Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: TABLE SETTER 11, ace42850; 50 anonymousDiscussion: Question 4 Major Plus teams??
| Posted | Discussion |
| Nov. 6, 2010 Duke Men's 65 908 posts | Question 4 Major Plus teams?? My team is new to the Major Plus division. We realize that there are very few teams to play. I have noticed several Major Plus teams reforming to Major teams, which means dividing up your friends, so you can have teams to play again. Is this the way to go here? I am guessing the only time that there may be teams to play in my division and age, would be in a large tournament. That is a false statement that I will explain here. The Vegas Winter Worlds in the 60 Major Plus Division has no teams. I guess if we would have entered, we would get our 5 games, win our division, and get a thank you for contributing our money, with an option to spend more for a ring. Not sure who we would have played our 5 games against, since there are only 2 60 Major teams entered?? There are a couple of teams that I cannot find listed on the ratings, so I assume they are new teams. If I take the 50 division, 55 division, and 60 division, there are 96 teams entered at this time. There is 1 Major Plus team in the 50's, 2 in the 55's, and 0 in the 60's. That is 3 teams out of 96 teams entered. That is ridiculous! Anyway, my 60 Major Plus team decided for the moment to stay together, and play smaller tournaments for just this reason. I think we guessed correctly. Although, most know that we are not really a Major Plus team, and we have no argument about our rating, because of winning the Phoenix Worlds. It is our assumption that we will probably be playing the same 60 Major teams as last year, but spotting them 5 runs. In some of the tournaments playing 55 Major/Major Plus or 65 Major Plus, depending on the teams that entered. My main question to you Major Plus teams, is do I have this senerio pretty much correct?? I am thinking that I will have to hook up with a 55 team to be able to play more teams in a division, in addition to playing with my 60 team. I would appreciate your comments on this matter. Andy Smith, Double Edge, 60 Major Plus |
| Nov. 6, 2010 Marv19 Men's 60 498 posts | Andy your always welcome with us. As a matter of fact there are some discussions on going that may address your situation. We have done the math also. :O) We hope to see you guys in December. |
| Nov. 6, 2010 SteveSimmons 66 posts | Andy, It was a joy playing your team in Phoenix and it was a special occasion for me facing one of your teammates, Carlos Beccera. Carlos and I were both on the original National Advisory Board during the second Senior Summit. I consider Carlos a good friend and that is the first time in 10 years that we have played against each other. We (the MN Prize 60's) played about as well as we can before being edged in bracket play by Master Collision 20-18 and then being eliminated by the KC Kids 33-32 in extra innings. Our hats are off to you for an outstanding championship in Phoenix and for defeating those two outstanding teams enroute to your victory. I am really happy to hear you have decided to stay together as a team. We really admired your group, both as outstanding individuals and as a very competitive team. For whatever it's worth I hold a SSWC qualifier in Minnesota in June and this past year had the good fortune of having four teams in the 60 Major / Major+ division. The four were Ricker's, KC Kids, MN Prize 60's and MN Masters 60's-White. That tournament will be held on June 11-12 in 2011 in Rochester, MN. I again expect that many 60 Major / Major+ teams to attend and extend an invitation for you to join us. I understand your travel budget may not allow you to participate but, if it is a possibility, the door will always be open. Have a great 2011 season, Steve Simmons - SSUSA National Director |
| Nov. 6, 2010 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | The Major-plus division is a joke! It's a death sentence! Since the division only has a few teams because as you mentioned, teams just fold and re-form when they get the bad news, you end up playing the same teams over and over again. If a team is as dominate as the Mavericks are in the 50 division, you will be playing (and paying) for second place all the time. There is no need for a Major-plus division. If a Major team is deemed to be better than Major competition, just put a (+) by them and they have to play with an equalizer. It's really quite simple but for some reason the brass doesn't see it that way. Why have a separate divison for one or two teams and make a half a dozen more "fodder" for them while teams that don't have to play up end up playing for championships when they are just as good as most of the Major-plus teams. Our team would never fold, our friendships run too deep, even if we are doomed for second place at best in the travel tournaments. We still have a lot of fun! My advise to you is to keep it together! |
