SIGN IN:   Password     »Sign up

Message board   »Message Board home    »Sign-in or register to get started

Online now: 0 members ; 10 anonymous
Change topic:

Discussion: Major Plus div, an idea. For each age bracket, a fresh start...?

Posted Discussion
June 19, 2008
Men's 65
4459 posts
Major Plus div, an idea. For each age bracket, a fresh start...?
This goes back to the days of yesteryear, essentially making it open rostered.
Player area restrictions by which players are drafted are set aside. {Teams will de drawn from complete list of Major Plus players, those who have played and those who want to play in this division}

You need to set the rules up "in stone" and any change(s) wanted or brought up later, would be made for a next years rule book. Once the rules are set you play under them for a year, until the nest years draft.
All Major Plus teams will be drawn through a DRAFT procedure. Sponsor &\or manager must attend one meeting where this would be done or via phone conference call to where ever the site will be for this draw.
All TEAM NAMES will be entered into a "HAT". A different person attending this event will draw one team name out of it and that team will have the first team draft pick another person will draw another team name and that will be team two draft pick and etc etc. Until all team names are drawn.

All managers will provide player names, positions played, and stats info, to be fair. Player name & info also goes into a "hat".

Team with draft pick#1 picks a player then Team#2 until the last team to draft, draws his. The next round starts with him (last team draft number) and reverses order. This allows for both ends to pick first.

