Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: Giantsfever, TABLE SETTER 11; 57 anonymousDiscussion: future of senior softball
| Posted | Discussion |
| Sept. 24, 2012 birdie Men's 70 802 posts | future of senior softball I just looked at the 50s and the were 49 AAA and 30 something in the major. I would think that would provide hope for the future of senior softball. Thanks Harry |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Harry, put the tourney in Milwaukee and see how much hope the senior game has. |
| Sept. 25, 2012 kbl Men's 60 544 posts | GARY19...Maybe there isnt much hope for Milwaukee itself, except for the Brewers...just sayin..thanks, ken |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Good point. Their NFL team took a hit last night. |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Looks great in Major and AAA, not so good in Major+ with 7. Gary, probably true for anywhere but Vegas! |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Great turn out. Unfortunately.... Senior ball is looking like the young kids game when you look at what Divisions teams are participating in.... Until The senior programs figure out a way to turn over the top of the Plus Divisions that Divisiin will never grow.... I'd recommend a limit of Plus Champion players being able to play on the same Plus team....I'd have the number around six players |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | I know, I know, it was a long time ago. But I remember as a kid going to Parma many Labor Day weekends to watch 30 or 40 teams from all over the country willing to be "sacrificed" to Howard's or County Sports or Michael's Lounge, etc. because they wanted the challenge. What happened to that mentality? |
| Sept. 25, 2012 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Tim, Your '1,099th comment' on this matter is duly noted... What did you expect the divisions to look like? Were you anticipating more teams in M+ than the others? This is consistent with the mix of teams in the late 70s and early 80s., which is when you were still driving your parents' car. Win something in M+ and then perhaps your many M+ opinions will be better received. Bob Woodroof |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Bob, kinda hard to post number 1,099 when I only have around 160 comments. What I am saying is.......for about the 20th time......senior softball needs to figure out how to grow the Plus Division.....I say it's by doing exactly what Senior Softball does to every other Division when a team Wins the World.... Don't allow them to return intact to the same Division..... If senior ball had been enforcing a system where the Plus Champion can only return with SIX players that have won a World in that age group....I believe Plus would have a larger team participation number.... As far as having the ability to say something only after you win at the Plus level.... I believe most of Plus's problems are based on senior softball listening to much to the so called dominant Plus teams.. If your in Vegas look me up....I will be playing with MTC Oh yah.....one more thing....I barrowed/shared my parents car for about six months, then bought my own in '76. |
| Sept. 25, 2012 softball4b Men's 70 1248 posts | Yeah, but how long did you sleep in the basement. LOL |
| Sept. 25, 2012 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Tim, I stand corrected... you only stated it 20 times. Instead of the car I should have mentioned 'while you were still reading one-handed'... And what I'm saying is the M+ divisions HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SMALLER than the other divisions. That is, since the B,C, etc. divisions were introduced. Most players do not want to play against the best teams/players. No one is stopping them from doing so. Why pretend that this is a problem that began in Senior ball? As early as your 'avid reader days' this went on... this was particularly true in CA... not so true in the southeast/midwest. We played in NSPC events that only 8 teams or so. That is roughly what the M+ divisions have in LV. MLB and other pro sports have been discussing the issue of revenue sharing because of the smaller markets. Should the World Series winner only bring back 8-9 guys? You might want to hotwire a little reality before you're too old to appreciate it. BW |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Actually many sports try to control team strength.... College limited scholarships Pro drafts and salary caps/penalties As afar as senior ball goes....it's not any different then young kids softball....until you figure out a way to turn over the top teams in each Division your not going to be ale to grow it. Looking at this years 50 Plus Division.....four out of the grand total of seven teams are from California... If you cannot see how that's a problem....you have to be blind...or.....close to one of the dominant Plus teams and not wanting your little dynasty weakened. |
| Sept. 25, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Don't be to worried Timmothy, your team beat two of those teams for the Northcal cup in major plus this year.. You don't have to get rid of 6 of your players and it looks like you will compete at the major plus level next year! ;-) |
| Sept. 25, 2012 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Tim, I never said that I do not see some problems in M+. What I have stated to you is that YOU have not provided the solution. I've always felt that 'known evils are better than unknowns'. And I'm not willing to donate players when we win a M+ championship. I value the relationships and would not want to be in the position to tell 60% of the guys to hit the road. That's way too drastic for me. And I wouldn't expect it of another team should they beat us out. We'll just try harder the next time. You using the term 'little dynasty' speaks volumes... but not in the way you might hope. BW |
