Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get startedOnline now: 2 members: Jimmyboy, leslie; 66 anonymous
Discussion: major plus
|Aug. 13, 2021|
As you know the Major plus division is pretty much broken. In regards to at least the 65, 70 and 75 age groups. The net net there are too few teams in these categories. At the Westerns there were two 60 teams, two 65 teams and one 70 and 75 major plus teams in attendance. Now I am hearing that there will be only one 70 major plus team at the Nationals??? I realize there are too few teams to carry much $$ weight and the bracket is there mainly as a penalty box to kick up teams so the rest of the major teams don't bitch too loud. But, something has to be done. We should all play within our own age bracket and give whatever amount of runs to be "equitable". I also think we should play a one-up homer rule when "mixed" brackets play. I don't know, it is frustrating to care about being the best you can be when most teams want to sandbag to play in the lowest bracket they can get away with. Then if they win, they "dissolve" their team, or go the medical waiver process to reconnect with their former teammates. Or you can do what the Animals did in 70 Major Plus go to tournies and get wiped out, until the team packs it in. I suggested years ago a committee of major plus players should be formed to address the issues and revitalize the Major Plus headache. This is symptomatic of issues throughout senior softball.. For us on Timberworks playing against 65 major plus teams was good but should be an exception process. Not the ongoing norm, because in the end no one wins. See the last Western Championship.
I don't know when the last time we played a 70 major team but I think it is about time we did.
It used to be a badge of honor to be called Major Plus, now it seems like a curse...
|Aug. 16, 2021|
|Way to man up Doak! Your rant almost brought me to tears thinking how badly I feel for Timberworks. You are right about one thing the major plus division is broke. A team with a 99.9% tourney winning percentage can't get anyone to play against them, that's a shock! Why would a team from Florida, Virginia, Wisconsin or wherever want to spend all that money to get beat up? And now you want to beat up the 70 major teams. We are a team of players all from Arizona. We are friends, we play locally together and against each other. We have no desire to recruit from other states, and we have zero major plus players on our roster, and we don't sandbag. What you are suggesting by putting Timberworks in with the 70 major teams is ludicrous. They tried this in the 2019 Southwest 65 championships. What a fiasco. I said at the time there was a huge advantage to the teams that were in the opposite bracket of Timberworks. And it came true, you sent team after team to the losers bracket and we (AZ Ancients) were in the opposite bracket and we won the major part of that championship. But it didn't end there, you wanted to beat us twice to claim the major plus title. Oops there I go again I'm tearing up. But I see you have a solution, let the inmates run the prison.. by having major plus players decide how to move forward. I have a solution.. only 3 major plus players can play on any one team. I'm probably the only one that will speak up, but in talking with other players many feel the same way. So as for sympathy for Timberworks, you'll not see it from me. |
Walt Kado-AZ Ancients manager
|Aug. 16, 2021|
|These divisions have been broke for years. Make the teams play from bordering states only. It will open the amount of players to other teams. Like the Ancients we paly with all local state players. We won the Masters and know what comes with it. We just need to do a better job of balancing the players and moving up the lower division teams that hide during the year. |
Richard Pratt-Top Gun Elite
|Aug. 16, 2021|
|Hi Doak. You have hit on the curse of being M+ after 65 years old. I loved the 2 years I played on Timberworks. I had never won a World Championship before, having two 2nds and a third. To win twice was amazing. However, with all due respect to the teams we beat, it became almost anti-climactic to win. The fact that we could hit 18 guys in Worlds and interchange almost any one person with another with no falloff ended up creating major plus divisions with Timberworks and whatever teams got moved up to face them for a year like Walt did with Ancients, The Animals, and the Rebels did playing 5 best of three series in 5 cities with the same team. Omen and Venom faced the same in 70's Major Plus. This year Timberworks played Texas Crush in a combined 65/70 Major Plus bracket many times. Mesquite, Vegas, Reno, Sacramento and Vegas again cost a lot of money to make those trips especially with your wife. It was about $1200 per tourney for me 3 years ago and was a major reason I stepped back from Timberworks. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$|
Last year I put forth an idea to SSUSA that I would now like to put here on the board for comment.
