League Optimization: NFL

Time to revive the series I never completed...

If you've ever had a boil between your buttocks (which I haven't) then you know that the only way to relieve the pain is to freeze the boil and chisel it off.  Today I will chisel the NFL's ass boils from betwixt its cheeks.

This is a toughie.  The NFL is not only exceedingly strong at the moment, but it's also configured in an ideal 32-team alignment, so contraction is off the table.  Also note that there are very few sick franchises in the league, and the ones that ail are ailing because they want to ail.  (Just ail, baby!)  Therefore I expect this to be a very short examination.  Turn your head and cough.  And try to relax... this will feel a little cold...

The Contestants

The only relocation target worth discussing is Los Angeles.  They could (and clearly would) support a team.  But with the league in such good health, you can't add an LA franchise without ripping the soul out from one of the following markets:

• Arizona
  
• Oakland
  
• San Diego
  
• Jacksonville

Arizona
Just because they've just christened their new stadium (the Pink Taco!) doesn't mean they stop being the Arizona Cardinals.  That having been said, I think it would be cruel to move the team from Phoenix now.  We have no idea whether the people of Arizona would support a real football team in a real stadium, because in 20 years they've never had that.  The one-time sad sacks of the league (Patriots, Bengals, Buccaneers) have shown that NFL football done right is a can't-miss proposition.  STAY

Oakland
Al Davis is the wildcard, or in his case the batshit-crazycard.  I could see him swooping down on LA (again) and taking the market away from Jacksonville, leaving Wayne Weaver an angry man with an angrier fanbase.  But I'm not touching them.  Keeping their idiot team and its idiot fans sequestered in Oakland keeps the rest of us clean and disease-free.  (Man, if I could put money on the inevitable North American flu pandemic starting because some dipshit Raider fan ate a sausage off the ground in the parking lot...)  STAY

San Diego
The Chargers always seem to come up, if only because of the proximity.  Like the Clippers before them, Los Angeles beckons, and provides San Diegans (?) with the best opportunity to remain loyal if they choose to do so.  I remember back when the Pats had a deal in place to move to Hartford... and I didn't give even a tiny, rabbit-sized nugget of shit about it.  Who would even care?  They'd still be on TV, and they're not, like, out of the area.  LA is not San Diego, but the same thinking is more likely to apply to Charger fans than to, say, Vikings fans.  Still... not the best move.  STAY

Jacksonville
Bingo.  The team is run well, they've had some good years, haven't had very many bad years at all.  A model franchise.  And the fans aren't coming out.  When even a last place team can (and will) sell out, that situation is downright unacceptable, even before factoring the tiny media market.  I'd love to bail them out, since I'm a sucker for teams in non-traditional markets... but it just makes too much sense.  MOVE

The New Alignment

Ah, the tricky part.  Picking the poor bastards who lose their team is the easy part... figuring out how to put a team in LA without breaking up the intense AFC West rivalries is the hard part.  The obvious move is to put the Chiefs in the south, where they can develop the same distaste for Indianapolis that the rest of us have.  But they have blood rivalries with the Raiders and Broncos that you don't really want to break up.

But let's also look at another team that nobody gives a rat's ass about: Atlanta.  Boy, do I love realigning and relocating their teams.  Maybe it makes me happy to think that a rotten city with no fans and a track record of playoff failures can be punished.  Regardless, the upside of having zero history is that there aren't any really worthwhile rivalries to concern ourselves with.  Atlanta could be just as happy in the AFC fighting for Southern supremacy against the Titans as they would be in the same battle with Carolina or Tampa or whatever.  And if they aren't... who'd care?  Their 23 fans?  Please.  Screw 'em.

So if we rotate the Falcons into Jacksonville's old spot... then stick the Los Angeles Jaguars in the NFC West... all we have to do is put the Rams in the Falcons' old NFC South spot (rekindling the Rams/Saints rivalry from the Rams' early-2000s "dynasty") and we have a workable new alignment.

