Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 4 members: Mickey C, Ronguru6754, TABLE SETTER 11, curtiss; 240 anonymousDiscussion: Spa Ratings compared to SSUSA ratings
| Posted | Discussion |
| March 10, 2009 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Spa Ratings compared to SSUSA ratings It is my understanding that SPA will be formulating their own team ratings and the differences from the SSUSA ratings could in some cases be much different especially on a team by team basis. Does anyone else see this as a potential problem especially for the teams that the folks at SPA have not had a chance to even observe. There are approximately 30 potential chances for Murphy's Law to happen (anything that go wrong will go wrong) at a SPA tournament. You know this is going to happen a team with a higher ranking in SSUSA is going to be licking their chops to enter a SPA event at the lower rating and sure enough this team will walk through destroying everyone. It has to happen Murphy's Law dictates it. Then What? Just saying. |
| March 11, 2009 BruceinGa Men's 70 3233 posts | Joe, since it is not a requirement to have the same roster across all associations, I would think that many teams would be rated in different classes. When I coached the Pensacola Hitmen about 5 years ago we were short players and thought of picking up guys for a tournament in a different association. I was told by SPA that our roster had to be the same, wether I played SPA, SSUSA, ISSA, ISA or any of the Summit associations. At that time I noticed teams were not adhering to that rule and the following year found that that rule was deleted. So, should teams have different names when they play in another association? I don't know. |
| March 11, 2009 Wes Men's 65 335 posts | Lecak--You are making the assumption that Terry got it right---I do not think that will be the case---Spa might have it right Wes |
| March 11, 2009 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Wes I was addressing what seems to be the trend to want to play at the lowest level possible. I don't know who is right my gut tells me the association that moves team up has it the most correct. We both know that Terry has the most visible profile therefore as soon as one of the higher rated SSUSA teams wins a SPA event at the lower level (and it will happen) the bitching and moaning will be endless. |
| March 11, 2009 Sweet P Men's 60 191 posts | Joe, I agree with Wes. When an association such as SS-USA uses an un-named 'secret' comittee to make arbitrary re-classifications w/o sharing the citeria and or reason for their decisions and or having a current team roster, something is wrong. Add to this that a number of teams who had successful seasons in 2008, and who expected to be moved up haven't been, makes you wonder who's on those secret comittees. Well at least SPA has a stated criteria for moving teams up/down and for making appeals w/o having to spend your limited dollars playing in tournaments in the wrong clasifications. Hopefully the senior organizations will recognize this problem and work together and come up with an open, documented and less subjective and secret process for rating teams. |
| March 11, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Hey Joe, As a matter of good faith one must give and be given the benefit of any doubt however, there're enough judgmental discordance around and about that this is no longer the most reasonable thing to do. Terry and SSUSA have been challenged on more than one sensitive and important issue with respect to our wants, needs and well being and it's time for them to show up or be held accountable for their mistakes. Perhaps, SSUSA has gotten too large to be run like a mom and pop shop or an elite private association and needs to be be/stay more in touch with the body and soul of it's membership. |
| March 11, 2009 Sweet P Men's 60 191 posts | Joe, how r u doing and who are you playing with this season. Tell George and Steve I said hello. Phil Cobbs |
| March 11, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Hey Phil, I love wearing my West Coast shirts and am grateful for the oppty to play with you guys. My leg is much better than last year, I'm hitting the crap out of the ball again and looking forward to pitching as much as I can. I'm not rostered at present but play with a number of teams and will let the season play itself out given how much of my old softball self I can get back by June/july. Say hi to the guys for me. |