Those chosen will become that team. Only two changes may be made to that roster for a year. Dates for this will be from winter Nationals to Winter Nationals. Player or manager may request to be dropped from a team, but only a manager may request a player for an addition.
Teams will only be allowed to pick up 2 players for any given tournament one time. you can not use them again. This is to allow thinking about making chances for the next year. Spread the player use around.
Being made effectively an open roster for the draw and for pick-up's, recruitment may be easier or harder.
I think also that a player has to have the right NOT to be drafted for and team he wishes as well. This will be a long process but it can work if you want it to. Players need to know what is going on and everyone needs to be informed or as they say in the loop.
If everyone had the same info going into the process, I.E. all info on all players, it can be. But with everyone spread out all over it will take some time to do it right.
I have done if with 16 teams, and process was about 3 hrs with around 200 players. But all manages were there.
To make it some what faster, each team could keep a "core unit" of say 5 players. Thus not having to start totally anew. Asking players who might want to move up is also a thought to consider. But the stigma attached to have played on a Plus team also needs to be addressed. as does having played on a major team.
I use the draft procedure as the best "leveling" the field as it were, because if you do not have a player already in your core, if that is used, or you do not pick him, if the opportunity was there, who's fault was it.
June 19, 2008
the wood
1114 posts
Scott, this may work in Little League and Fantasy Baseball but it will have limited appeal (at best) for major plus softball, which is played on the national scene.
Two primary problems that I foresee...
1) what would bind a player to play if he was drafted by the wrong team? i.e. he gets drafted by a FL team in he lives in AZ.
2) As a sponsor, why would I agree to this?
Underscore the above by the concept of 'having fun with the guys that you like to play with'...
This is the most wordy dumb idea that I've seen in a long time.
June 19, 2008
Men's 65
4459 posts
There are many leagues that do this, back east and in CA, we do it here. The Baseball system is somewhat this way, but with the trades and all. I put fourth this without all that and more to try to keep it simple.
As for not getting on a team "you want' tough. lol. That is also why I added the core unit. Don;'t like 5 try 7, but you need to have a number LESS than what you would field in a tournament to allow for working wiith different players and positions.
M-Plus teams want a place of their own, I only offered a possible way that opens a door.
after all an open door is what you need to get a foot in.
Major league BB has a draft as does about all major sports, but it's too wide spread with options.
There are many definitions to your use of the work fun here. Can't say as I blame you though.
My post was only a sugested map. There are many roads that get you to the same place.
Like the rules, they all have been worked on one way or another.
It's an option and would be tough for a Fl team wanting to practice for sure, but given the freedom from a connected state draw, he would have more to choose from.
Building a "new'" anything isn't easy. But you do have to have an idea to start with.
this is just one I know does work on a localized level, but it's how it would be brought about that is the major concern.
I also feel you would have to have strict restrictions or what happened before will come about again.
If the number of player changes are too little which I ASS-U-ME, is what you allude to, make it an open player change from the winter worlds to the date of the first day of the TOC. That gives around 4 months of player exchange rights to both the players and managers.
I see 3 options to date, this one or something formed around it, what you already have, within the many different Assn's you play in, or start your own .
Nothing will come over night.
June 19, 2008
the wood
1114 posts
It 'aint broke' now... yes, we need to change a few rules to reflect what the major plus mgrs really want. But we don't need to re-invent the wheel.
As of today, there are already 3 senior assns that understand the major plus division (SPA, SSWS & LVSSA) and it's our hope that SSUSA will take the same route. The types of rules that we've requested are the same rules that have been implemented by the aforementioned assns. We are not asking for the moon here.
The, like any assn, need to accmodate the teams rather than the reverse. If SSUSA (or any assn) finds that it is not in their best interests to do so, then so be it. It is my personal hope that they can find a way to work it out with us.
A few years back (say, 2002), we had a possible 8-9 different choices of assns to choose from. since then USSSA and NSA have dropped out of the summit. The latter had a minimal profile out west and USSSA really didn't invest itself into senior ball... ASA has remained a member of the summit but insists on 'dumbing up the game' (to steal a phrase) to such an extent that few major plus teams wish to travel to their events. ISA and ISSA used to enjoy larger major plus followings than they do currently.
SSUSA had good acceptance in the major plus division last year (55) with 7 teams. But only had 4 in 2005 & 2006. Quite frankly, I do not recall how many they had previous to '05 or where they were held for that matter. One of the reasons for their lower level of participation was the 5 run innings, which they changed before their World Championships last year. Recognize that some of this is my opinion and some is based upon actual facts.
When you do the math, you'll see that the major plus teams are down to 5 potential avenues (SPA, SSWS, LVSSA, SSUSA & The Huntsman Games). Further, of the ones that are not 'real players', some of them departed of their volition and the others are experiencing a back lash (lower acceptance) due to their unwillingness to adapt. But this is mostly OK with us because it increases the likelihood that we'll run into each other... i.e. increased number of teams in a single event... we were all over the board before.
Those folks/teams that are not in the major plus divison have offered many different 'solutions' for us. Others have been critical of us for one reason or another. I'm not sure what it is that incites this but we just want to play the game in the way that we like. If you don't like what it is that we do you have the option to play in the division that suits you.
Bottom line:
Try out your suggestion of a draft in your own division first and, if it works there, let us know. I do not mean in your local/regional events but in national ones.
People say that we're in 'our own little world' as if this is a bad thing.
June 19, 2008
Men's 65
4459 posts
I'll agree on the rule changes that need, should be, or compromised on. I would think SSUSA will come around soon or risk the loss of them as a group.
Huntsman only has the one in Oct and I believe one other somewhere else. I do not think until this year that the rules were any different for them over any other division however....This year will be different for the Plus division as I understand it, but not sure as to a rules change. Only familiar with SSUSA, LVSSA, Huntsman and to some extent NSA as far as major Assn's go.
As for a draft in the others, won't happen. Too many teams and players. I only used it because of the numbers.
Hopefully your roundtable for this will bring about some end result that is like able for both sides. It does need to be a win\win situation for both sides in order to survive. Rules changes vs revenue. But in reality both sides are going to have to give and take in the long run.
that would cover all the proposed changes i;v e read as well as some that would no doubt come up in the mean time...
Bottom line...Net profit vs Hr's allowed et al.
I do hope working together (SSUSA and the Plus task force) works out.
Another problem to overcome is tournament scheduling. But that is another story...
June 19, 2008
the wood
1114 posts
You are correct about the need for compromise. However, if the SSUSA end result is a higher priced version of what is available elsewhere, its acceptance will be reduced. This is particularly true with the eastern teams due to the air fare increases, cost of transporting bags, etc.
As far as the Huntsman Games go, I know a guy that is involved with them (Dan Needy) and it is my belief that they have adapted somewhat to the input that they have received. We have been told that the facilities in St. George are second to none and that they really treat the teams well... but this is almost all that I know... plus, they begin playing on Thursday and finish on Saturday.