!. Dissolve Major Plus as we know it for all players 65 and over. Allow all major plus players to play on 65 Major, 70 major or older rosters during the year. This will strengthen the Major divisions and should help create more team participation during the year. And it will give those that still have the Major Plus 'DRIVE' to compete at that level for a Championship.
2. All Major Plus Players will still retain their Major Plus status as before and only 3 players with Major Plus status can play on any one Major team, just as it is now.
3. At Worlds in Vegas, there will be a time set aside for a Major Plus Worlds at each age group over 65. Judging from participation for the last two years, one day would be all that is needed to conclude the tourney, which would have no seeding games, but would be seeded by a coin flip. Teams will submit a roster at the beginning of they year for their Major Plus team, but World's will be the only time they will be used. I'm sure the rules as to the eligibility to play would be a bit different as far as eligibility with no tourneys to qualify for it. Dave, Terry and the others will be much better at coming up with a usable set of rules for this.However, players that do participate during worlds one year retain their label for 3 years after that. This could help keep teams from stacking their 65 major teams, or 70 Major, etc.
4. Many Major Plus teams could compete in tournaments outside SSUSA so they can play tourneys together during the year. They do this already so no difference there.
4. I have a sneaking suspicion that a few more teams might take a crack at the end of the year world's at Major Plus over 65. After all, we ALL realize that anyone can beat anyone on a given day. And it's only one tournament.
This is a work in progress and all suggestions are welcome. If the idea is well received here, I would be happy to submit it to SSUSA officially.
Thanks for reading.
|Aug. 17, 2021|
|This is a serious issue for all levels of teams. I understand frustrations from Walt and I agree it's not easy playing a team that has been winning almost all of there games. The issue goes even farther for other level of teams and includes SSUSA (which is put in an almost impossible position.) Yes, it is even difficult for the Timberworks team.|
Doak was pointing this out and not looking for sympathy for this Major Plus team. What he was looking for was awareness, action or hoping to start a process to resolve this frustating problem for all levels and all teams. No easy answers for anyone! It's not fun to be beaten on a regular basis and it really is not fun to be on the other side despite what players may think. You play Major Plus because you want to play the best competition not to beat up on teams forced to play you. You go to tournaments for a chance to compete not to be dominated by another team on a consistent basis.
Resolution is going to take some work but something does need to be done for all parties to be somewhat satisfied.
|Aug. 17, 2021|
|Well, here we are at "deja vu all over again" 13 years later ... On August 26, 2008, SSUSA announced the adoption of the Major+ Rules package recommended by that summer's Major Plus Task Force ... A lot of really talented ballplayers who also happened to be pretty smart fellas attacked this problem ... Here was the result ... |
SSUSA Adopts Major-Plus Task Force Recommendations
On June 4, 2008, the SSUSA commissioned the Major Plus Task Force to survey the Major Plus managers in the 50ís, 55ís and 60ís age groups and to use the responses from those managers to formulate recommendations concerning playing rule modifications for those divisions.
The Task Force was chaired by Gary Tryhorn (Old Aís 60ís), and included Bob Woodruff (GSF 60ís), Audie Hollis (Hollis Appraisal 50ís and 55ís), Butch Drake (Travelodge 55ís), Randy Hendricks (Hendricks Sports Management 50ís), Ken Lipinski (Seacrest Mavericks 50ís) and Jim Hornus (W.E. Ruth 55ís).
The Task Force has submitted their recommendations and the SSUSA is pleased to announce that it is adopting eight of the nine recommendations. The effective date for all of the adopted recommendations is September 1, 2008, except as otherwise noted.
Recommendations Adopted Ė
1. TOURNAMENT FORMAT Ė Major Plus teams will play two seeding games on the first day, double elimination (or three game guarantee, field availability permitting) brackets starting on the second day, with the third day concluding in the early afternoon.
2. TIME LIMITS Ė Sixty-five (65) minutes plus open inning in seeding games, 75 minutes, finish current inning, in bracket, and seven innings full, no time limit, in Championship game(s).
