Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: TABLE SETTER 11, dillydilly; 47 anonymousDiscussion: Combining parts of the Major & Major + divisions
| Posted | Discussion |
| Oct. 29, 2008 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Combining parts of the Major & Major + divisions This isn't a new topic as it was beat around pretty thoroughly a couple of months ago. I was definitely negative toward the idea for a couple of reasons... 1) the major plus task force had just complied its survey and had generated a very repsonsible recommendation... 2) I've been involved with Senior softball for 12 years now and I've seen an awful lot of sandbagging (some discreet and some overt). After seeing the weak turn out over the past 3 M+ events (SSWS, LVSSA & SPA), and seeing the extremely encouraging fields of major teams (50-60) at the same time, it seems like the time has come to really consider this possibility. In addition, now that the SSUSA scores have been posted, anyone can see that they are very similar in both divisions. The missing piece is the number of HRs hit in all of the games but I'd be surprised if the 60 majors hit less than we did (60 M+)... I'm talking about balls that were hit over the fence whether they were treated as singles or as HRs. Along with all of this, the 40 & 45 divisions seem to operate just fine even though there are only two divisions. There is a prevailing myth that suggests that all M+ teams hit more HRs and score a lot more runs than all major teams. Aside from a couple of isolated games in AZ, there really is little truth to this. Turn Two has been one of the most consistent winners in the 55 & 60 M+ divisions over the past 4 years and they hit very few HRS (relatively speaking)... but they do score a lot of runs and play sound defense. Clearly, some level of compromise would need to be reached from both ends. I throw this out there again in hopes that something meaningful can be developed that will combine the upper major teams with the M+ teams. This will give the upper major teams the opportunity to say that they beat the best and, at the same time, will allow the M+ teams the chance to play someone other than the same 4-5 teams. I've used the term 'upper major' teams...presume this to be the top 25% or so... I do not pretend to know the exact number that would be the most appropriate. And the thought that it would work perfectly from the 'get go' is a bit presumptuous as well. We are about to have a presidential election along with an assortment of propositions and local elections. We've been doing this for over 230 years and most folks do not believe that we 'have it right' yet. The point here is that we need to allow some level of trial and error. BW |
| Oct. 29, 2008 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | My wish would be that every senior softball player get an opportunity to participate in a large bracket with all kinds of styles of softball from the bombers down to the singles hitters, too hard to handle pitchers all in one bracket at least once a year. |
| Oct. 29, 2008 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | It's nice to hear that Woody has come to his senses. No offense intended. Let me add fuel to his fire. Our team planned ahead of time in Phoenix to meet in order to decide what to do next year and to whether we would attend the TOC. Since we have a small roster it is important that all of our players travel to our tournaments. I learned through the grapevine that 3 of our players were against going to the TOC due to lack of teams in our division--55 major+. I came to Phoenix hoping to talk these players into going to the TOC. It became a moot point when we found out that the other two teams to qualify--MTC and Ruth--were not going. Therefore the 55 major+ will not be represented this year. We had won the last two years--in major and major plus--and were hoping to go to keep our streak alive. Needless to say an unopposed championship is meaningless regardless of how much fun the TOC has been in the past. Now there may be other reasons for attendance being down--namely the economy for one. The point is whatever the reason it does not do senior softball players nor the organization any good to ignore what is going on. The power in the 50's can't be denied. No one wants to be on a team that has 60 runs scored against them--and the team that put up the 60 runs in Phoenix finished 3rd. Rules need to change but not to what the task force recommended and the 50's played under in Phoenix. If you want a tournament to see who can hit the most homeruns in the 50's keep the same rules. Better yet don't run a tournament run a home run derby competition. I agree with Woodruff that the number of home runs hit on average in the 55 and above age brackets in major plus is not as high as players from other divisions might imagine. In the 50's it is a different story. Our team averages between 2 and 3 home runs per game. Sometimes we hit more and sometimes we hit less. These are the rules I proposed on a previous thread when I asked to combine Major Plus with the Major division: 5 hr with 1 up (singles thereafter). Limit of 5 runs per inning. Normal time limits that