| March 11, 2009 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Phil and Joe my background has always been to play at the highest my physical capacity will allow. I also don't believe that you need to win a majority of your games to be properly classed. My example the Detroit Lions are an NFL team there is no movement to drop them to division 1 in college. That is where I am coming from. The PPR and HR issue are not the same to me as this classification issue. I don't know who is right SSUSA or SPA in their ratings probably whoever has the lower rating the team involved would say that organization. What I am saying is that a major plus team in SSUSA is probably going to get an opportunity to enter SPA as a major team and as sure as I'm sitting here will win it. The team winning it will be happy but you and I both know the teams losing are going to say how could a major plus team be allowed to enter as a major team and then win it. The 50 age group is really a problem on the west coast I don't know many players who have played in a SPA tourney how do they decide what ratings these teams are if they decide to go to Dalton this year and attempt to play at a reduced rating? |
| March 11, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Joe, Someone or more aptly some association can say they are the standard for senior softball all freakin' day long. It doesn't make it so or them correct on any issue involving the senior softball community. Senior softball "are us", an entity having nothing directly to do with SSUSA, SPA or any other association. Until they and anyone else interested in our loyalty and support individually or together get this there's always gonna be problems that shouldn't be and/or that can easily be resolved. We all need to keep sight of this definitive reality. |
| March 11, 2009 Robo2 238 posts | Nicely put Joe. I like some of the rules put out by SSUSA and some by SPA and some I would prefer different in both. In my opinion, the SSUSA went from the best association to now in the mix and unless the rules move to follow the consensus of the ball players and to try to get our opinions they will continue to move downward and will probably loose teams. Especilly in this economic period. Nobody wants to spend big bucks traveling if they cannot compete. That does not mean win most games, it means have a chance to win every game. Arbitrary rule changes that make no sense and change the game we have a passion for is a mistake that will take it's own toll. Pitcher Protection and HR rules are direct opposites. I suggest to try a couple of tournaments with unlimited HRs, except in last inning, and see how fast games go and how teams move to a level of their own caliber. Has anyone received a survey from SSUSA? I got one from SPA some time ago. At least there is a movement to ask all members what they think. I know it takes time and effort. But hopefully it will be worth it. |
| March 11, 2009 NYTX Men's 65 55 posts | I agree strongly with Wes. You can't have arbitrary opnions decide how a team gets moved up or down. It has to be decided on the field according to agreed upon rules, like SPA does it now. Teams have the choice to not play in an association if they feel they are being mistreated. |
| March 11, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Well stated, Robo. This website is a monster tool as it exists right now for SS-USA to poll/survey us the senior softball community for opinion and support and SSUSA did not, has not and may well never will use it. This says a ton as to why and how our problems with them arise. Not says, but screams. |
| March 11, 2009 Dbax Men's 65 2101 posts | Lecak, I have to strongly disagree. The Detroit Lions should definately be moved down to division I. |
| March 11, 2009 jah#4 Men's 70 576 posts | Joe ridge and other directors will look at new teams and teams that has several roster changes, other than that the teams that wins will be moved up. the are teams that Terry, Ridge and RB all look at and share information on teams in there tourney that does not play in that respected tourney. So they can have the teams rating in case they attend thier world or national tournaments. Maybe this helps just a little Don Ward Kittrell Softball |
| March 11, 2009 jrhunch 113 posts | my opinion is i would combine aa&aaa into 2 divisions gold and silver.the teams that win in silver move 2 gold and teams losing in gold move to silver.win 2 majors within in your age group 50-54 55-59 etc automatic move up to higher division.next division would be for major teams that draw players from 50-75 mile radius.after winning 2 majors in age group automatic move up. weaker teams may move down.the last division would be for teams who draw from all over the state and touching states.maybe even pick up whoever you want from anywhere.this would be your major plus.any team that doesnt want to play in major plus just recruit from 50- 75 miles .this is just my opinion.when we were moved up to major we moved up with the same team other teams that moved up with us were able to recruit many new players and some are in major plus today.they got better every year.where as we are still the same team.not complaining but sunshine states can get on this web