| Nov. 6, 2010 DoubleL10 Men's 70 907 posts | Duke, I think you got it right on! In the 60 M+ division, there were 3 West Coast teams this year and just a few more throughout the rest of the country that actually played in Nationals. As you probably know, GSF is disbanding and I do not know if they will reform as M+ or not. Omen is moving to 65 M+. That could just leave MTC unless they move someone else up and/or keep D&K and Robson in the M+. I've been where you are before and even petitioned to have our Boaz team re-classed to Major in our last year together. Our petition was denied since we beat the Major teams we had to play in the seeding games in Nationals. We had one big open inning in one game and it cost us. Now, I'm looking at moving to 65 M+ but the same scenario exists there. I might have to stay in the 60 Majors just to get to play some teams in the Nationals. Good luck to you next year. |
| Nov. 6, 2010 Duke Men's 65 908 posts | Thank you everyone for your thoughts so far. Steve, I will keep that invitation under my hat for next season and thanks for the invite. Steve, let's be honest here, to spend money to go play 4 other teams in a local tournament does not sound too cost effective. I would rather play 4 teams here in the 60 Major/Major Plus division, and not spend all of that time and money traveling, especially for just a qualifier. About 90% of all tournaments are qualifiers. I do appreciate the thought. Our team will stay together for this season, and most likely, only play in the smaller type of tournaments locally in California. We will stay together for at least this next season, because the guys on this team all get along and have a great time at every tournament. By playing these type of tournaments, we will rarely play any 60 Major Plus teams, but not because we do not want to, but because there are no teams to play. For this reason, we will not petition to play 60 Major mid season, since we cannot get our brains kicked in by teams that do not exist. We may just get kicked by some 60 Major teams once in awhile and give them 5 runs too. LOL! I last heard that D & K does not exist in the 60 division any longer. They moved down one division, and are playing 55 Major now. Thanks, Andy Smith, Double Edge, 60 Major Plus |
| Nov. 7, 2010 Tate22 Men's 60 280 posts | While I've always advocated 3 divisions and agree with Jawood on the challenges of being Major Plus, there are alternatives ways to react to being branded as a Major Plus team. Having played 8 seasons of senior SB at the 50/55 M & M+ level I've seen all sizes, shapes and some pretty amazing skill levels of senior athletes. Unfortunately for me, I still lack the psychic ability that some possses to accurately differentiate major and major plus players or teams . Mind you, we've competed against some exceptionally talented players, but even the superstar HOF dude only gets 4-5 swings per game. This year my team played 13 tournaments as 55M+, 8 of which were SSUSA events, the rest either LVSSA or SCSSA. I'll bet we gave up more "stimulus package, government cheese" runs this year than any other team in any division or any age because of mixed draws. Players who likely decry the evils of socialism in other forums gladly scooped up their "entitlements" because someone declared that we were too strong for the competition. Whatever! Why earlier this year we had to give EIGHT runs AND 11 players to a certain 60 Major Team. Our team was formed 2 years ago from a 50 M team that finished 9th in the '08 SSUSA worlds and a 55 M team that finished an equally imposing 9th in the same event. In 2009 we were immediately branded Major Plus. (Unfair?? Don't Care!!) Because more than anything we love to play ball, we chose to roll with it and leave the moaning and teeth gnashing to others. We won some, we lost some, but we've played 70-80 tourney games each year against some very good 50's, 55's,60's teams in the M&M+ divisions. We likely missed out on a few T-shirts and plastic trinkets, but that's not why we play. Giving runs on a regular basis sometimes got a little old, but it definitely prepared us for the tight games we've played in the big events against our own division. As for the demise of M+, I can only speak from our experience this year in 55 M+. There were 6 teams in Reno, 8 in LVSSA, and 11 in Phoenix. More than worth our while to attend those events. The Cliff Notes version of the above long windage is this: You can just accept the structure of senior softball, show up, play the game you loved as a kid, enjoy the comraderie and friendships that are kindled and edure and maybe even get hot and win a big event OR ... well these pages are filled with the other type of response. If MLB had Major Plus the Phillies and Yankees could have just played in early October . . . but instead we got to witness a team run the table that almost didn't make the playoffs. I prefer the latter scenario. Thanks to each and every team and each player we met this year on the fields. Hope you enjoyed it as much as we did. Hope to see you all next year, in good health. At the end of the day, we are all old farts in this bus, and damn lucky to still be able to lace 'em up. Fuggeddabout the labels and JUST PLAY BALL! JMHO Don Newhard Nighthawks 55 M+ |