3. RUNS PER INNING Ė Seeding games: Seven (7) runs per half-inning at bat, with last inning open. Bracket and Championship Games: No run limit (open scoring) per half-inning at bat, with mercy rule of 25 runs after 5 innings.
4. HOME RUNS Ė Ten (10) plus 1-up, Singles thereafter, in all three age divisions.
5. SOFTBALLS Ė Each team will be provided with two dozen new softballs at the beginning of the tournament. Teams will hit their own softballs and chase their own home runs. Additional softballs may be purchased at the tournament or teams may bring their own SSUSA approved (only) softballs.
6. BALL / STRIKE COUNT Ė The current SSUSA rule of a 4-3 ball/strike count will be retained. No courtesy foul.
7. ROSTER RESTRICTIONS Ė Teamís home state plus bordering states, Snowbirds prohibited, and one (1) out-of-region exception player allowed per team, using East/West of the Mississippi River boundary. [EFFECTIVE DATE: November 1, 2008, to prevent disrupting current rosters for the 2008 World Championships in Phoenix]
8. ROSTER PUBLICATION Ė Major Plus rosters will be made public through the SSUSA web site.
Recommendation Declined Ė
9. BATTED BALL STRIKING PITCHER Ė The managers surveyed by the Task Force voted exactly 50/50% on the question of retaining or eliminating this rule, and the Task Forceís recommendation was to eliminate it. The rule will be retained, in modified form, and is simultaneously being extended to all ages and divisions of play, effective September 1, 2008.
Rule Modification Ė Specific language will be published shortly, but the Pitcherís Protection Rule will apply only if the pitcher is in the Pitcherís Box and, in the judgment of the umpire, the Pitcher has no chance to make a defensive play on the ball. The component of the current rule that limited its application to the line drive batted ball only will be removed.
ECONOMIC IMPACT ON TEAMS Ė The adoption of the Task Force Recommendations will result in additional softball costs and longer game times, for which umpires will be entitled to, and receive, additional compensation. The 50ís, 55ís and 60ís Major Plus teams will be charged an additional entry fee of $200 to help defray a portion of the additional costs.
Thank you to all of the managers who replied to the survey, and a special thank you to the Major Plus Task Force for an exceptionally well done job.
Follow-up ► Within 90 days, the Major Plus Task Force had petitioned that these rule amendments be rescinded ... That request was granted, ending the modification experiment ...
|Aug. 17, 2021|
|The M+ issues as stated in this thread all have merit and have been around a long time and will probably be as long as there are teams that dominate.|
Hereís a link to a thread with a similar topic from 2015. https://seniorsoftball.com/?messageboard&viewby_thread=122883&message_topic_id=misc&keywordsfound=major+plus+problems
Our team unfortunately has not been able to play ball in the US since 2019 due to COVID / border closures but having played at M+ I can submit my humble assessment for whatever itís worth:
Most of the proposed solutions do not consider players and or teams that come from sparsely populated regions. Breaking up M+ teams or dispersing those players onto other M teams might be a worthy proposition but have their own inherent setbacks such as playing with friends as one example. Also, sparsely populated regions might not have access to M+ players and/or that the travel and distance involved for adding M+ players are not always realistic.
It seems to me that one or two M+ teams already have a solution that "sort of" works Ė if overpowering a division play down an age group straight up against your competition. That 5-years is a good equalizer.
|Aug. 17, 2021|
|In my short time in senior ball at 50 Major the Major Plus problems exist there also. Most tournaments Iíve seen there are only 2-3 Plus teams to play pool games with the 50 Major teams and then they play their own mini bracket. This past weekend in Richmond the games between the 50 Major and Major Plus teams were all pretty close.|
|Aug. 17, 2021|
|It was a great decision to put such a who's who of Senior softball on the committee. I understand nothing was really accomplished but like I stated it's not going to be an easy solution. Almost all approaches have drawbacks! To arrive at answer and please everyone included Senior Softball will be all most impossible. But still the problem exists and maybe even more so than before. I believe we have to make some attempt to come up with a plan that will at least help?|
Just my thoughts!
