Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: Emmitt, TABLE SETTER 11; 58 anonymousDiscussion: 50 Major+ Worlds...OKI
| Posted | Discussion |
| Oct. 11, 2011 udaplaya 90 posts | 50 Major+ Worlds...OKI Is OKI playing under a different name or will they not be participating this year? |
| Oct. 11, 2011 Mario Men's 50 451 posts | If you are talking about Phoenix, OKI will be there. |
| Oct. 11, 2011 udaplaya 90 posts | cool, didnt see you guys on the list, but i know that is not always up to date. that makes seven teams teams total in our division...not bad. |
| Oct. 11, 2011 Mario Men's 50 451 posts | That would be Demolition, Line Drive, East Bay Oldies, OKI, Northwest Legends, and who else? |
| Oct. 11, 2011 softball4b Men's 70 1248 posts | Demolition (Let It Fly) San Diego, CA East Bay Oldies Fremont, CA Kevitt X Orono, MN Line Drive/Salsa Bombers Sterling Heights, MI Nazzareno Electric Longhorns Castro Valley, CA NW Legends 50+ Seattle, WA OKI |
| Oct. 11, 2011 Mario Men's 50 451 posts | OKI stands for Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana and we are base out of Indianapolis, In. |
| Oct. 11, 2011 ShaneV Men's 55 393 posts | Go Legends!!! ShaneV |
| Oct. 11, 2011 Mario Men's 50 451 posts | Shane you play for the Legends? |
| Oct. 11, 2011 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Wow, 7 teams for a world championship! |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Jawood, is that good? |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Brett Men's 55 239 posts | Yes Gary, it is a good turnout for that division. |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | No, 7 teams says it all in regard to the state of Major-plus. |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Brett Men's 55 239 posts | Considering there are fewer than 10 'active' 50 major plus teams, I would say 7 is a good turnout. |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Good because it is a high percentage of teams? If that is all it takes, a division with only 3 'active' teams and all 3 showed up would be really, really good? I think Jawood said it well, and only reinforces what Pricer has been saying all along. |
| Oct. 12, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | I see 6 or 7 (presuming we--OKI have entered)50 major plus teams. I see 31 total 50 major teams entered. I see 31 total 50 AAA teams entered. I see 13 total 50 AA teams entered. Combine major and major plus you have 38 teams. Combine AAA and AA and you have 44 teams. Combining divisions like that would offer a much better tournament and more challenging to win. |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | stick, I am sure the Major+ guys do, but you have to wonder how much of a challenge the others really want. Especially when you read on here all of the opposition to combining any divisions and increasing the size of the brackets and perhaps the level of competition. |
| Oct. 12, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | That's a good point Gary. If major+ and major were combined it's feasible some of those major teams would elect to not play and/or try to work their roster to be at the lower level. Perhaps those teams just don't have enough faith in their abilities? |
| Oct. 12, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | stick, How about keeping the equalizer rule that the Major Plus teams have in effect and let them play at the major level. There is a reason that the majority of these teams are rated Major Plus. They are better than the Major teams. I am on a Major team and we have a lot of faith in our abilities but when you lose 4 out of 5 games to a Major Plus team some doubts will creep in there. One game was 21-19. The 21-19 ( no equalizer rule) is still a lose no moral victories in a lose.I believe that our team would play and not try and work the roster to get moved down. The equalizer would help in that decision to play tourneys in which a Major Plus team was entered. Thanks Harry #20 NVFORCE. |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Would anyone really decide to attend a tournament only if they get an equalizer? If they won with the equalizer wouldn't they realize they still really lost the game? Are hollow "victories" really that important to guys this age, versus an opportunity to have an actual win? |
| Oct. 12, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | Gary You do have a way with words.You just do not see my side of the situation. You can compete all you want but when your best effort results in a lose that is no fun. There has always been different divisions even in the 80s for the reason to try and make it fair. If the runs level the playing field so be it. I would know that the only reason that we won the game was because of getting the runs but hallow as you may think it is. I would take it. Thanks Harry |
| Oct. 12, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | Birdie I appreciate your team being one that would would play. But in all honesty I'm not a fan of the equalizer rule. I can't speak for all the major plus teams but I can tell you we (OKI) cancelled out of going to 2 tournaments this year because no major plus teams entered. Our sponsor felt that it wasn't worth the time and money to spend to have to play a tournament giving up 5 runs per game or facing 11 fielders. Your right in that a loss is a loss and there are no moral victories. Suppose your team plays our team and using your score, we win 21-19 but with the equalizer rule your team gets 5 extra runs which makes the actual score 24-21 for your team. I don't see how anyone would consider that a real victory. |