we have been playing. Last inning is the only open inning. Guarantee of at least 6 innings. Start with 1 and 1 count. No time limit in championship games. Based on current ratings Major team would have choice of being home team. No extra charge for tournament fees since we would be using normal time limits. (I believe the 1 and 1 count would basically keep the games running on time even though we are guarantied at least six innings) Retain normal pitcher protection rules. Allow a one player exception without boundaries. Use the flip flop rule. Do to comments in that thread I would drop the flip flop rule. One final change I would add to encourage the uniting of the two classes would be to use the equalizer of giving the Major division rated teams 1 run per inning starting in the second inning when playing against a Major Plus team. Maybe if these changes were put into effect there would be fewer teams breaking up and reforming to avoid the Major Plus division. I believe this is a very valid and important matter for the Summit to consider. Please do so in the near future. Some players are considering retiring from senior softball as an alternative. Let's not let that happen. Respectfully, Bob Schulz Travelodge (maybe for the last year) 55 Major Plus |
| Oct. 29, 2008 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Hey Bob, Great seeing you in Phoenix. I love lots of what you've proposed. No flip flop. No one run to the "lesser team". But I played in both Major and major plus 50's this year and there's not enough difference to keep them apart. If you keep the 5 run innings and home run equalizer the Windy City Team could beat any time in the tournament as could many other teams. I love the 1-1 count. Hit the pitcher once, side out Hit him twice, player ejection. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 Dirty Men's 50 1371 posts | The batter gets ejected because the pitcher missed the ball? Kidding, right? |
| Oct. 30, 2008 tattooball 774 posts | Bob W, After watching the majors in Pheonix I will say that the game sucks. The only thing I could see from the new rules is that there is a bigger gap between major and major+. Take a team like Windy City, they are a great team but not even close to competing in major +. As long as the rules are in place there will always be a super power team that no one will compete with. Those teams will come from ca or fl because of the pool of players they have to choose from. This is going to create sandbagging from the major division and it will have ripple effects all of the way down to AA. This has been going on for 15 years in the younger softball associations and you all need to pay attention to this before it ruins senior softball like the younger softball. When you all started playing softball you would have laughed if someone told you there would be a D and E division in softball. When I was playing class D was local league teams that never left the state now it is the biggest division in softball. Guys that shoul;d be playing at least class B ball are proud to be playing on D teams everywhere. This can and will happen to senior softball if the rules are not changed to accommodate major teams that have to move up. The best games I saw this past weekend were AAA and major. Major plus was painful to watch. I'd like to say sorry to windy city they did not belong where they played. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | I spoke with the Windy City guys this weekend and they were crest fallen having been taken apart by the Hendricks team similar to what Kevin was talking about but in SPA this year they, Windy City beat us, Mac 2, twice under ideal conditions for them. If the rules, like Bob was saying, are 5 run innings and equalizer home runs Windy City would have a terrific chance to beat anyone including the Mavericks even with the wind blowing out. Ask the Mavericks, any of them, if they can be beaten if you want to hear the truth. Our game, the major/major plus game doesn't suck at all. I've been playing senior ball for 11 years now and I've never, barring some injuries, had more fun. I saw the best and most representative tournament I've ever been in this year in the 50 major division. The best team, Gekel, got eliminate well short of the finals. Terrific teams like the MOB, Washington Legends and East Bay Oldies and MTC were eliminated along the way. I agree were have some troubling and difficult issues but they can be resolved and we can keep the good stuff and move on. We need what is absolutely essential and that is a good to very good bat/ball combination as a starter. Then move much as Bob and Woody have proposed to a 1-1 count, effective pitcher protection and home run equalizer and five run innings to an open inning at the end. Then defense becomes as or more important as offense and outstanding hitting teams like Gekel and the Mavericks who had some problems in their infield are vulnerable and can be beaten. There are a number of people with opinions about us, Senior Softball, with all kind of experiences and agendas and ideas about what's best for us. I primarily trust the players/managers but only when we have the courage and commitment to stand up to and for what is truly in our best interests. Just like in the "real" world it's time to stand up, be counted and make a difference or do nothing, be part OF the problem and almost assuredly end up somewhere we don't want to be. