If MLB Adds Nashville and Salt Lake City, What Should Realignment Look Like

Soon MLB will add two new teams, marking the first expansion of baseball since the addition of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays and Arizona Diamondbacks in 1998. It will be three decades since we've had new teams and there's already talk about what to do with them.

Remember that baseball has had expansion over the years ... including massive expansion from 1961 to 1998. During that time, MLB grew from two eight-team leagues to two 15-team leagues ... nearly doubling in size. In 1969, both the American and National Leagues split into two divisions, creating a playoff. In 1994, both leagues split into a three division format we still use today (though some of the teams have moved around a bit). In 2013, the Houston Astros switched from the NL to the AL to create two 15-team leagues split into three 5-team divisions.

Adding two new teams disrupts that clean breakdown. So what will we do?

Let's start this exercise by stating that Nashville and Salt Lake City will be the cities receiving new franchises. That isn't a lock, as there are places like Charlotte, Portland and Montreal who feel they have a shot at getting a team but those two are the strong favorites. 

JUST ADD ONE TEAM TO EACH LEAGUE

The easiest fix is just to add one of the teams to each league. We've had uneven leagues and divisions before. For a while, the NL Central had six teams while the AL West only had four until the Astros moved made all the divisions even.  So you could put Nashville in the NL Central and Salt Lake City in the AL West to give each of those divisons six teams while the other four divisions stay at five. Nashville fits with the NL Central footprint better while Salt Lake City would fit nicely alongside Seattle and Las Vegas. 

CREATE A FOURTH DIVISION WITH CURRENT AL/NL SETUP

What will likely happen is we get a fourth division in each league. With 32 teams, making a clean realignment plan where each league consists of four 4-team divisions would be the best looking way to do this. I'm not as big into this idea as most, because I think small divisions like this lean towards bad teams getting a shot at the playoffs just because of geography. We've seen it in the NFL where teams with losing records win divisions.

NL EAST: NY Mets, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington
NL CENTRAL: Chi Cubs, Colorado, Milwaukee, St. Louis
NL SOUTH: Atlanta, Cincinnati, Miami, Nashville
NL WEST: Arizona, LA Dodgers, San Diego, San Francisco

AL EAST: Baltimore, Boston, NY Yankees, Toronto
AL CENTRAL: Chi White Sox, Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota
AL SOUTH: Houston, Kansas City, Tampa Bay, Texas
AL WEST: Las Vegas, LA Angels, Salt Lake City, Seattle

In the American League, Salt Lake City enters the West while the two Texas teams will help form the new South. Tampa Bay leaves the East for the South, while Kansas City joins them from the Central.

The NL is a bit tougher. Atlanta and Miami leave the East to help form the South with expansion Nashville. Pittsburgh got back to the past and rejoins the NL East that they were in a long time ago. The NL West loses Colorado, who now moves to the Central. Cincinnati is sort of the odd man out and moves South from the Central. 

FOURTH DIVISION WHILE SWITCHING LEAGUES FOR TWO TEAMS

Of course, there is an idea floating around that Colorado and Tampa Bay could switch leagues to help with the geography. This would be a much better option for continuity among the divisions and a better geographic fit.

NL EAST: NY Mets, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington
NL CENTRAL: Chi Cubs, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, St. Louis
NL SOUTH: Atlanta, Miami, Nashville, Tampa Bay*
NL WEST: Arizona, LA Dodgers, San Diego, San Francisco

AL EAST: Baltimore, Boston, NY Yankees, Toronto
AL CENTRAL: Chi White Sox, Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota
AL SOUTH: Colorado*, Houston, Kansas City, Texas
AL WEST: Las Vegas, LA Angels, Salt Lake City, Seattle

The main differences would be that Tampa Bay now goes to the NL South, Cincinnati gets to stay in the NL Central, and Colorado makes sense with the teams in the AL South rather than in the NL Central (and they fit better with those teams than Tampa Bay). If they go to 4-team divisions, this is my favorite setup.

FOUR TEAM DIVISIONS WITH MASSIVE REALIGNMENT

Let me start by saying that I am so against this idea, but it's out there. Rob Manfred could entertain one of the most controversial plans of his commissioner-ship ... and that's saying something. 

In 2000, MLB took over and eliminated the AL and NL being separate entities and those designations are really just names now (like the AFC and NFC in football). We have seen teams switch leagues a couple times, most notably the Milwaukee Brewers to the NL and Houston Astros to the AL. But a massive realignment where we throw out the traditional league structure is something that's being discussed. Here is what it could look like.