site and recruit new players for their team instantly.as far as the ssusa ratings they changed the rules but keep the same criteria for moveups.we would not have won in dalton with the rules that are in place now.some teams move up without winning a national tournament nor come in the top 5 while other teams win and dont move up.homeruns and run differential(prelim games)shouldnt be the criteria.it should be based on winning over a period of time.in 8 team tournies getting on a roll can happen to any team our age.i have played in many senior tournies and i believe that out of 100 tournies ,2 would have positively had the same winner.pine knob in canada and extra innings in manasses and that was in 2004.i think there is too much complaining(which has caused our problems)and now not enough listening.this is just my opinion.i love playing and would like to keep it going.stay safe and keep hitting jr#11pace |
| March 12, 2009 Robo2 238 posts | I and not a Major Plus caliber player so I guess one could say I know my own limitations. However, I would like to comment on Major Plus teams. It is my opinion that they should be in a class by themselves with slightly different rules. Allow Major Plus players to play on any major Plus team regardless of state boundaries. That way a Major Plus player can play at the level they deserve if they wish. I undeerstand the state boundary rule and why it exists, but for Major Plus, I do not think it should apply. |
| March 12, 2009 Gekle BUilders Men's 50 204 posts | Hey Dbax watch the Lions jokes,Cards were not all that good a couple years ago.And like we have been saying for the last 50 years,wait till next year!LOL poor ol' Lions fan |
| March 12, 2009 Dbax Men's 65 2101 posts | I apologize Gekle......but why did you think it was a joke? :) |
| March 12, 2009 Gekle BUilders Men's 50 204 posts | Dbax,didn't think you would reference the Lions in a serious conversation? |
| March 12, 2009 Dbax Men's 65 2101 posts | Good point! |
| March 19, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Phil, I had read your posts previously but didn't really think them through. It seems odd that an assn that used stated criteria for years and now makes arbitrary rating decisions based upon whim... and upon the opinions of certain individuals who may have an ax to grind of their own. To top it off, these same folks are allowed to operate anonymously. In the 60 M/M+ division there is a CA team that won some M eventrs last year and has been somehow able to maintain its M rating. Could it be that someone close to this team works directly (or indirectly) for SSUSA? Surely this wouldn't be the 'broomstick in the spokes' of the normal due process. Your team has been moved up without even playing in a SSUSA event? This hardly seems reasonable... perhaps the secret committee could shed some light on this. I will go on record here and state unequivocably that GSF will immediately re-evaluate its schedule and its support. In short, we will not feel good about any organization that makes 'smoke filled room' decisions... Come on, stand up and be accountable. And if this angers the covert group, I can live with this. Disappointedly, BW |
| March 20, 2009 Sweet P Men's 60 191 posts | Bob, I'm still waiting for a for a response/ruling to the appeal I sent to SS-USA a couple of weeks ago regarding our re-classification. I guess it takes time to poll the special comittee!!! Thers no way we should be denied, seeing that Master Collision who won a World Championship and defeated us when we met, can be allowed to play Majors and not us. Is GSF playing in SPA's Palm Springs tournament the weeked of June 13/14? |
| March 20, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Phil, we have just learned that they're having one... one more well kept secret. We'll look into it... I hope that SSUSA does, in fact, re-evaluate your team's position... as well as that of some other So Cal teams. No system is flawless but if perfection is really a goal then secret committees is definitely a wrong turn. No personal/working relationship is worth undermining the integrity of the entire rating process... if the relationship depends upon special favors it isn't a solid one. Yet we continue to see this year after year... few of which pass the smell test. Integrity is a choice and it isn't a part time thing. Well chosen words will not override ill chosen actions. Good luck to you and WCAS this season... BW |
| March 21, 2009 salio2k Men's 60 547 posts | Too bad SPA has 60's playing Thursday-Friday. Some of us still work. Only option is to play 55's Saturday-Sunday. |
| March 23, 2009 Sweet P Men's 60 191 posts | Sal, I though the 60-division played Friday - Sunday, just like the 50 & 55 divisions. That will be tuff on guys still working! Are you guys playing in Oxnard on April 4 and 5, we will be playing our first of possibly 3-SS-USA tournaments for the year.We are planning on playing Las Vegas on April 18 & 19. Hope to see you guys. |