| Sept. 25, 2012 garyheifner 649 posts | Harry Thom runs a very nice early season (May)tourney in Milwaukee each year. We always have 5-6 teams in the 65 division. Good teams, good fields, good umps. Great way for us Northerners to start the year and Senior Softball is alive and well in Milwaukee regardless of what the totally clueless might try and indicate. The other divisions seem to have plenty of teams for the 5 game round robin. There might be enough teams for the really younger guys if advertised. As I play in various park district and pick up games, I often mention to guys that they are really good and might enjoy the senior tour. They say, "what's that". There are millions of park district players out there. If SSUSA and the rest did more advertising there might be an overwhelming response of new teams. I don't know if Vegas could handle many more. My 65AAA division has 24 teams for next week and it will take "4" days to play it out as it is. Wow, really sounds like Senior Softball is in trouble. |
| Sept. 25, 2012 donll 68 posts | Tim Most softball growth is from the lower division up. Why aren’t you fixing the AA division? Trying to soften the landing for your eventual bump up.? We’ve been over this before. You already said if the plus champion were removed from the division YOU STILL WOULD NOT PLAY!!! I know it was only about a month ago when you were exposed. Do you think we forgot? You were told that you couldn’t use the “break up the dynasty” argument anymore and have credibility. You are a sandbagger plain and simple and afraid of playing the best. Just remember that whomever wins the 30 team major division really is only playing for 8th place/-Kind of like being the minor league champs of the world=who cares and who knows. Quit whining and step up man. |
| Sept. 25, 2012 FreeAgent10 62 posts | garyh-If you want a real earlybird tournament, we will be having our 11th annual EarlyBird in Baytown, Tx, just east of Houston. Usually 20 plus teams of all age groups. We try do it in one day but are open to 2 days. Four games for the best price going. Come on down and play. Good luck to all in Vegas. GT |
| Sept. 25, 2012 FreeAgent10 62 posts | Senior moment. Guess I should have added, its the 3rd weekend of Feb. Great for all you snowbirds to get some ball playing in early. GT |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Over the last 5 years at the Major+ level, a team from California has won the world championship in the age groups 40 to 60 16 out of 20 times. JK in the 40+ division has won it 4 times with the exception of 2010 when they had to play with an equalizer. The Mavericks in the 50+ division has won it 4 times with the exception of last year when they decided to not participate the second half of the season. MTC won it at the 55+ level in 2007 & 2008 and then won it again last year at the 60+ level. See some "dynasty" teams here? California seems to have the advantage with their 38 million population to choose from. This is not their fault but why do they need players from bordering states along with 2 extra players from non bordering states? Making California a "stand alone" state is a start. Then rather than disband the champions, make them play with some equalizers within the Major+ division. Call them Major++ or Super Major+. These equalizers, along with bringing the playing rules back to where they were in past years will help the Major+ division become a lot more competitive. |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Jawood, that could work also.... Having Plus Champions give runs or an extra fielder to non-champion Plus teams might entice the Major teams to attempt to play up when they get bumped. |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Swing, first I'd like to thank your Barons team for handing us that NorCal title. You guys Beating the Plus east bay oldies 18-5 (a team that beat us) then beating the Plus Nazarino team 16-10 sure helped us out. |
| Sept. 25, 2012 donll 68 posts | Hey Tim, I like Jawood's idea too. How about all California teams give runs to non California teams . Maybe you could set an example and spot teams 5 next weekend since you have the advantage Jawood talks about. That is if you are really concerned about the growth of the upper division. So what do you say---are you going to walk the walk and give equalizers to non California teams? Here's your chance to prove you really care about growth. Come on Tim what's your answer? This growth has to start somewhere, how about with you? |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Donll, if we dominate Major we would understand it wouldn't be good for the health of the program to leave us there.... But, as far as our team goes.... We have 12 players.... 9 were in phx last year when we tied for 12th.... Two of the other three played for the Barons who tied for fifth.... The other player we added played for a major team that didn't fair to well last season. I don't know where you came up with the not being able to talk about breaking up the plus dynasty's any more and still have credibility.... It's obvious that something is keeping plus from growing... I say it's leaving the Dominant Plus teams in tact year after year... Senior softball has already PROVED that eliminating Champions from a Division they have already dominated is healthy..... All I am saying is..... If its healthy to only allow three AAA players in AA.... Three Major players in AAA and three Plus players on Major teams...... What's wrong with only allowing six plus Champions on Plus teams? |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Donll, I don't think this is a state thing.... It's a dominant thing..... If you dominate you move up.. If your dominating in Plus and cannot move up you have to be weakened so how.... It's obvious Plus is not enticing teams to move up for some reason..... I kinda like Jawoods idea if it includes any team with more then three Plus Champions on it.... It would be worth a try to see if giving non-Plus Champions the choice of nine runs or an extra fielder would get major teams to stay together when they get bumped.... Lord knows what's being tried at the current time is not working |