AL NORTHEAST: Boston, NY Mets, NY Yankees, Philadelphia
AL ATLANTIC: Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Toronto, Washington
AL SOUTHEAST: Atlanta, Miami, Nashville, Tampa Bay
AL NORTH: Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, Minnesota
NL MIDWEST: Chi Cubs, Chi White Sox, Milwaukee, St. Louis
NL CENTRAL: Colorado, Houston, Kansas City, Texas
NL MOUNTAIN: Arizona, Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, Seattle
NL PACIFIC: LA Angels, LA Dodgers, San Diego, San Francisco

The American League is basically an Eastern Conference now, while the National League is the Western. Maybe they just ditch the NL and AL and go to "Eastern" and "Western". Eh. Ironically, the AL Southeast and NL Central would be the same divisions as I had before. But this is too drastic to accomplish ... what? 

What Could The ACC Look Like In The 2030s?

I've been a ACC fan my entire life. Grew up in Charlotte and am a North Carolina fan. But despite all these decades of loving the conference, I've recently accepted the fact that we are nearing the end of it ... at least in the way we knew it.

Actually, that's already happened. What was once a cozy league nestled in the mid-Atlantic grew in the 1990s and exploded in the 21st century. From five (six before I was born) Carolina teams mixed with Virginia and Maryland, to expanding to Georgia Tech and Florida State, getting more serious about football with Miami and Virginia Tech, to now teams in Boston, Pittsburgh, Indiana, Louisville, Dallas and the Bay Area. The ACC we knew is long gone and that may be even more evident over the next decade.

ACC AND ESPN ARE TOGETHER THRU 2036

ESPN picked up their option to keep their current rights deal with the ACC through 2036. So the deal that was already considered bad (by comparison to the Big Ten and SEC) will stay that way for another decade. It also binds the league by the Grant of Rights fees which means the ACC owns its members' TV rights until 2036 ... even if the member leaves.

ACC'S NEW PAYOUT MODEL AND EXIT FEES

When Clemson and Florida State challenged the ACC over the last couple years, the parties ended up settling for a changed model. Essentially there is a merit based system that rewards the best performing schools by using the pieces of the pie that new members SMU, Stanford and California won't be getting to pay out "bonuses". That helps close the gap for schools like Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina and others but doesn't eliminate it. Also, the expensive exit fees that a school must pay to leave will drop a little each year for the life of the deal. 

So, basically, everyone is good for now, but in about six years or so you will start to see wandering eyes as various other rights deals begin to open up. 

WHO IS A THREAT TO LEAVE

Technically ... everyone. But the main culprits are Clemson, Florida State and North Carolina. Those three schools were the only ones who voted against bringing in SMU, Stanford and Cal. Clemson and Florida State were the ones who sued the ACC over the Grant of Rights and the league's power over them, while North Carolina was quieter about its moves towards leaving the ACC. 

NC State was the defector in expansion, initially voting against it before swinging towards allowing the three new schools in. So you would think they'd be interesting in bolting if they had to. In fact, the North Carolina legislature has already been trying for force North Carolina to take NC State with them wherever they may go. There is also Virginia, who is more linked with North Carolina than NC State since those two make up a similar academic and athletic profile. The SEC and Big Ten would be more apt to love a UNC-UVa pairing of great institutions with very strong athletic departments who gets those league into two very important mid-Atlantic states.  Then there is Miami, one of the strongest football brands out there. 

If an exodus begins, they it could peel off schools like Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech and Louisville. Cal and Stanford may elect to jump a sinking ship and head back to the Pac-12 ... even though it is a lesser version. Duke is a major basketball brand that could be snapped up by the Big Ten, paired with UNC in some fashion, or join the Big East and find a new landing spot for football. 

SMU would suddenly be more attractive than they were before they were the joined the ACC ... winning the bet they made on themselves. SMU has shown to be a really solid football program and their hoops prowess is getting better. The support the community has shown for its move to the ACC makes it much more of an option for the Big Ten or Big 12. If the ACC crumbles, I'm sure moving to the new Pac-12 could be a nice landing spot if the power leagues freeze them out.

