View Single Post
Old
02-15-2013, 04:20 PM
  #50
MNNumbers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I stopped it there, though I looked at the rest of your post just to confirm... Hey, MNN, you don't seem to be getting my point.

You prefer the 4-Division structure, as do I, and it seems as does the PA. However, you said that:
60 games = 4 x 15
16 games = 2 x 8
8 games = 1 x 8
84 games
OR
60 games = 4 x 15
12 games = 2 x 6
10 games = 1 x 10
82 games
OR HELL
56 games = 4 x 14
22 games = 2 x 11
4 games = 1 x 4
You said that you "don't think it will ever fly."

Now I'm asking you what 4-Division scheduling structure would "fly"?

And you haven't answered. You said you wasn't sure what I meant.
I'm assuming that you'd suggest something like this:
42 games = (6 x 7) or (36 games = 6 x 6)
36 games = (2 x 18) or (46 games = 2 x 23)
4 games = (1 x 4)
82 game Total

But I'm saying, How can such a schedule not justify a 4-Conference structure, rather than a 4-Division structure? You play everyone outside your Division only 2 times (or less), so how to you combine two Divisions and call them a Conference?
Hey, now this is getting down to brass tacks.
When I say something won't fly, I mean the owners and the PA won't be able to agree on it. That doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. And, I totally agree, if you do a home/home with everyone and the rest in your group, that's really 4 conferences, not 4 divisions/2 conferences.

But, here is what we know:
Owners seem to want h/h with everyone.
Players don't seem to mind that - it seems to make travel more or less equitable. There will likely have to be care taken when scheduling road trips, etc, but it seems 'equal', so the PA will be ok with it.
Owners want the rest to be played in the group. TV start times and the money that goes along with that. Players seem to be on board here.
Playoff structure: Players say 'no way' to 7/8 issue.

Conclusion: It doesn't really make sense to do it this way (but when did this league ever make sense??), but it will be the December proposal with some tweaks of teams, like TB, Flo to the ATL to make that 8 teams, and CAR and CMB being split between the NE and CENTRAL, and PHX going to QUE. Anyway, it will be Pacific = 7, Central = 8, Eastern = 7, Atlantic = 8. So, 7/8/7/8 and they will call them the Western Conference and the Eastern Conference, even though the Central actually has no more connection to the Pacific than they do to the Atlantic.

That's what I think. There are too many teams getting what they want not to find a way to make that happen, even if it really doesn't make sense to label it that way.

Oh, and one more word: Even if they do that, Logic would indicate it would go like this:
Top 8 qualify.
First Round: Maximize intradivisional play. That means:
If the teams are 4/4 then play all intradivisional matchups
If they are 5/3 then give the top 4 home ice, and have one crossover series. It might go in order of seeding: 1a, 2a, 1b, 1c, etc: Then (home ice first) 1a/5a, 2a/next worst team, 1b/(whoever is left in their division), 1c/(whoever is left). You can't really know. But, the top 2 in points should get the bottom 2 in points. More likely is 1a/5a, 1b/3b, 2a/4a, 2b/3a and home ice in the last one goes by points. It might also go: 1a/5a, 1b/4a, 2a/3a, 2b/3b. But, one of those.
If the teams are 6/2, which is unlikely, but possible, then it should be simply 1/8, 2/7 , etc.
Second Round: Since the Top 4 seeds had home ice, no need to re-seed. The original bracket would make this round 1v4, 2v3. If there are upsets, just plug those teams in...

But, it won't go that way. That would be too 'fair', but too hard to explain.

So, the playoffs will go: Top 8 qualify. 1/8, 2/7, etc...

MNNumbers is offline   Reply With Quote