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 tattooball 774 posts | Just as I said, the major and AAA were great games on both sides of the ball. Seacrest played 3 innings in all of there games but the finals. There is no run rule in the finals. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | Hi Kevin nice to meet you in person in Phoenix, Frannie introduced us. We played a number of games last weekend that with unlimited runs we would have had the scenario you described 3 innings and God only knows what the scores would have been. We played Gekle on Sunday morning and won 28-22. I bet the first four we didn't get a total of 5 outs. Without the run limit that score could have been a name a number type of deal. We did get 3 fairly quick outs in the open inning. I'm no genius but the options seem to be limited runs or figure out a way to reintroduce defense. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | hey kev you gots them fat fingers again:):) another note i'll be in the berkshires for about 10 days(22nov-1 dec) and would like to get together if ya would like.would like to see a MM combat. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 Dirty Men's 50 1371 posts | Lecak, without the special bats and with controlled balls the scores might also have been more reasonable. It all boils down to the equipment. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 tattooball 774 posts | I am away until the 23 rd I think but I will make time if you want to visit. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | thanks kev should i just use the phone # u gave,if not just pm me at SBF(bb666b77) |
| Oct. 30, 2008 tattooball 774 posts | Office 800-327-0074 ext 210 Cell 845-430-3994 Any of these will work. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 mad dog Men's 65 4191 posts | thanks kev |
| Oct. 30, 2008 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Hey Kevin, "Bob W, After watching the majors in Pheonix I will say that the game sucks." Sucks? The game I/we play doesn't suck. You qualified yourself later on but that's one hell of a lead sentence. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 tattooball 774 posts | Yeah, I meant the major+. I enjoy watching a softball game not a three inning batting practice session. I wish I could say there was some good defensive plays but the only defense I saw was when some one miss hit a ball. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 tattooball 774 posts | The majors on the other hand was pretty good overall. Many long home runs and some defense. The runs per inning rule made these games very competitive. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 DesertDave Men's 60 74 posts | I think the increased defensive improvement of an additional fielder for the lower rated division would be the most effective equalizer. JMO |
| Oct. 30, 2008 tattooball 774 posts | I thought the lower level games were much better, you even saw guys catching balls. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 DesertDave Men's 60 74 posts | with the runs per inning limit and an 11th fielder, I think most M teams could compete with ANY M+ team |
| Oct. 30, 2008 Smokey20 Men's 55 102 posts | Why in the 50 Major Pus did we play one set of rules in seeding and different set of rules in the bracket. 7 runs per in seeding and all open innings in the bracket. I say Major division only. Eliminate Major plus. 1-1 count. 5 per inning, open.Pitcher safety rule, from home plate to second base on the line drive. Let JK Inc (40)and Secrest Mavricks (50) play brackets by themselves best two out of three. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Desert Dave: I'm real curious... what division do you currently play? I don't want to expose your anonimity or anything... but you'd like to see the major teams get add'l runs and an extra fielder? Why don't we just guarantee them a win and a ring? But perhaps you're right... maybe the sand baggers would move up under those circumstances. I cannot speak for anyone other than myself but I'd rather try to deal with the status quo before giving away the tourneys just because some teams are hairless. That isn't the type of compromise that will work (add'l runs & extra fielder). Maybe you are removed from both divisions and haven't really seen either of them play. But there isn't as much difference between the M+ teams and the upper M teams as most folks think. Look at scores on the MB and you'll see. BW |