AFC EAST	AFC NORTH	AFC SOUTH	AFC WEST
New England	Pittsburgh	Indianapolis	Denver
Buffalo	Cleveland	Houston	Oakland
Miami	Cincinnati	Tennessee	A Whale's Vagina
New York Jets	Baltimore	Atlanta	Kansas City

NFC EAST	NFC NORTH	NFC SOUTH	NFC WEST
New York Giants	Green Bay	New Orleans	San Francisco
Washington	Chicago	Carolina	Arizona
Philadelphia	Detroit	Tampa Bay	Seattle
Dallas	Minnesota	St. Louis	Los Angeles

The only alternative I could see would be to move the Saints into the AFC South instead of the Falcons.  The Saints would have an instant blood feud with Houston, but St. Louis would be really screwed, with neither a geographic nor a competitive rival closer than Atlanta.  So that's out.

Conclusion

Is this much of an improvement?  Probably not.  Moving Atlanta away from Carolina is a realignment "minus."  But it's still outweighed by the "plus" of giving the Saints someone to play with, and putting Los Angeles in a geographically appropriate division.  And it's better than, say, the Vikings moving to LA, which would make Chris Berman cry a greasy, fat-laden tear at the thought of breaking up the NFC Norris.  But if the Jags were to move, I'd think this is better than leaving LA in Tennessee's division.

League Optimization: NBA

George Orwell once said that any word not critical to the expression of a thought can be edited out. The same is true of sports teams. Today I lipo-suck the fat from the NBA, leaving behind a leaner, more elegant basketball league.

There are fewer unhealthy NBA franchises than, say, NHL franchises. The league is pretty bulletproof at the moment. But that doesn't mean teams are in the right cities, and it doesn't mean they need 30 teams.

As with the earlier NHL optimization, this is primarily a work of fantasy. I'm looking at fan-support issues, not the financial realities of each team's situation. For example, I drop my boxers and shake what remains in the face of anyone who thinks that the Seattle SuperSonics should leave The 206. Regardless of the arena deal and whatnot, I'd think the NBA would prefer that they live long and prosper in Seattle. Sure, the league would be fine with the Sonics in Vegas or Oklahoma or Bismarck or whatever, but basketball done right in Seattle has a higher ceiling than that of any potential suitor.

Anyway, here are the teams I'd consider moving or folding:

• Atlanta Hawks
• Charlotte Bobcats
• Memphis Grizzlies
• Orlando Magic
• Toronto Raptors
  

Atlanta Hawks
I will parrot my cry from the NHL post: this is not a city that can support four teams. Even three teams is a stretch. There is no love affair in Atlanta sports. The Braves are a habit, like brushing one's teeth every morning, more than a passion. The Falcons are probably the team that needs to succeed the most. The Thrashers and Hawks, however... jeez. The Hawks have tons of history, with Dominique and Spud Webb and all them, which is a fair point. Then again, they have a ton of history in St. Louis. Hot dog, we have a wiener! MEET THEM IN ST. LOUIS

Charlotte Bobcats
Bill Simmons took the city of Charlotte to task recently for not supporting their shitty team. While that seems like a great reason to yoink their team away, I think the Carolinas are too basketball-obsessed to abandon like this. Given the choice between pro ball succeeding in Charlotte, Atlanta or Orlando,I'll take Charlotte every damn time. STAY

Memphis Grizzlies
Am I allowed to vote for contraction simply because Dahntay Jones plays for them? Absolutely. I do have other reasons... the franchise is in horrible shape (pending Oden's arrival), and Memphis isn't exactly crying out for a team. But mostly it's because of Dahntay. Dahn-na-na, na-na, na-na-nah, hey, YOU FOLD