| Nov. 7, 2010 Player25 Men's 55 50 posts | Our team plays major plus. I for one am tired of spending time and dollars to play the same several teams. The only time we see more teams is going west. Have not seen the final stats for this year but if it remains as in years past, our team averages about 2 hrs/game. When playing with a 10 homerun limit, we have the possibility of 8 balls that we can not defense. At best this could be 8 runs. At worst it could be 32. Our team was set up years ago to play major when the rules were 3 hrs and then outs. The team was set up with speed, defense and base hitting. With the better equipment, much of the speed and defensive aspects have been removed from the game. I personally would like to get back to a more balanced game. My guess is many are saying just change the composition of your team. And that could be a possibility if you could find personnel in your region who: a) meet the criteria, b) would leave the team they currently play on, c) the players picked up would maintain the "chemistry" of the current team, d) the current team wanted to discontinue playing with long time friends. Our team does work hard during the off season to maintain our abilities and conditioning. But we want to continue to play together. We have some success in the region we typically play, but when going west, we typically have not faired well in major-plus. As for radical ideas: a) player who hits hr must run the bases.( yes takes time but equalizes the effort for the base hitter who has to run the bases) b) limit the number of courtesy runners to 1 or 2 per inning (limit the players with power who can not or do not want to run) c) allow teams to get moved only as high as major. Those that want to play major + will elect to play there (it is easier to find major talent players) I for one love the game and will continue to play but would love to see the game move back to a more balanced game. JMHO |
| Nov. 8, 2010 softball4b Men's 70 1248 posts | IMO There is too much energy being expended discussing divisions. Success creates opportunities and challenges. Man up and deal with it. If you don't want to compete on the national level, then don't. I don't care what the rules are for what organization, if I don't like them then I don't play, simple. This is going to be taken as a slam to the lower divisions, but in reality it is only a comment about whining. The best sponsors attract the best managers who attract the best players. Not always the best team, though. The best team is the team that competes every inning every game. The current limits on HRs, limit on runs per inning are equalizers, the games that are close are because the "weaker" is playing great defense. Demolition was lost a tournament in June to a good AAA team because of the HR limits. 3 and 1 up. They were smart enough not to hit their 3 even though they had the power to do so. My NCI team NEVER hit 10 HRS, we NEVER hit 5 HRS, and when we lost it was because we did not catch the ball. Personally, I would rather see: Non Tamper Proof bats - make a HR hitter valuable again. You do that and every team is competitive. The guys that hit HRS will still hit them and the skill players will become relevant and valued. If you are found with an altered bat - Banned for Life - no exceptions Arch 6-10' because the you fixed the bat issue. No run limit, no HR limit. 2 Divisions: Rec and Competitive. Lastly, I don't enjoy losing, but I respect the players and teams that beat my team and me. If I am playing my best and competing and do not win then my hat is off to those who bettered us that day. You can bet though, next time they better raise their level because I am going to raise mine. See you in the gym, on the field and later lets have a beer. Mike Adair |
| Nov. 8, 2010 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Great comments, Mike. I would make the arc 3-10 and widen the rubber 3 more feet on each side, creating more angles for the pitcher. I like Rec/Competitive, too. Just 2 divisions. Black World is like that. Equalizer on the home runs like we experience in NorCal is a great playing field leveler and keeps teams/games competitive. And of course, lively bats and balls, forever. |
