Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 4 members: JohnO28, Mos, TABLE SETTER 11, TonyA; 88 anonymousDiscussion: RED FLAGS FLYING OVER LVSSA/SSUSA MERGER
| Posted | Discussion |
| Oct. 4, 2011 DD Men's 75 92 posts | RED FLAGS FLYING OVER LVSSA/SSUSA MERGER We congratulate LVSSA and SSUSA for their merger recently announced and hope the future holds all the promise officials are counting on. As a player, though, I'm not at all sure this will work out very well for the paying customers. Why? Well, for one thing, there is a NET LOSS OF ONE TOURNAMENT. There will no longer be an LVSSA World Masters tournament. There will be one LVSSA/SSUSA World Masters event and NO OCTOBER World Championship tournament in Phoenix. You teams that loved to play in both...sorry, one will have to do next year. It's being ballyhooed as the largest tournament in the world...but SSUSA already made that claim the last 5 years anyway...read their press releases elsewhere on this website. You can probably plan on a sizable entry fee bump, too...and that will be "justified" by the argument that you were paying more for two events...a $795 entry fee should seem like a bargain!! For another, NO SEVEN INNING GAMES. Rules enforced by LVSSA (and just adopted by SSUSA) will guarantee shortened games as was the case over the last two weekends in Las Vegas. Thirteen games in two different major plus divisions provided just one 7 inning game; seven 6 inning games; four 5 inning games; and one 4 inning game. If you think softball is a seven inning game, better find a different organization because you are not going to get seven with the current set of rules in place. SSUSA has reversed itself by now allowing for virtually unlimited home runs in all divisions except AA. After several years of sanity with respect to reasonable limitations on HRs, SSUSA has allowed the guppy to swallow the whale with the adoption of LVSSA's unlimited (and preposterous) HR rules. With the exception of all but a few major plus players, the verdict is in. Limit home runs...make the excess OUTS...and bring some balance back to the game. Defense and seven innings, along with hitting makes for a COMPLETE GAME...and that is what most players want. Business is business and we cannot fault SSUSA for doing what it had to do to take over a proud but obviously struggling competitor. However, paying customers MUST be satisfied...and it remains to be seen if SSUSA will continue to do that. We remain guardedly optimistic....but red flags are billowing above this proposed merger. |
| Oct. 4, 2011 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | DD, I guess two boast that about being the largest. I just took this off the Huntsman site.: "This event is the largest senior softball tournament in the world. Several divisions within each age bracket permits teams to play their own general level of competition. Our event is played at four locations with the award-gathering Canyon's Complex the center of activities. Teams are guaranteed a minimum of 5 games. Tournament format is pool play, then double elimination." The usually have over 300 teams. Fantastic parks and fields barring the sun in a few and some wind. As for fees, I think your right but I believe there are some in the East or south that hit the 700 mark already or more. Time will tell if the bugs and the rosters that may change for some teams make any difference. The 5 runs per inning limit but for the last one should keep the numbers relatively close unless one has a bad or very good day. |
| Oct. 4, 2011 Omar Khayyam 1357 posts | taits, you're right about the Huntsman. Even if the new super tournament of LVSSA and SSUSA draws more than 300 teams, it will still not be able to match the quality of fields, the amenities, and the festivities of the Huntsman. Only its remote location keeps it from being even larger. I was amused by your quote from the Huntsman "play their own general level of competition." A VERY "general" I would say. The roster rules are so relaxed and the sandbagging is so notorious, that I can't get my team to attend anymore. We go every year to Reno because the competition is balanced (with rare exceptions), but "5 and out" in St. George has left a bad taste for too many guys. |
| Oct. 4, 2011 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Got to agree with you DD, they have gone overboard on this. We are a Major-plus team that would have liked to seen the rules stay the same except they could have adopted the progressive HR rule. 9 runs is way too many, taking 2 hours to play a game that goes the full 7 innings. It amazes me that SSUSA would adopt LVSSA rules when it's LVSSA that is in trouble. The brass seems to think that allowing more runs and HR's will make teams WANT to play at a higher level ... I don't think so. If they are bumped up, they will just disband and start over. And what about the smaller tournaments where teams from multiple divisions are playing each other? The lower teams are not going to be very happy watching single after single, walk after walk or whatever you call it going over the fence all the time. Finally, who cares that there are 200, 300, 400 teams in a tournament? There are so many age groups and divisions that we are still competing against our little groups of less than 10. |
