View Single Post
Old
02-15-2013, 10:26 AM
  #31
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,508
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MNNumbers View Post
Back to being strictly on topic.

1) I think the likely thing is a playing schedule like was offered a year ago in December, with playoffs being 1-8 in the East and in the West (Move QC to the East I think is most likely, but if that doesn't happen, then Columbus...)

However, there is a slight variation that MoreOrr will like on one level and hate on another. It goes like this:

2 15 team conferences. Each with an 8-team and a 7-team division. The playoffs will be Top 8. Now, MO doesn't like having lots of games against teams with whom you are not contending for the Playoffs (the current matrix is great for that...). So, start with a home and home versus everyone. Now, modify it: Remove 1 game from one division in the opposite conference, and add it to the other division in your own conference. You would get, for example:

PAC teams: 3 games vs CENT, 2 games vs EAST, 1 game vs ATL. The rest against their own division - the Pacific.

That makes either 59 or 60 games every year against those you are competing with for playoff spots. It also makes it so that 57 - 59 games on your schedule are the same as everyone else in the conference (Measured by opponent).

Of course, MO will hate that this matrix has odd numbers of games against lots of teams.
LOL... Don't have to be satisfying me, MNN. But thanks anyway for the consideration.

But ok, let's look at this on two levels, sincerely considering a 4-"Division" structure, and 8-team Divisions, which is the ultimate result, plus a scheduling structure...

If somehow, with 4-Divisions, the scheduling structure could still have 6 games against Division opponents, then:
42 games = 6 x 7
48 games = 2 x 24
90 games
That just doesn't work! 4-Divisions nor 4-Conferences. And with the 4-Conferences, that's more than 1/2 the games outside the Conference where teams are competing in the Standings. So, on a 4-Conference level, it doesn't work or make sense.

So what other options exist? Still with the 4-Divisions as the first priority.
28 games = 4 x 7
48 games = 2 x 24
76 games
Hmmm, there's still 6 games left over (I'd also still consider the possibility of 84 games MAX in a 32-team league, so that could be 8 more games).
So yes, as you said above, that could be 1 extra game against teams in the other in-Conference Division. But still, as you said, I don't think an odd number of games, against teams that are directly competing against each other in the Standings, would be a good thing. So in fact, one could argue that such a scheduling format might be better with 4-Conferences, the teams in each Conference getting 6-8 teams outside the Conference in which it plays an extra game against. BUT HELL, wait,... Teams would already be laying more than 1/2 the games outside the Conference. Regardless of where you put those minimum 6 other games, the number of games outside the Conference is already totally out of whack Conference Standings realities. (*I'm thinking that this is a big part of what the PA aren't happy with.)

So, back to the drawing board...
It looks as though those 2-games against all teams in the League is a problem. So, let's go for at least 2 games against at least 3/4 of the League:
28 games = 4 x 7
32 games = 2 x 16
8 games = 1 x 8
That leaves us with 14 - 16 games (again considering the possibility of an 84-game Season with 32 teams).
So another 2 games against another 8 teams, and voila... there is an 84-game Season with 4 games against teams in two Divisions, 2 games against teams in one Division, and 1 game against teams in the other Division. Now of course, those 2 games and 1 game against wouldn't have to be strictly Divisional, it could be just 2 games against random teams and 1 game against 8 random teams. And if the League doesn't want 84 games, then it could be 2 games against 6 teams and 1 game against 10 teams.


Now, that worked out, but could there be another option?
There's this:
42 games = 6 x 7
32 games = 2 x 16
8 games = 1 x 8
82 games
There you have it. The perfect 4-Conference scheduling format

I still choose the previous one, and you know why. I don't want 4-Conferences. I don't want a top-4, I want a Top-8. I don't want a minimum two Rounds of Divisional/Conference Playoffs; I want one Round of Divisional matchups, nothing more. (Of course, who cares what I want, right.) But furthermore, I don't think that such a structure is beneficial to PT/MTZ teams, cutting them off from primary important games with CT/ETZ teams and the TV audiences in those areas.


Now 4-by alignment is a whole other issue, with another group of possible gripes.


Last edited by MoreOrr: 02-15-2013 at 12:15 PM.
MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote