Mt. SAC Area releaguing, revisited

I know for some of you, I’m too obsessed with releaguing. But I thought I’d dig out this proposal I came up with a few weeks ago on my own (although it could match up with one of the many dozens of proposals out there). I’d like to hear what you think about the winning proposal, and whether Glendora, Rowland, South Hills and Charter Oak have legitimate beefs.

Parentheses are differences in the two leagues

BASELINE LEAGUE

Winning-6 teams: Alta Loma, Etiwanda, Los Osos, Rancho Cucamonga, Upland, (Glendora)

My proposal-6 teams: Alta Loma, Etiwanda, Los Osos, Rancho Cucamonga, Upland, (Damien/St. Lucy’s)

SIERRA LEAGUE

Winning proposal-6 teams: Ayala, Chino HIlls, Claremont, South Hills, (Damien/St. Lucy’s, Charter Oak)

My proposal-6 teams: Ayala, Chino Hills, Claremont, South Hills, (Glendora, Diamond Ranch)

MIRAMONTE/SAN ANTONIO

Winning proposal-7 teams: Bonita, Diamond Bar, Los Altos, Walnut, West Covina (Diamond Ranch, Rowland)

My proposal-6 teams: Bonita, Diamond Bar, Los Altos, Walnut, West Covina (Charter Oak)

MT. BALDY LEAGUE

Winning proposal and my proposal-7 teams: Chaffey, Colony, Don Lugo, Ontario, Garey, Montclair, Chino

VALLE VISTA LEAGUE

winning proposal-7 teams: Baldwin Park, Covina, Nogales, Northview, Pomona, San Dimas, Hacienda Heights Wilson

My proposal-8 teams: Baldwin Park, Covina, Nogales, Northview, Pomona, San Dimas, Hacienda Heights Wilson, (Rowland)

MONTVIEW LEAGUE

winning proposal and my proposal-8 teams: Azusa, Bassett, Duarte, Gladstone, La Puente, Sierra Vista, Workman, Ganesha

 

Although possibly not completely satisfying them, appealing schools Rowland, Charter Oak and Glendora would likely prefer my proposal. The other appealing school, South Hills, would not be helped by my proposal, and Diamond Ranch and the Chaffey district would not be happy, among others.