http://seniorsoftball.com/?page=12

 
SIGN IN:   Password     »Sign up

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

Online now: 1 member: BigDadsBusy; 58 anonymous
Change topic:

Discussion: Major+ Equalizer - What do you think?

Posted Discussion
Jan. 8, 2010
Sisavic
134 posts
Major+ Equalizer - What do you think?
IMO, one cause of too few teams in the Major+ division: Teams disband, reorganize, or stop going to big tournaments because they believe they have no chance versus the previous year's World's Champion. This is unique in Major+ divisions because the winners of the Worlds don't "move up."

How about instituting a 5-run equalizer for one year to those M+ teams that didn't win the Worlds. So all M+ winners of the 2009 Worlds in Phoenix would have to play with a 5-run deficit, but for only one year (unless it again wins in 2010). This might get more M+ teams to participate.

What do you think?


Jan. 8, 2010
Jawood
Men's 50
791 posts
Do teams feel good about getting runs given to them and then win the game when they really don't? If Major and Major-plus were combined, you can allow a Major team to score one more run an inning than a Major-plus team up to the open inning. The Major team can score six more runs until the 7th but has to EARN them.
Jan. 9, 2010
taits
Men's 65
4331 posts
Jawood,
As it is now, don't the rules require M teams vs m+ teams to play under Major rules? But is merged Some would be competitive, some would not. Not unlike any other ratings mismatch.
I think there are many teams at all levels that could move either way. But you know the vast majority want to play down, not up.
Jan. 9, 2010
smooth01
Men's 50
121 posts
Last year, powers to be changed the HR rule to try and equalize teams ,in order to get more teams for the Major Plus to beat up on.Then they re-classified teams, moving many of them up to Major and Major Plus ,that did not belong there. Again,just to get more teams in the Major/Major Plus divisions. Now,we are discussing to make changes just to give these teams more runs ,needed to compete with Major/Major Plus and make the final scores LOOK like these teams can be competitive. Being that bitching about the HR rule is now not an option ,now we discuss runs scored.
Classifications should be determined by talent and skill level,not by giving runs to equalize or by taking away HR's like they did last year.There should have not been any rule changes last year,This association and people on this message board ,keep bringing up the idea's of changes to the rules and how the game should be played,when they should just leave a good thing alone and quit trying to change something that's not broke.Looks like alot of these post are just for people who enjoy seeing their name on the board,and think they have to comment on every little post.It would be different if they really had an input to help the game,but they just comment to comment as if we really cared for their every little thought.
Jan. 9, 2010
Jawood
Men's 50
791 posts
We really don't care what the equalizer rules are. We were one of those Major teams moved up for the benefit of the Major-plus teams. We'll play anyone but don't want to play in these 3/4 team tournaments stretched out over three days when it can be easily done in two. In the 50's, with the Mavericks done, is there really anyone that much better than the rest of the Major teams that a separate divison is required? And if there is, just put a (+) by their team and they have play with an equalizer.
Jan. 9, 2010
taits
Men's 65
4331 posts
SSUSA usually has some sort of * markings for those types of things. IE; exhibition, 11 players, 5 runs, etc.
The not knowing before hand about only having 2-3 teams to play against is is probably the biggest problem along side of needing to arrange lodging most of the time for 3 nights,(4 days) for something that may have been done in a 2 & three thing.
The number of teams overall and fields available is one possible obstacle for some but surely not all.
Jan. 9, 2010
Jawood
Men's 50
791 posts
I was refering to the regular tournament, not the exhibition games which really don't matter anyway.
Jan. 9, 2010
ShaneV
Men's 55
381 posts
What if managers realized that actually
they could control their own destiny.
Rather than expecting TD's to cater to
their needs, the managers all got each
others contact info and coordinated when
and where they play. They could even
Jan. 9, 2010
ShaneV
Men's 55
381 posts
Oops. They could even negotiate their
own equalizers, etc., and then together
inform the TD what it is they desire.
What TD would complain if teams took
control, paid their entry fees far in
advance, arranged their own particulars
and just asked for their guaranteed
games and a sensible schedule. Take it
a step further and do the whole thing
yourselves, for about 2/3 the price!

Where are the natural leaders and
innovators among us? Many are
tournament directors already. TD's
offer us their wares, mediate all the
differences and listen to all the valid
and invalid complaints from every
direction, and really do the best they
can. And many wonder why TD's turn a
deaf ear! And many of the best ones
quit after a few years!

The small number of teams in the Major
and MajorPlus classes is a problem. I
can't solve that problem as a TD. With
the managers' help, WE can.

ShaneV
Jan. 9, 2010
taits
Men's 65
4331 posts
Jawood,
I didn't think you were...
What I was saying is what SSUSa uses these symbols to reflect runs given by certain teams. Actually for any team that has some sort of differentiation from the others.

Shane,
Some mgrs as well as players, use this forum as well as other sites to 'try' to get a handle from other teams that plan or will on attending specific tournaments. This is a very good idea.
Only hole in it is that there are only around a hundred or so posters on here that are really active.
There are roughly 950 teams and many of the posters are not attending tournaments and are from same teams.
So getting close to an accurate count for any given age and level might be really hard.
If mgrs have access to the other teams contact info it would be a great tool to find that info ahead of time.
That is why I am in favor of viewable rosters as NCSSA has with mgr contact info. Cross checking player data can informative if the info is updated and correct. Theirs is lacking there..example some players are listed as having date of birth in the 2000 period... players on multiple rosters, underage for age group, etc.
Many a TD are in it for the bucks, first, not the game.

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
Send us e-mail
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

Partners