO will be a runaway winner...it has all the benefits we'd want:
Balanced schedule
One extra playoff team (keeps more people interested, longer...)
Two week (or 10 day next year!) championship round
Next year Selig has created a NIGHTMARE schedule for fantasy baseball...
patrick.o
09-15-10, 09:53 AM
I haven't been following this very closely, but one thing to remember is that any change in the way we do things will require a whole new schedule to be worked out manually - the site doesn't do it for us (at least not a division format). Since I did the current one I have a pretty good idea of how it might be figured out so I volunteer to give it a shot, but I make no guarantees. We'll obviously need to make some sort of change though, with MLB having such a wierd schedule next year. I still can't believe teams agreed to waste a high attendance weekend game on a home opener.
Re: polls, my experience is that more than 2 options is usually a bad choice.
Also, Pete, I would usually argue that any changes that affect next season should be worked out once all owners are paid for next year, but in this case since we pretty much have to make a change of some sort (or have a 4 day championship round) and working out a schedule might take a long chunk of time, settling the issue before this season comes to a close and owners drift off might be the best option.
ChrisRo
09-15-10, 10:01 AM
I agree, we should set this now, and not leave it for next year. I also hope CHOICE TWO wins :)
patrick.o
09-15-10, 10:29 AM
Now that I think about it, changing the schedule to a 5 division format might actually be relatively easy. I may be able to just tweak the current schedule to make it work.
Hitman23
09-15-10, 10:35 AM
Cool. Glad you're around to do that Pat. I certainly want no part in scheduling. I tried it once. Nearly tossed my lap top across the room.
Now that I think about it, changing the schedule to a 5 division format might actually be relatively easy. I may be able to just tweak the current schedule to make it work.
I think it might be easier Patty if we have 4 teams per division - during inter-division weeks you don't have to worry about the 5th team playing out of division.
YanksRockMan
09-15-10, 02:26 PM
Also, Pete, I would usually argue that any changes that affect next season should be worked out once all owners are paid for next year, but in this case since we pretty much have to make a change of some sort (or have a 4 day championship round) and working out a schedule might take a long chunk of time, settling the issue before this season comes to a close and owners drift off might be the best option.
Now that we know the schedule next year I agree with that. I'll get to the preliminary poll soon, and hopefully we can get something done prior to the end of the playoffs since we don't want a 3 day championship week.
YanksRockMan
09-15-10, 02:39 PM
You could try it as one poll, such as:
Poll:
Do you want division expansion?
- No, leave as is with 4 divisions/5 teams (CHOICE ONE)
- Yes, expand to 5 divisions/4 teams in each/2 wild cards (CHOICE TWO)
- Yes, expand to 5 divisions/4 teams in each/1 wild card (CHOICE THREE)
If 11 of the 20 teams vote for one of the choices, case closed. A majority of the league has spoken.
This is the gist of the poll I will be using. In reality, there is no way we can keep it as is, so I am going to just make it a two-choice poll and we will either have 2 or 1 wild card.
The FUTURE
09-16-10, 02:11 PM
I propose me and E stay in the same division - arch rivals and all....
I would wanna get me out of MY DIVISION too
I would wanna get me out of MY DIVISION too
Meh, you are a one trick pony kiddo. I have other rivals that I would love to play twice a year - I have a history with E & Steve. No offense but it will be fun to trade with you if you are gone out of my division.
The FUTURE
09-16-10, 04:17 PM
Meh, you are a one trick pony kiddo. I have other rivals that I would love to play twice a year - I have a history with E & Steve. No offense but it will be fun to trade with you if you are gone out of my division.
how am i a one trick pony ? and I'd love to make some more matt garza trades
Hitman23
09-16-10, 04:19 PM
where the eff was all this fire during the season? :lol: it was so quiet this year!!
The FUTURE
09-16-10, 04:31 PM
haha I just didnt wanna jinx myself during the season after I lost YOUK I was kinda worried of a collapse
Hitman23
09-16-10, 04:33 PM
Well next year we need some more of it. The noobs have no excuse! :D
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.7 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
0