| Nov. 8, 2010 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | yes mike,maybe 3 divs tho,upper-lower and a rec div.otherwise it'll be the same teams winning,b/c of sponsorship.how many players will pay to play when they can get a sponsor to pay for them,that is where the disparity will come into play.before you say get players to make you better,they are usually going to the sponsored teams. we also can combat the dirty bat issue with the 52-275 ball,dirty bats will not perform any better with this ball,and to any who want to complain,well maybe they are the dirty bat users..mmmm... the real hr hitters as yourself will still be able to hit them out with the 52-275 ball and the singles hitters will be singles hitters again.there will be no more oops hr's hit.i have played a bunch of tourneys here with the kids and we use that ball as directed to by usssa.there are balls being hit out with no problem,just don't have those composite hero hits from the dirty bats,or any composite bat for that matter. so lets be men and quit crying about our entitlement,and give the 52-275 ball a chance as the ball does play well. |
| Nov. 8, 2010 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Robert. If it ain't broken don't fix it. I have a dozen 52 balls someone sent me and I'll tell you one thing. They bounce off hard ground like spaldings. What experience do you or any of the seniors have regarding the hops on grass, soft infield or hard infield. It's entirely possible these balls will cause more injuries especially to the face if they are too bouncy to field. |
| Nov. 8, 2010 Dirty Men's 50 1371 posts | Joe, if teams want to make/keep games competitive, they should improve themselves. NOT look for more bizarre rules to do that for them. I am 54, take BP 3 times a week, and am in the gym 5 times a week in the off-season. Not that this makes me all-world or anything, but I'll be damned if I am not going to keep trying to improve myself. Others can work to do the same, and stop looking for rules and equipment to do it for them. |
| Nov. 8, 2010 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Gary. It took me a while to learn I'm with you fundamentally. They should never have changed one rule and play the game straight up with good bats and balls and "let the buyer beware." But, they started changing stuff to make it easier to get more guys to participate, I'm willing to bet. And once you do that it invites the thinking of what might be better or more consistent with seniors or our game. The other side for me as I've said a zillion times is hitting a good ball with a good bat is fun all by itself and is worth the price of admission. We should never go to "compromised" equipment ESPECIALLY when outside interests and concerns are calling for it and not us, the players. Look at what's going on in Football. They're fining guys for hitting/leading with their heads when tackling. Holy George Blanda! We were taught to lead with our heads into the numbers since high school. All to say there's a movement that's been going around the country to make sports "safer" and I don't think it comes from the sport but from outside interests and concerns trying to get recognition for THEIR causes and/or to make a buck. Nothing wrong with that by law but it's not from and in our best interests I do believe. I do. I do. |
| Nov. 8, 2010 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Kinder gentler football? What? That's like kinder, gentler warfare and smells like something else is definitely cooking. |
| Nov. 8, 2010 outfielder Men's 65 59 posts | I played on a 65 major+ team year before last and we never went to a tournament and played in the 65 div until the Nationals. We always played in the 60 gold div. I agree that when you reach the major+ level you are doomed. It's hard to compete out of your div., believe it or not five years in age do make a difference |
| Nov. 9, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Outfielder-you are so right. I have watched and when you hit late 50's that 5 years gets bigger and bigger. That's why I think you can get away with 50-57 and 58-64, but then every 5 years. We played a 60's major team-friends-this year and it was a big difference, you just start slowing down and you can't beat Mother Nature forever. And, you just can't find enough teams to play most of the year at your level. |
| Nov. 9, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Einstein-for once I agree with you-football is a game of intimidation. You are taught to destroy your opponent. That is the game-this has really been a goofy year for football-touching Peyton's helmet is 'roughing the passer'? Setting a ball down after making the game winning catch in the end zone constitutes a dropped pass? Put flags on them. Sheesh! However, we don't get paid to play and we go back to our jobs after a tournament. Yes, there is a need to try to make the game safer for seniors. It is such a fine line, though. |
| Nov. 9, 2010 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Hey Mark. They say great minds think alike. Watch out. I think it's the same movement that's trying to make football kinder and gentler that's trying to change senior softball, too. It has to do with sideways thinking rather than directional thinking. It happens when a person/culture gets stuck and has trouble moving forward. I remember periodically when growing up there would be this outcry of how brutal professional boxing was. Same stuff. As long as it's voluntary leave it alone. |
