29 Jan 2013, 11:08 am
This is the way I'm leaning if anyone has comments before it is finalized: The initial allocation of owners to divisions will be geography-based and permanent. I believe a two year experiment will be sufficient to determine if it works for us. After the two year period, we will evaluate the system.
The divisions appear to be quite unbalanced based on historical and recent team history. The intent is to take advantage of natural rivalries (West, Mass, NY, South), not balance. However, some balance will be attained via the scheduling of the three inter-division games. Note that the new teams will be in the weaker divisions. Michael doesn't fit well (geographically) into any of the east coast divisions so he was placed in the weakest of those three.
Here they are, ordered by time in league and with last 3 years of results (regular season place):
Note on division names: These are preliminary and I am comfortable with divisions naming themselves.
Alexander (13th, 8th, 14th)
Nick (12th, 11th, 7th)
Brad Ba (1st, 4th, 10th)
Division notes: Freeman enters into a weak division. Who will rise in the west?
Andrew (6th, 3rd, 11th)
Brad S (11th, 13th, 8th)
Steve (10K record: 3rd, 10th, 13th)
Division notes: Michael enters into the weakest east coast division. Massachusetts is for the taking.
George (2nd, 7th, 1st)
Brad Bu (9th, 14th, 12th)
Todd (5th, 1st, 4th)
John (7th, 5th, 9th)
Division notes: A tough conference. Brad, you really need to up your game!
Mike (8th, 6th, 6th)
Matt (4th, 2nd, 2nd)
Barry (10th, 9th, 5th)
Ryan (14th, 12th, 3rd)
Division notes: Another tough conference, especially with the recent success of the last two teams.