I think the thing is that in MLB you’ve never had every team play each other. The Brewers never played every team in the NL when they were in the AL, or vice versa now that they’re in the NL. (On a side note, what a retarded decision. Do I hate Bud Selig? Yes.)

Comparing anything to the NFL is just dumb. No other league in the world is like it excepting College Football. Other than those 2 entities, nothing else is like it.

College? Throw college hoop out the window too. Not the same game or anything remotely like it. College hoop fans may hate that statement, but the NBA has a lot better players who make the 82 game season seem difficult because of how good their teams are. The best team in College will end up playing HALF, if they’re lucky, the games that an NBA team plays in each season. There are only a few teams every year who even get up to that games played total. Most of them are top notch college programs, and most of those programs USUALLY feature the best players. Still, it ain’t remotely like the NBA.

That said, I don’t think there’s a problem with the NBA schedule as it is. Divisional and conferences tend to be the problem when it works against your team, but fine when it works for you. The Bucks wouldn’t even be close to sniffing the playoffs in the West, but are definite playoff contenders in the East. And that’s noting that the Bucks are over 500 at the moment. I’m not trying to downgrade the Bucks here. My point is just simply that right now all the playoff contenders in the West are 9-10 games (or more) over 500. The Bucks are not good enough, yet, to be 10 games over 500 on a consistent basis.

On the flip side, if you wanted to re-seed the NBA playoffs by a 1-16 basis, the Bucks are still in the playoffs. But now they aren’t the 5th seed of the East but the 12th seed in the 1-16 tournament.

The point I’m trying to make, even though the question of the playoffs is not even brought up in your post Benny, is that whatever system you create will make holes. There is no obvious solution for the Bucks, the NBA and fans to solve the inherent problems of the current system in divisional alignments, and then the playoffs.

I think it works because like any system it has the least amount of flaws that I can accept. I wouldn’t want a 1-16 playoff system that would create logistical nightmares for teams (and broadcasts more importantly) which would then create monetary issue’s if games were no longer as lucrative to advertise because of regional aspirations in a particular game. Part of the regional aspect is a huge reason the games exist the way they do.

I look at the NBA as a sprinting marathon. At the end of the season (and the playoffs) you sprint like hell towards the finish line. In the beginning of the season, you start out well, need a lot of stamina to maintain that pace, and turn it up as the playoffs loom.

The problem essentially, as I see it, with the NBA schedule is that the stars bring in a lot of business. As a fan, I could live without seeing Kobe Bryant or Steve Nash 4 years every year, but Phoenix and LA are close geographically. It is also possible that the Lakers/Suns might not be good for awhile in the next couple years, and that could be beneficial as well. The Kings also benefit in down years (such as this one) where Laker fans can come into Arco and boost attendance. (Or Cavs fans.) As a fan I hate the idea of Laker/Cav fans populating Arco, but the owners like it. It makes being an owner a little less painful.

So, in short, I have no problem with the divisions as it is. If your team is of top quality, it won’t present a problem. If it’s not, then, well, that’s the real issue isn’t it?

I generally think it makes sense. I’ve never liked how baseball divisions favor teams in weak divisions (both in their ability to win divisions as well as wild card), so I think the conference playoff format is fairer and the scheduling is then better aligned. On the flip side, the additional travel required to play every team the same amount of times (roughly three games each) seems like a bit much, even if it’d be more fair to determine the playoffs based on the top 16 overall. The conference system seems like a good balance.

On the flip side, I think baseball’s system is by far the dumbest from a fairness/competition standpoint. I know it’s all in the name of tradition and rivalries, but having mostly separate league irrespective of geography is pretty bizarre in the grand scheme of things. And with 162 games and teams playing each other multiple times in a row, it’s the only league where you could easily have everybody play everybody else.

Let me ask this question. Are personal rivalries not as important in the NBA? I can see how it doesn’t make a lot or sense to not play more teams in baseball, but I kind of like seeing the same teams more. The comparisons above were more because of my own passions about those sports. I might fall asleep on the couch for 12 chiefs games a year, but if it’s the Raiders or the Donkeys, I’m screaming my head off at the TV. Same with the White sox, if they’re in town, we will purposly sit in the outfield to scream obscenities at the outfielders. And anytime MU plays KU is an excuse to drink. (I’ve got no dog in the hockey fight) Now, this might say more about my lack of class then any real sport to sport comparison, but I think strong rivalries are a great part of being sports fan. So where are they at in the NBA? It seems like the biggest rivalries would be Celtics/Lakers who only play each other twice a year. Other than those two it seems like the rivalry games are more based on individual players. Shaq goes to the Cavs? Suddenly the Suns vs the Cavs is a rivalry game. And I’m not saying this is a bad thing, just different. I want to embrace the NBA culture as much as possible I just need to know how to react.

Last Question: Who is the Bucks biggest rival? Can I buy a F*** Jim O’Brien t-shirt?

and have them play each other 30 times.

I think manufacturing rivalries is unnecessary regulation of the schedule. Were the Packers and Buccaneers really rivals back when they were in the same division? (Other than the comical story of Tampa v. Green).

By the way, who is to say that just because you are not in the same “division” that you can’t play an inordinate number of times? If I had my way, I would get rid of the divisions, but maintain the schedules. So, the Bucks would play the Timberwolves, Bulls, Pistons and Pacers more than any other team. But, the standings would still be broken up into conferences.

And this applies to all sports. The fact that the 8-8 Chargers made the playoffs ahead of the 11-5 Patriots two seasons ago is preposterous. Or that every year each team in the AL West has a 25% chance at making the postseason, while the NL Central has a 16.7% is inherently unfair.