|
Post by Randy Edwards on Oct 12, 2007 13:06:12 GMT -8
It looks like some if not all the leagues will be adding a team or 2 Little Leagues 2007 Operating Manual has 4 options that they suggest in adding a team(s) I really do not want to type all these options so I was hoping someone could scan them on page 68/69 and copy them to this thread.
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Oct 12, 2007 16:27:03 GMT -8
Adding Teams! Are you nutz?!
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Oct 12, 2007 16:27:36 GMT -8
Imean that respectfully Mr. Prez. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Randy Edwards on Oct 12, 2007 16:35:37 GMT -8
LOL It looks like some of the leagues will be adding..... And I thought this threed should FIRE UP some debate on the Discussion Board
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Oct 12, 2007 16:47:54 GMT -8
I think its great if our numbers are going up. I was playin . . .
|
|
|
Post by crash23 on Oct 13, 2007 9:30:40 GMT -8
Numbers (in majors) will only be up b/c of LLs new ruling that all 12s must play up... Then again, if people perceive it will dilute the caliber of play they may opt out of LL so numbers could be down... Do we have to expand? And how can we really know the answer to that until after sign-ups? AE is losing almost half it's players. I can't believe there's that many 12s to necessitate another team. In reality we don't have to draft all 12s - and shouldn't if it puts them in harms way (then again that holds true for 9s, 10s & 11s). The operating manual has a rating system and if a player doesn't earn enough points he's not supposed to be drafted. If we follow LLs own methodology then I'm sure a waiver would be granted to allow him to play in the minors. LL International is hanging itself... Unless they are trying to make it a rec ball program and drive all the top level players to Cal Ripken and/or travel ball. What to do locally? The LL manual has several suggestions for expansion, most of which lead to the new team (most likely) getting rolled every time they play. I don't see how that's good for anyone. The only scenario they suggest where that doesn't happen is when everyone goes back into the draft (of course, the manager can exercise draft rights to his son). But no coaching staffs are in place (so no one can stack a team). Assuming we have to add a team, I think that's the best way to do it. If we don't, I can't imagine the new team(s) will have much pitching or catching... No fun for them, no fun for the teams they play. If we start anew, then most teams - including the new one - will have 1 or 2 quality starters and a catcher and all teams would be (more) fairly balanced (versus the others scenarios) and that will make for better baseball. That being said the Cubs have plenty of pitching so they're good to go no matter what happens... more importantly I don't want to have to tell any of my players they're going back in the draft because the perception will be that I don't want them - and I like all my players. If everyone goes back in the draft, no one gets hurt. I believe it minimizes the potential for animosity all the way around. And while parity (or is it mediocrity?) sucks in the NFL I think it's a pretty great thing for LL b/c it maximizes the fun for the kids.
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Oct 13, 2007 9:44:00 GMT -8
I read some where that more than half of the LL Leagues redraft every year. Many redraft and break their divisions into 9-10s and 11-12s. They never have the issue of what to do with 12s.
|
|
|
Post by Randy Edwards on Oct 14, 2007 7:03:58 GMT -8
N/NS How many teams are you looking at adding using last years #'s and how do you plan to expand the team(s) ?
|
|
|
Post by scrapper on Oct 14, 2007 18:32:19 GMT -8
If, I am not mistaken and Mel would know for sure, but we would be expanding by one in National. National South would stay the same if it was by last year numbers. How would we would expand? I don't think it has been decided yet.
|
|
|
Post by Rodney L. Voumard on Oct 15, 2007 6:05:46 GMT -8
What happened to the discussion of re- drawing boundaries ?? Would be a good time to BALANCE the Leagues ?
I'll put on my flack jacket now...
|
|
|
Post by crash23 on Oct 15, 2007 14:19:55 GMT -8
Been talked about for years. Great idea whose time has come?
|
|
|
Post by mflema on Oct 15, 2007 21:20:57 GMT -8
If we change the boundaries now we are bound to the 20,000 population rule. If we wait a year then the new rules will be in effect and we will have more latitude in population. Once 2008 boundary rules take effect, there will no longer be a population rule for existing leagues. For instance this is great for AE and NS. They can grow, which they have lots of area to do so and can. The plans in NS for the new homes by the golf course and the new homes over off East Ave area will only make NS grow, and the 20,000 population rule will not apply any longer. I don't know of building plans for AE, but that is only because I haven't paid attention.
Now for American and to a lesser extent, National they are hemmed in and I think we should wait and see what the rules say about modifying the boundaries once 2008 boundary rules are applied. According to HQs, they will not be any stricter then they are now, and I believe by the attitude they are taking, that they are just going to not care as much about the population then. I think we will only hurt ourselves by changing any of the boundaries now.
The other thing is that Turlock along has 68,000 population. That alone is 4 leagues. (3 times 20,000 is 60,000, and we are over this so on to the 4th league) This is not considering Denair, Chatom, Mt. View, Keyes, or of course Hilmar or Hughson or Delhi. Now we can ask for a waiver for the population since there are other baseball programs in these towns, but International is getting hinky about waivers, and that is why they are allowing established leagues to maintain their boundaries in 2008 without any care to the population. Inter. HQ does not want to screw with any more waivers and the way they are doing away with them is by just saying keep your boundaries, don't worry about the population. (The 2008 rules)
Sso I think we should wait until the 2008 boundary rules are clear and made public, so that all 4 leagues can make intelligent decisions. Or we can let Jim Green decide. (Kidding Jimbo)
Mel
|
|
|
Post by mflema on Oct 15, 2007 21:28:11 GMT -8
As for number of teams that the Nat will have to expand, we should be expanding at least one no matter what. NS is not going to have to hopefully, but that depends on what is going to go on with the 12's.
I agree with Craig, but the only thing I worry about is parent's egos. I have had parents whose kid should not of been in the league at all, but still would not take them out. I had a couple of kids in Juniors a few years ago, that during tryouts I had to instruct the managers not to hit fly balls to them , because they were going to get hurt. The parents sat there and watched this and still did not pull them. So I worry about the egos of the parents. Of course I worry about the safety of the kids more, but I am afraid the parents will not worry as much as we will.
MEL
|
|
|
Post by Randy Edwards on Oct 16, 2007 8:11:33 GMT -8
Mel with that being said about the parents, we as a board have the abligation as well as the right to let the parents know that safety comes 1st... and their son or daughter will not play at a level that may get them hurt.
|
|
|
Post by trevor9 on Oct 16, 2007 11:15:29 GMT -8
I'm I hearing this right? It's possible that all returning players will re-enter the draft. As for the A/E, the teams are pretty even now. Each team has a couple of solid players and we will see what is available in the draft to determine who is going to win it all. Crash asked my opinion and went in another direction last year. The player I suggested will be a huge factor in the Angels line-up this year and Crash's pick may not even play this year. Good call "Skipper" hehehehe. It's starting to get old being right all of the time.
|
|