|
|
Post by Shannon Borho on May 18, 2006 9:04:11 GMT -5
By now everyone should know about this debate. After the draft was done, the league proposed (and passed) a new method of dispersing players that come to the league onto the reserve list.
What was decided was that as players were added to the reserve list, they would be immediately placed on a team. If teams wanted the extra player, they would get first shot at that player (the player was to be kept anonomous). If no one wanted an extra player, that player would be randomly placed on a team's roster bringing their total to 13. The following season, all players who came into the leage through the reserve list automatically go into the draft (so its only a 1-year thing for that team).
The reasoning behind this is that we don't want to turn players away (by leaving them on the reserve list for an extended period of time, maybe all season) when we already lost a team and want to get back to 8 teams for next season. Not only that, the league fees expected were for 8 teams (~96 players) but we only have 84 players so the league may take a loss financially for this season and the league fees will increase next season (or we won't play as many games).
Of course forcing teams to 13 isn't really fair to teams that have players that show up for every game because a 13th player means less at bats and less playing time for everyone on that team. So when league members caught wind of this, there were complaints which is why this is being brought to a vote. Obviously, this forum isn't the official vote but i thought i would bring it up and see what people's comments were regarding this topic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shannon Borho on May 18, 2006 9:14:51 GMT -5
My opinion on this matter was that we should immediately take the players into the league even if it means that each team gets a 13th player. As a league, I don't think that we want players to go to other teams in other leagues (such as the RA or even to *gasp* slo-pitch) or within the next couple of seasons, we may drop to 6 teams and the downward spiral will continue.
I know that people were talking about getting a full team to fill the void for next season but that is not a solution to the problem, its just a temporary band-aid. What about the league that the team comes from? What we should be doing is promoting fastball in the area and welcoming anyone to the league that wishes to play. Its still a gentleman's league. By turning them away, we are just giving the league (and fastball in general) a bad name.
I realize that the majority of players in the league are say 35+ and it may not be a big deal because their fastball days are dwindling. But there are many guys in the league that would like to see the league prosper and remain at 8 (or more) teams for years to come and turning players away is not the answer even if it means getting 5 or 6 less at-bats for the season.
Just my opinion though.
|
|
|
|
Post by catcher17 on May 18, 2006 13:01:39 GMT -5
I think that we should have scrambled some how to make 8 teams to begin with. Was this going to be difficult to do......absolutely but dropping the league to seven should have been the last resort. I know we had the last ditch meeting but going to 13 players per team is not going to solve the problem. The most players that are going to be on the reserve is probably around 5-6 and this will not be enough to form a team for next year. Don't get me wrong I want this league to prosper for many years and promoting has to be done, but this is not the answer. I think we have to talk to as many people we can and get them to come out to the sign ups. I know we have an age issue but we should look at re-addressing this to allow younger players to come into the league. We could promote in High Schools. If I knew that by saying if we all went to 13 players would give us another team for next year then by all means I would say that we should go for it, but why make all teams do this for the sake of 5-6 players?  |
|
Derek
New Member
Posts: 29
|
Post by Derek on May 18, 2006 15:39:23 GMT -5
I think we should take on the extra players for this year. Isn't it supposed to be a fun league anyway? If it were a competitive, where not everyone makes the playoffs, then I wouldn't be in favour of it. But for the sake of the league, and a possible 8th team next year I would be willing to scrifice a handfull of plate appearances this season.
Also I don't mean any disrespect to the veterans around this league, but in order for it to prosper, we must aquire more young players. Since there are little to no Junior teams in this part of the city, I suggest getting in contact with minor fastball associations and giving the midget players the option of coming to Blackburn to play. I'm sure that they would be more than happy to continue playing fastball rather than jumping ship and join a less competitive softball league.
|
|
|
|
Post by horseshoeman2006 on Jun 20, 2006 9:21:14 GMT -5
What was the decision about the reserve list?
|
|
|
|
Post by Shannon Borho on Jun 20, 2006 14:20:03 GMT -5
I attended the meeting and the reserve list is going to remain the same as with previous years with one small change. That change is that all teams will be informed that a player has been added to the reserve list (the player will remain anonymous to the team reps) when someone wants to join the league. In the past, it was up to the teams to request a player off the reserve list (no one knew if someone was there).
At that point, the teams with the least number of players on their roster have first shot at that player. If more than one team applies, then a team will be chosen at random among the applying teams. If no team wants the player on the reserve list, then that player will remain there for the remainder of the season. Teams will not be forced to go to 13 players. As with past years though, if a team drops to 11 (due to injury or a player leaving the league), they must take the next player off the reserve list and go back to 12.
Hope that is clear.
|
|
|
|
Post by horseshoeman2006 on Jun 21, 2006 14:50:33 GMT -5
[glow=red,2,300]I don't see how this will increase membership in a meaningful way. [/glow]
|
|
|
|
Post by Shannon Borho on Jun 22, 2006 7:40:58 GMT -5
It doesn't, the reason no significant change was made was because some thought that it may decrease membership even more if we forced teams to 13 players.
|
|
|
|
Post by horseshoeman2006 on Jun 22, 2006 11:39:10 GMT -5
If a team borrows a player more than 2 times they should be forced to pick up a player from the list.
|
|
