Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 2 members: TABLE SETTER 11, mello24; 61 anonymousDiscussion: Major+ Equalizer - What do you think?
| Posted | Discussion |
| Jan. 8, 2010 Sisavic 190 posts | Major+ Equalizer - What do you think? IMO, one cause of too few teams in the Major+ division: Teams disband, reorganize, or stop going to big tournaments because they believe they have no chance versus the previous year's World's Champion. This is unique in Major+ divisions because the winners of the Worlds don't "move up." How about instituting a 5-run equalizer for one year to those M+ teams that didn't win the Worlds. So all M+ winners of the 2009 Worlds in Phoenix would have to play with a 5-run deficit, but for only one year (unless it again wins in 2010). This might get more M+ teams to participate. What do you think? |
| Jan. 8, 2010 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | Do teams feel good about getting runs given to them and then win the game when they really don't? If Major and Major-plus were combined, you can allow a Major team to score one more run an inning than a Major-plus team up to the open inning. The Major team can score six more runs until the 7th but has to EARN them. |
| Jan. 9, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Jawood, As it is now, don't the rules require M teams vs m+ teams to play under Major rules? But is merged Some would be competitive, some would not. Not unlike any other ratings mismatch. I think there are many teams at all levels that could move either way. But you know the vast majority want to play down, not up. |
| Jan. 9, 2010 smooth01 Men's 50 128 posts | Last year, powers to be changed the HR rule to try and equalize teams ,in order to get more teams for the Major Plus to beat up on.Then they re-classified teams, moving many of them up to Major and Major Plus ,that did not belong there. Again,just to get more teams in the Major/Major Plus divisions. Now,we are discussing to make changes just to give these teams more runs ,needed to compete with Major/Major Plus and make the final scores LOOK like these teams can be competitive. Being that bitching about the HR rule is now not an option ,now we discuss runs scored. Classifications should be determined by talent and skill level,not by giving runs to equalize or by taking away HR's like they did last year.There should have not been any rule changes last year,This association and people on this message board ,keep bringing up the idea's of changes to the rules and how the game should be played,when they should just leave a good thing alone and quit trying to change something that's not broke.Looks like alot of these post are just for people who enjoy seeing their name on the board,and think they have to comment on every little post.It would be different if they really had an input to help the game,but they just comment to comment as if we really cared for their every little thought. |
| Jan. 9, 2010 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | We really don't care what the equalizer rules are. We were one of those Major teams moved up for the benefit of the Major-plus teams. We'll play anyone but don't want to play in these 3/4 team tournaments stretched out over three days when it can be easily done in two. In the 50's, with the Mavericks done, is there really anyone that much better than the rest of the Major teams that a separate divison is required? And if there is, just put a (+) by their team and they have play with an equalizer. |
| Jan. 9, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | SSUSA usually has some sort of * § ¶ markings for those types of things. IE; exhibition, 11 players, 5 runs, etc. The not knowing before hand about only having 2-3 teams to play against is is probably the biggest problem along side of needing to arrange lodging most of the time for 3 nights,(4 days) for something that may have been done in a 2 & three thing. The number of teams overall and fields available is one possible obstacle for some but surely not all. |
| Jan. 9, 2010 Jawood Men's 50 943 posts | I was refering to the regular tournament, not the exhibition games which really don't matter anyway. |
| Jan. 9, 2010 ShaneV Men's 55 393 posts | What if managers realized that actually they could control their own destiny. Rather than expecting TD's to cater to their needs, the managers all got each others contact info and coordinated when and where they play. They could even |
| Jan. 9, 2010 ShaneV Men's 55 393 posts | Oops. They could even negotiate their own equalizers, etc., and then together inform the TD what it is they desire. What TD would complain if teams took control, paid their entry fees far in advance, arranged their own particulars and just asked for their guaranteed games and a sensible schedule. Take it a step further and do the whole thing yourselves, for about 2/3 the price! Where are the natural leaders and innovators among us? Many are tournament directors already. TD's offer us their wares, mediate all the differences and listen to all the valid and invalid complaints from every direction, and really do the best they can. And many wonder why TD's turn a deaf ear! And many of the best ones quit after a few years! The small number of teams in the Major and MajorPlus classes is a problem. I can't solve that problem as a TD. With the managers' help, WE can. ShaneV |
| Jan. 9, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Jawood, I didn't think you were... What I was saying is what SSUSa uses these symbols to reflect runs given by certain teams. Actually for any team that has some sort of differentiation from the others. Shane, Some mgrs as well as players, use this forum as well as other sites to 'try' to get a handle from other teams that plan or will on attending specific tournaments. This is a very good idea. Only hole in it is that there are only around a hundred or so posters on here that are really active. There are roughly 950 teams and many of the posters are not attending tournaments and are from same teams. So getting close to an accurate count for any given age and level might be really hard. If mgrs have access to the other teams contact info it would be a great tool to find that info ahead of time. That is why I am in favor of viewable rosters as NCSSA has with mgr contact info. Cross checking player data can informative if the info is updated and correct. Theirs is lacking there..example some players are listed as having date of birth in the 2000 period... players on multiple rosters, underage for age group, etc. Many a TD are in it for the bucks, first, not the game. |
