Too many or Too few??

[Little Angels Softball]

You can't have it both ways. I have seen an insane number of posts here that say "if your DD isn't a #1 or #2, you need to find a new team because she won't get enough circle time." Then people complain there are too many teams started by parents who want to get their DDs circle time. It's the same with the clubs that are trying to recruit players for three teams at an age group instead of combining the girls they have - they probably have too many pitchers for fewer teams. (Or they have coaches with big egos who all want to run their own team.)

My guess is that there aren't enough players to fill teams for all the girls who want to pitch. Obviously some of these pitchers (maybe a lot, I don't know) probably aren't good enough to be a 1 or 2 at whatever level they are playing. At the same time, it's not fair to criticize parents for doing what you are saying they should do.

Like JJSqueeze says, it isn't that I object to folks taking their DD somewhere else when she turns out to be of #4 quality on an A-ball team. My objection comes when daddy takes her and starts a new "A" team just so his #4 talent DD can be a #1 pitcher. That is what causes A-ball tourneys to have 17-0 games, even on elimination day. That is no fun for anyone.

We have various levels of softball with the ideal being that there is a team for everyone. I like that, but so few want to take advantage of it. If more did, we'd have enough players to fill teams for all the girls who want to pitch without diluting the upper levels. We'd also have more competitive (or more fun, if you prefer), evenly-matched games at every level if people were willing to do so.

IMHO, elite players need and deserve an avenue to develop their skills just as much as C-level and rec players do. Same goes for every girl in between.

The issue lies with nobody wanting to say their DD is on a "B" or "C" team.

 

[FP26]

The situation you describe with your DD's teammate is not an issue of too many players, IMO, but the distribution of players.

Say you've got 100 players in the area who want to play travel ball. You have 10 teams. Rank the players 1-100. Do you have teams of #5, #15, #25, #35 ... #85, #95? Rather than #3, #7, #12, #15 ... #35?

The solution, IMO, is not to block the #95 kid from playing more softball. It's to provide better avenues for teams and players of similar ability to congregate. Tournament directors have found there is a market for entry-level, weaker teams.

So, how to we change the distribution of talent within teams so that your daughter is playing catch with players of similar ability? What is the ideal distribution?

I have been following this thread, but really have not posted my opinions because many of them were already stated. In my opinion, this is one of the best methods to solve the problem. Unfortunately, I don't think it will ever happen. If you have 100 players that want to play travel ball, how many parents will readily admit that their daughter is among the bottom 10 in that group? Little Angels and others have made excellent posts on the topic as well. I believe the various classifications provide a good opportunity for all players, if they are willing to play within the classifications. But how often does a true "B" level player get pushed into a higher bracket because the parents are too proud to admit she belongs on "B" until she can refine her skills a bit more.

I have a very good friend with a daughter that is moving up from 12u "A" to 14u "A". She wants to pitch, but she is currently the 4th pitcher on this squad (based on talent, not politics). She spends most of the weekend on the bench and plays between 25 and 30% of the overall innings. The team wins a lot, so they are collecting a pile of trophies. Yet, they are constantly complaining because they want her to play more. The truth of the matter is, she is a "B" player and probably a low "B" pitcher. So I told them that our organizations 14u team was looking for a pitcher and I could give them the coaches number. The dad looked at me like I was from Mars and actually seemed insulted by my suggestion. I am willing to bet that this type of reaction is not unique among parents.

 

[abbygale]

When my dd was playing first year tb, her 12c coach was very upfront with all the parents and kids. The level they would play was this, and that is where they would play. He stated that there would be girls who didn't feel challenged enough and they would move on to more competitive teams and that was good and nothing wrong with it. However, the team he was coaching would stay at this level and if it wasn't competitive enough for girls or parents, he would help those girls find a stronger team. He wouldn't move his team up as he felt it was all about developing the girls basics and not about competing. He was a good coach, my daughter had fun but moved on after that first year. She still enjoys watching his team some if she see's them and she gets what he is doing with his coaching madness. And if the game gets to be too much for the girls who have moved up, he welcomes them back with open arms.

