Victoria Barrett 20 May 2005 02:49:21 [ permanent link ]
On Thu, 19 May 2005 17:31:23 -0500, Jim Goloboy <goloboy@uiuc.edu> wrote:>The Mutiny were a league-owned team. Glazer considered investing in>them before they were contracted but declined.
BTW, a long-overdue correction. I posted a week ago that Glazer owned an NHL team. Nonono. That's the chap who owns the Detroit Pistons.
Thank you to Jim for not raking me over the coals in the meantime.
On Thu, 19 May 2005 18:42:14 -0400, Victoria Barrett <vbarrett@the-beach.net> wrote:>
Now, if Paul Googled or did this all by his lonesome little self, it's>okay. More worrisome if say, he overheard this charming stat on Radio>5 Live, or similar.
I, alone, am guilty. I was just perusing the baseball standings.
So why does one league have 16 teams and t'other 14? I presume the Washington something-or-others are new this season (did a franchise move?) and were there any other changes?
Paul C wrote:> On Thu, 19 May 2005 18:42:14 -0400, Victoria Barrett> <vbarrett@the-beach.net> wrote:>
Now, if Paul Googled or did this all by his lonesome little self, it's>>okay. More worrisome if say, he overheard this charming stat on Radio>>5 Live, or similar.>
I, alone, am guilty. I was just perusing the baseball standings. >
So why does one league have 16 teams and t'other 14?
As opposed to 15/15?
Because in baseball, teams play nearly every day, and interleague play is a very small part of the schedule. 15/15 only works if there's (at least) one interleage series every weekend (no team ever gets a scheduled off day on a Saturday or Sunday), and that's deemed to be A Bad Idea (TM).
I presume the Washington something-or-others
Nationals.
are new this season (did a franchise move?)
Montreal.
and were there any other changes?
No, that's the first new city since the expansion to Arizona and Tampa Bay in 1998, and the first franchise movement since (I believe) the Washington Senators became the Texas Rangers in 1972.
Oh, trivially, the Anaheim Angels, who were previously the California Angels and before that were the Los Angeles Angels are now "the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim". But they haven't moved to a new stadium or anything like that.
Paul C wrote:> On Thu, 19 May 2005 18:42:14 -0400, Victoria Barrett> <vbarrett@the-beach.net> wrote:>
Now, if Paul Googled or did this all by his lonesome little self, it's>>okay. More worrisome if say, he overheard this charming stat on Radio>>5 Live, or similar.>
I, alone, am guilty. I was just perusing the baseball standings. >
So why does one league have 16 teams and t'other 14? I presume the> Washington something-or-others are new this season (did a franchise> move?) and were there any other changes?
They were the Montreal Expos and moved to Washington.
Victoria Barrett 20 May 2005 05:36:17 [ permanent link ]
On Thu, 19 May 2005 17:31:48 -0600, MH <nopinkstuffakaspam@ucalgary.ca> wrote:>Victoria Barrett wrote:>> On Thu, 19 May 2005 18:42:14 -0400, Victoria Barrett>> <vbarrett@the-beach.net> wrote:>>>The Tampa Bay Lightnight -- current NHL Stanley Cup holders (and for>>>the immediate future).>>
Not to be confused with the lesser known Tampa Bay Lightning. >
Victoria Barrett 20 May 2005 05:37:46 [ permanent link ]
On Thu, 19 May 2005 17:32:42 -0600, MH <nopinkstuffakaspam@ucalgary.ca> wrote:>Paul C wrote:>> So why does one league have 16 teams and t'other 14? I presume the>> Washington something-or-others are new this season (did a franchise>> move?) and were there any other changes?>
They were the Montreal Expos and moved to Washington.
And to confuse matters for non North Americans more, there used to be a baseball team in Washington years before called the Washington Senators, but they moved to Texas and are now known as the Texas Rangers.
Victoria Barrett wrote:> And to confuse matters for non North Americans more, there used to be> a baseball team in Washington years before called the Washington> Senators, but they moved to Texas and are now known as the Texas> Rangers.
And to confuse matters for non North Americans more, there used to be a baseball team in Washington years before called the Washington Senators, but they moved to Minnesota and are now known as the Minnesota Twins.
They were also known as the Nationals - not that that's confusing or anything.
There's far more confusing stuff around. Baltimore Orioles = Cuddly, inoffensive (threathened species according to owner). Former Baltimore Orioles = Incarnation of pure evil.
There's far more confusing stuff around. Baltimore Orioles = Cuddly, > inoffensive (threathened species according to owner). Former Baltimore > Orioles = Incarnation of pure evil.
Ah yes, IIRC
Original Baltimore Orioles => NY Highlanders => They Whose Name Shall Not be Spoken.
How come some teams play other teams multiple times and some only say 1> or 2 time during the season?
In which sport?
In the NBA and NHL you play the teams in your division the most times, the teams in your conference fewer times, and the teams in the other conference only twice.
Builds rivarlies against division opponents. Also, it means all the teams in a division play essentially the same schedule.
Somewhat flawed since playoff spots are mainly determined on how you do in the conference. Ideally all the teams in a given conference play identical schedules.
However, it's still a lot better than baseball, which is a complete mess from a fair schedule point of view. I couldn't begin to get into it.
Ok, I'll try. You have a set up where teams competing for the same playoff spot (i.e. the wildcard) play wildly divergent schedules. One team - poor Tampa Bay ;) - plays a combined *57* games against the Orioles, Red Sox, and Yankees (plus the Marlins and Braves throw in for good measure). Another team in the same league - the Twins for example - only plays these teams a combined 20 times (or so), but gets 57 against the vastly inferior by comparison Royals, Indians, and Tigers (and interleague games against the likes of the Reds and Pirates). Needs some work.
However, it's still a lot better than baseball, which is a complete mess > from a fair schedule point of view. I couldn't begin to get into it.>
Ok, I'll try. You have a set up where teams competing for the same > playoff spot (i.e. the wildcard) play wildly divergent schedules. One > team - poor Tampa Bay ;) - plays a combined *57* games against the > Orioles, Red Sox, and Yankees (plus the Marlins and Braves throw in for > good measure). Another team in the same league - the Twins for example > - only plays these teams a combined 20 times (or so), but gets 57 > against the vastly inferior by comparison Royals, Indians, and Tigers > (and interleague games against the likes of the Reds and Pirates). Needs > some work.
If the hierarchy were prepared to rip up their assumptions, it wouldn't be a problem.
Actually, creating a balanced schedule is trivial, provided you're prepared to add two teams.
