I always try to keep it simple...If you have an age division..adhere to it..then there is never any controversy....
Only exception should be when a new division is forming, and you may need younger players to help get it off the ground...
When the 55's formed in 2008, they accepted players 52 and over the first year, 53 and over the second year etc so by the fourth year everyone had to be 55 and over...atleast in theory..made perfect sense...
It is now an 8 team division ?...maybe it grew too fast...but if you allow waiver players just to field teams, or to try to make them more competitive..you will, with the best of intentions aside, obviously upset some in the division.
Well said Mr. Martin. I believe that most of the motivation to bring in waiver players under 55 has to do with the desire to field a more competitive team. If a team cannot field enough players at age 55 and above to put 9 guys on the field game in and game out, then there needs to be a reduction in the number of teams in the league.
Notl so fast boys. John, reducing the number of teams in the division sounds logical, but this is what would happen. The Marlins, for instance would fold, the better players would go to the better teams and the weaker players would go to the weaker teams. More games would be blowouts, and there's already too many of them as it is. The better players on the better teams don't want to show up to beat up on an inferior group. It ruins the experience. You just played a season with the Reds where most of your games we're competitive against similar talent. I bet it was more fun playing the Bombers then it was the Cyclones. The only way your going to have a competitive schedule in the 55's is to give the weaker teams exclusions like the 55's do now. The Hawks and Peppers we're much better and the Wiz stayed more than competitive because of their 52 year old exclusions last year. The Marlins won four games last year, we had trouble fielding a team for many games, if we we're to continue without waiver players I would have left and gone to a more competitive team. I guess John Reel or Steve VanGelder came up with the waiver idea last year and it really worked to help balance the league. As long as the lesser teams continue to get waivers and the top teams don't, the league will become automatically become more competitive. Those guys had the right idea, don't stop it.
Wayne, Just to be clear, waivers were never my idea. What Jon, said was correct. we started with 52,53,54, and then 55 to start the league. It was our understanding that when we reached 55, no more waivers would be allowed. As in any division, you will never have parity. The bigger problem is guy's that did wait until they were of age to play. Over the last 2 year's there were 20 or more waiver player's allowed. Every manger always want's to win. So playoff time comes around, and guy's that followed all the rules will have to give way to waiver player's. By doing this, we will force guy's 60-70 out of the league. Like I said, I do not support waivers at all. All it does is create problems ,and threads like this. But if waivers are being granted, it would be nice if the other managers have a input. I would much rather see, a 50 division, and a 57 division, with 0 waivers. Have a couple less team's in each division. The way it is going, a manager does not even have to recruit. All they have to do is ask the league to make them stronger. If it is all about being competitive, what does a guy 52, have to be proud about playing guy's 60- 70 year's old. I would love to hear from guy's 55 and over that feel they no longer have a team, or place to play in the division. It is not about the competition. All the teams will have to play whoever is in front of us. The problem is pushing guy's of age out.
Steve, thanks for correcting that. I never even knew we had waivers until last year and someone told me you and John came up with the idea. I thought it was a great idea at the time and still do. The Wiz beat us soundly to knock us out of the playoffs last year but I enjoyed the competition that the 52s provided, it was a better brand of baseball. You make valid points about the older, less competitive ballplayers being shoved out. That is valid point and that's why the 45s got it right last year. You need two leagues for each division. Let's face it, most of us love to compete or we wouldn't have ended up in an over 52 baseball league. There is no competition in games that end 15-0. Be honest, was it fun last year playing the Cougars, the Cyclones or last year's 55 Marlins. It's not a knock on those teams, it's just a fact that when a decent team played them everyone new what the outcome would be. I just want to play as many hard fought games as possible and to do that you've got to have parity. You can't achieve it without exclusions and you can't achieve it by reducing the number of teams. No, there are only two solutions: a draft, which is complicated and not supported by membership, or exclusions. Let's not worry so much about specific age let's be more concerned with evening off talent. Two leagues in each division or exclusions, it's the only way to go.
Let's not forget - baseball is a gentlemans game , especially in the cdmsbl . So I have an idea that would certainly even up the games , no matter who plays who. Instead of two divisions in the 55's let's establish the teams in need of help and when one of those teams play a team with more talent they simply choose sides ! Both teams are now fairly equal ,no fuss . Uniforms ? Switch hats. Who picks first? Kick the bat. The fruits are far greater than a solid division , you really get to know the other players as you are on their team and you get to play against guys on your original team . Some of my best baseball experiences where playing along side guys I didn't really know, opens up a whole different thought process, and it's a lot of fun ! Let's not get caught up in this team thing and think more about league and who's in it . No wavers needed, one mans take on it . John La Torre
Very interesting concept John and that was how we did fall ball this year and everyone had fun (except perhaps Artie who couldn't use the game as a practice for his Florida squad like he had intended!). This is also similar to the way John had planned to setup the 60+ division had it come to fruition last year.
We had a few waivers in the 45's and they worked out very well.
Keep in mind that one policy / rule may very well impact another. The waivers in the 55's last year came about in many ways because of open free agency and no rules on new teams taking players from existing teams when they form. A new team was formed and roughly half were from one squad. The players that remained wanted to continue playing and wanted to keep their team together but it isn't all that easy to recruit 5 or 6 guys over the age of 55 in a short period of time.
The waivers kept that team in existence and as a result kept people playing ball that may not have found a team or at least found playing time on a team.
Many leagues limit player movement and the number of players on a new team that can come from a particular existing team to stop situations where the formation of a new team forces an existing team to fold. There are obviously pros and cons to both.
As this post and the other post about waiver show the opinions range from one end of the spectrum to the other. Some people want open free agency and player movement. Others want a draft and parity. It is not possible to make everyone happy.
Bottom line is that our league is about getting as many of us old guys out on the baseball field as possible and all in all i would say we do a pretty good job of that with 4 divisions and hundreds of us playing ball still. Is it perfect? Of course not but i would say the vast majority of us have a positive experience in the CDMSBL.
And for those of us that don't join the board next fall and take an active part in helping to tweak the league and make it better. I hear all of the time that the league should do this or do that but when it comes time to be the ones that make those decisions those people don't want to be involved.
I can't imagine why anyone wouldn't want to spend four hours on a subzero night in January discussing old man's baseball!