| March 23, 2009 salio2k Men's 60 547 posts | Phil.......Right now, looks like the Double Play tournament in Riverside on the 18th, then LVSSA. I checked the SPA site for P.S........50&55 play Sat-Sun 60's play Thurs-Fri. Good luck in Vegas. |
| March 24, 2009 Dbax Men's 65 2101 posts | Bump |
| March 31, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Lecak: In observing the games and the teams in Mesquite it is crystal clear to me that the parity landscape has changed once again. When the Summit was initiated 9 years ago, one of its primary goals was to create a national rating system whereby teams could play in multiple associations and have the expectation that a major tournament would field major teams (and the same for the other levels). In comparing the SSUSA ratings against the SPA ratings there is obviously a huge difference. As a Summit Advisory Board member, Joe, you know a lot of the inter workings of the Summit... i.e. the 'why' and 'wherefore' elements. SSUSA's new rules have created hybrid teams that can compete in SSUSA's M+ but not in SPA M+. It is my opinion that this is a disservice to the ideals and direction of the Summit. Certainly, there were ratings issues (prior to SSUSA rule changes) but nothing like we see today. Joe, is it the chicken or the egg when it comes to comparing an SSUSA rated team v. a SPA rated team? The SPA ratings more closely mirror the model used by the Summit over the past few years and, IMO, are more accurate. SSUSa has bolstered the 'false sense' by listing so many hybrids as M+. Damn few of the new M+ teams can compete when we use M+ rules (SSUSA rules should not be confused as such). SSUSA's plan to create a larger M+ division is flawed because the overwhelming majority of hybrid teams just won't do it. Compare the numbers to the 2008 Spring World in terms of the M+ divisions. Projecting forward to October, what can we (M+ teams) really expect? SSUSA shows 16 M+ 60 teams... will we have any of the hybrid teams there? I seriously doubt it. So if the underlying purpose of the rule changes was/is to bolster the M+ division, I'd say that this is not a reality. Since our team doesn't play AA-M I'm not in a position to definitively state, or even guestimate, what the new rules will do for those divisions... I only know the dynamics of our divison. Joe, you stated that the 'Murphy's law' effect will occur in SPA when hybrid teams 'play down' and possibly win a ring. Bear in mind that they'll only be playing down based upon the SSUSA's rating system. All in all, there will surely be more discrepencies in teams moving to and fro, from assn to assn. SSUSA provides a very good product to everyone except the M+ division. We are not their primary revenue stream, consequently we are not their highest priority. We do not take this personally as it's just business. We know that the rules we like are contradictory to what SSUSA wants to offer. SSUSA had the results of a survey (M+ Task Force) that it initiated and has chosen to use modified M rules instead. Only an honest decree from SSUSA could be more telling than this. Is there anything to be gained from all of these changes? Again, I'm not really qualfied to speak of the other divisions but the new environment might allow an opportunity to a team that truly does want to move up a level... an opportunity to grow a bit before competing against tougher competition. My experience though has been that this is a very short list. Many people have said many times that perhaps the M+ division needs to create its own assn. I do not see that happening but it is time for us to realize our true position. For starters, there are not 16 M+ teams in the 60s... no matter how many teams SSUSA moves up, there will still only be 5-7 teams that will show up at a national event. As has been stated previously, we owe it to each other (team to team) to coordinate our plans. BW |
| March 31, 2009 Sweet P Men's 60 191 posts | Bob, I received a response from Rr. Henessy, dening our appeal and informing me that he would only re-consider our appeal and current roster, after we played in 3 SS-USA events. So I guesse we will have to waste our money and time playing '3' SS-USA tournaments if we want Mr. H. to consider the facts contained in our appeal versus the recommendations of the secret comittee. Isn't senior softball just GRAND!!! |
| March 31, 2009 Wes Men's 65 335 posts | Are the SPA rating out yet. the wood ---I know what the definition of the word "hybrid" is---tell me what a hybrid team is???????? Here is the other side of the problem,I do not have a solution. Our 65 team was moved up to AAA 3 years ago because we won a touranment. We have been getting our butts beat for 3 year and have been trying to get moved down to AA---well we got moved down this year but now that we see some of the very good AAA moved up we think we might want to stay AAA--however if we go to our first tournment and play AAA and still get our butts beat will Terry let use then move down to AA???????????????? Wes |