| Sept. 25, 2012 Omar Khayyam 1357 posts | As of today, SSUSA has 80 teams ranked as Major Plus. Here is the breakdown: 50 20 55 17 60 19 65 12 70 12 75 none 80 none Of these, the states are represented as follows and population: Florida 16 18.8 mm 1 per 1.2 mm Arizona 5 6.4 mm 1 per 1.3 mm Michigan 6 9.9 mm 1 per 1.7 mm Minnesota 3 5.3 mm 1 per 1.8 mm Ohio 6 11.5 mm 1 per 1.9 mm Maryland 3 5.8 mm 1 per 1.9 mm Virginia 4 8.0 mm 1 per 2.0 mm California 16 37.3 mm 1 per 2.3 mm Nevada 1 2.7 mm 1 per 2.7 mm New Jersey 3 8.8 mm 1 per 2.9 mm Kansas 1 2.9 mm 1 per 2.9 mm Georgia 3 9.7 mm 1 per 3.2 mm Washington 2 6.7 mm 1 per 3.4 mm Kentucky 1 4.3 mm 1 per 4.3 mm Colorado 1 5.0 mm 1 per 5.0 mm Wisconsin 1 5.7 mm 1 per 5.7 mm Texas 4 25.1 mm 1 per 6.3 mm Indiana 1 6.5 mm 1 per 6.5 mm New York 2 19.4 mm 1 per 9.7 mm Pennsylvania 1 12.7 mm 1 per 12.7 mm Make of it what you wish |
| Sept. 25, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Tim, I'm still waiting for my Watch I helped you win! |
| Sept. 26, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Omar, that took some time... |
| Sept. 26, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Omar, that took some time... |
| Sept. 26, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | On post by Jawood, I do not feel making CA or FL for that matter a sovereign state for ALL divisions is justified but for M+ with the snow bird issue maybe of just get rid of that. What about a stricter player "rating" for those in the M-M+ arena as they have started in the lower divisions. That has already moved some teams up. I think it will cause teams to move voluntarily or forced to do so. But much better than having to tell friends you gotta go. As teams are now after Reno there are some that could make the move like the Steve Levine Financial I believe who were Majoy playing AAA teams there. Still rated Major as of this month. T They all complain when they get the boot up, but usually do better after the mood set in. No one complains about going down. There are many CA teams that could go up one and do well but seems no one wants to make that happen. A few teams won 2-3 this year and last year. But no move up. Adjust the player chart for how they 'rate', avoid forcing a let them go issue. |
| Sept. 26, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Omar, you are making my head spin. Actually there are even less Major+ teams than you showed ... some teams are listed twice and some don't even exist anymore. Just getting rid of the out of area players rule and snowbirds would be a good start. How can it be allowed that Major+ teams can have out of area players when they play Major teams most of the time and they can't have them? That has to change #1. Bring back the 5 runs per 1/2 inning, (instead of 9). The more runs per inning that a dominant team is allowed to score, the more dominant they become. With the run differential, I would be in favor of giving the lower team the opportunity to score an extra run an inning, not give them "fake runs". The Super Major+ teams can score 5 runs, and the regular Major+ teams can score 6, up to the open inning. At some point, make over the fence hits or whatever they are called, DBO's. How many do we need? Bring a little defense back! Major+ 8 HR's + 8 WALKS ... DBO's Major 6 + 6 ... DBO's AAA 4 + 4 ... DBO's AA 2 + 0 ... DBO's |
| Sept. 26, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | So why not AA 2 + 2...DBO? That Falls in line with your others. |
| Sept. 26, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Why not reduce things to two divisions? If only five runs "equalizes" Major + with Major, and AAA with AA, then there isn't enough difference to justify the seperation. |
| Sept. 26, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Gary, why not just try reducing the talent on the major plus champions before you allow them back In a Division they have already dominated. |
| Sept. 26, 2012 Gary19 Men's 50 2609 posts | Tim, I can somewhat see the frustration, but I just keep thinking back to the line "it is not my job to keep the game close, it is the other team's". I am kind of glad you have never been in charge of a sport, or we might never have come to know the Packers, Yankees, Celtics, Canadiens, UCLA basketball, or Iowa wrestling. |
| Sept. 26, 2012 Z28 8 posts | If you are willing to play at the top division, why should you be penalized for being the best. Maybe we should stop keeping score and call all the teams in the tournament co-champions. Oh wait Mom and Dad are already doing that in T-ball. These teams are what they are because they want to play with their friends, the same people they played with coming up through the younger circuits. If some of their friends have retired or moved to another state, why can't they still play together? Why do you always want to penalize the more talented players? Why should a group of friends playing at the rating given to them by the governing association have to break up because they win too much if they are already playing at the highest level? Do we tell the class Valedictorian that He/She is too smart and they are not allowed back in the school until they get dumber? If not, why would we do this to our bretheran on the softball field? |
