Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: TABLE SETTER 11, dawg888; 71 anonymousDiscussion: team ratings
| Posted | Discussion |
| July 2, 2008 hoover13 Men's 65 8 posts | team ratings I'm hoping somebody out there can expain to me how a team can finish second at the TOC, losing in the championship game by one run, after playing the winning team for the fourth time in the tournament (splitting the four games), and then get moved up from AA to AAA, while the championship team stays AA. As a matter of fact, we kept hearing all through the tournament how the team that won, shouldn't have been in the TOC AA division....everybody seemed to feel they were definitely a AAA team. My issue isn't about our team being moved up to AAA, it's all about being treated equally! When you give prefential treatment to the TOC winner, which just happens to be a USA team, and stick it in the left ear of a league team from a small town in Canada, I think it's time to re-think the support we have been givivg the many organizations, whose tournaments we have been regulars at for many years. Can anybody offer an explanation that makes any sense??? GD |
| July 2, 2008 RochBob 54 posts | Does any of this ever make any sense. One does not get very far talking to the powers from above. I had mentioned we need a players group to represent our needs and review some of the thngs that can not be changed except from the powers from above. |
| July 2, 2008 RochBob 54 posts | Three diffeent orginizations SSUSA SSWS SPA 3 different plate dimensions. 3 different rosters that do the same thing some have impossibe requirements 2 snowbird cards have to be used for any player that plays in SPA or SSUSA SSWS accepts either card How do you expect them to be able to rate teams with the same intent. It is purelu one sided. Theirs. |
| July 2, 2008 grumpy55 Men's 60 102 posts | Our team was moved from AA to AAA after 1 qualifier this year, because we were a plus 8 in our wins. We played the same team twice out of our 5 games and won both times. They did not have a good tournament and we were fortunate to hit well against them. This tournament you played all 7 innings with no run rule and the open inning. You could be up thirty and had to play all the innings. Are other games were 2 or 3 run games and we did not win the tournament either. We have lost to a couple AA teams since then and they know we are not AAA. They do not understand it either but I guess it is what it is. As far as rules go this is another joke. We have played 4 SSUSA tournaments and the rules have been different for each one. I do not understand that either. They can rerate you after 1 tourny but it takes you 3 tournys to try and get rerated back to where you belong .Very frustrating. |
| July 2, 2008 umby44 48 posts | i know what u mean, you have to spend money and travel at todays economy, get beat up , demoralize you players, just to get a chance at your rightful rerate, its great on convincing your new players to go |
| July 2, 2008 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Not sureif it is the magic numberr or what, but three times this year I have heard that should you WIN by 8 or more, you can count on a upgrade. Then again, if your not the home team, can you afford taking the chance of letting a few in to close the gap... Perhaps then, loosing by 8 should be the same. Go play to win, giving it your best and have a good time doing it. |
| July 2, 2008 hoover13 Men's 65 8 posts | Thanks for the input guys. I'm trying to do the right thing here by believing SSUSA knows what they are doing, but doesn't know how to explain exactly what that is. What I failed to include in my earlier e-mail is that we were made aware prior to the TOC, that the Champion would automatically be moved up from AA to AAA. What I'm seeking to find out is can somebody offer me a credible reason why the team that won the TOC Championship is still rated as AA , and we're now AAA. I've tried over and over again to rationalize "why", but do not like the answer I keep coming up with, as it stinks to high heaven! |
| July 2, 2008 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | H-13 I do not think where a teams comes from has any thing to do with it, but I do believe the Mgr deserves a explanation. I only saw one team from Canada, Dorchester, 2\0 and the Whalers 1\1 (those are posted results) winners. I figure these are the teams...(It's better to give all info...) since you did not give names. If your Dorchester, perhaps it's because you came from the losers bracket to get to there you ended up...A reward, who knows... but to leave to others down, I'd wonder also. But the manager needs to request the rationale, The guy who can change a tire isn't going to do it without the help of the guy with the keys to the trunk.....Might not be able to anyway if the tire if not there, is flat or the wrong size, etc, etc.. |
| July 2, 2008 Ken Men's 55 462 posts | I was told that the people that make the decisions on ratings are meeting again on July 10th. Maybe this discussion should be tabled until after that date. They may try to rectify some of their mistakes. One thing I did hear is that the magic number for run differential is lower than 8. |
| July 3, 2008 misty23 Women's 40 12 posts | How do you justify a team with 8 players from a major classified team last year, winning 6 of 8 tourneys so far this season, finishing second in the other two and classified AAA. Of course the team name is different. Similar situation as the classifying is not consistent. |
| July 3, 2008 oneofeleven18 Men's 50 57 posts | Misty: I think the team you are referring to have played six tourneys with four firsts and two seconds. The same principle applies. |
| July 4, 2008 Gelpas Men's 55 25 posts | I have read many posts and threads concerning rating of teams. I wish I could say that there is a fair way to rate teams but I am afraid it will always be based on some organization trying to have the final say. I just know I have play teams rated Major - AAA - and - AA and the differences sometimes really boils down to who has that one good inning whether it is offense or defense. Granted I am sure there are dominate teams in each division and on the other hand there are teams struggling to compete in their division. With that all said I personally rather play hard fought games against teams who over the years I have came to know and respect irregardless of their rating. Just my thoughts Gelpas |