| Oct. 30, 2008 4x4 Men's 65 601 posts | Well - in his last post "Dirty" just exposed himself reasoning wise. "It all boils down to equipment" This person who has limited skills feels the equipment must make the difference - and THAT'S why he refuses to pay the price of admission AND would rather throw useless diatribes. Dirty - go find a "league" board you haven't been thrown off yet. Or - maybe even a team! Contribute (on the field/at a tournament/be sure to identfy yourself as the "big dog - Dirty" to all as you PARTICIPATE)or vacate - you will not be mourned. Good luck bigshot. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 Gekle BUilders Men's 50 204 posts | Hi Wood how are you.We have discussed this before,like I said before we are open to any thing that will improve the game.But if I am reading Desert Dave's post correctly, he doe's not appear to be asking for both the x-tra fielder and a run per inning,instead it looks like he's talking about run limits per inning (5) and an x-tra player on defense. Myself I think just limiting runs per inning to 5 or 7 than an open inning would be adequet to keep games competetive.I am not speeking for Dave, thats just how I read it.Which sounds practical to me. Good Luck Ray Morgan/Gekle |
| Oct. 30, 2008 DesertDave Men's 60 74 posts | BW, we played AAA this year. We are moving to 60M next year. I think you misunderstood. I only sugested the adnl fielder (not runs also) to equalize the divisions if the M+ teams have no one to play. I don't care who we play. I enjoy the competition. We have enjoyed playing some M and M+ teams this past year. Even tho they kicked our butt a couple times. Combining the divisions might give the M+ teams bigger brackets, but I think there are many M teams that wouldn't look forward to the competition without some sort of equalizer. I look forward to this next season in M. If we are at any of the same Tournaments this year, stop by and introduce yourself Dave #31 Robson 60+ |
| Oct. 30, 2008 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Ray: you're right, I did misread it... Desert Dave, I owe you a partial apology as you weren't advocating both... still, the add'l fielder won't be an option in my opinion... it's unnecessary. Sorry for the misread. BW |
| Oct. 30, 2008 Gekle BUilders Men's 50 204 posts | Sorry Dave didn't mean to speak for you.Or step on your post. |
| Oct. 30, 2008 DesertDave Men's 60 74 posts | Not a problem. Even if there was an edit feature, it is not a substitute for making yourself clear. Playing straight-up is the best way to measure your progress anyway. Bob, I hope to see you this next year at some tournaments. Our team is doing some healing over the next couple months. A side note, I think we played your team this past summer in Pinetop. I think you guys were playing short handed. Dave |
| Oct. 30, 2008 DesertDave Men's 60 74 posts | Ray, Thanks for the backup. Sometimes even I don't understand what I'm saying :) Dave |
| Oct. 31, 2008 cpope Men's 75 160 posts | JUst skimming this thread, it didn't seem to talk muck about the combining the two divisions. We all know the Major + division are short of teams at most tournaments. But why?? Many national tournaments are won my Major teams each year and should be moved up to M+, so why are they short of teams? Having the M play M+ and giving extra runs, or extra players, to me takes away from the game.. M+ should be able to have enough teams for at least a 10 team tournament. Take the Major teams that have won a big tournament and make them move up. I know all the little things they do to keep from moving up a division. I played on a team that did just a few and was left down in Major. Notthe way the rules were laid out. Several of us didn't like the thinking of the manager so we just moved on to other teams. But sooo many teams get by with this. Thats why we are working this thread now. They are a lot of teams that could be considered very close to M+ and maybe they should be moved up. Hope I didn't bring back bad memories for players but where do you want to play? Where you beat everyone with easy or play some real competive softball. At 62 I like to win, but not everygame in 3 innings by ther run rule. Have a great winter all. |
| Oct. 31, 2008 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | Charlie, There are only 16 major plus 55 teams. Only half of them actually played in a tournament this year. About half of that group played in a national. Only three came to Phoenix. The numbers are similar for the other age brackets in terms of percentages. The reason that half the teams don't play in tournaments is that they disband as soon as they are rated major plus. This is either due to the competition or due to the lack of teams who play in major plus generally. The current rules only require that a team move up if they win a national that has at least four teams in your division participating. When teams stay down and reform they are usually very strong major teams and often win multiple nationals in the following year. This is counterproductive to the process of "graduating" a number of major teams to major plus since there are a small number of different teams then winning nationals. Of course the new major plus game rules are also discouraging many major plus teams from playing in major plus or moving up to major plus. Thus the need for rules that tend to level the playing field which is what I have proposed. It seems that we have quite a few players who suppot a combination. It would be beneficial to hear from teams or players who would oppose it to find out what their reasoning is. Bob Schulz |