| Nov. 9, 2010 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | what the hell is this movement you talk of.i have seen none of it what so ever. and no you don't think like webbie,b/c if you did you would be looking to make our senior game more safer to play(as all other assoc's are doing now),as webbie said,"we all have to go back to work on monday". your examples of football(which has been improving equipment for safer play,also boxing)and pro boxing are terrible examples.they get paid into the millions of dollars to it. |
| Nov. 9, 2010 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | Joe isnt sideways a direction? And you cant hit the Rocking Chair until I do! |
| Nov. 9, 2010 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Hey John. How're you doin? Well, I hope. We've all done well getting this far. Everyday's another gift, another blessing. I've got a couple of games left this weekend at NCSSA before shutting it down. Senior bats and Baden Fire balls. A good way to end the year. |
| Nov. 11, 2010 LineDrive 2 posts | I've read most of the posts on this subject and it looks like people would like to hear the opinions from other M+ teams. Having run many tournaments and helped with Associations, I can tell you that most of the comments are upside down. The lower divisions are where the majority of the teams play, so I don't think that it is likely that anyone would want to change their rules to cater to the upper divisions. Making lower divisions play upper teams will only have the lower teams not want to come back, which will eventually trickle down, causing tournaments to have less and less teams. Just seeing this association growing proves that point. We would love to come and play more teams, but the economy doesn't allow the travel the way we used to. Especially flights. We don't mind the mixture of divisions. I question the equalizing rules, because we not only have a lowered home run limit, but we are forced to give up additional runs that we quite possibly can't make up. One of my teammates had a suggestion that we give the other team "up to" the 5 runs throughout the game. That way, if they score 3 runs in an inning, you would add 2. 3 the next inning would get 2 more, an so on until they get their 5. However, if they get all 5's they wouldn't get any runs, because they proved they are equal to the team they are playing. I thought that was a good idea. But the reality is that we want to play, and I am realistic enough to know that losing one M+ team is better than losing 30 M and AAA teams. So we need to deal with it. If we are the better team, the equalizer will be just that (Like handicap in bowling). As far as the awards comments, I believe that if everyone is paying the same, they should be earning the same awards. But I also agree that there should be some type of incentive to encourage teams that can play up, to play up. No one cares for a team, or player, that just plays down to win a ring. Sorry if it was long winded. |
| Nov. 11, 2010 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Just not having the Mavericks there should give teams a fighting chance to win something at the 50 Major-plus level. Although if you are from the Linedrive team out of Michigan, you guys are now the favorite if they are in fact done. I'm sure their players can make a number of teams a whole lot better! Any equalizer that provides a lower team to EARN some runs is acceptable. It is very tough to GIVE a good lower team runs, hit their HR rule AND not be the home team. |
| Nov. 11, 2010 LineDrive 2 posts | I've read most of the posts on this subject and it looks like people would like to hear the opinions from other M+ teams. Having run many tournaments and helped with Associations, I can tell you that most of the comments are upside down. The lower divisions are where the majority of the teams play, so I don't think that it is likely that anyone would want to change their rules to cater to the upper divisions. Making lower divisions play upper teams will only have the lower teams not want to come back, which will eventually trickle down, causing tournaments to have less and less teams. Just seeing this association growing proves that point. We would love to come and play more teams, but the economy doesn't allow the travel the way we used to. Especially flights. We don't mind the mixture of divisions. I question the equalizing rules, because we not only have a lowered home run limit, but we are forced to give up additional runs that we quite possibly can't make up. One of my teammates had a suggestion that we give the other team "up to" the 5 runs throughout the game. That way, if they score 3 runs in an inning, you would add 2. 3 the next inning would get 2 more, an so on until they get their 5. However, if they get all 5's they wouldn't get any runs, because they proved they are equal to the team they are playing. I thought that was a good idea. But the reality is that we want to play, and I am realistic enough to know that losing one M+ team is better than losing 30 M and AAA teams. So we need to deal with it. If we are the better team, the equalizer will be just that (Like handicap in bowling). As far as the awards comments, I believe that if everyone is paying the same, they should be earning the same awards. But I also agree that there should be some type of incentive to encourage teams that can play up, to play up. No one cares for a team, or player, that just plays down to win a ring. Sorry if it was long winded. |