| March 31, 2009 curveball Men's 65 705 posts | Bob, here's a view from below your level of play. "SSUSA's plan to create a larger M+ division is flawed because the overwhelming majority of hybrid teams just won't do it. Compare the numbers to the 2008 Spring World in terms of the M+ divisions. Projecting forward to October, what can we (M+ teams) really expect? SSUSA shows 16 M+ 60 teams... will we have any of the hybrid teams there? I seriously doubt it. So if the underlying purpose of the rule changes was/is to bolster the M+ division, I'd say that this is not a reality." Th kind of ball played up through the Major division a a different brand than you play. The Major teams that are really good at that level cannot compete at yours. It's not that we don't want to, it's just a fact there isn't enough talent on one team to make it possible. Look at the size of our country, we have 26 or so major league baseball teams only. Why? Because that's about all we can have with the talent pool available. In our softball case, we mostly play with friends and guys who we've played with for years. We pay our own way, buy our own gear, and just want to do battle between each other. We win some, we lose some. But, unless 3-5 of the top Major teams pooled there top 3-4 guys, there are no Major teams to compete with you; and, there aren't any that I know of that want to! You can't work out and imrove enough! There aren't Major+ guys sitting around looking for a team. There are just so many guys that can play Plus, YOU GUYS IN PLUS ARE IN ANOTHER LEAGUE. That is a compliment, my hats are off to you. Great guys, great ball players, but I'm one of many that choose not to throw away my hard earned dollars being your wooping boy. I'm sorry, but not my idea of fun. Trust me when I say I would like to be one of you; but, God didn't give out that talent to everyone. Top Gun got moved up at Mesquite to Major+ after seeding and the game against GSF. You saw what we had, how do you compete against teams of your level with our group? Poorly. D and K (sorry Larry) great Major team, fun guys to play aganst, but like us, they are NO Major+ team either! Another group moved up to bolster Plus. We ended up spotting Major teams 5 runs in the Major division after seeding, we were beat twice straight up by LV 60's and the Braves; hardly a Major+ showing. Maybe SSUSA could see reason to make them both Major+ also, that would add 2 more and with justification, they beat us! And while I'm at it, being moved during a tournament like SSUSA did to us at Mesquite was digested horse food! Should have been done when the money was sent in, or, after the tourney. So Woodman, the bottom line to getting more teams for you guys to compete against is still in doubt. The economy is only going to allow us upper rec. players to do X number of things, wasting those $$$'s to get your lunch handed to you I'm afraid isn't going to happen. The only thing that will happen is less $$$'s in SSUSA coffers due to less teams in attendance. When you take the chance to win away from a team, I think you've lost that team. My last example of how the system is flawed is one of the owners of SSUSA's team, Ruth Realty 60's. I'd have to assume they couldn't compete at the Major+ level, got dropped to Major in August, ran the table in Major and won the Worlds. Are they a good Major team, you bet they are. Are they competitive at Major+, I don't think so. |
| March 31, 2009 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Wes the SPA ratings are on their website. I looked at the 50's and it looks like they are only rating teams that have registered with SPA. If you have never played in a SPA tourney I don't think your team will be listed. Rating teams that have played in their assoc. using their criteria for rating a team makes sense, will be interesting if they defer to say SSUSA on a team they have no history with. |
| March 31, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Hey Phil, How's life south of the border (Bakersfield)? SSUSA has a well earned reputation among players for being arbitrary and self serving regarding many player oriented issues. Another brick in the wall, you say? They seem distant and other involved a lot of the time. I was told Terry would be getting back to me regarding some issues I raised weeks ago and I'm still waiting. They'll get away with doing whatever it is they want to just as long those of us who disagree all keep rolling over and take it lying down. There's always pride and alternatives like NorCal and necessity will create other venues as well if they or any other association don't serve us well. |
