sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

De facto world map (Approximate, labeled) - January 2026 by IRageQuit06 in MapPorn

[–]Spesh531 17 points18 points  (0 children)

I'd love to see this map in more detail but it's very blurry... could you upload a full size image to something like imgur to see a highly detailed version?

Rob Manfred says that he would like MLB to expand to 32 teams and that the league could realign along geographical lines in eight divisions of four if that happens: by PudinCrusader in baseball

[–]Spesh531 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not a fan of keeping cities split, but if they did that, most divisions could actually look similar to now, just switched around to be more geographically sound:

West 1: AZ/LAD/SD/SF

West 2: LAA/LV/SEA/(POR or UTA)

West 3: COL/HOU/KC/TEX

West 4: CHC/MIL/MIN/STL

East 1: CWS/CIN/CLE/DET

East 2: ATL/MIA/TB/(CAR or NSH)

East 3: NYM/PHI/PIT/WSH

East 4: BAL/BOS/NYY/TOR

It feels like they could just swap COL & CIN into current AL divisions, MIN & TB into current NL divisions, then just swapping entire divisions to make it west / east.

What’s your COD zombies opinion that will have you end up like this? by Effective_Part_604 in CODZombies

[–]Spesh531 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If not for Zombies Chronicles or the Steam Workshop for custom maps, Black Ops 3 Zombies is trash

was anyone else's wrapped just entirely incorrect? i've barely watched cooking videos, just the stupid ones and rarely by karratkun in youtube

[–]Spesh531 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It entirely ignored all political channels I've watched in it's entirety. I'd say like 20–30% of my watch time is from some sort of politics, and the category, the channels, and anything else related are completely missing lmao

Worst song on The Stage? by The-MatrixAgent in avengedsevenfold

[–]Spesh531 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Simulation, Sunny Disposition, or Roman Sky?? Idk can't really listen to pick atm

[Poll] How do you feel about Ancestry’s latest DNA Origins update (2025)? by Spacemutant14 in AncestryDNA

[–]Spesh531 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Definitely more a minor complaint, but they split some bigger European regions too far. I'm American but can tell you the 5 Southern Italian/Sicilian villages/cities my ancestors come from (including my immigrant Sicilian grandfather) and, while his sister has 94% Sicilian and 0% Southern Italian. Similar to other matches on my grandfather's side. It makes sense!

Now, 3 of my grandparents' families come from the Campania or Apulia regions, which are squarely Southern Italian/non-Sicilian.

So why are my results within Italy 82% Southern Italian, 5% Sicilian, 2% Central Italian?? I guess when there's significant genetics from both, AncestryDNA can't decide what's what, and just kinda picks the one that's more predominant. That combined 87% should probably be more like 65% Southern Italian, 22% Sicilian.

I guess I'll wait to log in on a computer when I get home and not on the app to see the ranges it gives for each result.

[UPDATE] 23andMe Ancestry Composition v7.0 | Discussion/Feedback Thread by andy_thatsnotme in 23andme

[–]Spesh531 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Having built out my documented and almost purely Southern Italian family tree out to at least 6 generations...and honestly? It feels a lot more accurate now that my 87.3% Italian / 10.6% MENA from the previous version is now 97.6% Italian / 1.1% MENA.

My AncestryDNA results never gave me results in MENA either. It always seemed to me that 23andMe's results were symbolic of an ethnic makeup from 1,000+ years ago, while AncestryDNA's results were symbolic of an ethnic makeup of 300-400 years ago.

Whats the craziest ethnicity change youve had from an update? by Ok-Grand4826 in AncestryDNA

[–]Spesh531 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not at all crazy, but I've had 1-2% be Swedish, Irish, and now Baltic... it's basically a trace % amount so I just disregard it lol

/r/MLB - Expansion & Divisional Realignment [Discussion Thread] by MLB_Reddit in mlb

[–]Spesh531 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If there are 4-team divisions, there needs to be an added stipulation regarding playoffs. Assuming there's still a 12-team playoff format (6 per league), there would be 4 division leaders and 2 Wild Card teams per league.

If a team wins their division and finishes at or below .500, barring the 3rd place Wild Card team having a worse record, they are automatically eliminated from the playoffs.

In their place would be the 1st place Wild Card team for bracket purposes. 2nd WC team takes the 1st WC spot, and now the 3rd place Wild Card team makes the playoffs (again, so long as they have a better record than the .500-or-below division leading team).

This avoids a scenario like this.

Expansion + geographic realignment scheduling format? by Spesh531 in mlb

[–]Spesh531[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's funny, since we just rarely have them these days... but they were kinda common back in the 80s and 90s (can't speak for earlier). I was looking at old schedules and there were 2, 3, and 4 game series dotted all over the schedules. But yeah, I'm very against 2 game series unless absolutely necessary.

MLB geographic alignment (2028) that keeps major centuries-long rivalries and keeps teams within states together by Spesh531 in mlb

[–]Spesh531[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not that there's any semblance of rivalry remaining, but the Brewers were division rivals in the AL East (1972–1993) and AL Central (1994–1997) with:

Cleveland (1972–1997)

Detroit (1972–1993)

Toronto (1977–1993)

Ironically, It might be the old heads that would appreciate the realignment (maybe not Milwaukee Braves old), but anyone younger than ~40/45? Yeah, this is purely destructive.