| Sept. 26, 2012 Z28 8 posts | If you are willing to play at the top division, why should you be penalized for being the best. Maybe we should stop keeping score and call all the teams in the tournament co-champions. Oh wait Mom and Dad are already doing that in T-ball. These teams are what they are because they want to play with their friends, the same people they played with coming up through the younger circuits. If some of their friends have retired or moved to another state, why can't they still play together? Why do you always want to penalize the more talented players? Why should a group of friends playing at the rating given to them by the governing association have to break up because they win too much if they are already playing at the highest level? Do we tell the class Valedictorian that He/She is too smart and they are not allowed back in the school until they get dumber? If not, why would we do this to our bretheran on the softball field? |
| Sept. 26, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | taits, my thought on AA was I have always heard that there is a need for a truly recreation division and rules that more talented players would not want to drop down to play. Not that just because someone can't hit homeruns they are not talented, but you get the idea. Z28, do you want to play tournaments with 2 or 3 teams in it? It's headed that way. I guess you are with JK, looks like you are already there. You do have a great team! |
| Sept. 26, 2012 donll 68 posts | Tim, Why you lack credibility. In July and August on your thread about “Why remove teams from a Division” I asked you several times, would you play major plus if the dynasty team was removed . And on August 1st your response is below in quotes- "Now to your question.....I would do whatever our team voted to do.....my vote would be to stay local all year playing a schedule kinda like we did this year, and skip any Worlds.Tim MIllette" Now that is why you lack credibility. It is NOT the Dynasty teams that are keeping you from playing. You don’t want to play the Longhorns or East Bay, or OKI or Demolition or Northwest Legends or any Major Plus teams. By your own admission. We've gone over this before. In the same thread you also claimed not to care about winning, and that you just play for fun. Again-lack of credibility. If you just played for fun you wouldn't care about playing Plus Teams and needing special rules (runs, extra players etc) to compete. You will never be “enticed” up. The only way you will go is kicking and screaming and then probably not at all. So please-stop with the lame excuse that it’s the dynasty team. NO credibility. |
| Sept. 26, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Actually donll, my vote this year would be to skip Worlds.... I am supporting what the others on our team want to do. I can care less about winning a senior world.... My fun is playing locally with a team full of great guys. My lack of wanting to play Plus is...... We would have to make changes to our team to have any chance to compete. I like all our guys..... If we win Vegas and get bumped. I will support what we as a team vote to do.... But again..... I'd vote to stay local and play a fun tourney in Tahoe and maybe Dunsmuir. But Donll, the problem with Plus has nothing to do with our team.... We have not been in the equation..... Maybe you should ask yourself why teams have not moved up and your stuck playing such small attended events? I gave you my reason and solution.... Maybe you should tell us yours? And please.... Don't start with that merge the major division crap. That's how all this talk initially started |
| Sept. 27, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Jawood, IĘthink you 'heard' incorrectly. I believe many AA teams could easily play in AAA as well as other divisions going up. Sure they would not like it, because hey are comfortable where they are, probably winning more then the other teams are. Many players are not home run hitters, but they are not the only hitters that score the runs needed to win. No one person really wins the game it is a team deal. Sure there are the ones that score the winning run but how did they get there. Conversely there are those who drop the ball to loose the game. I like AA ball as well as AAA ball. Mixed brackets for any rating \age group is not healthy for the sport, but are imo solely a money maker to keep assn rolling along. Vegas should not have any with the numbers of teams present. |
| Sept. 27, 2012 donll 68 posts | Tim, Just wondering. Now that you won the NorCal cup will you be breaking up your team for NorCal play next year? I mean wasn't it your idea that champions should be broken up? Perhaps you will lead by example. Give you a chance to earn some credibility. |
| Sept. 27, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Ok, taits, let go 2+2 in AA. I don't think we can get away from the mixed brackets though ... not enough teams to have 30 different age groups and divisions. Vegas and Reno are the exceptions. |
| Sept. 27, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Too bad we don't have a say in the matter... |
| Sept. 27, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | well, after thinking about this subject for awhile... I think that a team that gets bumped up for the right reasons, It should be an honor to get bumped and not a death sentence...going from major to major plus is not going to be easy and nor it should be. yes you will have to upgrade in areas but each year, I think all or most teams are looking for this. Timothy is just scared of competing against the best! I relish it, and it is fun to step up and knock the Dynasty team off their pedestal! My two cents! |
