Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 3 members: TABLE SETTER 11, TD51, TT Man; 131 anonymousDiscussion: Combining Major & Major Plus Divisions
| Posted | Discussion |
| Jan. 16, 2005 BillyMac Men's 55 91 posts | Combining Major & Major Plus Divisions There was a lot of talk at the Senior Summit this past weekend about eliminating the Major Plus Division Entirely. We;ll have to wait and see. Best of luck to all concerned. peace Hit To WIN!!!!!!! B Mac |
| Jan. 17, 2005 jah#4 Men's 70 576 posts | I hope they do not combine the Mjor and the Major +, There is a big gap of skill and money between the two division. In the several tournaments that we played in last year that combined the two the Major team came out on the short end. The major teams that was borderline was good enough to win in some tournaments but would have a hard time to win on a regular basic. With the new move up rule would this hurt senior softball as a hold? In several years in the future the major division would be top heavy or there would be a lot of teams disbanding and coming back or just not playing because you can not play on the same level with the current Major + teams we have today. I think if you look at the scores of some of the tournaments that was played last (USSSA being one) you can see for yourself. |
| Jan. 17, 2005 BillyMac Men's 55 91 posts | Don..I agree entirely. This is not a good idea at all. I've seen what happens first hand in regular men's softball. The current Major teams end up playing AAA. The AAA teams become AA, etc. It's just a natural trickle down effect. No one is willing to give up their weekends with little or no chance of any kind of success. In a few years we'll end up with the same number of teams in the uppermost division. The only difference is that it will be called Major instead of Major plus. The only way that I could see for this to work would be to develop an "elite player" list, with some kind of rule about only being allowed a certain number of players from the list on your team, depending on what division you wanted to play. Of course, if they went in this direction, it would only make sense to eliminate the geographical restriction rule (just my opinion). Gary Tryhorn came up with an interesting statistic. 70% of the registered teams in the country only play in "one" National or World tournament each year To me, that means that the associations' list of total number of teams at each level doesn't really mean very much in the overall scheme of things for decision making. peace B Mac |
| Jan. 17, 2005 BillyMac Men's 55 91 posts | I just got word that this is definitely not happening. peace |
| Jan. 17, 2005 BruceinGa Men's 70 3233 posts | Yes, BillyMac, rate players, not teams. |
| Jan. 17, 2005 jah#4 Men's 70 576 posts | that the best idea that anyone could have rating the player and not the teams. It would stop sandbagging and teams changing their name and dropping a division to play. Be one the best thing that would happen for softball. I think that what they do in open ball. I saw names of open player on different organizations web sites. |
| Jan. 17, 2005 Robo2 238 posts | I do not believe that the two groups should be combined, however, one way is to eliminate the boundary rule for Major Plus. Let's face it, most of the Major Plus teams have the resources to draw in talent that independent teams cannot. So let them get whoever they can. As far as the issue with the bats, why not have the sponsoring equipment manufacturer supply bats with the tournament stamped on each one. All players must use one of these bats or it's an automatic out and the manufacturers write them off as demos. They can even sell them after the tournament at a reduced cost. |
| Jan. 17, 2005 PattyMac 90 posts | BillyMac, What is the official statement coming out of the meeting about Florida and California? Can California and Florida get any players from touching states this year in any organization? Just wondering. |
| Jan. 17, 2005 stever Men's 70 99 posts | I don't understand the reluctance to rate players (at least at the Major Plus level) and allow teams to use whoever they want. That is the way fast pitch used to be years ago. The Major Plus teams are, for the most part, well funded and, essentially, professionals. If we can't come to grips with this issue and realize there is a small percentage who the rest of us can't play with, then we are going to have (in my opinion) a bigger problem when the "trickle down" effect becomes real. |
| Jan. 17, 2005 BillyMac Men's 55 91 posts | Patty Melt... The player advisory board was excluded from the discussion meeting of the delegates. We were asked to leave the room, as it was a closed meeting. I do know that all the rules regarding this issue remain the same as they were before the summit, at least for 2005 peace B Mac |
| Jan. 18, 2005 Robo2 238 posts | One problem I can see with rating players is that a couple of players on our team are very good and would be rated as Major Plus. We are a league team that simply want to play as friends and have played together for many years. However, we could not compete as a Major Plus team and it depends on how many players rated as Major Plus can play on a Major or AAA team. I don't want to see our team break up due to a players rating rule. If teams are rated based on overall performance and torunament directors stick to the rating (not like in DesMoines), then the team rating could still work. I see benefits and flaws in both rating systems. It seems that the only group that has a problem is the Major Plus group and if that group is allowed to simply operate without boundaries, then the other groups should settle in well. I have not seen many players being recruited for Major or AAA teams. |