| Nov. 12, 2010 stick8 1992 posts | Jawood I play 50 major plus (OKI Players)and while the Mavericks dominate the division why would other teams want to go in thinking they're playing for second place? Not to be arrogantly cocky but why not have the attitude you can beat them? |
| Nov. 12, 2010 FOFO Men's 60 284 posts | How about making the + divisions voluntary with no HR rules or restrictions on runs per inning etc. That way the guys that enjoy hitting home runs and scoring a lot of runs could do so. Leave the HR out rules and and runs per innings limit in place for the rest of the divisions. |
| Nov. 12, 2010 FOFO Men's 60 284 posts | How about making the + divisions voluntary with no HR rules or restrictions on runs per inning etc. That way the guys that enjoy hitting home runs and scoring a lot of runs could do so. Leave the HR out rules and and runs per innings limit in place for the rest of the divisions. |
| Nov. 12, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | I threw that idea out on another thread and was mildly surprised nobody commented on it. If they are going to have a major plus division, it looks like it will have to be treated differently to make it attractive. There are too few plus teams and too few players of that caliber to make the division attractive. They end up playing down, giving away runs, defensive players,etc. I wouldn't want to play most games with one arm tied behind my back. |
| Nov. 13, 2010 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | stick8 We have played your team. I agree with you, we don't have a problem playing the Mavericks, I'm just saying a lot of teams don't and a big reason why they don't want to get bumped up to Major-plus. Maybe now if the Mavericks don't play we can get more teams in to the Major-plus level to make it worth while if they insist on having this division. |
| Nov. 14, 2010 stick8 1992 posts | Jawood I guess I'm from the old school that believes playing against the best serves to make you hungrier & better. Then you know where you stand and what you and the team have to work on. What team are you on? |
| Nov. 14, 2010 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | I'm old school too, stick, it's just there aren't enough in our class to play with the rules we used to back in the day. Playing 2-3 team tournaments are the worse! If we were able to have 16 team Major-plus tournaments, let's go for it!!! We need to find ways we can get the numbers up. NW Legends. |
| Nov. 14, 2010 stick8 1992 posts | I know what you mean Jawood. To get more teams I say combine major and major plus. Split the difference with the hr rule if necessary. Good game you played against us in Phoenix. Which one were you? I was in left center who hit little duck snorts to right field. |
| Nov. 14, 2010 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | I have said it here before somewhere, I have never personally talked with any player that believes Major and Major-plus shouldn't be combined. Our team rotates around a lot, I think I was just hitting in the game against you guys. |
| Nov. 15, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Jawood, Stick8-you guys are right on. I am also old school-play'em straight up-look'em in the eye-if they beat you, shake their hands and go back to work to get better. I would like nothing else but to get rid of all the limits in the game, but conditions make that 'improbable'. I am very seriously debating going to Tucson to the meeting. Being laid off may make 4 days tough on the pocket book, but I care about our game. I have talked to the guys from Arizona Rogue 55 M+ a lot (we played them 3 times this year) and got some of their input. If you 2 wanted me to take anything personally to the meeting, what would it be? You can email me about this at weber5069@msn.com or just post it here, and that goes for anyone and their input. I love our game and want to help it improve. |
| Nov. 15, 2010 stick8 1992 posts | Webbie if you go suggest combining major and major plus. As Jawood elluded to I don't think very many players would have an objection to that and it's very feasable. |
| Nov. 15, 2010 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | It would be great if you can go ... and be heard! |