|Aug. 18, 2021|
|I know one change I would like to see. When a team is bumped to Major+ make it for one year instead of two. A lot of times when a team gets bumped they are on the verge of going up in age classification, or half of the team can go up in age and the other half can't leaving the "younger" players in limbo for the next year and the burden of finding a team that will pick them up and automatically be at the plus level due to the number of players to be picked up. I think making the plus tag apply for only one year would benefit a great number of players.|
|Aug. 18, 2021|
|Having played major plus roughly half of the time ive played SSUSA, I personally like the idea of the M+ division, and if someone is good enough to have a dynasty, so be it. It should be big boy softball...and good for the teams that can dominate it. My only suggestion, as I reach 68 years next year, is that with the fewer number of teams 65 and older, I think once we reach that age, with less teams overall, a consideration to simply have a AA, AAA and open major..for 3 divisions instead of 4. If there are 8 to 10 teams in open major, its alot harder for the best teams to win against 10 teams vs 3, and its alot more fun to play against a larger pool group. If you have won worlds or placed high enough in SSUSA worlds, consider it an elite group your in and you have to beat the best to win this division. Just my opinion, and appreciate the pros and cons from the SSUSA standpoint..I feel they always doing what they feel is best for all player levels...and we don't always have the total facts to understand their stance. 3 levels instead of 4 would help balanced the overall lack of teams as we sadly age.|
|Aug. 20, 2021|
|Senior Softball protects all age/class divisions by moving a team up in class when winning the worlds except for Major Plus teams. In the 2019 annual meeting it was proposed that when a Major Plus team wins there age division, they get moved to the next lower major Plus age division(65 to 60) so they also move up in class. For whatever reason, it was voted down.|
This option to me makes sense and will stop a Major Plus team from dominating a division.
|Aug. 21, 2021|
|How about using a Debeer 212 softball, single walled bats, and unlimited arc pitching ? Then you can eliminate both AA and Major + divisions.|
|Aug. 22, 2021|
|Major Plus is still a badge you can wear proudly, the Animals won that privilege during the last World Championships. We had a great run of 7-0 to win, but in the year of COVID, we did not see any teams from the East other than Venom 70 Major Plus. Our team knew going into the championship game against the Sidewinders that if we won, we would be playing Timberworks every time we played the following year. |
Winning was the most important thing, the Animals have never ever sandbagged for anybody and never will. Our team is comprised of mostly local players and we are proud that we compete at a high level and win against some of the top teams in the Country.
Thank you Doak for suggesting that we packed it in, thatís not really true. My core group of guys will play anyone at anytime, but you canít get some guys to commit to getting run ruled every time out, so you just canít play with 8-9 guys. As a self sponsored team, the cost per player for travel and expenses is large and spending $500 or more for some guys to get a 2nd place cap every time out and I understand that. We didnít even get a cap for the Rock n Reno tourney, Timberworks got 1st place in the 70ís, Texas Crush got 1st place for the 65ís and we got 3rd place??? It was just a three team bracket and I donít really care about the cap, second place is for losers.😃
Itís not my intent to change the chemistry of the Animals just to play M+, this team has a 40 year history of friends playing ball together. If you have the ability to win, you must also have to be gracious to lose too.
If the Animals get lucky enough to play Major again, we will strive to win that title again.
I donít see a reasonable outcome regarding the disparity between M+ and M. It would be nice to see sponsored and non-sponsored divisions but thatís not going to happen. There is really nothing different now than years back when these same M+ players were playing younger, they dominated those age groups too.
I know the Major associations like SSUSA have problems getting equitable opponents for the M+ teams and I think they are the ones that need to work harder to fix the problem.
Hope to see everyone again at the Winter Worlds with a healthy Animal team, good luck to all during the Worlds in Vegas
|Aug. 23, 2021|
|Doak do you ever come east..smokey/issa/spaworlds..Isssa toc???????I know the 50/55 m+ teams mostly do not...Reid Miller BPA 55M+|
|Aug. 24, 2021|
|Don, I didn't mean to disparage the Animals and what they accomplished last year, my only point was a very good major team was forced to play up because of the current processes. You guys were "forced" to play up with your "major team" and you played in 4 or 5 tournies as a major plus but after Reno you decided not to play in the Westerns or go the the Nationals. (That's what I referred to as packing it in. It is interesting Dave that you still have not gave any concrete resolutions to this Major Plus problem. |
Here are a couple of suggestions:
1) have all the teams in the 65 and over sessions have the 11th fielder. This is a huge point of contention when we play down in age groups. This would allow 70 major Plus to play heads up with 65 majors.