| Sept. 27, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Donny, the concept I put foreword was an attempt to solve the problem of the top bracket/Division in all age brackets not being able to entice participation. Your arguement...... Although very cute..... Is comparing Apples to oranges.... The NCSSA Hall of Fame top bracket is not having a hard time getting teams..... The top bracket has seen participation numbers within 15 percent of every other bracket. Now.... On the other hand... And I don't think this is a secret... 40 Plus is four teams.... 50 Plus is seven teams..... 55 Plus is 8 teams...... All these divisions show a failed ability to create upward growth in each age group. I say it's because the teams that have domInated those Divisions have not been weakened when proven dominant.... Maybe you can think of a different reason for the bumped teams have hosen to not move up.... BUT.... To this point you have failed to give any answer to why Major teams are not moving up to plus.... So let's see??????? 40s have a team that urban legend says didn't loose an inning in 85 games..... 50s have a team that has won every Plus World they have played in/and at one time had a 118-3 record.... Now maybe you can come up with a better reason that teams are not moving up to plus then my.... So what is it? |
| Sept. 27, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Tim quit crying about the upper dvision just deal with it and quit crying! I |
| Sept. 28, 2012 DCPete 409 posts | Looking at Omar's chart, a lot of states only have 1 M+ team. If these teams were dominant and you broke them up, where would the rest of their players end up playing? |
| Sept. 28, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Not counting women, I count 83 M+ teams 21 50's 17 55 20 60 13 65 12 70 0 75 0 80 |
| Sept. 28, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | It would not be difficult at all to make these "dynasty" teams in Major+ play as a Major++ team. They obviously have no where to move up to but are totally dominating the division. Good for them. Don't disband them, simply require them to play with equalizer rules against other Major+ teams, the same way as a dominant team has to in their own state and region throughout the country when they are the top dog. If this is done, along with bringing some of the past rules back, more teams may be willing to play and have a fighting chance of competing at Major+. |
| Sept. 28, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | I think you need to count ACTIVE PLUS teams.... How many plus teams per age group at SSUSA Worlds this year... I read that there 21 50 Plus teams in SSUSA yet in reality SEVEN are attend the biggest tourney of the year.... I "assume" this means most of the players on the rest of those 21 teams are playing something other then 50 Plus.... Some have move to 55, but with 55 World on a different weekend.... Those players could still play 50 Plus. I "guess" a large majority of them are playing on teams not in the 50 Plus... The issue that first needs to be decided is why don't most teams not move up when bumped to Plus???? I say it's because the Dominant teams left in tact year after year don't make it enticing..... Then the next question should be...... How do you change that? I have done nothing more then given my "assumptions" and solutions.... |
| Sept. 28, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Jawoods, that's another way you could attempt to do it..... Problem is.... How to make the equalizers Id say.....If your a team returning with more then six Champion plus players you have to give up two runs for every Plus player over six on your roster PLUS an extra fielder. If SSUSA went back to five runs per inning I think you could reduce that run count to one run per player. Something like this is worth trying.... Obviously Plus is not enticing right now. Especially when it's rumored a couple of the 50 Plus teams/around 30% of this years Worlds might not be returning next season |
| Sept. 28, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Tim, That I would not know who is active. I do know the 'Ratings' in many cases are years off, but I doubt that means they are not 'active'. So your a rumor spreader, on next years event I see. |
| Sept. 28, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Well let's see.... In the 50 Plus Division of the World one team took about three months of this season and another teams nucleus is over 55 next year. I don't believe those are rumors...... |
| Sept. 28, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Many teams out there have that lopsided age issue, it is just they way it will be. Players try to stick together for as long as they fee comfortable at that rating or age group. I know out team is like that and is splitting into 2. Many other teams could as well but I honestly think this the commemorate and cohesion they have learned get together in the games that keep them together for as long as they can. This is the time of year people think and start to act upon it. |
| Sept. 28, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | I do know whatever rules SSUSA goes to, they want to keep it as simple as possible (kiss) for the umpires to enforce. They feel that they have enough on their plate already with the game itself than have to know what equalizer rules are being played with from game to game. It is sad when 67% of the 50 Major+ teams choose not to attend the world tournament, and it's in Vegas! There would be even less if it weren't. |