Orlando Magic
Peter May didn't dub this city Hooterville back in the 90's for nothing. What is the NBA doing in this city? They make Atlanta look viable and vibrant. Look at it this way... the state of Florida is overpopulated, well above ecological sustainability. The underground aquafers are stretched beyond the point at which they can support the state's existing level of industry and residence. In that sense, it's really in Mother Earth's best interests to start Florida on the path towards environmental recovery by shitcanning the Dwight and Darko show. It's what Al Gore would do. (I suppose Gore's actual revenge against Florida would look different, but this is a good start.) FOLD

Toronto Raptors
I'm all for putting hockey teams back up there, but when your players actively dislike playing for you because of the financial situation, I think that's a bad sign for future growth. And it's a legitimate gripe, too... there's a ceiling on how successful the franchise can be, given NBA culture. Building legitimacy for Canadian basketball is already an uphill battle, and that's a big strike against it. Even the Raptors' current Atlantic Division supremacy, and the upward spiral of Chris Bosh, won't change my mind. Oklahoma City did such a bang-up job with the Hornets, I say we throw them a bone... or, should I say, a fossil? Ha ha! MOVE THEM SHITS TO THE OKC

Seattle SuperSonics
There have been rumors circling that they will move. However, those rumors exist because of arena/lease issues, and ownership issues, not fan support or team success. Again, the league is way, way better off with Seattle than without them. STAY

New World Order

Atlantic	Central	Midwest	Pacific
Boston	Cleveland	Dallas	Phoenix
New York	Detroit	San Antonio	LA Lakers
Philadelphia	Chicago	Houston	LA Clippers
NJ/Brooklyn	Milwaukee	Oklahoma City	Portland
Washington	Minnesota	Denver	Seattle
Charlotte	St. Louis	New Orleans	Sacramento
Miami	Indiana	Utah	Golden State

Summary

Not nearly as drastic as the NHL changes. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, the Atlantic and Pacific are entirely identical to their alignment prior to the Bobcats' arrival. The main switch is pulling Minnesota into the East, and moving the OKC Raptors into the Midwest, such that geographic rivalries are maintained. Doesn't it make more sense for Minnesota to go up against Milwaukee and Chicago? Or for New Orleans to compete against not only nearby Texan cities but the "other woman" that tempted their current team, Oklahoma City?

The dispersal draft would have a huge impact for the worst of the worst, but not really for the rest. There are exactly three impact players (Dwight Howard, Pau Gasol, Mike Miller), some rotation players/curiosities (Hedo Turkoglu, Jameer Nelson, Rudy Gay, Hakim Warrick) and a bunch of shitty flotsam (J.J. Redick). I would think the league could hold a separate lottery for dispersal purposes, thus preventing anyone in the top 3 of the rookie draft from getting a top 3 dispersal pick.

So there you have it. Bask in the glow. (Stings a bit, doesn't it?)

Whither Canada?

The main obstacle here is Der Fuhrer, David Stern, and his insufferable promotion of NBA internationalism. He'd sooner move the Raptors to La Paz than return them to America. He is wrong. Internationalizing the teams' location is the wrong move; if it were a reasonable proposition, the European soccer leagues would have expanded themselves by now, because no sport is more international than soccer. It's no damnation of Canadian basketball to admit that NBA basketball in Toronto is dead.

Besides, the real way to develop Canadian basketball is for them to make their own league, a la the CFL. Look at how many undrafted college grads and NBA castoffs are going overseas and playing in friggin Israel and Turkey and shit. How many of them wouldn't opt for Canada if the money were about the same?

The reason this could work, and why it's such a provocative idea, is that Canada's league wouldn't be competing with the NBA: they'd be competing with the NCAA. Play in Canada until age 20, and jump to the NBA without college, just like the average European superstar would do.

I think there's a real beauty in this. Canada has no reason to give a rat's ass about abiding by either the NBA's 20-year-old age limit or the NCAA's de facto minor-league status. And they can offer a legal, reasonable alternative to college for all the kids who wouldn't take it seriously anyway. Not to mention a paycheck, over the table, that could likely match what they'd be getting under the table at college. There's really nothing the NBA could do from a legislative standpoint to prevent a Canadian pro league as a legitimate sidestep to the age limit.