| Oct. 12, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | stick, I understand how you feel about the runs. If the shoe were on the other foot, I do not think that I would like it. you a getting into a play on words now. Real victory NO it would be tainted but a victory none the less. It is a tough call either way. I am glad that I only play and not manage or run an organization. It is a real hard job just trying to please 75% of the people and the other 25% you can never please. Thanks Harry |
| Oct. 12, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | It is a victory in the books but I for one wouldn't feel like I won a game if I received 5 extra runs. For years I played USSSA B and when we played the A, AA and major teams we didn't get an equalizer rule. We played straight up. I just don't see why it isn't that way in Senior ball. I've seen and played against some pretty damn good major teams. Your correct in that your not going to please everyone but I just look at how the game is supposed to be played. |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | No doubt a loss is a loss. But a win because of an allowance given is not a win. Not sure quite what I would call it, but a "victory" would definitely not be my way to describe it. Perhaps it would be a "gift". |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | stick, I think equalizers are not only given but apparently demanded because somehow guys think they are entitled to winning by virtue of paying money and showing up. Oh, and there were not always division. I believe in ASA the "A" division did not come until the 70s, before that it was just Open. Yet I used to go to Parma every Labor Day weekend and watch a lot of teams showing up to play, though many knew they did not have much of a change to beat Michael's Lounge, or County Sports, for examples. |
| Oct. 12, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | Gary, I played in Va and we had D,C,B.and A divisions in the 80s We had qualifiers that you had to win in the late s 70s I just do not know the organizations. I thought that it was USSSA but I could be wrong. Hard time remembering yesterday. I will take the gift I do understand your point on the gift and it is just your opinion. Thanks Harry stick, I agree but times are changing. whether for the good or not is always debatable. Thanks Harry |
| Oct. 12, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | Just curious are there any other Major players that have an opinion on this or am I out of line here. Thanks Harry |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | birdie, I agree this is all just opinion. I just know if my kids found out I ever won a tournament because I got extra runs, or an extra fielder, or extra anything they would probably lock me out of the house. :) |
| Oct. 12, 2011 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | Gary I doubt that they would bite the hand that feeds them. If they did that you could get back to playing LOL. You wife on the the hand may do that. Thanks Harry |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Well, maybe they wouldn't go that far, but you don't know my kids. 14 varsity letters between them, and 2 played sports in college. Heck, my wife lettered in 4 sports in high school and played some D-1 college basketball, so she would probably lock the door too. LOL They would just find that very embarrassing. Though you could have a point. If they did bite my hand, perhaps that would save us a LOT of tuition and room and board we are paying. Always a bright side............ |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Stick missed seeing you in Vegas tried a couple of times just didn't see you. Stick keep in mind when you want to combine Major and Major plus. Major plus does not have to qualify players at all and for SPA and LVSSA you get two players not bordering states. Big advantage. I can tell you we aren't going to Phoenix this year because we could not field a team (we couldn't add two players unless we went to a qualifier) because we could not afford to go to a late season qualifier. Economy is not allowing several of our players to travel. We had the players lined up and they were major we just could not add them unless we took on the added expense of an additional tournament. I do not believe Major plus has to go through this. |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | When we play in our local tournaments, we often play against 40+ teams and are eligible to take a 5 run spot ... we never do, or will take something that we don't earn. If we don't out score our opponent in real score, WE LOSE, and we are okay with that! I am however not against equalizers but a team has to earn it. An example would be a Major team can score one more run per inning than a Major-plus team ... something like that, an equalizer that is EARNED, not gifted. By raising the limits on HR's, runs per inning and allowing players outside their bordering states for 2012, SSUSA has effectively LOWERED the number of teams that would even think about playing at the Major-plus level. BTW, stick, do you have to be at least 6'4" & 250# to play for OKI? |
| Oct. 12, 2011 Q19 Men's 65 81 posts | If we have just 7 teams in Major Plus, we should just play round robin and best record wins the RING! Good Luck to all! |
| Oct. 13, 2011 Swampy 24 posts | The 7 teams not only speaks for the state of Major Plus, but also for the Major division. Stick said there were 31 Major teams entered in Phoenix. I would have to think out of the 31 teams, there are more than a few that could hang with the rated Major Plus teams but refuse to give it a shot! If there are tournaments where equalizers are necessary, I do like Jawoods idea of making them earn it. Sad, but 7 teams in the tournament does represent a high percentage of participation from the Major Plus division. |
