32 team MLB alignment (please critique) - Page 2

Muzamba · 11-09-2009, 03:33 PM

Also, travel is not as big of a concern in the NFL, as they only play one game a week. So it wasn't as important for teams in the same division to be as close to one another.

Once the league realigned after the last expansion, they decided to shrink a few of the wider distance gaps and fix some of the more laughable situations, like Carolina in the West. At the same time, they didn't want to break up some of the bigger rivalries involving some of their more historically successful franchises, like the Cowboys and Dolphins with their divisional counterparts. So they left a few teams where they were.

That was my idea with the configuration I suggested. With the exception of the Florida teams being in the Central instead of the East and the Chicago teams in the Midwest and the further west Twins in the Central (Still appropriate for the division names, however), all the teams are geographically-aligned. And as we've been discussing, keeping traditional rivalries intact usually trumps geography when it comes to realignment.

mgom27 · 11-09-2009, 10:27 PM

Just being geographical would be fine for me.

BostonRS14 · 11-09-2009, 11:04 PM

Here is what I used awhile back when I played with an expansion dynasty.

AL East: Baltimore Orioles, Boston Red Sox , New York Yankees, Tampa Bay Rays
AL North: Toronto Blue Jays, Minnesota Twins, Detroit Tigers, Milwaukee Brewers
AL Central: Cleveland Indians, Chicago White Sox, Texas Rangers, Kansas City Royals
AL West: Seattle Mariners, Anaheim Angels, Oakland A's, Portland Raiders

NL East: New York Mets, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh Pirates, Washington Nationals
NL South: Atlanta Braves, Miami Marlins, Houston Astros, New Orleans Knights
NL Central: St. Louis Cardinals, Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati Reds, Colorado Rockies
NL West: Los Angeles Dodgers, San Francisco Giants, San Diego Padres, Arizona Diamondbacks

Jeffy25 · 11-10-2009, 09:23 AM

the only thing i would mention, is that Kansas City and St. Louis are not much further south than Colorado, but you already mentioned you didn't like their placement, and i don't know how you could change the n.l. west to include colorado...so i said you did the best you could with what you have.

I like it.

11-09-2009, 03:33 PM	#21 (permalink)
Muzamba All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 1,608 Thanked 486x in 202 posts	Also, travel is not as big of a concern in the NFL, as they only play one game a week. So it wasn't as important for teams in the same division to be as close to one another. Once the league realigned after the last expansion, they decided to shrink a few of the wider distance gaps and fix some of the more laughable situations, like Carolina in the West. At the same time, they didn't want to break up some of the bigger rivalries involving some of their more historically successful franchises, like the Cowboys and Dolphins with their divisional counterparts. So they left a few teams where they were. That was my idea with the configuration I suggested. With the exception of the Florida teams being in the Central instead of the East and the Chicago teams in the Midwest and the further west Twins in the Central (Still appropriate for the division names, however), all the teams are geographically-aligned. And as we've been discussing, keeping traditional rivalries intact usually trumps geography when it comes to realignment. __________________ "It may be nothing. But it usually is always something and more than something." - Cardinals GM John Mozeliak on... something?

11-09-2009, 10:27 PM	#22 (permalink)
mgom27 All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 1,633 Thanked 108x in 71 posts	Just being geographical would be fine for me. __________________ Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!

11-09-2009, 11:04 PM	#23 (permalink)
BostonRS14 All Star Reserve Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Red Sox Nation/Baltimore Posts: 789 Blog Entries: 1 Thanked 14x in 4 posts	Here is what I used awhile back when I played with an expansion dynasty. AL East: Baltimore Orioles, Boston Red Sox , New York Yankees, Tampa Bay Rays AL North: Toronto Blue Jays, Minnesota Twins, Detroit Tigers, Milwaukee Brewers AL Central: Cleveland Indians, Chicago White Sox, Texas Rangers, Kansas City Royals AL West: Seattle Mariners, Anaheim Angels, Oakland A's, Portland Raiders NL East: New York Mets, Philadelphia Phillies, Pittsburgh Pirates, Washington Nationals NL South: Atlanta Braves, Miami Marlins, Houston Astros, New Orleans Knights NL Central: St. Louis Cardinals, Chicago Cubs, Cincinnati Reds, Colorado Rockies NL West: Los Angeles Dodgers, San Francisco Giants, San Diego Padres, Arizona Diamondbacks __________________ Dynasty: Building Dynasties in Boston: 2007: 2008: 102-60 (1st AL East, 1-3 Division Series) 2009: 111-51 (1st AL East, 1-3 DS) MLSB Washington Nationals: 2008-2011 (434-550, .441) \| AMBL Boston Red Sox: 2008-2011 (345-303, 2010 AL East Title)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-10-2009, 09:23 AM	#24 (permalink)
Jeffy25 Major Leagues Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 441 Thanked 22x in 15 posts	the only thing i would mention, is that Kansas City and St. Louis are not much further south than Colorado, but you already mentioned you didn't like their placement, and i don't know how you could change the n.l. west to include colorado...so i said you did the best you could with what you have. I like it.