Look at a basket case like O.J. Mayo. The benefits of college, and possibly college basketball as well, would be lost on him. So why make him go? Given the choice between a year of basket-weaving classes at USC, versus a season in Toronto or Montreal making bank while playing against professionals and developing NBA-style skills, what do you think Mayo would do?

Is it smart for the average high school player to do this? Probably not. But at the same time, I'd think a legitimate Canadian league could stock its roster with enough Kevin Pittsnogles to be selective when it came to high schoolers. It wouldn't necessarily be a way around school for kids who need it.

Am I missing something here?

League Optimization: NHL

I've been thinking today about how so many major sports franchises are mismatched with their cities.  Hockey in Miami?  Basketball in Memphis?  And so forth.  So I thought I'd evaluate each of the four major leagues and present some ideas... just fooling around, for the most part, seeing what would look good from a fan's perspective rather than an economic one.

Since it's playoff time, and nobody will care about hockey in a few weeks anyway, I'll tackle the NHL first.  This is a league that has at least four teams too many, and not enough teams in places that actually care about hockey (hrmphCANADAharumph).  Further, you have three teams in the New York market, two of whom have trouble drawing fans, so one of those teams has to go.

Let me reiterate that I'm not attacking this from an economic standpoint.  I'm not an economist, don't pretend to be, and don't give a hoot about whether teams are profitable vs. in the right location.  I'm looking solely at whether teams are truly succeeding in their cities, and whether their fans' potential for support is enough to justify the team's existence.  After seeing what's happened in Buffalo and Pittsburgh this season and last, I think looking at your fan base's potential, and their performance during the good times, is a much better way to approach market feasibility than arena age, luxury boxes, and so forth.

Excused from the list, despite suckage

Chicago: Easily the worst franchise in hockey.  They have been gutted like a fish by that piece of shit Wirtz.  But you can't move them.  Chicago's too big.

Boston: Same reason.  The team is atrocious, but it's too big a hockey town when at its best.  And the place still fills up for Habs games, which is somewhat stunning to me.

Nashville, Carolina, Tampa: They get a bad rap, like hockey doesn't belong there or whatever, but they have supported those teams.  Hockey's thriving in those places.  Atlanta too, but they're not safe.

The Chopping Block

Seven franchises could safely move or fold, all in questionable hockey cities.

• Columbus Blue Jackets
• Washington Capitals
• Phoenix Coyotes
• New York Islanders
• New Jersey Devils (they have no fans!!!)
• Florida Panthers
• Atlanta Thrashers

Blue Jackets
There is absolutely no reason for this team to exist.  At least visiting teams have a good time visiting Miami.  Who wants to go to Columbus in February?  They haven't done well enough for anyone to care all that much.  In fact, the most notable event in their history was when Espen Knutsen killed that girl by accident with a stray puck.  This team has everything you want in a contraction candidate.  FOLD

Capitals
I can't in good faith offer up the Caps for contraction or relocation.  Washington has supported hockey in the past, and we are capable of doing so again.  But that is a long, LONG way away right now.  Ted Leonsis is absolutely killing hockey in DC.  Nobody gives a shit about the Caps, and at $35 a pop just to sit in the upper level, how could we be expected to?  I'm sure the economics of the situation are such that prices are where they ought to be, but it says loads that nobody's coming out to see a guy of Ovechkin's talents.  I say it'd be shrewd of Leonsis to give back a little money every night in order to revive his dwindling fan base.  Otherwise, the economic arguments (fans pay the high ticket prices when the team wins) may not work out as well as Ted hopes.  I honestly don't think he should be daring us to stay away from Verizon Center.  SPARED, BUT NOT FOR LONG

Coyotes
The best thing this team has given Phoenix is air conditioning.  Fastest growing city my ass, those fuckers belong in Winnipeg.  Seriously, can anyone think of a single reason why we shouldn't shove a big fat "Return To Sender" sticker on the Coyotes?  I hope the Great One is secretly gutting the team with the intention of moving it back to Canada as a contribution to preservation of national heritage.  MOVE