| Oct. 13, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | Joe, correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand it in SSUSA if your a major, AAA or AA team and want to add players for Phoenix they have to be on your qualifying roster. If they aren't they can only play major plus. Is that accurate? I saw you playing in Vegas but didn't get a chance to say hello. Too bad your not going to Phoenix. I completely understand about the economy, it's tough all over. Just a question about the Shadow Rock complex. Was it me or were the bases shorter than normal? |
| Oct. 13, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | Jawood, I get teased about that quite often. lol Perhaps our team is in the wrong sport. Is their senior football? lol |
| Oct. 13, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | Q19: I'd be ok with that. That way each game means something. |
| Oct. 13, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | Absolutely Swampy. I've seen some that could hang pretty well in major plus. |
| Oct. 13, 2011 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Hi Stick my understanding is you add players below the major plus you either have to qualify or under certain circumstances where the roster goes below 12 add the next age group and lower class. My team for example 50 major we would have been allowed to add 55AAA or spend the money and qualify a new roster. We also could have opted to play major plus. I have mixed feelings on declaring a team major plus without going through the learning curve so to speak. Major plus is a big step, based on what I've seen the jump from Major to Major plus is bigger than AAA to major. I'm sure others will disagree but I can only go by what my eyes tell me. |
| Oct. 13, 2011 Mario Men's 50 451 posts | We are not all 6'4" & 250#'s. We have at least 4 or 5 guys smaller than that. |
| Oct. 13, 2011 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | With 7 teams, a full round robin and the two teams with the best record play for the championship. The second best record has to beat the team with the best record twice. EVERY GAME MEANS SOMETHING! Mario, you mean "smaller" like 6-2 210? |
| Oct. 13, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | Joe I think you touched on it. I believe if a new team that hasn't played a qualifying tournament that wants to go to Phoenix has to play major plus. I'm not certain if this applies to individual players that haven't played. Major plus is definitely tough this year. Each game we played in Vegas was a dogfight right to the end. I see no reason Phoenix being any different. Stay well and hope to catch up with you down the road. |
| Oct. 13, 2011 FOFO Men's 60 284 posts | I play Major and don't like the equalizer, don't like the idea of merging Major and Major + any more than I would Major and AAA. The teams are classified for a reason. Some are just better than others. Major + should be unlimited HR's and let the bombers bomb. Leave everything else as is. By looking at the numbers the only division in trouble is Major Plus which indicates that style of ball isn't attractive to most players. |
| Oct. 13, 2011 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | FOFO, It's pretty much unlimited at every level except AA next year. Call them what you want, walks, dead ball singles or HR's, most everyone will be bombing! |
| Oct. 14, 2011 FOFO Men's 60 284 posts | Jawood, Don't you think that will give teams even less motivation to play Major+. I for one like the home run limits as it puts a little more emphasis on playing "D" and makes teams loaded with power hitters want to move up. Oh well, what do I know. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | I absolutely agree with you FOFO, that teams will not want to play Major-plus. I think they went way too far with these rules. The brass thinks that teams will flock to Major-plus because of the basically unlimited HR rule and 9 runs per inning ... WRONG! I was simply stating what I believe the mind set of most players will be, even at the other levels. Next year, the Eestern and Wastern Nationals will have 1-2 teams in them, the little NW, SW, Midwest, etc Championships will have none and we will be sitting in Vegas for the Worlds with our same 6-7 teams. I hate to be Debbie Downer, but this is what I see happening at the Major-plus level, not that most care about it, being a very small amount of teams to begin with. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 FOFO Men's 60 284 posts | Jaw, I think you're right. I don't know of anything that can fix the problem because the facts are some teams/players are just better that others and most don't want equalizers etc. I just felt they should do something to make the plus divisions more attractive while somewhat handicapping the rest, thereby motivating teams to want to move up. Seems they have done the exact opposite. Well whatever they do I for one will continue to enjoy the game. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | FOFO, it just seems like few if any teams/players can be motivated to want to move up. Just sooooo much different than when we were younger and moving up was what everyone sought to do. Just seems like now everyone wants to be career Freshmen or JV players instead of working to play Varsity. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 Swampy 24 posts | Standing in the outfield and watching ball after ball go over the fence is not all that exciting! 