| Sept. 28, 2012 donll 68 posts | Tim, How many level, in each 5 year age group in NorCal softball? For instance in the 50-55 age group, when they have a tournament do they use 4 levels? |
| Sept. 28, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | NCSSA is figured in totally different way. Look at the ratings and judge for yourself. By the numbers basically, but sometimes they are used in a screwed manner. Most schedules, when they ever post them, usually post the number they are rated at, as well as distance traveled to it. Used as a gauge for game set up. 1st game 2nd game etc. |
| Sept. 28, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Donll, you can try to deflect from the issue of how weak the attendance in for plus ball but that will not help solve the problem... I have given you my reasons for why plus has so few teams at their events. If you have the ability.... Please tell me why my assumption of why teams don't move up is wrong? If you have the ability (which you have failed to show so far) give other methods to getting Plus ball Growing, and share your assumptions why you think it will work. |
| Sept. 29, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Tim, Re your post here: " Now.... On the other hand... And I don't think this is a secret... 40 Plus is four teams.... 50 Plus is seven teams..... 55 Plus is 8 teams...... All these divisions show a failed ability to create upward growth in each age group. " What about the 60's, 65's, 70's & up? All were represented there in some fashion. I know our team was, but not a M+ team.... Sop how many M+ teams were in those brackets? I understand the problem but I don't think the PoWeRs to be will do mUcH at all to do as you suggest and just the end of year changes do it for them. Though those your seek won't happen to really benefit the whole program. Tighter, stricter & more T's need to be used in the ratings system not just the mealy mouse few, they can only sometimes use, because of the poor turnout they get most places. I see it as a 'won' tournament even with only 1-3 teams. They still get a ring or option for it. They want the 'glory' well they get the re rate consideration also as part of the package. It came with the win. Not knowing how many actual T's are used or loosely used, concideration for re rates, I don't think it's a very high percentage of the overall qualifiers out there that are. Here, there about 21 TOC birth events, where not many are actually used, why not? No telling are out there for the other assn's. 21 of the roughly 75 put on during the year. That is not even a third of the events put on that could easily be used. What is used is like one apple in a bushel of apples. Not representative of all considerations, especially when teams do not go to all of them. The pick, choose and even avoid many. You going to P-town end of Oct? Look me up on 65 Bears team. |
| Sept. 29, 2012 donll 68 posts | Tim, We've been over this before. You claim its the dynasty teams that keep teams from moving up. But when asked if the dynasty team was removed would you move up to plus. Your response was no. So obviously its NOT the dynasty teams that are keeping YOU from moving up. I don't know how you cant see that this defeats your argument. |
| Sept. 29, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | He cant donll, he is afraid! maybe if had a glove instead of a clown! Fyi |
| Sept. 29, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | He cant donll, he is afraid! maybe if had a glove instead of a clown! Fyi |
| Sept. 29, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | I don't believe I ever said I was afraid to play Plus.... I said my vote would sways be to stay local and not do worlds.... But if my team mates vote to go to worlds I will go. Once again donll.... You fail to give your reasons why the major teams are not moving up AND..... Solutions to change that. As for Swing talking about someone being scared of anything??? That's pretty funny coming from a guy that wants to know if he's going to be hitting in the top four in the order before he commits.....:) Oh yah..... And cries to sponsors when his feeling are hurt a widdle....poor swing. Is it true that Nazarino or whoever else you try to jump to next year will have to guarantee you hit third before you will talk about playing with them? Swing..... You gave no answer to my asking for an opinion on that cheating 51-50 third baseman...lol |
| Sept. 29, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Still a turd! I am not going anywhere! No plans for next year! So your turd expedition didnt work! I hit where ever they put me! Fyi I gave you my opinion twice |
| Sept. 29, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Still a turd! I am not going anywhere! No plans for next year! So your turd expedition didnt work! I hit where ever they put me! Fyi I gave you my opinion twice |
| Sept. 29, 2012 donll 68 posts | Tim, I can't give you a reason why YOU won't move up to Plus. I can only tell you that the dynasty teams are not the reason YOU won't move up. How do I know this? Because YOU said that YOU won't move up if the dynasty teams were removedREMOVED. So, do you see how you can't use that as an argument that's keeping you from Plus? So perhaps you can tell us the real reason YOU won't move up. And don't use "the dynasty" argument, you've already proved that's a spurious argument. |