2) Go to a one up home run rule in 65 and up. No one hits near the limit anyway especially with the balls being used. This would stop the complaint of major plus teams having a power advantage. This rule works very well in our Nor_cal tournies. The result of going 2 homers up is it is treated like a walk...Very effective.
3) Stop the medical exemptions, it is an abused process. There are Major teams who have 7+ former major plus players on it. I don't get it I have a bad knee as a major plus player then I get it fixed and I get an exemption to play down.
to r4pitch, when we were the rebels and then MTC we would often go east to play SPA, the world series, u trip. asa, ISA, ISSAA and even NSA and in the late 90's early 2000's teams like Fergies, the crush, mavericks various Texas teams would pound us. It was a great time to play senior softball. Those teams were the Timberworks of their time and they weren't the problem either.. Say something Dave/Terry that helps resolve the issue...
Thanks for your anticipated cooperation,
|Aug. 25, 2021|
|Walt and Don, Having played with Doak for 2 years, I can tell you he is a true gentleman of the game. I KNOW he meant no offense. |
Doak, I looked at the list for 70 M+ in worlds. One Team-Timberworks. I thought Clatterbough was going to bring his team, Superior, but I guess not. So here you are-70M+ World and Triple Crown champions again and you have to make the trip, spend money and show up to get it, and maybe play the Texas Crush team or other 65 teams as an 'exhibition', which unfortunately, is all it will be. And so my proposal, supported by Bogie in a slightly different way, gains a little momentum. Having a division with one team nationally leaves an empty feeling.
I know SSUSA is trying hard to make this work. Their move last year about having teams that could recruit from the entire nation, unfortunately, created the situation where those teams end up in a division of their own, spot EVERY team they play, and still does not solve the problem.
Has anyone one else got any ideas?
|Aug. 25, 2021|
|It's probably time for an update to the 13 year old revisions of basically a different Era in senior softball...we played a major+ team in a major play- in game a few weeks ago, and it was just a formality for them...they knew there were only 3 teams in their bracket and play-ins didn't mean anything except BP and fielding...why don't we combine the major and major+ into one division, allow an extra fielder for the lower team, 5 runs and allow 8 HRS when competing...most major plus teams play against 5 man anyhow and they lose only 2 HRS so it equals out somewhat....it would give major teams a chance to compete against different teams and better talent but the equalizer brings the competition closer....I am personally tired of traveling 8-12 hours to play the same 4 or 5 times on the east coast nearly every tourney we play and play a major plus play in game that is just going through the motions to fulfill the 4-5 game guarantee....time to refresh the rules and give everyone more variety in competition and teams played....its either that or teams are going to disappear|
|Aug. 26, 2021|
|Some teams were strong in 50 Major but moving to 50 Major + they werenít the big dogs anymore and werenít happy about that. I played on a 50 Major team and I have no issue playing the Plus teams, I would welcome it. The team I played with this year I think won one game in 4-5 SSUSA/ISSA tournaments and that was against Suncoast 50 in Richmond. Iíd have to think that was due to getting 5 runs. |
I donít know what the solution is but some teams go to tournaments to have a good time and others go to win.
|Aug. 26, 2021|
|Get rid of either AA or Major plus then you will have more teams in all 60,65,&70 division's|
|Oct. 3, 2021|
|I would like to be the first to welcome Minnesota Masters and Arizona Ancient back to 70 Major Plus after their performances in Worlds. Walt (800), Az Ancient, you guys now have a chance to knock off the 6 time World Champs and 5 time Triple Crown Champs. I hope both teams give Timberworks a heck of a battle every time you play them. Good luck.|
|Oct. 3, 2021|
|AZA has been, but has the MNM team Eva been a M+? Both teams have been very competitive in recent years. Yes 25, win or not, itís good to see some new blood in the 70M+.|
|Oct. 6, 2021|
|i see an easy solution to the M+ division- any team so classified may play in their appropriate age division, @ Major, with out said team using senior bats. I realize that may lead to some cheating, but it would be minor I hope.|
|Oct. 6, 2021|
Not sure where you got your information but AZ Ancients has not been reclassified as of this writing. ( Maybe you have the secret code)I'm not sure why they would .. we were 4th out of 5 teams in the Western Nationals and 2-2 in the Western states, and 2nd in the Worlds...certainly not major+ caliber. Besides the fact we are 1-19 over the last 6 years versus Timberworks and they proved they are better than any 65 Major+ team. Not sure why you think this deserves a bump. If anything Timberworks should play 60 major + now to protect the lesser teams.