 

[Anthony Vertuccio]

Hey lots of interesting answers but as I thought no real solution. Thanks for the answers and keep them coming

 

[Little Angels Softball]

I have been following this thread, but really have not posted my opinions because many of them were already stated. In my opinion, this is one of the best methods to solve the problem. Unfortunately, I don't think it will ever happen. If you have 100 players that want to play travel ball, how many parents will readily admit that their daughter is among the bottom 10 in that group? Little Angels and others have made excellent posts on the topic as well. I believe the various classifications provide a good opportunity for all players, if they are willing to play within the classifications. But how often does a true "B" level player get pushed into a higher bracket because the parents are too proud to admit she belongs on "B" until she can refine her skills a bit more.

I have a very good friend with a daughter that is moving up from 12u "A" to 14u "A". She wants to pitch, but she is currently the 4th pitcher on this squad (based on talent, not politics). She spends most of the weekend on the bench and plays between 25 and 30% of the overall innings. The team wins a lot, so they are collecting a pile of trophies. Yet, they are constantly complaining because they want her to play more. The truth of the matter is, she is a "B" player and probably a low "B" pitcher. So I told them that our organizations 14u team was looking for a pitcher and I could give them the coaches number. The dad looked at me like I was from Mars and actually seemed insulted by my suggestion. I am willing to bet that this type of reaction is not unique among parents.

I started thinking about this last year and have thought about it more this year. In places like So Cal, where essentially everything is ASA at the younger levels, I think the U-Trip model where you have A, B and C levels of travel ball that are not league dependent along with a "rec/all-stars" division for leagues, should be looked at closely. I know ASA has at least "B" level tournaments that are not league dependent in other parts of the country but they don't do it down here.

USSSA also re-classifies if a team is winning too much or getting beaten up regularly within the division they signed up for. I don't think ASA does this in parts of the country where they run both A and B travel tourneys, but again, I think it should be looked at.

 

[WaSpeed02]

Hey lots of interesting answers but as I thought no real solution. Thanks for the answers and keep them coming

Solution? I'm still trying to identify the actual problem. All I've seen is descriptions of symptoms.

 

[Coachmom]

Solution? I'm still trying to identify the actual problem. All I've seen is descriptions of symptoms.

I was thinking the same. There is the presumption of a problem that needs solving. I am not seeing it.

 

[Easton33]

I started thinking about this last year and have thought about it more this year. In places like So Cal, where essentially everything is ASA at the younger levels, I think the U-Trip model where you have A, B and C levels of travel ball that are not league dependent along with a "rec/all-stars" division for leagues, should be looked at closely. I know ASA has at least "B" level tournaments that are not league dependent in other parts of the country but they don't do it down here.

USSSA also re-classifies if a team is winning too much or getting beaten up regularly within the division they signed up for. I don't think ASA does this in parts of the country where they run both A and B travel tourneys, but again, I think it should be looked at.

In our State USSSA teams registered as an A class team number 16, B class 40, C class 12. Many of the A's should be B's and several B's should be C's. USSSA will reclassify if you are dominating your class but if you are losing it is on you to request a drop in class. I think back to this past year and an org that registered as a B class was like 3-24, they decided to drop down (should have happened earlier) to the C class where there wins improved to 7 total and losses went up into the 40's. It was a voluntary drop though. These parents were paying $125/month for this experience. What first year coach or knowledgable bucket dad couldn't give them this same experience for a lot less money? These USSSA "B" teams will register as an "A" ASA team. I think the USSSA model is the best. Around here, A's and B's play together in the open tournaments and there are very few A or B only tournaments. The C class has tournaments specifically for C.

 

[Anthony Vertuccio]

Thanks for the ego answers also...lol!!

 

[Greenmonsters]

Solution? I'm still trying to identify the actual problem. All I've seen is descriptions of symptoms.

IMO, the problem is that you have players and teams playing at the "wrong" level. IMO, the solution is for coaches to be honest about their teams' capabilities and players' parents to be realistic about their DDs' talent levels.