| Sept. 29, 2012 donll 68 posts | Tim, I also noticed you ducked the question about the number of levels in each 5 year age group in NorCal ball. I'm guessing its less than 4. You say that NorCal ball is flourishing. Perhaps the answer is right in front of you. Maybe SSUSA should take a page from them and reduce the number of levels within each age group. You know combine major and major plus and make 3 levels. Or maybe just 2 groups-competitive and rec. In rec all homeruns would be an out and end the inning. How many levels are in NorCal ball? Tim, I think you may be really on to something here. Yes, it must be the number of levels. |
| Sept. 29, 2012 swing for the fences Men's 50 1224 posts | Donll, Tim is just going to say He wants to play one dayers and that's it.. I know for a fact that most want to play more than that.. However Tim knows that if he played more in NorthcalSSA he would be on SSUSA's radar, since they both share info! So, he's laying low in local 40s tourneys! He is so afraid about being handed his ass by Somerville that he's hiding like a little boy about to get a whooping! Don11 let Little Timothy cry all he wants, SSUSA is far more intelligent than he is and won't start breaking up teams on little Timothy's request! |
| Sept. 29, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Wow..... So let's see... How to handle this tuff attack???lol Swing.....No need to cry about anything???? We are what we are... Currently the tied for 12th Major team from last year.... As far as you playing with another team next year goes.... Rumor has it your Looking because your afraid your teams going to emplode if you don't do well in Vegas..... Ronny, Brian and rick looking at 55 teams.... More then a few others putting out feelers trying to see if there are better options....personally, like I have said, I hope you guys do well in Vegas and stay together next season.... Your another good NorCal team, and we can use as many good teams as possible. Donny.... Before we go any farther maybe you can let me know who you are and what team you play for.... It will help us understand where you are coming from. As far as me..... I play on a Major team.... I' will support whatever my team votes to do.... I'd like playing all local ONE day tourneys because it makes my wife happy. If those tourney need to be 40s.... So be it |
| Sept. 30, 2012 Mango Men's 50 159 posts | Tim, Swing Donl, I've seen you guys go back and forth on this issue for sometime. I’m going to make another suggestion. That, the propensity for there to be more teams ‘in the middle levels” of any given age group of senior softball is no more different than there being more people toward the average or middle in anything. Be it intelligence, height, ability to jump, run etc. In probability theory, the normal (or Gaussian) distribution is a continuous probability distribution that has a bell-shaped probability density function, known as the Gaussian function or informally as the Bell Curve: In the bell curve there are fewer outliers at either end of the x axis. There are fewer people 7 feet tall and 3 feet tall than there are people 5 feet tall. The further, or more extreme out you go to either end of the axis , the less people you will find there. This holds true to Senior Softball as well. There are fewer Plus and AA teams than AAA and Major. This is a Normal Distribution! This is also a function of the number of levels at each age group. If you were to add more levels (making it 6 instead of 4) by adding say, Super Major Plus, and A, you would find even less teams in those outliers than compared to the middle, following the bell shaped pattern. Conversely, if you were to reduce the number of levels to say, 3, you would find more balance in number of teams in each division. I’m not saying that needs to be done, just that you would find more balance in number of teams, and it is a function of the number of levels. Mango |
| Sept. 30, 2012 titanhd Men's 60 638 posts | Mango more simply put is to say that we currently have too many divisions... |
| Sept. 30, 2012 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Mango, That all sounds liker high school stuff. but your right on the bell curbe relationship. Titanhd, I'd say too many tournaments started to get toned down ages ago. Back here when i first started sr ball were pretty much filled. Then here comes another event option here or there, and so on. Results were more options and yes places to go, choices to make thus some did not any longer get full brackets... There are more than 3 most anywhere in the US to play on most weekends 'cept holidays and even then some places. What are there something like 8-9 assn's not counting the one within ght states like NCSSA. There are at least half dozen in central CA Have no idea about up north above Sacramento state wide. Then there are the mom & pops as I call them. One day, maybe two. NSA has a ton of those in the state. Damn good awards too. Mostly kids but many now have sr slots. |
| Sept. 30, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Mango...... First..... I wish I had a dictionary so I could fully understand what you were trying to share with us.... Is it grammatically correct to use the term..."no more different"? Or should it have been written...... Not significantly different.... Ok.... Enough fun on the grammar fun...lord knows I am way over my head with the grammar police On to your bell shape "curve" thesus.... As far as senior softball goes.... I hope it would be "no more different" then the Laffer curve..... You know???? The one that flattens it out and levels it out just a little... If we are going to talk about plus ball???? Let's talk about the on going talks of just merging Plus with Major.... Mango..... Would you not agree all this would do is throw Pluss problems on a larger number of teams) I mean really..... If SSUSA reduced it's divisions to three wouldn't that just let the dominant plus teams have more teams to beat up on at Worlds? If your up for it..... Let's have a honest debate on Plus and the issues associated with it |