Then there are the former Big East schools like Syracuse, Pitt and Boston College who may find themselves in a survivor's spot. I could see them join the Big East again for all sports and possibly the MAC or The American for football. Notre Dame would be alright as an independant in football and could easily join the Big East in hoops.  Then there is Wake Forest, who may be the most vunerable of the entire ACC. Every school could leave, though it is more like the ACC goes a different route.

THE ACC GOES THE WAY OF THE PAC-12

This is were I see the ACC going in a decade. I have my own ideas of what college athletics should look like going forward, but the reality is that this is a slow moving segmented task. When it becomes viable, expect the SEC and Big Ten to go after North Carolina, Clemson, Florida State and Miami. Those are the big fish those leagues would love the catch. As discussed, Virginia, Duke, NC State and Virginia Tech could be extracted in some form to appease the expansion process. 

If the ACC crumbles, expect Louisville to leave. Louisville sees itself as a commodity that needs to find an appropriate home. I'm not sure the SEC or Big Ten would go after them, but the Big 12 just might. SMU could have the same option.

But I don't think the ACC dies as much as the ACC as we know it does. Imagine if schools like Georgia Tech, Pitt, Syracuse, Wake Forest, Boston College, Virginia Tech and/or NC State decide to retool the conference by holding on to it and then adding some high profile members from other conferences. Think Memphis, South Florida, North Texas or James Madison. No, it won't ever be like it was in its heyday, but it would continue to exist in some form.

I know nobody wants to hear any of this. I don't want to say any of this. I grew up in Charlotte and the ACC was this beautiful basketball conference. That's already drastically changed and until we can wrap around the reality of more changes coming, we are just kidding ourselves.

NCAA Tournament Expands To 76 Teams Because College Sports Continues To Do Stuff Like This

Last week the NCAA tournament expanded from 68 schools to 76 schools despite the customer not wanting it. It is yet just another example of the slow-moving college athletics just killing itself on its way to inevitability. 

The NCAA tournament is about as perfect a sports event that could possibly exists. Not only do die-hard fans love it, but it is one of the few things on the sports calender that casual and non-existant fans will actually follow to some degree ... like the Super Bowl and Olympics. So expanding this tournament from 68 to 76 teams really rubbed people the wrong way because it doesn't make it better. 

I'm not against change. I love that NIL exists. I love that the transfer portal exists and is easier to navigate. That's not to say that it is perfect, but it is the right thing to do. But, the NCAA just won't do anything to try to put guard rails around it so we are truly living in a wild west of constant free agency and massive movement. That also applies to conference realignment, which rocked the college world a couple years ago and will do even more damage in a few years when the TV contracts come up. Get ready for another storm that might kill more conferences. And I've been a champion for a college football playoff ... which has worked ... but the powers that be in college athletics are about to ruin that, too.

It isn't just me saying "I don't like it" because it is change. It actually ruins the fabric of a tournament that just came off one of their most watched events in years.

THIS DOES NOT HELP THE MID-MAJORS AT ALL

One of the storylines heading into Selection Sunday last year was Miami-OH's case to be in the tournament. They finished the regular season undefeated but lost in the MAC tournament and had some of the worst metrics an at-large team could have. They did earn a bid, but was placed in the First Four in Dayton. Some said that if the tournament expanded, it would help the mid-majors earn more bids.  Yeah right. 

The official "first four out" had Auburn, Indiana, Oklahoma and San Diego State. San Diego State is technically a mid-major, but is really in a good conference that is firmly in the tier right behind the power conferences. California, Stanford, Oklahoma State and New Mexico would also have made it in under the expanded format ... with three in power leagues and one in the same Mountain West SDSU resides. In all likelihood under this format, Miami-OH would have been pushed even further down the list -- not that it would matter too much. It wouldn't have been the 68th team admitted but the 74th or so.

This expansion was more about the power conferences (ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC) gaining more power, money and influence. Did the tournament really miss a 17-16 Auburn team that lost 11 of 18 SEC games playing? Or an 18-14 Indiana team that lost its only Big Ten tournament game? How about rivals Stanford and Cal who each went 9-9 in ACC play? I'm sure those fan bases would love it ... but it really doesn't add much to the tournament as a whole.

THIS DOES NOT HELP THE LOW-MAJORS ... MUCH

Now let's look at the low mid-majors. Those are the small conferences that nearly always are one-bid leagues that end up as the 15th or 16th seed.  Let me lay out the domino effect of what's going to happen with them.

Before: We had six total 16-seeds in the NCAA tournament. We had two games where two 16-seeds played each other in the First Four, and then the other two 16-seeds were already in the Round of 64.  We also had four 15-seeds. Four 14-seeds. Four 13-seeds. Get it?

