Divisional pairings across conferences. (MOD: Playing Matrix)
View Single Post
02-15-2013, 11:37 AM
Join Date: Jun 2006
Originally Posted by
You are right. I am leaning toward a 4-division, 2-conference format, simply because:
1) The players want equal teams in each group who is competing for playoff spots, so the 7 and 8 thing won't work with them. They have the right to reasonably withhold acceptance of changes, and that's reasonable, so....
2) The teams in the CTZ, MTZ, and PTZ all would prefer 4 groups rather than 6.
Now, the scheduling matrix is a bigger problem, because I think that the following will happen:
But, I think that the fine points of any other arrangement for a 30 team league are too numerous:
Like my 4 x 14, 2 x 11, 1 x 4 matrix. It's too complicated to explain the 11/4 split.
Or, my 3 x 7/8, 2 x 7/8, 1 x 7/8. Too complicated.
And, division crossovers. Too complicated.
So, I think it will end up a straight 1 - 8 in both east and west. Even though the west especially could retain 3 or 4 intradivisional first round matchups in most cases. (I would never mandate 1a v 6a, 2a v 5a, 3a v 4a, 1b v 2b if the top 8 came out that way). That's too complicated, too.
Ok, I'll omit the Quebec part because that has more to do with align, IMO, and we're focusing on scheduling here, and since we're both with the idea of 4-Divisions rather than Conferences...
*Understand that I want to look at this as a potential 32-team, 4-Divisions...
So, you're saying that:
60 games = 4 x 15
12 games = 2 x 6
10 games = 1 x 10
60 games = 4 x 15
16 games = 2 x 8
8 games = 1 x 8
Neither of those options will fly, but that something like a:
Hey wait, I read more closely and all you said was "Like my 4 x 14, 2 x 11, 1 x 4 matrix. It's
to explain the 11/4 split. Or, my 3 x 7/8, 2 x 7/8, 1 x 7/8.
You didn't actually show me what scheduling format you think would be used in a 4-Division setup. ??
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by MoreOrr