| Nov. 15, 2010 softball4b Men's 70 1248 posts | It would certainly eliminate the game playing with the rosters. The only problem is a Major player can still play AAA while a Major Plus player cannot. I suggest an Impact play list and not just routinely making a player who plays on a Major Plus team a Major Plus player. Every team I have ever played on has "role players". Without these players we would not have won, but they themselves were not the reason we won. |
| Nov. 15, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | That is one "nice" thing about the NCSSA's assn. Players can play in what ever team they choose and rosters are usually up to date and visible for all to see. Not all teams are there nor are the ages correct for many players but generally a good job is done well. That is one very important issue that is lacking here. No cross checking. I've had M+ players play AA & AAA. But you also get the teams going against each other as well on occasion. Still good & fun. |
| Nov. 16, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Good suggestions-and I really like the one about 'impact' players. There may be a lot of players that might be able to play M+, but are in a situation where they know if they did, they could never play back down. For example,if I were so inclined, and I did play some Major Plus, I would not be able to come back down to play with my Desperado family again, as we are AAA. I am going to ask to open debate on a change to 50-57, 58-64 brackets in Major Plus only because of lack of teams. You could 'grandfather' in teams already together in the 55 bracket that may not fit totally into one of the new brackets agewise. There are only 58 teams registered Major Plus between the 50, 55, and 60 division. I think it is worth talking about. Keep the ideas and thoughts coming. |
| Nov. 16, 2010 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | webbie sorry to hear of the layoff,keep plugging and something will come for you. the player ratings in the past have been a joke tho,as i have seen guys who got that rating and were not a M+ player,but were restricted from playing anything else,i have been there done that and had to write letters to get my reprieve.it would be nice tho to have a system in place. |
| Nov. 16, 2010 Omar Khayyam 1357 posts | Just to clarify taits's comments on NCSSA. This is an association that ranks teams on ability and TDs try to group teams of similar skill, even if they play teams older or younger. However, there are a couple of protections. Teams must be in an age bracket. No player can play up in age (e.g. whether Major or Major Plus or not, no one 57 can play on a 60-64 team) but they can play down. If they do join such an older team, even if they are the only "younger" guy, the team is reranked to the younger player's age, in my example reranked to a 55-59 team. Also, if an "impact" player (sometimes a guy who only warmed the bench on a Major Plus team) moves down in the same age bracket to play on a AAA team, the team may be upgraded by SSUSA, even though NCSSA allows the roster move. By the way, not every NCSSA player likes it when a true impact player plays down on a lesser team, particularly one two levels down. Especially if this is done for a tournament, where NCSSA rules allow up to two additional players. The two-add on rule helps avoid many forfeits and saves the stamina of older players by expanding the roster, but a pick-up player who is banging the fence every at bat can seem a bit unfair to weaker opponents. |
| Nov. 16, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Omar, Some of what you said is valid, not all. given is the can't play up in age, And team will end up or should end up playing at youngest players age he's listed at, but M+ players I have had playing on my AA teams, plural, played. Within last 3-4 years. Teams are\were not shown on SSIUSA ratings back them either. Maybe got lost in shuffle who knows. Holes exist and are used. I also agree with the last paragraph. |
| Nov. 16, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Taits, Omar-I just roughly counted the number of teams in the 50,55,60,65 divisions and came up with about 800. If you average 18 to a roster, that is 14,400 players to try to keep track of. If you really attempted to build a data base on every player and what level he plays or has played or played under an assumed identity, it would be quite a job to rate them and keep them straight. Then you would have to match every roster against the mass data base in every tournament.I'm not sure who has the time to do this-plus-can you imagine how many exemptions would be requested, or how many guys would contest their rating, or--- whew, I don't think this will happen any time soon. Even rating teams with 800 total teams is daunting-if every team plays 6 or 7 tourneys a year you have around 5000 team tourney results to check and if each team averages 6 games a tourney, that is 30,000 games. And, 'Team A' got hot for two tourneys and smoked everyone, but went 1-5 and 0-6 the last 3 tourneys-was it injuries, hot streak/ then back to normal, sandbagging so they didn't get rerated? All these must come under consideration. Nobody is ever going to keep everyone happy. And I only went up to the 65+ age bracket. |