| Oct. 31, 2008 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | D Dave: We played you a few times this past season... in Tucson (12/07) and twice in Prescott (5/08). I was impressed with your team's cohesiveness... I'm not surprised that you're being moved to M next year... I believe that you'll do well if you continue to play as you did in Prescott. BTW, you played the 11th fielder against us in Tucson and it was the worse game, based upon final score, that you played against us. I believe that this was more coincidental than anything else... but you did station him as a 5th out-fielder rather than a 5th infielder. The reason that I asked which division that you were in was to give me insight to your frame of reference. Coming into the M division as a new team you would theoretically be a lower M team. As such you should be subjected to playing M+ teams for the most part. When you do, your team does deserve an equalizer... as would other lower M teams, IMO. However, I doubt that you'll be a lower M team for long. Again, I apologize for not reading your post correctly as it was written in the King's English and this is one of my MB pet peeves (guys shooting first, asking questions later). Sorry for jumping the gun. BW |
| Nov. 2, 2008 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | This is a big issue for everyone involved as it comes up on the board about once a month. I am coming from the 50+ perspective. There are only 4 or 5 teams head and shoulders above the others when it comes to Major and Major +. If they (M+) were forced to play Major rules, they would not win all the time. Bring them in! Don't force Major teams to move up. There was not one team in the Phoenix tournament that could compete in the Major + division with the current rules they currently have. Windy City is NOT a M+ team! The team who won the tournament, Coors will get killed at Major + if forced to move up. I propose that in 2009 combine the two divisions using the majority of the current MAJOR rules, this would be enough of a equalizer. Don't cater to a few teams, cater to the masses! > 5 runs per inning (open in 7th) > Compromise and make it 4 HR's (one up, then singles) > 1 and 1 count (get in the box and hit!) > Pitcher protection (if a pitcher gets hit, inning over. This area MUST be off limits, it's just too dangerous with the bats we use, Miken is not going to go away) > NO exception to the borders (this will keep M+ teams from tossing their $ around) > No flip-flop rule M+ players have got to realize that this is the way to go! You are always complaining (with good reason) that you are playing the same teams all the time. This is a way for you to be able have as much fun as we are having at the Major level. The M+ level will never be any more than 3 or 4 teams. Major teams that get moved up simply will not spend that kind of money to travel, play homerun derby and get their butt kicked. |
| Nov. 2, 2008 Duke Men's 65 908 posts | To whom it may concern, I read all of the posts here and elsewhere. While I understand the main point to be lack of teams in the Major+ tournaments, most Major teams do not care to play homerun derby. SSUSA has already been on a mission to move AAA teams to Major. Doing this has ultimately seen at least 4 great teams that I am aware of to disband. Since there are many more AAA teams to move to Majors, than there is to move Major teams to Major+, it makes it an easier task to accomplish. I do feel the pain of the Major+ teams, but I know our team would disband, if we had to play in the Major+ division. I was so pleased to see 14 Major teams in Phoenix, AND not to have to combine with the 3 Major+ teams. Way to go SSUSA on that decision! Sorry Major+ teams, but you are all about you. Take for example one of the rule changes you propose. Give the Major teams 11 fielders?? Why?? Give the Major teams 20 fielders, it just will not matter. You cannot defend a ball hit over the fence,unless you let us have that 11th player on the other side of the fence. LOL! Thanks for trying to limit the home runs too! LOL! Major+ teams do not play softball as it was meant to be played. You guys play home run derby. Great for you guys, but not much fun to the players that want to play softball. Now, if you REALLY want to combine Major and Major+ teams, then let's play softball as it was meant to be. One way would be to take down the fences. Since that may never happen, then all balls after the first home run is an out. That is my compromise for the Major teams to play with the Major+ teams. Of course, you would not like that equalizer, would you? I am new to the Major division, and had to laugh, when I was given an option to buy softballs to put in the game, when I chose to do so. In addition, the balls were altered by keeping them cool. What a joke!!!!!! You might as well throw in the shaved and altered bats, and be done with the rules of the game. I knew Major+ teams do that, and it further emphasizes that Major+ teams are concerned about is home run derby. That is great for you, but leave us softball players out of it. Thank you for reading and that is my opinion. Andy Smith Double Nickels, Manager |