| Oct. 1, 2012 donll 68 posts | Mango, Debating Tim will be a waste of your time. You will try to use logic with him. Tim has demonstrated that logic is a stranger to him. He still hasn't grasped how he contradicts himself with his “dynasty” argument. He states that dynasty teams are the reason teams don’t want to play plus. But when asked if he would play if the dynasty team was removed would he still play – his answer …no. And he doesn't get that defeats his argument. |
| Oct. 2, 2012 Mario Men's 50 451 posts | Now that I have seen the senior game for 3 years, we should just leave everything the way it is. Everybody that wants to play Major+ is playing there now. Let everyone else stay down and play where they want to. The senior game should not be any different than the young kids game. There are only 4 Super teams in young kids ball and there are about 8-10 Major plus teams in the 50+ division. Nobody at the plus level wants to play people who don't want to be in the division with them. There is a team that I want to give props to and that is the team from Minnesota that is playing up because they want to play the best teams in the nation. Kivett I think is the name of their team. Those are the kind of teams that I want to play. Not the teams that have been forced up. The plus division is just fine the way it is right now. LEAVE US ALONE!!!! |
| Oct. 2, 2012 Malo37 62 posts | Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, please don't try and shove yours down my throat and I won't either... Here's mine - I play with Arizona Elite, a 50's major team. We relish in the opportunity to play against the best, regardless of what division they play in. We love playing in combined tournaments with 50 major + teams. We enjoy the challenge and feel as though it brings out the best in us. Me personally, I hate getting runs or an 11th defensive player. I/we enjoy the challenge of playing the best. If we get our a$$ handed to us then we need to play better next time. We've always had the same attitude. When we were younger and we were playing A's we couldn't wait to play in major tournamnets. When I played B's we always wanted to play up. I don't understand the mentality of breaking up teams, just like I don't understand the mentality of not trying to be a better team? Being a better team doesn't mean having a revolving door and constantly making changes. For us it means, stating off with the right group of guys that are comitted to winning, getting in better shape, guys that are making sure that they're hitting and taking grounders on their own if necessary. If they don't do those things then they end up getting rid of themselves. This is my first and probably last post, don't understand all the crying about better teams. Don't we all want to work to be a part of something better??? |
| Oct. 2, 2012 Tim Millette 615 posts | Malo, if your team feels that way..... Why not place your team in the plus Division at Worlds? I am sure they would like another team full of guys that just want to play the best all the time. It doesn't seem to make sence that a team that wants the "challenge of playing the best" doesn't just leave the second tier Major Division and move up so they can fulfill thier desire for the best comp????? |
| Oct. 2, 2012 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | My take on Major+ is not about forcing Major teams to play up where they don't want to, it's making the Major+ division more fair for everyone that is currently there. By permitting teams that can afford to bring in players from outside their bordering states, they have made it increasingly harder for the small budget Major+ teams to compete. Eliminate this rule and I would agree with most of what you have written, Mario. I understand that the Arizona Elite team wanted to play at the Major+ level but SSUSA wouldn't let them. This is what I heard, don't know if it's totally true. |
| Oct. 2, 2012 Allan55 102 posts | I feel the Senior Softball Association should shoulder some of the blame for the limited number of M+ teams. Over the last few years, I have seen teams moved up only to be moved down after a year or not even a year. If a team goes 1-4 or 0-5 in a World Tournament, they should be moved down (if they have been in the division two or more years). However, I have seen a major team place third in the World Tournament...be moved up and moved down for the very next World Tournament. I have witnessed a M+ team have a .500 record one year and be moved down to major...and miss playing on Sunday by losing two one run games. That would not have been a high point for the SSUSA. I have also seen a M+ team go 3-3 at the Reno tournament this year, only to be moved down for the World Tournament even when they lost close games and beat the second place team and current Western Champ in the tournament. If a team (AA, AAA, or Major) finishes in the top three, they should be moved up for a min. of two years. If the record in the second year is not good (1-4 or 0-5) they could get dropped. If players try to stay down and play for another team, they should be evaluated. I know someone out there probably has a good idea. Please feel free to comment. |
| Oct. 3, 2012 Mario Men's 50 451 posts | Jawood, I totally agree with you. We, OKI are only partially sponsored and all of our guys are from a bordering state so this rule change would not hurt us, but help us. |
| Jan. 20, 2014 joel 1975 131 posts | if OKI is a partially sponcered team I wonder what the rest of us are.we dont have 30 to 40 thosand dollas a year.if we gwt between 5&7500 we are just so happy!!!!!!!!!!! |