Going forward: We will now have eight 16-seeds. There will be four games featuring two 16-seeds playing each other. We will also have six 15-seeds where four will play two games against each other while two other 15-seeds will already be in the Round of 64. Now understand who that will be.

Two of the 15-seeds from last year will now become 16 seeds. They will have to play an extra game to get into the Round of 64, and once they get there they will play a No. 1 seed instead of a No. 2 seed. That's a huge difference of challenges.  Also, all four 14-seeds from last year will now become 15-seeds, with two of them having to play in this new Opening Round alongside the already existing 15-seeds. Now those new 15-seeds will be playing against a No. 2 seed instead of a No. 3 seed. That's a step up in class. Moving on down and the 13-seeds from last year are now 14-seeds. And the 12-seeds are 13-seeds. All their paths just got tougher. That doesn't really help mid-majors or low-majors at all.

What does help them is an easier way for these leagues to make some money. See, winning an NCAA tournament game earns your league a unit, and that unit is used as earnings for your conference. So when a SWAC school beats a MEAC school in the First Four, that win is a financial boost for the SWAC. Now that we are adding more of those 16 vs 16 and 15 vs 15 games, it does provide an important financial gain for the league.

DO YOU WANT TO HOST A BRACKET POOL

I'm that guy who hosts my work bracket pool and this new development does change things. While it isn't important to the grand scheme of things, it is actually the one thing that most fans relate to the most. When it was a 64-team field (or 65 for a brief time) the bracket was very simple. Six rounds of games where you knew who was playing from the jump. With the First Four, you could blow off the 16 vs 16 winners, but those 11 vs 11 games gave you some pause if you thought one of them could win in the next round. 

This will be a bigger pause.

You are going to have two 11-seed vs 11-seed games and four 12-seed vs 12-seed games. When those teams are Auburn, Indiana, Oklahoma, etc then it will make you hold onto your bracket until the deadline. For bracket pool runners, that can suck. It can also cause some confusion for the more casual fans who don't understand who is playing who and when. Again, I know this isn't the biggest of issues in the world, but it does suck.

IT DOESN'T REALLY HELP THE PRODUCT

So what do we gain? The fans. What do we gain? Sure, there are now eight more games to chew through on a Tuesday and Wednesday afternoon. Or we will see them staggered at night, which likely means those 16 vs 16 games will be cannibalized by seeing those mediocre power schools facing off. Either way, nothing is better.

Did you watch the NIT this past March? Me neither. And these are the teams that were playing in it. Average power teams playing other average power teams. That's what the First Four already was, but instead of two of those games we will be getting six. Getting to see 17-16 Auburn play against a middle-of-the-road ACC team on a Wednesday night isn't really special. It's like watching the second round of the ACC tournament -- ya know, the round that happens two nights before Duke plays. 

You could argue that the first round (is that what they are still going to call it?) will be a better product because we will have shaved off some of those pesky low-majors that typically get rolled by 25 points and replace them with a meh power school who has a puncher's chance at pulling and upset. But shouting that 12-seeded Stanford upsetting 5th seed Michigan State just doesn't seem that historic. 

This comes off the heels of a highly watched tournament where mid-majors were flushed out by the time we got to the second weekend of the the dance. So maybe this is what the public actually wants. And, honestly, it is. While people love seeing the Cinderella upset the big name schools during the first weeked of the tournament, we don't really like seeing them beyond that. We rather the big name schools play on the weekends that really matter. History has shown us that. 

SO WHAT IS THIS REALLY ABOUT?

Power. If you have been paying attention, the SEC and Big Ten have been flexing their muscle about how they want college sports to look like moving forward because it benefits them. They don't always agree on what that should look like, but they both are showing their power to get things the way they want. The ACC and Big 12 are along for the ride so they can keep their lesser power for the time being. The Big 12 dug themselves out of almost certain extinction while the ACC is trying to stave off their own.  Meanwhile, the mid-majors are just wanting to be some part of this thing.

In college football, the conferences hold all the cards. That's where the big, big money lies and the mid-majors (well, the Group of Six) have just enough voting power that the Big Ten and SEC needs to throw them a bone. A small bone. In college basketball, the NCAA owns the NCAA tournament and it is the one sizable moneymaker that no one wants to risk throwing away. 