| Nov. 2, 2008 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Some good points, Duke but do you want to play the infield against a M+ team with a Miken in their hands if the balls hit over the fence are a dead ball out? Homeruns should never be a dead ball out, that is what has ruined the game at the younger kids level. Having the M+ teams have to play the Major teams rule would be enough of an equalizer to combine the two. Maybe you could separate them at the World Tournament, but for all the other dinky little tournaments, there just isn't enough teams for two divisions. |
| Nov. 2, 2008 Duke Men's 65 908 posts | Jawood, I do not want to play Major+ teams at all, unless I have a Major+ team. I am not going to pay money for travel and fees, to play home run derby either. Yes, I want a dead ball out if the ball is hit over the fence. If we have to play them, my infield will be ready to field them. I pitch and do not fear any player hitting the ball at me. I take it as a challenge. If we end up playing Major+ teams, then I will retire from tournaments, and just play in leagues. I have played enough, and will not miss it at all. I am here for fun, relaxation, and winning is nice too. LOL! Let the homerun derby egos play their game, and leave the rest of us alone. Thank You!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Andy Smith, Double Nickels, Manager |
| Nov. 2, 2008 DoubleL10 Men's 70 907 posts | Duke, You must not watch the game I play. Your comments about "home run derby egos" are not well received by my group. My team is in the 60 Major Plus group and I can assure you we do NOT play homerun derby in our tournaments. We are a competitive team but you will not see ANY team in the 60s playing what you call homerun derby. The best team in our division, Turn 2, MAY hit 3 or 4 a game. My team, Boaz Export Crating, MAY hit 1 or 2 a game. Of course, this is under normal conditions; if the wind blows out, the numbers will go up. I can state in no tournaments in which we played this year did we exceed the alloted number of home runs. Read some of the other posts on this site about this topic, particulary those in which Donnie Chavis of Turn 2 shares such statistics with board readers. It seems everyone wants to lump all Major Plus teams with the Mavericks, Hendricks Sports and the very few teams of that ilk. IT JUST AIN'T SO! Larry Lopez Manager, Boaz Export Crating |
| Nov. 2, 2008 Duke Men's 65 908 posts | DoubleL10, Actually, I have watched 60Major+ and 60Major teams play, and you are correct. You guys do not hit as many home runs as the age group that I was addressing. I should have clarified that I was referring to the 50Major+ and 55Major+ teams. Sorry that I did not mention that upfront. Andy Smith, Double Nickels, Manager |
| Nov. 2, 2008 DesertDave Men's 60 74 posts | It is not the division/age group my team plays in. Perhaps, the proper combining of teams above the 50M and 55M would be to combine only the 50M+ and 55M+ as one division, and leave the rest alone. That way the YOUNG GUNS can play the game their way and everyone else is happy as is. Just a thought |
| Nov. 2, 2008 Gekle BUilders Men's 50 204 posts | Dave I think SSUSA intentions are clear with 6 major teams being moved up as of Nov. 1 08 making it 14 total for the year.That they are going to balance the two divions .My only request would be to implement a 7 run limit per inning with 7 open.Or else the games could be real long or real short.5 hr's with one up.To many changes would just be medaling with the rules. |
| Nov. 2, 2008 DesertDave Men's 60 74 posts | Aren't you glad all we have to do is show up and play ball? |
| Nov. 2, 2008 Gekle BUilders Men's 50 204 posts | Dave I wish thats all I had to do!!!!!Players,travel,lodgeing,uniforms,rosters,fees,etc.etc.etc. coaching sucks. |
| Nov. 2, 2008 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | You may get more teams for the worlds in Major plus by bumping all these teams up, but the others will still be a small number of participants. Teams will not go to these tournaments without a chance compete and a "chance" is playing with the major rules, not homerun derby rules. |
| Nov. 3, 2008 Duke Men's 65 908 posts | Jawood, Again, you are right on. You are correct about this too. It sounds like teams/players are seeing the light and agreeing about what is going to happen and why. Good to see! Andy Smith, Double Nickels, Manager |
| Nov. 3, 2008 Duke Men's 65 908 posts | DesertDave, Your idea of combining 50Major+ and 55Major+ is a good one. Both divisions are very evenly matched. You might enter a suggestion to have no age restrictions till you reach the 60's. It would be a 10 year spread, rather than a 5 year spread. The only flaw would be a 55Major team being bumped to that division and not having any 50 players. You might just make all of the divisions 10 years between the ages of 50 till 60. At 60, I have noticed a najor slow down for many players. As I approach that age, I can see myself slowing down too. :-( Andy Smith, Double Nickels, Manager |
| Nov. 3, 2008 DesertDave Men's 60 74 posts | It's not that long ago, but the 50 and 55 sure seem younger now, dont they? :-) |
| Nov. 3, 2008 Duke Men's 65 908 posts | DesertDave, You are right about that. LOL! I am a year away from the 60's. Andy Smith |