| April 1, 2009 salio2k Men's 60 547 posts | curveball........as a member of a team that got moved to M+, I've got to agree with you. My team was a M team. The difference between my team mates and those of the M+ teams was simple......we had not been asked to play for a M+ team! We were not good enough! Now, SSUSA is telling us that we have to play against them. |
| April 1, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Ask questions, connect the dots and follow the money if you wanna figure out who/what we're dealing with. |
| April 1, 2009 Renny 5 posts | Curveball nice post and since we are on the same team and friends I will agree with you 100%. You are one of the best players I have played with and are very capable of playing major plus ball. Many of our players also could play at the major plus level but few if any would be impact players. Those of us who have played major plus ball have reasons for not making the move up from the major division. The most significant reason is our talent. We were not asked as stated by salio2K in his post to play by one of the few truly major plus teams in our area. The fact that most of the established major plus teams are fully sponsored is completely relevant to the quality of players they have. We pay 100% of our own costs to play and travel to tournments. Another reason for not moving up is many of us have gone through many injuries over the years, myself I have just went thruough my second knee replacement this last year. On a more serious matter the events casused this weekend by SSUSA in Mesquite sent fifteen Top Gun players home unhappy. This could have been handled professionally after the tournament was completed. We spent our money to play in the major division and because of pressure from another team the powers of SSUSA folded. One must ask themselves how a change in the middle of a tournament can be justified. If this was my business would I have treated my customers that poorly? If I did my company would not survive in today's market. Im not saying if we would have won the tournment or would have blown out our competition the committee of one (?) could have made the appropriate adjustment after the tournment. That would be his/her call and as a customer if we were unhappy with the decision we would have to reconsider spending our money with his organization. On a more positive note when the additional complexes are completed in Mesquite the city should become a Mecca for softball in the west. John Renwick Top Gun 60's |
| April 1, 2009 Dirty Men's 50 1371 posts | "einstein", who is "we"? I thought you quit this association. salio, accept the challenge. That is what sports is all about. |
| April 1, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Curveball & Renny: Since you have made similar points, I'll address some of this to both of you... 1) There was some dialogue going around that GSF 'tanked the game' against you in order to get you moved up to M+. Nothing could be further from the truth... we never have intentionally lost games... you simply out played us. Scrap Iron beat us as well... we didn't tank that one either. We have no vested interest in your ranking... the point that I made a week ago (or so) about Top Gun was more about SSUSA applying the rankings fairly than our desire to see you as a M+ team. We do not want to see M teams ranked as M+... it does NOTHING for us... so aside from speaking about ranking fairness (on the MB), I have had no conversations about your team w/ SSUSA. For what it's worth, I did see both Fran and TH after we played you and made zero comments about where you ought to be ranked. So don't lay that on me... if you wish to blame someone, start with your recent successes. 2) The truth is that M+ is not about money and is only slightly related to talent. The underlying common denominator in the better M+ teams is a fundamental desire to play against the best... the Old A's used to dominate the 55 and 60 M+ divisions, go to all corners of the earth and had zero money (or close to it). They also did this with a large % of AAA and M guys along with some very, very good M+ players. 3)Robbie, you are correct (IMO) when it comes to the limited number of M+ teams. This was true when you played for H. Ford's, it's true today... it will be true 5 years from now. There are a zillion reasons why this is so. As it relates to MLB, it is my belief that the total talent pool is less responsible than $... how many cities can truly support a MLB team? 4) Robbie, you mentioned Ruth Realty's move to the M division last year. I cannot speak definitively about that but I can tell you that if GSF had a rash of injuries (which we did have) it is a CERTAINTY that we'd still be ranked M+. 