Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: MAP, TABLE SETTER 11; 96 anonymousDiscussion: Merge the major/major + divisions?
| Posted | Discussion |
| Sept. 15, 2008 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Merge the major/major + divisions? It has been suggested that this be a totally new thread. So here is the background... a lot has been said about the potential merger of the major and major + divisions. The focus of this thread isn't to presume that it's the right (or wrong) thing to do but to ask for opinons as to why it should/shouldn't be done. Some have suggested that this will solve many problems. Here are the questions... 1) Why do you fell that it's the right/wrong thing to do? 2) If it is the correct thing to do, where would you 'draw the line'? i.e. what part of the current major level would form the lower end of the new division? 3) Would your team be willing to compete in the merged divisions? This is open to free speech but this subject matter is best reserved for those are currently competing in high AAA and up. BW |
| Sept. 15, 2008 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Here you go Bob. This is a good thread so I will take a shot. 1.) I have seen a number of tournaments where only 1 major plus shows up, this division should not be left to whither away. 2.) I would setup an incentive program for Major teams to volunteer. A points program that can be turned into a higher seed at the world championships would do it for me. 3.) I'm not the manager of the Arizona MOB but under the correct scenario I believe the MOB would try it. One problem with my thought is the worlc championships themselves. At the LVSSA there was only one 50 Major plus team. SPA and SSUSA world championships there would probably be enough 50 M+ to not need volunteers. In my age group we have seen the Mavericks several times this year. This is a very tough team and very difficult to stay with. Playing them in a RR game is one thing but having to go in for a championship would require some thought. There is an answer to this one I just don't have it. I think my points plan can take care of the non world championship events. Joe Lecak |
| Sept. 15, 2008 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | haveing played in all 4 div's i can't say it would be the best thing to do.i play 55 AAA and think our team is pretty good,a major team no, but maybe could play a little major ball(lo end).i have seen maybe just the top 5 teams in 55 last yr in phx could of been moved to M.u see less glove work in the lower div's and if u merge AAA and M(the lower ones)u'll see people getting hurt.just my .02. sorry there just doesn't seem to be a real good solution to this problem. |
| Sept. 15, 2008 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Bob I'm not addressing this as an individual my response is generic as a participant in the major division. There are individauls on teams who would do it with no prompting and individuals who wouldn't do it if you paid them. The idea would be to have the ones who would do it take the balance along for the ride. |
| Sept. 15, 2008 turn2 489 posts | Bob, This is a very good thread. It is getting old going to tournaments and being only 1 or 2 major plus teams there. If the 2 divisions were combined why couldn't use a drop down. Everyone starts in the higher division and once you lose you would drop to the lower division. This would give you a chance major plus then if you lose drop to the lower major division. R.B. used the drop down division years ago when he use to draw a lot of the top teams. Usually when a major plus team plays down we play by the major rules. I know in vegas the rules are not that much different for the top divisions. Major Plus gets unlimited hr's/ 7 runs and Major gets 7 hr's and the same 7 runs / inning. This is not much of a difference. A lot of major plus teams could play major if we were allowed. It would be nice to play some different teams. Thanks, Donnie Chavis Turn Two / Elite 60 Major Plus |
| Sept. 15, 2008 ssalt Men's 70 9 posts | The World Series for several years had the major and major+ teams play together in additional round robin games with the major and major + teams separating based on the RR win/loss records (in some manner). However, I witnessed one team in Des Moines that reversed their batting order, had infielders playing outfield and outfielders playing infield and thus purposely dropped down to avoid the major plus category. Merging the two divisions (M & M+) for the round robin is a solution I have read in some of these threads and it might be the best solution but there needs to be some incentive to play up and changing the award system for winning just might be a way to provide that incentive. Thus, the major + division winners would get rings (for instance), the major division winners get a wall plaque (or something similar) and so on down through the divisions. Hopefully then teams would actually try to play in the major + division in order to earn a ring. Just a thought. Steve Salter SF Seals 70 Major + |
| Sept. 15, 2008 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | If you restrict the number of runs per inning to 5, like we do in NCSSA and start the equalizer from 1 home run a less powerful singles hitting team can stay with a homerun hitting powerhouse. That's how we do it in NorCal and it works very well as we have major plus clubs like Mac 2, MTC and the Old A's in the same tournament with major teams. |
| Sept. 16, 2008 Brett Men's 55 239 posts | I would prefer to see only 2 divisions in SSUSA and SPA, similar to how the USSSA organization does it. Combine major and major plus teams in to the competitive division and AAA and AA in to the non-competitive division. In doing so, this would eliminate the very small turnouts we have today in tournaments for both the major and major plus divisions. It's very disheartening to endure the time and expense of traveling great distances only to see 3 or 4 total teams in our division. On another note, how about winning a tournament after shelling out 'big bucks' for a entry fee only to receive one 10" - '12" team trophy and no individual awards such as a merely t-shirt? Now that's a whole new subject. I for one would like to have someone explain why senior tournament entry fees are so outrageously expensive. Manager - Kansas City Barons (50 major) |
| Sept. 16, 2008 Dirty Men's 50 1371 posts | Brett, you hit the nail DIRECTLY on the head. |
| Sept. 16, 2008 Bluejay00 1 posts | Maybe giving rings only to major plus champions would be an incentive. It seems that winning a ring these days is not a very big deal. |
| Sept. 16, 2008 softball4b Men's 70 1248 posts | Rings for all divisions is okay with me. Hall of Fame consideration creates the separation and distinction. I agree with 2 divisions only. There will be haves and have nots, but that is nothing new. Competition is not the enemy apathy and complacency is. |
| Sept. 16, 2008 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | The reason that rings are not an incentive is that most everyone has one. Senior Softball gives them out for everything. Way to much. I've been saying combine Major and Major plus ever since I starting playing senior ball. Einstein had a good suggestion when a Major plus plays a Major, go down to 1 HR (progressive, then singles). When a Major plus plays a Major plus, play their current rules.. When Major plays Major, play their current rules. It is not really that complicated. |
| Sept. 16, 2008 Duke Men's 65 908 posts | Jawood, Simple and excellent and correct! You hit it right on the nose! Andy Smith, Double Nickels, Manager |
| Sept. 17, 2008 BruceinGa Men's 70 3233 posts | For the past couple of years I've said that we only need three divisions. It doesn't matter if you do away with AA or if you combine M and M+, the end result would be about the same. Maybe the time is right for this to happen. |
| Sept. 17, 2008 Dirty Men's 50 1371 posts | Are rings actually given, or do you just win the right to buy your own? |