NY/NJ: Islanders
Between the Isles and Devils, one of these two has gotta go.  The Isles are the natural choice, given recent history.  But much as the Isles are woefully mismanaged, I kinda like them where they are.  Their fans have a lovable sort of "why me?" mentality.  They have a franchise identity dating back to the 70s and 80s... Mike Bossy, Bryan Trottier, all those Cups.  They're likely to support a good, competent team.  Besides, this is my list.  SPARED

NY/NJ: Devils
Devils fans, on the other hand, could give a rat's ass about their team.  Despite being a legitimate Cup contender pretty much every single year since about 1994, they can't sell out the Meadowlands unless the Flyers or Rangers are visiting.  Given how far out of his way Lou Lamoriello goes to alienate everyone in a 50-mile radius, I can't blame those fans either.  Further, they've only been in New Jersey since the early 80s, so we're not talking about uprooting an institution of any kind.  So I'd move them to Portland, and rename them the Oregon Trails.  ("You lost two oxen.  Scott Gomez got two minutes for roughing.  Patrik Elias got dysentery and died.")  MOVE

Panthers
If a hockey team folds on the beach, does anybody care?  FOLD

Thrashers
Yeah, they won the division.  Yeah, they count Lil' Jon as their unofficial mascot.  Doesn't matter.  That city doesn't give a shit about sports.  The Braves are the only team that sells well, and it's mostly to do that obnoxious, racist chant all night.  They've got no business having any of their teams, let alone a fledgling hockey team.  However, I can't fold them at this point, because that'd leave us with an odd number of teams.  So we have to move them.

Now, I really enjoyed that part up above where I put the Coyotes back in Winnipeg.  I want more of that feeling.  Quebec City should get its hockey team back, since they were so loyal to the Avalanche even after they'd moved.  And doing that would leave Denver without hockey again, despite having proven itself to be a very worthy hockey city.

So I propose moving the Thrashers to Colorado, calling them the Avalanche, and restoring Les Nordiques to Quebec City.  Everybody wins... Denver gets better players, Quebec gets their team back, and we don't have to deal with shitty Atlanta being in the league.  MOVE

New Alignment

While I'm at it, let's rename the divisions back to what they were in the first place: Norris, Patrick, Adams, and Smythe.  Old-time hockey!!!  I think the following alignment makes a bunch of sense:

Adams	Patrick	Norris	Smythe
Boston	Rangers	Detroit	Los Angeles
Montreal	Islanders	Dallas	Anaheim
Ottawa	Philadelphia	Chicago	San Jose
Toronto	Washington	Minnesota	Oregon
Quebec	Carolina	Winnipeg	Calgary
Buffalo	Nashville	St. Louis	Edmonton
Pittsburgh	Tampa Bay	Colorado	Vancouver

Summary

This'll never happen.  Union concerns about lost jobs and whatnot.  And the thrust of this proposal is moving teams back to Canada!  Ha!  Still, as a genuine hockey fan, I think the league you see above looks a hell of a lot stronger than the one you see here.  It preserves all the key rivalries, both geographical and practical.  It puts the two best young teams on the planet, Buffalo and Pittsburgh, in the same division.  It even puts Detroit and Colorado in the same division, which could get ugly.  (That's good.)  And it returns hockey to Canada in a significant way, since America generally has no need for it.

There wouldn't be any huge shifts in talent via the contraction dispersal draft... you're looking at Rick Nash, Olli Jokinen, Nathan Horton, Fredrik Norrena and Jay Bouwmeester moving to the five worst teams in hockey, Sergei Fedorov landing somewhere new and making you say "hmmmm," unsigned entry draftees becoming the property of new teams, and the rest just adding to depth.  Still, the league's talent level would be that much better, which really has to help.

Well, this is what I think they should do.