5) Hybrid team - a M team that can better compete w/ a M+ team simply because of the change in rules. This creates a false sense of security because once it travels outside SSUSA that same team, if labeled as M+, will be in over its head. Fortunately, SPA and LVSSA (and other assns) will apply the national rankings instead of the SSUSA's secret committee, which gives Top Gun and other hybrids the chance to play where they belong. Incidentally, I mean no disrespect in using this term, just my feelings as to what has occurred. Bottom line = Top Gun, D&K, West Coast All Stars cannot compete at the M+ level... except within the confines of SSUSA. Of the 3 teams mentioned, West Coast has lost more than it gained since last year (players). Renny, get a grip, you guys won a M national last year, which carries a whole bunch more weight than any comment that I might make... trust me, I'm not a member of the secret committee. But rather than blame someone, I'd be congratulating your teammates because, like it or not, it is a compliment. Incidentally, you mentioned spending money in Mesquite... we spent the same $450 as everyone else and we played 5 of 6 games on baseball fields (as did MTC)... so we all have an axe to grind. It would have been nice to have seen those fields 'shared'... But whether SSUSA should have changed your rating in Mesquite or not is beyond my expertise... I hope that this answers your questions relating to me, GSF, etc. BW |
| April 1, 2009 salio2k Men's 60 547 posts | Dirty......When I said "we" I was speaking of the M teams that were moved to M+. I like to play against them because they are the best. As has been noted, some of the teams cannot compete against the elite and expect to come out on top. I just want to play. |
| April 1, 2009 Renny 5 posts | Bob In regards to GSF "Tanking" the game. I didnt hear one comment from anyone regarding this discussion. I know your team would never lie down; the team has too much class. I also never heard that you or your team had any discussion regarding Top Gun moving up. You are correct the rule changes made by SSUSA has leveled the playing field. We would have much less chance as a hybrid team (I like the name)in other organizations. I due totally disagree with you about the talent level. In major plus the top sponsored teams have the pick of the litter. If they have less talent it's because they don't go after it. I don't speak for Top Gun. I only speak for myself and I had zero input in the ratings. The issue should have been decided by the not so secret rating committee. I believe you missed my point; my issue is SSUSA making a change in ratings during the tournament. If you as others believe the committee made the a mistake in moving us down to major thats fine and acceptable. We should have been notified before the tournament not after two games played. We then could of had the option to play and/or not play at the major plus level. It's just like a purchase agreement you pay on what was agreed upon up front. It's OK for us to disagree besides we really enjoyed playing you guys and under simuliar circumstances we might win again. Bob thanks for your response and I look forward to seeing you at the park. |
| April 1, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | John, apparently I did miss your point... both of them. Sorry. Bear in mind that I'm ok playing those rules because they encourage M teams to play us... but I hate to see them used in M+ play. Yes, you may well win the next time... however, if you honestly feel that way then you might be more than a hybrid... it wasn't that we played so poorly, it was more due to your team playing so well. as it relates to 'talent or no talent'... perhaps as a partially sponsored M+ team we do have a recruiting advantage but there are many talented guys that prefer the 'smaller pond' and less pressure... there is also the 'I v. we' thing that we (GSF) have had to learn over the years... not every 'super talent' is a M+ guy... I really don't have anything meaningful to add on SSUSA's mid tourney decision other than I don't disagree with you. I look forward to seeing you as well. BW |
| April 2, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Renny, I almost can't believe they changed your status mid-tournament but sadly, I can. They do and will do arbitrarily whatever they want to irrespective of any rule/standar/concern or anyone else. And, here's the kicker. They want us to believe that whatever changes they and some committee of 20 employees and friends made are binding because of due process. Almost laughable it wasn't so full of meaningful disregard to us, the senior softball community. The problem with Senior softball is the same problem we have in society and it was voiced best by Martin Luther King. "All it takes for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing." Simple, sad and true. |
| April 2, 2009 Dirty Men's 50 1371 posts | Dam* it Gump, just go play in another association already. |