| July 4, 2008 hoover13 Men's 65 8 posts | To Taits: Yes, I am with Dorchester Canadians, and our manager has requested an explanation as to why Cape Cod are still sitting AA after having won the TOC. All SSUSA does is offer some lame excuse for our having been moved up, and ignores the Cape Cod issue. I have lost all respect for SSUSA and their "fly by the seat of their pants" attitude...costantly changing the rules on a whim and making exceptions!!! To Ken: I hope you are right about the Summit group meeting July 10th regarding ratings. As luck would have it, we will be in Champaign for the Mid-West Championships two days prior to the meeting, and should be able to spend some time with the SSUSA convenor and hopefully, be able to convey our concerns. Also, for the magic number, you heard correctly....they advised us we were moved up because we were a plus 6.8 runs , with no explanation as to the number of tournaments, or number of games, etc. To Misty: we're getting a little off track here, but to be honest, there is no justifying a AAA team having 8 major players on it. Just another illustration of how badly run SSUSA is!!! |
| July 6, 2008 Wes Men's 65 335 posts | Have any of you read T.H. article in the last Senior Softball nes???? He makes it clear that he is in charge and he thinks he is saving the furture of Senior softball. They do not care if you win or lose-- the most important thing is ((do they think you can win))-- the fact that you never win a game is not important to them only the possibility you might win. Wes |
| July 10, 2008 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | RochBob: For the record, you stated that the rating committee is made up of 3 assn directors, which is true. But you also said that the director of SSWS is one of them... not so. The 3 guys are Ridge Hooks (SPA), Terry Hennesey (SSUSA) and RB Thomas (ISSA). For reasons of 'simplicity' they have rejected all efforts to include any players or managers to the committee. There is 'the strong possibility that by including managers or players a conflict of interest could exist'. I presume that this would extend to a team sponsor as well... any team sponsor or just certain ones? Please do not read this in a way that suggests that I agree with their thinking as I clearly do not. The Summit asks folks, at their own time and expense, to join with the association delegates in an effort to 'make senior softball a better product'. On the surface this seems like a grand idea because the teams definitely need adequate representation. But whenever the rating committee is brought up, the advisory board members are held at arm's length. As has been stated many times before, we are pretty much like the Queen of England... just without all of the clothes, jewelry, castles and foot persons. Do Terry, RB and Ridge REALLY know the teams that they rate? Do they know them better than the managers? From what I've seen over the years,this has been 'hit and miss'... at best. Several of you, Taits in particular, have made some valid and strong points on this thread. If the real best interests of senior softball are high priorities for the committee, they will heed your input. As an example, Tate22 has written in recent weeks that there is hardly any real written criteria. Why not? RochBob, I do not take issue with your minor error. Your other points are well stated and well taken... as are the points from others. The players group idea makes sense to me in more ways than just this. We (players, teams and sponsors) are the ones that are generating the revenue... it is only fair that we have a real voice in matters that are important to us. As of now, our only true power is the right to participate in the associations of our choosing. But, by and large, we continue to go to the popular or convenient events, rather than the ones run by the assns that are most sensitive to our needs. As long as we keep doing it this way, we'll continue to be 'eating only what we are fed'. BW |
| July 11, 2008 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | BW, I thank you for the compliment, I too have written about the lack of written material for a checks and balances as it were to rate teams and for equalizing at tournaments. Terry H. plays ball, this make it hypocrisy of the three some, I do not know if the other two play ball but would venture to say they do...Managers should be involved in this, If they cannot be honest about it, then they should be released from the honor of the appointment to a forum for this. To say a player or managers involvement would take hinder simplicity, is out of reality. I doubt Terry gave it up. Unfortunately some players are no longer with us here that gave good input & ideas as well, I refer to Stephen Stone and Pete D. You do not loose control by using valuable input, there are many quotes by many famous people on this subject, perhaps they need to google some. Some great ideas come form the most unlikely sources. |
| July 11, 2008 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Another idea, it figures right. In Feb of '06 bashbro1 posted a list state by state, the number of teams that play AA (116), AAA(140), *Major(31), & **M+(20) as a totals. Those numbers I'm sure have changed upwards, but should be close for what I propose for a "Draw" to form a committee to "Help" rate teams. Do it like a lottery, give each manager a number on a ping pong ball or golf ball and throw them into a "hat" and have someone no one knows, pull out 5 balls for each AA, AAA , & Major* grouping. *The majors only would get 3 unless their numbers have come close to that of the 100 plus the other two have. **Plus teams are out of this because they have their own agenda unless that goes sour. Those 5 managers help rate teams along with the "powers to be". There needs to be an odd number for voting purposes, so the 5 managerial spots may lessen or increase depending on the number of Assn. reps involved.If the those making these evaluations were not to be players etc, how the hell can they make rational assessments. Not all managers play, nor do they watch all that goes on. Conversely, not all players can play. |