|Oct. 6, 2021|
|800 the answer would be Run Differential. Generally, if your run differential is >5, SSUSA is likely to move a team up if they finish second.|
|Oct. 6, 2021|
|Why don't you just get rid of a division. Say have either AA AAA &Major or have AAA Major & Major Plus & I don't understand the East West of the Mississippi(Louisiana's on both sides of the River) If you only get 4 guy's out of area who cares where they come from.We played 65 major plus this year with only 4 major plus rated player's & none were out of area. The home run rule needs fixed I Think 7 or 9 is a good number but not an out after you hit your allotment maybe singles Why penalize the long ball hitter ,You don't penalize a fast guy because he can still run but if you hit middle & hit pitcher your out second time your out of game if & it should never happen 3RD Time game over forfeit by team who's player hit pitcher. Thos guys have got to be protected. We play with a screen,has saved a lot of guy's from injury.|
|Oct. 6, 2021|
|Bogie I apologize,I didn't see you comment until after I wrote mine. Haven't seen you guys in couple years used to always see you in Indy & Lansing. I've been coming over your way seems like I spent most of 2020 over at Mayo Clinic think I'm back on track got to go back Oct-12th then maybe not for a year.Hope to see ya somewhere on ball field Rickey|
|Oct. 8, 2021|
|Sorry I didn't answer sooner. I have been on the road working. 800, (Walt), precedence is my guide. I watched R&R do the same thing. They went up to M+ one year, lost, got moved down for one year, then won at major and got moved up again. Usually they move at least 2 in a bracket your size. By coming in second in worlds, that seems a good possibility. I understand perfectly that you are a local team of friends, but you have to admit you are a darn GOOD team of friends. It will be an interesting decision, but I am betting you both get moved. That brings us back to my original post that maybe there should not be a M+ level because teams like you will just end up not going to tournaments you would have gone to as a major team. It does get repetitious to play the same team or maybe 2 teams in Mesquite, Vegas, Reno, Sacramento, and then Vegas again. For many, it is a lot of money to spend to play the same team a best of 3 in 5 different cities during the year. The idea to only assemble Major Plus teams over 65 or 70 for Vegas Worlds still seems to make the most sense to me. It is a tough situation. I also believe the teams are already beginning to make that decision for you. To have only one 70 M+ team for worlds speaks volumes. And please understand, if it was just me that felt this way and others didn't, I would not say a thing, but I hear this from a whole lot of players and teams out there.|
I also want to address one other idea-the one that a team like Timberworks has to play 65 or even 60 M+ to even things out. My question to a lot of 70's teams is 'Would you play M+ if Timberworks was reclassified as a 65 M+ team?' I bet many would. Having said that, if you won worlds at 70 M+, would you feel comfortable being declared the 70 M+ world champion knowing Timberworks is actually a 70 M+ team and is the best?
|Oct. 8, 2021|
In checking back they have not moved up 2 70 major teams for the last 5 years. Don't know why they would start now. I freely admit Timberworks is the best 70 team.. You could add + or ++++ it wouldn't matter. And with the new 70 year olds they have coming up you could add more +++++. There is no way to make it fair for any another 70's team to play against them.