9 runs an inning does not allow for anything more than a 4 or 5 inning game. Unlimited homeruns will not excite many, if any teams to want to play Major+. Other issues, such as using senior bats, rocket balls, on cement type infields and on 300'fences deminishes the defense, other than the balls hit right at the infield or a mishit fly ball to the outfield. It would be interesting to move a Major+ game to a high school field and compare the numbers. I agree with posts above and many of you guys have played longer than I and have juggled ideas to make it better. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 FOFO Men's 60 284 posts | Gary, I live in Vegas and 30 years we were able to play USSSA and ASA "B" tournaments in town with a fair number of local teams and C was loaded. Now with 5 times as many people there are no "C" tournaments due to zero local "C" teams. WTH! Only tournaments are "D" and "E". "E" in this mans opinion ruined softball and was nothing more than a money grab by the organizations. Swampy, I am with you. Unlimited home runs does not appeal to me. I like a little D in a game. Maybe it's because it's the only part of the game left that technology and pharmaceuticals can't make you good at. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 kbl Men's 60 544 posts | guys...talk about a money grab...check out USSSA "E" in the orlando tourney...192 teams..D/E tournament ttthanks, ken |
| Oct. 14, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | At this point is it a money grab, or good business? If USSSA can find 2000 guys with such little pride that they would spend that kind of money to travel and play that low of a level, then who here is at fault? If "fault" is even the right word to use. I just can't blame the association for this one. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | USSSA E Worlds West (College Station, TX 9-9-11) 87 teams USSSA E Worlds (Orlando, FL 9-16-11) 192 teams USSSA E Worlds North (Sterling Heights, MI 9-23-11) 62 teams That's a total of 341 class E teams participating in a world tournament. In a down economy it sounds like USSSA is doing something right business-wise to attract this number of teams. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Sure they are, stick. They are calling Regional tournaments "Worlds". But yea, someone is falling for spending that much money to win that low of a classification. There is a reason why I don't think any states hold JV state championships. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 Al33 Men's 55 183 posts | There are no home runs allowed in either USSSA "E" or "D". What's drawing these teams to this level is beyond me. There are very few class "A" or "B" teams around the country anymore due the lack of sponsors. All they play in my area almost every weekend for the kids is "D" and "E" tournaments, so that's all they qualify for at the end of the year. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 Pricer Men's 50 621 posts | Money is the reason for the numbers in both D&E. The money they save by there being more regionalized tourneys without the money spent on travel and the money the associations and parks make during these tourneys. All the asociations I'm sure have a concern on what would happen if they did away with one or both. You almost have to start the change at the top. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | Someone proposed they should eliminate class E. With all those teams and revenue coming in their out of their minds thinking that. However, it's plausible for calling E class D, calling D class C and on up. Class E was not meant for C players to be playing in. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | Someone proposed they should eliminate class E. With all those teams and revenue coming in their out of their minds thinking that. However, it's plausible for calling E class D, calling D class C and on up. Class E was not meant for C players to be playing in. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 Pricer Men's 50 621 posts | Your right stick, you either have to start calling the divisions a different letter. You can start at the top(major) or bottom (E) and it will make no diff. Just need to start someplace. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | Jeff back in the day class E was considered rec league or beginner ball. Now you have guys that could easily play C (and some who previously have) prevalent all over. |
| Oct. 14, 2011 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | The game is going to hell, at all ages. |
| Oct. 15, 2011 stick8 1992 posts | Unfortunately your right Gary. Many teams and players not playing at the level they should be at plus the attitude of some of the younger players. Many think their the greatest thing since sliced bread. |
| Oct. 15, 2011 Pricer Men's 50 621 posts | I'm reposting the following. It really pertains to all of softball, not just the younger groups. Maybe it should be it's own thread, by all means let's have one. "This is a huge problem with no denying the fact that yes the great players today would still be great players. But the problems are the inflated egos created by the equipment being used today, let alone the illegal equipment. Do you think we'd even be having this discussion if the majority of today’s players could not hit the balls as far and as hard as the best of the best before composites? I don't think so. I'm not going to get into this era vs. an older one. But players knew where they fit in before these bats. Seriously, how many players that play tourney ball at all levels in softball right now have never hit a home run at 300"? My guess not many of them. Before composites you had players that played at the A & AA level that had never accomplished this. But they were still top-level talent. JMO " |