| Nov. 16, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | You left out about 100 for the 70's and older divisions... I've counted them before, but pointed out well. Not all play any longer or very rarely but likely not enough to worry about. They have the data in the rosters and score books as well as other info collected over the years. Assumed identy is a violation of rules, not that anyone would do that, right...lol Checks and balances are needed the one sided control on the game isn't justified, imo. Good job or events or not. you might want to include sandbagging in there as well. Regardless of thoughts on it, it still exists. Quite a job, I definitely agree. And I've asked for it for many years. Work on one age rating at a time. Start at the top and work down. It won't happen over night, and sure won't happen unless you start somewhere either. |
| Nov. 16, 2010 Omar Khayyam 1357 posts | Webbie, good points about the difficulty of determining a player's ability. Much of the roster comparison is easy for a computer program. Once written, and all players having a unique identification (too many John Smiths), it would easily find problems. The challenge is ranking the player initially, at least something more than that he had a cup of coffee with a Major Plus team once upon a time. Don't know an easy answer to that, but taits suggests one age bracket at a time. It's a start. |
| Nov. 17, 2010 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | Webbie, I'll be at Shadow Rock 8am and 9:30 games Friday. John Miller OC Mustangs 60 AAA SS/2B |
| Nov. 17, 2010 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | webbie/omar,what about a major+ player list like what the younger guys have(for the j halls,bj fulk,bret helmer,etc).we could list the top 100 or so that can only play M+,than have another list as players to watch that can play major or above. now we can let them play lower,but the team will need to be looked at closely,say a AAA is the only place they play with b/c of distance from a M+,M team for them,well maybe.do like the young div's do it,allow bumps to the lower teams so the upper play can play,aka AA can have 1 bump(watch player only,no M+ player on the list) or they get moved to AAA,AAA gets 2 watched list,or 1 major+ bump or they get bumped to M,i also would like to see the M and the M+ div's combined. E4/E6,hey john take it easy on my spurs out there, i now think i might have played against you if you played with the mustangs from 2001-2005,i played with a team called topgun-shuttermart/stone age(#77) back then. good luck there in vegas and good luck in your treatment when you get back.. |
| Nov. 18, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | E/4E/6-We will be at Lorenzi Park at 10 and 11:30. I would look forward to meeting all you old farts that still have the heart to be out here!!! I am #25 with the Blue CTI knee brace on. Mark Weber Desperados 55AAA |
| Nov. 18, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | mad dog-I thought of that, and if it was worked out, we would also have a few things to consider. We age, get injured-sometimes permanently now and what if a major impact player had an injury that severely limited him and he could still play, but only at the AA level? Also, proximity to teams at that level-we have no major plus or major teams within 450 miles. Suppose someone from Albuquerque got classified as a major player-he would have to travel to play and I think it would be hard to force someone to travel to play. I probably will bring that up, though. |
| Nov. 18, 2010 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | webbie,yeah we get older and get hurt,but most of the time our bat is still real good,that is where most of the rating come from anyways.do you think the halls,helmer's,fulk's are on the major player list b/c of their glove,not really,its b/c they can hit the crap out of the ball.to me it would have to be a case by case situation.i know of a guy who is classified at M+ and he can't play close to home(b/c of the state touching rule,he is a Midwesterner and played with a western team,before the touch rules) as ssusa told him any team he would play for would be reclassified to at least major(they were AAA).personally i think he should of been grandfathered in as he had played with this team for a few years,before they told him no more.i know 1 player doesn't make a team,but........ i also know someone who lives in Amarillo,tx who can't find a team b/c there is nothing close to him.he finally will get to play,but the team is in Austin over 400 miles away. damned if we do,damned if we don't. |