That doesn't mean they (the power conferences) don't want to tweak it ... which they just did. Adding more teams means adding more of their teams. With the SEC at 16 schools and the Big Ten at 18 schools it is difficult to have 11 of their members earning bids when they spend January and February beating each other up. Just like with their wishes to expand the college football playoff, they want more seats at the table. 

Of course, there is a world where all this could just go away. The power schools could break off and form their own football world and they could decided to do the same with a basketball tournament. History, humility and tradition is what keeps the NCAA tournament around -- and for all the flaws of the NCAA they are great at throwing a tournament -- but those things aren't important anymore. History be damned. There is no humility. And tradition was thrown out the window when rivalries were broken and the Pac-12 imploded because of money. 

But if these schools could figure out a way, they would have their own 48 or 64 team tournament with nothing but power schools in it to sell to the public ... and we'd buy it. 

Sportz' Take On New North Carolina Hoops Coach, Michael Malone

 I get asked a lot, so here's my answers:

*HE CAN BE FAMILY: Michael Malone is the first head coach without ties to North Carolina since Frank McGuire was lured away from St. John's in 1952. Since then they've hired assistants Dean Smith, Bill Guthridge, Roy Williams and Hubert Davis and former player Matt Doherty (Davis was also a former player). With no obvious Carolina Family candidate available, UNC went outside to land a new coach. If it wasn't Malone, it would've been another outside coach. And that's cool with me.

When Roy Williams retired in 2021, I really wanted Mark Few to be the next head coach of the Tar Heels. Obviously that didn't happen and the program stayed in the family to hire Williams' assistant, Davis. So I have been willing to break away from family, but that's not been true with everyone. There are fans who still wish Davis was the head coach or wanted guys like Sean May, Jerry Stackhouse or Rasheed Wallace to take the job. But the wise move is to get a highly successful coach who will get Carolina back to competing for national championships. And that's what they hopefully have done with Malone.

Malone isn't totally foreign to Carolina basketball. His daughter is a sophomore on the Heels' volleyball team, and he has visited her in Chapel Hill quite a bit over the past year. He mentioned that he's attended some practices and has hung around the basketball program a little over the past year. Not everyone is born into a family -- some arrive later and join in.

*HE CAN COACH: I know that college basketball and the NBA are different, but Malone's ability to coach on the college level isn't very worrisome for me. No, Nikola Jokic will not be a Tar Heel, but Malone is a coach's son and has been coaching most of his adult life. He works hard and quite possibly his stern coaching style will actually work better on the college level. He likes defense, rebounding and having bigs. That's been the Carolina way under both Smith and Williams so fans should enjoy the style of play that Malone brings.

*BUT CAN HE RECRUIT?: Recruiting is a whole different animal. In the NBA, much of your roster is set since you have guys under contract. Malone didn't have to worry about Jokic putting his name in the portal after every season. There are free agents and trades and all of that, but that's typically the front office's job with the coach obviously consulted about any changes. In college, it's much different. For a long, long, long time college coaches have had to go on recruiting visits, watch high school ball games and schmooze with coaches and parents ... only to watch them pick another school. With the portal and NIL, basically there is a free for all with free agency. Like NBA free agency, it tends to go quickly at the start but there are thousands of players to deal with and, unlike the NBA, new guys become available in the portal. But it is a big change than what he's been used to, so hopefully Malone is able to hire assistant coaches who do have the relationships and know-how to help him get through this. He also has a GM in Jim Tanner who will be in his second year at this job. Tanner had a mixed bag in Year 1, landing Henri Veesaar and Jarin Stevenson but really missed on overpaying some other guys. 

*EXPECTATIONS: I don't really know what to expect. I don't expect Malone to waltz into this job and build a team into a national championship contender. I don't even think the 2026-2027 team will be as talented or as good as the 2025-2026 team was until Caleb Wilson went down with his injuries. I do think this is a building year, where we see some successes and see some frustrating times as well. A tournament spot should be in the cards and hopefully one in a better place than the No. 6 seed we were in this tournament. I'm looking a little more long term. The build of getting his feet wet and understanding the college ropes while also installing his culture and how he wants to shape his program. That isn't easy, especially at a place like North Carolina where a culture has been in place for such a long time. 

What I don't expect is how off the rails things went for Bill Belichick. I know there will be a lot of comparisons between Malone and Belichick since both left the pro game where they won championships for North Carolina programs that are reeling a bit after firing their head coaches.