| Oct. 5, 2011 Dbax Men's 65 2101 posts | Couldn't agree more. Played 50 Majors last weekend in LVSSA. The seven run per inning rule does absolutely nothing to add to the game. All it does is guarantee you will not play 7 innings. We played 7 games and did not play 7 innings in any of them. No reason for 7 homeruns either. 5 is plenty in Majors. We watched a Major + game go on for 2 hrs. because of the open inning. I still think the way to go is the one up rule. |
| Oct. 5, 2011 PattyMac 90 posts | I played in Las Vegas two weeks ago in the 55 major plus division. We won 3 round robin games and then scored almost 100 runs in our two losses in the tournament. After saying that this was the most fun tournament that our team played in all year. Great competition, great ball and all the hitting and defense you wanted. Whats wrong with playing a 2 hour game? We play to play and the two hour games we played were nothing but fun. Few balls were hit up the middle because you could take a full swing. Hope they keep the "Rock" ball in the new tournament as it stayed good all day, even in the heat, not like the balls usually used by SSUSA in their tournaments. PattyMac |
| Oct. 5, 2011 BruceinGa Men's 70 3233 posts | I agree, Pat! Why is everyone trying to shorten the games???!! I understand why tournament directors would want one hour games but not players! |
| Oct. 5, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Yep. If guys don't want to play, then why do they bother to show up at all? |
| Oct. 5, 2011 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | DD: I always read your posts with interest because they're usually well-considered, not laced with self-interest and you are out there playing all of the time. I happen to agree with your feelings/concerns about the proposed merger. First of all, is it really a merger? Time will tell on this point... right now, it's just speculation as to whether it is a merger or an acquisition. Secondly, is 'bigger' the same as as 'better'? It wasn't with the Soviet Union. Who really cares that an event draws 150 or 300 teams? The important issue has more to do with how your team and your bracket is handled. Thirdly, you hit the nail on the head... what has been 2 national events is now one. In the past there have been 4 national tourneys that we tried to attend every year. SSWS, SPA, LVSSA and SSUSA. This list has been cut in half. How do we fill this gap? IMO, the timing is right for regional assns to 'belly up to the bar'. Lost in all of this seems to be the good people of LV... they have put on roughly 20 events over the past 10 years and the LVSSA had grown to be one of the best M/M+ events. None of these people made a dime personally because all of the proceeds went back into the teams from LV. I'm aware that the past 2-3 events haven't gone smoothly and recognize the problems that exist. SSUSA has suggested that they will adopt more liberal M+ rules. How long can we expect this? It was only 3 years ago that they 'commissioned' the M+ Task Force... (there was no compensation paid). Those recommendations were highly lauded and the changes they generated actually persisted for 2-3 months. Finally, you (DD) suggested that they need not adopt the LVSSA rules (HRs, runs/inning, time limits, etc.) and I don't really care whether they do or they don't. Again, it's like the weather (but in a different way)... if you don't like it, stick around for an hour because it will change. We've had many knee jerk rule changes over the past 3 years... HRs, closing down CA & FL (aka the Bill Ruth rule), etc... no need to list them all as they've been discussed ad nauseum. In lieu of all of these changes, what I'd really appreciate is some continuity and consistency... continuity with the rules and consistency in the way they're applied. To me, these two things would be more impressive than the fact that SSUSA (or whomever) drew 200 teams. BW |
| Oct. 5, 2011 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | DD,the wood,yep both of ya's have hit the ol proverbial nail on the head,lets see what happens now............ |
| Oct. 7, 2011 CRUSADERVB Men's 70 275 posts | WOODY & DD ARE 100% RIGHT. WE LOST ALL OF THE LVSSA TOURNAMENTS. THE ONLY BRIGHT SPOT, THE WINTER NATIONALS WILL NOW BE IN PHOENIX, WHERE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FOR YEARS!! THE 9 RUNS PER INNING IS WAY TOO MANY. THEY SHOULD JUST KEEP IT AT 5 PER INNING WITH ANYTHING OVER 10 HRS AN OUT. |
| Oct. 13, 2011 Fabe Men's 65 456 posts | The Vegas Tourney has been going down hill for the past 5 yrs. We travel from Hawaii and end up playing 4 Hawaii teams! This year we had to play against AA teams because that division was short of teams....the flip flopping of the rules during our game was a bummer!! Hopefully next year we can have some complete divisions...Aloha, Fabe |
| Dec. 26, 2011 neck10 714 posts | patty mac did you get back to your old self stay out of that doctors office its more fun on the diamond merry christmas from all the kinnco bunch |
| Dec. 26, 2011 The real deal Men's 70 114 posts | Just wondering - why is playing 7 innings in 65 minutes better that playing 5 or 6 innings in 65 minutes? Either way, your playing just as long... |