Not to kick a dead horse... but I couldn't begin to pick 5 GSF guys as the 'keepers' only to leave the remaining guys open to the winds. I suspect that I'd be burning some good relationships if I did.
The Honorable D. Newhard recently mentioned that he didn't relish the thought of replacing friends with 'better guys' in order to ramp up to major plus status. He has no real leg to stand on, in my view... :-) I guess that the theory is that the major plus teams don't develop strong personal relationships and I'd have to call 'BS' on that. It is my personal belief that Don's list of friends is shorter than he suggests anyway... :-)
All kidding aside, this is another intregal reason as to why I would seriously oppose any form of player draft.
June 19, 2008
Men's 65
4459 posts
Go back a few SSUSA newspapers or and I think you'll find or may recall that fee increases were on the horizon...
Given longer game times which are needed across the board I can see it if not just to pay for the extra time umping.
But on the other hand the cost to travel might off set that from happening any time soon in order to get the teams to show.
Dan helped me get a medal my dad won and did not collect there in golf., twice...
Fields are as you say. More like groomed golfing fairways. There are round 5 complexes with another that was in the making last year. Roughly 15-20 fields. More than worth the trip. Medical screening alone more than covers the player fee. everything you might look for in Vegas (138 mi away) you can find there except for gambling which is only 38 mi away towards Vegas in Mesquite. Rooms are cheaper as well over all unless that has changed in the last year. I have never seen any Graffiti in all the time I have gone.
Speaking of golf they use 8 courses for the games & have about 24 in the area. So if your into pasture pool, you might try it.
I can see the day change made rationale, more than half the teams are eliminated on Wed, thus freeing up many fields.
If I can find some pic I'll email a few to you... no promises though.
The pick and choose would, could, will hurt relationships but if it were a choice of that or not playing, what's a guy going to do. I think after a year or so unless you do not have a heart of any kind you would have some sort of personal relationship with the players around you. Be it on field off the field or some moral issue...
My idea was only that, something to think about...
Try ST G, at least once. I doubt, you'll regret it . Who knows, you might medal. (Open roster)
June 19, 2008
the wood
1114 posts
Costs - I recognize that we live in an inflationary world and that costs are always rising. My point was about relativity... if an assn's costs seem to rise faster than others (for a like product) we'd likely be looking elsewhere.
SSUSA Newspapers - I do not keep them around after I scan through them.
Huntsman Games - I am actually entered in an event this year already. I've agreed to be a spotter for 'Twins25' as he has entered the pie eating contest... and is favored to win. :-)
June 19, 2008
Men's 65
4459 posts
Mine was really no different, I just used time as the cost offset. I am not sure on game times for other Assn's, other than you rarely get 7 in other than for the championship.
Had a pie eating contest been an event... I might have been a participant....
June 20, 2008
Men's 65
273 posts
June 20, 2008
53 posts
Here is a way out idea
A players union
To give us voice in what happens.
Who pays the bills?
Starting a new 70's team has been a nightmare

June 20, 2008
Men's 65
4459 posts
Brief version: Unions are only as good as the negotiators that 'work' for it & both sides, the "companies" (Assn) willingness to "bargain", and the union members (which usually become all the concerned within the scope of the issue) willingness to actually go on this case not go to tournaments...
I doubt it would happen to do any good.
The strike force looking into the Plus side of all this, one could call the union negotiators.
Would that mean paying dues...
June 20, 2008
53 posts
Do no call it a union
Call it a players rep group
nominal fee per team to join
$2 or $5

There are times we need some clout.
send me an email
June 20, 2008
Men's 65
601 posts
Guys - we started this thread as an offshoot from the M+ task force with one members perception of a useful idea brought forth with the spirit of adding to the discussion.

Now we had people choosing sides, hinting at union dues/representatives/agents taking on an us against them scenario to, in effect, choose up sides.

To what useful purpose? At this stage there is a committee in place to express the agenda needed to make the M+ division what it should be = the premier division of our level of play AND played that way. To choose sides, start a union, pay dues with a ill advised call to arms can only broaden the chasm that is trying to be bridged. With the committee in place there is already recogntion of a need and people working together to address the need. What we DON'T need is someone driving a wedge through the middle of the process.

If you want to vent, rail, incite, protest, march, burn flags/bras/your Ulta II - whatever - go ahead. There's lots of worthy causes out there that can use firebrands there's ads in the paper every day looking for that type of talent. Go for it.

While your out there doing that this newly initiated process can continue just fine without it.
June 21, 2008
Men's 60
241 posts
My advice is to keep it simple. Do not change just for the sake of change. Let the Major Plus teams vote for what they want. I think in the end we will find that what we have is close to what we want.
June 23, 2008
Nancy Allen
Men's 55
711 posts
I agree with Bob because what has bugged me on all of these discussions is what happened to the "for the love of the game"? Unfortunately it seems like the elite of softball do not always get to enjoy the fun part of softball which is sad in my opinion. I was at the last NSA AAA World Series, and it is sad to see all the complications eliminate such a division. I know that Timmy has been very lucky in the Major/Major Plus divisions at the qualifier in Indy which has grown every year for the last 5 years. There were 14 this year between 50 and 55. We thought about pulling some of the equalizers off last year, but when a couple of the players told us that they were having fun, it really made a lasting impression on me, especially when there were even more teams this year. Please do not ever lose your love of the game over complicated rules and processes. Enjoy.
Sign-in to reply or add to a discussion or post your own message and start a new discussion. If you don't have a message board account, please register for a free nickname. It will only take a moment.
Senior Softball-USA
Phone: (916) 326-5303
Fax: (916) 326-5304
2701 K Street, Suite 101A
Sacramento, CA 95816
Senior Softball-USA is dedicated to informing and uniting the Senior Softball Players of America and the World. Senior Softball-USA sanctions tournaments and championships, registers players, writes the rulebook, publishes Senior Softball-USA News, hosts International Softball Tours and promotes Senior Softball throughout the world. More than 1.5 million men and women over 40 play Senior Softball in the United States today. »SSUSA History  »Privacy policy

Follow us on Facebook