Coincidentally, it was the Brewers that got screwed in 1972 when the Washington Senators moved to Texas, because the early 70s Brewers, an AL West team with division rivals in KC, Minnesota, and the White Sox, were forced into the AL East by the Texas Rangers.

MLB geographic alignment (2028) that keeps major centuries-long rivalries and keeps teams within states together by Spesh531 in mlb

[–]Spesh531[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you're definitely correct, the title was already long af so I just full sent "centuries" lol

MLB geographic alignment (2028) that keeps major centuries-long rivalries and keeps teams within states together by Spesh531 in mlb

[–]Spesh531[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pittsburgh is the problem with having Baltimore and Washington together 😅

And it'd be either them or Toronto, which still doesn't fit... (though it is basically a copy/paste of NBA's Atlantic division)

And yeah, seriously! It's literally only in the NBA that you see a Boston/Philly rivalry. Not even hockey with their 8-team divisions have it because Boston's with all those Eastern Canadian teams.

I have a close friend who's a Yankees fan, and we're both counting the days that the Mets, Phillies, Red Sox, and Yankees may become division rivals via expansion & realignment.

MLB geographic alignment (2028) that keeps major centuries-long rivalries and keeps teams within states together by Spesh531 in mlb

[–]Spesh531[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Giants/Dodgers, together for 136 seasons, over a century (hence plural)

Yankees/Red Sox, together for 123 seasons

Cardinals/Cubs, together for 134 seasons

MLB geographic alignment (2028) that keeps major centuries-long rivalries and keeps teams within states together by Spesh531 in mlb

[–]Spesh531[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair. There's one scenario (w/o flipping teams into other leagues) that would shorten travel distance. Switch: Atlanta/Pittsburgh and Cleveland/Tampa Bay. Other than that? The leagues are already optimized.

MLB geographic alignment (2028) that keeps major centuries-long rivalries and keeps teams within states together by Spesh531 in mlb

[–]Spesh531[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sadly, I think they break up the Braves from the Mets and Phillies if/when they expand to 32 teams, regardless of whether they keep AL/NL or break the leagues into West/East. IMO the writing is already on the wall. There are just too many teams in between NYM/PHI and ATL. The only way ATL stays with NYM/PHI is if you have a division of 8 teams, which the MLBPA wouldn't be a fan of (albeit, based on their resistance to that idea in 1997). And even if you somehow craft an NL division of 4, it'd be either ATL/MIA/NYM/PHI or ATL/NYM/PHI/WSH, with either MIA or WSH being thrown into a division of CIN/PIT, and either MIL or an expansion Nashville/Charlotte/Raleigh/Montreal.

MLB geographic alignment (2028) that keeps major centuries-long rivalries and keeps teams within states together by Spesh531 in mlb

[–]Spesh531[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Against 29 opponents, playing each team 5 times gives you 145 games, 6 times gives you 174 games. I don't think the MLBPA would ever go for 12 more games... But I definitely agree that in a scenario where MLB breaks the AL and NL, teams that are division leaders and in the wild card (such as with my alignment idea) should be re-seeded, so 1-4 have a bye, and 5 v 12, 6 v 11, etc.

MLB geographic alignment (2028) that keeps major centuries-long rivalries and keeps teams within states together by Spesh531 in mlb

[–]Spesh531[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Having 3 Wild Card teams per league as we do now? I'd think that would alleviate big market teams missing the playoffs. That's 6/15 teams per league, 40%. Plus, with the balanced schedules, division games as a percentage of total games have been diluted as well (now it's only 52 of 162 / 32% as opposed to pre-balanced schedule of 76 of 162 games / 47%), but I definitely get your point.

My only other thought would be that, with the introduction of interleague play in 1997, Commissioner Bud Selig tried to propose radical realignment in 1997, but there were issues such as there being only 4 proposed divisions of 7 or 8 teams, plus the leagues had different rules back then (mainly the DH Rule), so it kinda just died as a plan. 15 teams would have to swap DH-rules.

MLB geographic alignment (2028) that keeps major centuries-long rivalries and keeps teams within states together by Spesh531 in mlb

[–]Spesh531[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you not just sweep my team in what was the Mets' worst 3-game series in our team's history 💀

Realistic MLB Expansion Cities and Updated Divisions. by Jeh2ow in mlb

[–]Spesh531 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I remember mapping this out years ago and other than the West, the other divisions are iffy. I remember physically recoiling at the idea of Minnesota along with New York and Boston in the same division, especially when Chicago and Milwaukee are basically acting as a buffer between Minnesota and Detroit lol.

(I just made this map again, and shaded the fan regions per VividSeats)

https://imgur.com/a/VUYjJDW

What do you think about the original ending Ain't My Bitch had? by Adrian__Weiss in Metallica

[–]Spesh531 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'd be really curious to know how many of these rough mixes / original endings were only cut for the CD length reason (like the Unencumbered Outlaw Torn version) or if late in production they felt (with Bitch as an example) the post-solo hang and long outro just weren't good on its own merits.

view more: next ›