| July 11, 2008 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Taits: I figured that I owed you one since I labeled your idea (major plus draft) as 'the most verbose bad idea that I'd seen in a long time'. :-) I served 3 years as an advisory board member for one of the ING companies. That was/is a multi-billion company and its advisory board had a much more meaningful role than the Summit Advisory Board does. They also paid for our travel but that is merely an aside (really, it is not an issue)... and we met twice per year for 3 days each. In the current rating committee only Terry still plays but Ridge did play at the major plus level. RB is the sponsor of Thomas Engineering, which had been one of the better 60 major plus teams. Terry has a partner that sill plays and also sponsors a few teams. With the existing framework it seems difficult to envision one of the members recusing themselves to avoid a possible conflict of interest. But, obviously, I have not been privy to their discussions. Even if they were to do so, this would leave just 2 people to make a decision. It seems to me that a more reasonable method (in lieu of the 3 people) would be to include about 6 players/managers from around the country, geographically separated. If someone has a personal interest/disinterest in a given team that person would not be a part of the decision affecting that team. Period. The most logical places to look for additional committee members would be in the AAA and major divisions. The AA and major plus folks are on the extremes and might not understand the other divisions. It is very likely that you and I will totally agree on most of this. That's great but until the current committee seeks change, we'll just be jawing about it. To reiterate, we need meaningful representation and we need some written criteria. BW |
| July 11, 2008 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | BW I know what it's like being on a committee with BOD's. Did it for a National network for a year, at the end of 13-14 years I worked with them. I left the next year when I learned about what I'll call dirty deeds that weren't disclosed and going on all this time. I do agree with you on this and at the same time have a problem with hypocrisy, double standard, and the do as I say, not as I do ...thing which appears to be applied here as well. Referring to the 3 some. I quess no matter who gets on something like this, there will be a tendency to favor something you have a stake in. That's human nature. My mention of a senior softball convention would be good for all, but a business meeting for only sponsors & managers to limit chat, would could, & or should, get problems solved more efficiently than airing them here...But this is the precursor to any of them. |
| July 12, 2008 DD Men's 75 92 posts | On page 29 of the Spring 2008 issue of Senior Softball News, Terry Hennessy details the hows and whys of team ratings. In 4 years of playing senior ball, my team has been bumped up to AAA without warning, appealed and were then reinstated to AA; a year later we voluntarily asked to be raised to AAA, added some players and were bumped up to Major, appealed that ruling and were once again reinstated to AAA, where we currently reside. The point? SSUSA (the only ratings that really count, in my opinion) is making a concerted effort to insure PARITY at their tournaments. Parity of competition is at the heart of any discussion about ratings. Why? Because so many managers (myself included) want a solid shot at winning the tournament whenever they spend money to travel and play. The article about ratings (referenced above) describes being competitive as, "...teams have a CHANCE to win. It does not mean a GOOD CHANCE to win; it means on a good day, they MIGHT win..." The article also states the Ratings Committee is UNEQUIVOCALLY committed to protecting the lower divisions. One can easily understand this thinking, as some 80+% of the players, teams, and revenue come from AA and AAA rankings. Without that base, there is no SSUSA and certainly no such elaborate tournament structure as we enjoy, and most senior ballplayers would be relegated to playing with 30-somethings once again...or retiring from the game (for the most part) once and for all. As stated elsewhere by others, ANY system that attempts to rate teams relies ultimately on the honesty and integrity of the managers and players themselves. In my opinion, teams should try to win their age/class championships and then willingly move up to the next division and try to compete and win there. But that's just me. Many teams have no real interest in winning any rings...they just want to play and have fun. They have the right to come and play without fear of being embarrassed by sandbaggers. While there are some mistakes made in ratings decisions, I have found the committee to be responsive and fair upon appeal, provided the appeal procedure was followed. And I encourage ANY manager who feels his team has been unfairly bumped to make the appeal in the correct fashion at the appropriate time. |
| July 13, 2008 RochBob 54 posts | We were beaten again by AAA teams and one majors team The majors team scored 32 runs to our 7 coffee cup minnesota do you suppose they should be rated majors plus or maybe they possibly made a mistake in ourn rating? Libert ywe won 1 game and lost 4 with 3 AAA teams omaha we won 2 and lost 4 taol all AAA teams We definitely sound like a majors team. People and teams that watched us play could not believe we were rated majors. yet coffee cup a 65's majors and won many tournaments became 70's in tact as a team and were rated AAA probably the radar was not working when they rated them They should be majors plus with non doubt It is no science but with no voice we have to do what the straw boss's tell us |
| July 13, 2008 DesertGuy Men's 60 224 posts | RochBob- I'm confused here. Did your manager make an appeal of your rating that got denied, or are you just complaining and hoping that if someone at ssusa sees this you might get a random ratings change? DD just told us about how they went thru the process, and it seems to me that until your team does, it's not likely a ratings change for you is in the cards. |