|Oct. 8, 2021|
|Walt, I get it. I really do. The moves I referred to were in 65 M+. There is no good answer with Timberworks as dominant as they are. You do prove one of my points, though. If you were younger, the hunger to win would probably prompt you to pick up a few guys to TRY to compete. At 70, you are happy playing with your friends and not so hungry to compete with the best. Personally, I get it and agree with you. I think I am trying to get SSUSA to understand that this belief is not as uncommon as they may believe. Best of luck to you and the Ancients in future years!!|
|Oct. 9, 2021|
|Kudos to Doug Robbins for the Timberworks team, 2022! they will get probably be better. More power to them, and good luck to anyone playing against them,, wherever they play. Why would anyone suggest that they should play 60ís. Ridiculous to penalize a team and manager for playing within the rules. Time cures everything, just go out and play and take your lumps if they come your way. |
Doak!! Love ya pal 😃 always a pleasure playing with you or against you! See you in Phoenix, just hope we are on different fields😎
|Oct. 9, 2021|
|I would really like to see a committee formed (preferrable made up of Major Plus and Major players) for the December meeting that would at least start discussing options to try and resolve this issue, which is growing and affecting a lot of teams at different levels. This will not be an easy answer and may take a while to come up with legitmate options.|
Just my thoughts!!
|Oct. 9, 2021|
I would like to congrat you and the Animals for playing tough all year (realize how frustrating it had to be) with class and positive attitute. Great group of guys and real competitors!!! Have a great year next year, good luck with what your hoping to happen.
|Oct. 11, 2021|
I think part of the issue on why the number of Major Plus teams will continue to decline is because of the roster changes being allowed from a couple of years ago. I hope this trend does not continue.
It was 2019, I think, that you went from 2 players from non-bordering states (same side of Mississippi) to 4. That caters to big money teams that can afford to strengthen an already competitive team into one of 2 or 3 dominant teams. Players that otherwise might play from a local team (strengthening that team) now play on out-of-area teams weakening the local team.
I recommend going back to 2 players from Non-touching states. Any team with more than that, can then be considered an Open division team (limit to 4 non-bordering players, of which 2 can be anywhere in the country). These teams will have to spot runs or fielder to Major Plus teams.
By allowing teams to add non-local players, you are catering to sponsored teams. The more money the team has, the better players it can get.
|Oct. 11, 2021|
|If there is a committee being formed I would like to be a part of same. 20+ years playing Senior Softball and there has always been haves and have nots. |
The M+ division issues are self created. I have played M+ for 3/4 of my career and would still be playing it I was more talented and not fat.
It is a manager's job to create the best team possible based on their vision and expertise. If a team was only allowed players from within the state or state adjacent, the talent pool is reduced. SSUSA does a decent job in leveling the playing field, but the elite should not complain at being elite. The Jamaican bobsled team may be the worst in the Olympics but they are better than 99% of the world. Thus the M+ division is eating itself so to speak.
Of the 800-1100 softball teams in the country, there are probably relatively few sponsored. My less than scientific guess is; 5% receive tournament fees, another 4% fees and uniforms and 20-30 teams all divisions both plus some other type of compensation.
The teams that are blessed to have some type of sponsorship will naturally have a better chance of obtaining the best talent. Those teams that are "on paper" better than others should not gripe when they have no one to play.
This is the senior division, age begets injuries, retirement reduces disposable income, and overall talent pool is reduced.
Mike Adair #35
|Oct. 20, 2021|
|I would also like to be included but not in Sacramento. Maybe Phoenix?|
|Oct. 20, 2021|
|Webbie (and Mike) ... I'm currently scheduled to be in the Phoenix area next month as the T.D. for the Winter World's ... Let's get together and talk for a bit ... Nothing is going to happen there (PHX) because we only do rules once a year ... That's at the Rules Committee Sessions during the annual convention, this year in Sacramento ... I don't have any idea if there is enough committee member support to move this from the "potential" to "actual" agenda, assuming someone actually submitted a formal request to consider the matter (Message Board commentary doesn't count) ... It's what some of us refer to as a "3% issue" since it only affects about 3% of all registered teams, so it's not going to have any sort of association-wide agenda mandate ... Good luck and I'll see you there! ... |
|Oct. 20, 2021|
|Hi Dave-Steve Imlay was also interested and there are many more M+ players here in this area. I know it is a 3% interest, but there has always been a lot of talk. I will try to make it if there is interest.|