|
Post by ramsrus on Mar 26, 2009 16:17:45 GMT 10
Teebag, I haven't done the necessary analysis to say whether or not teams should or shouldn't have been in the finals. It would be impossble to do anyway as the draw did not ensure that all teams played each an equal number of times.
The north / south split ensures that there will always be north and south teams in the finals. In my opinion, this is wrong if for example teams in one region out performed teams in the other but didn't get to the finals because of the north / south split. Why don't we have 3 regions if travel is an issue as Wests and Ipswich still have to travel so this isn't helping them.
The travel reason doesn't gel with me. Is this something the clubs voted on? If so I support it as a democratic process was followed. (Not to say clubs actually discussed this with the players though?)? If it was a BQI decision without consultation, then it doesn't get my support. I would like to see more visibility of the options / solutions to the challenges facing BQI before decisions get made. There is no way to make everybody happy, but more visibility of the issues and solutions may stop a lot of criticism.
|
|
|
Post by puff on Mar 26, 2009 16:23:05 GMT 10
I will have a small wager with you to say those Clubs will not finish 14 and 15 either in the 15 Team comp puff. I Had a PH dad say to me a few years back, why are we trialling these kids, we already know who the good players are from last year. YEAH..... Right ................ Ok, maybe 15 and 14 then. But definately not top 8. If they were to let clubs know now and not next September that the 15 team format will start the season it certainly gives clubs plenty of time to get their act together if their goal is top 8. It definately would create a lot of interest in the A grade comp for the 1st 7 weeks of the season.
|
|
|
Post by 44 on Mar 26, 2009 16:42:14 GMT 10
I have to think that Homer is right on the money with including 15 clubs. Sure there maybe some clubs that have no chance just yet of being top 8... Let them play and see what happens.
I Just read from IBAF that the Aussie team is now ranked in top 8 in the World so who knows who will be top 8 GBL next season.
Any club aspiring to top 8 really needs to get their Junior recruitment in order though.
bronco said why Carina ? .. Carina possibly wont match it with the top Major A 8 teams just yet , but they have very good and strong numbers coming through U14 level right now. They have every right to try and play Majors same as Padres, Pine Hills and Rapids.
As I said before, our sport is too small to be exclusive, we need to be more inclusive.
|
|
|
Post by bronco on Mar 26, 2009 16:54:41 GMT 10
bronco said why Carina ? .. Carina possibly wont match it with the top Major A 8 teams just yet , but they have very good and strong numbers coming through U14 level right now. They have every right to try and play Majors same as Padres, Pine Hills and Rapids.
As I said before, our sport is too small to be exclusive, we need to be more inclusive.
[/quote] I fully understand 44, but what happened to "criteria"?
|
|
|
Post by snoball on Mar 26, 2009 17:25:33 GMT 10
Just a couple of questions -- How is reducing the number of Major League clubs going to improve level of play? Do you anticipate teams relegated to the lower division will lose players to the higher division teams? If not, then you have a number of your better players playing in a lower division.
What criteria did you use? If you're looking at games won over past two seasons, as was mentioned in one of the previous posts, Beenleigh had more senior wins than Musketeers.
Wasn't a fully lit field one of the criteria for 2009? Is that no longer a requirement?
|
|
|
Post by snoball on Mar 26, 2009 17:41:35 GMT 10
Instead of reducing teams and players, why not INCREASE the number of games? A-grade training is far over rated. Players are better off playing more games instead of having team trainings. Teams on US college summer league teams don't train--but they do arrive a couple of hours before each game to do their work, and they play 4-5 nights a week. Why not set up a proper league that plays 2-3 midweek games and a Sunday double header? A graders would get 5 games/week instead of 2. It would be tricky to schedule, but is very possible. I'd be on a committee to work out the game schedules. Big drawback? Not enough pitching.
|
|
|
Post by williemays_hays on Mar 26, 2009 19:29:41 GMT 10
We had a league that played Tuesday & Friday night no too long ago, 3 game series each weekend. Then it went back to Double headers, which the clubs hated. Then we had Tuesday & Sunday, that the players hated as noone wanted to finish an Ipswich game at 10.30, drive home, then get up for work the next morning. So it became Friday & Sunday, with little travel - as per the request of the clubs and the "players". BQI have only really ever given what has been asked for by the clubs. The presidents vote on and agree to the criteria, rules and competition format EACH season. Perhaps take your issues to your club President, or get a stronger President who may actually say no if the club feels strongly about it. When baseball in Qld was at it's strongest in the mid/late 80's there were 8 A Grade teams, I believe playing 3 games per week. Maybe that's the model that worked in the past, and that we should be working toward again.
|
|
|
Post by puff on Mar 26, 2009 19:46:25 GMT 10
Yes you are correct hitdog, when baseball was at it's strongest there were 8 A grade teams only. That is why I like the idea of the 2 divisions but there must be a relegation or promotion system in place where teams in the 2nd division have an opportunity to move up. Teams like Toowoomba or Carina or any of the clubs with plenty of juniors can take it 1 step at a time proving themselves without being thrust straight into Division 1. Why were Carina and Toowoomba relegated in the 1st place and what has changed for them to be able to compete in the top grade now?. Mention was made about Carina being strong in under 14's but those kids are still 5 or 6 years away from A grade. Are there other clubs out there whose players would prefer to play in a competitive division 2 team rather than have their butts kicked every weekend? Also with the relegation system clubs in division 1 would need to keep developing and improving or they would eventually find themselves locked in Division 2. If you're ignoring junior development now eventually it will cost you.
|
|
|
Post by ramsrus on Mar 26, 2009 19:53:06 GMT 10
Thanks hitdog, this is all good background. Most people don't know the detail of the processes and procedures - what the clubs do vs what BQI does. All the people I know at BQI and those on the Board, just want to improve baseball. I think sometimes there is a communication breakdown somewhere in the chain - BQI to club presidents, to committee members / club officials, to coaches, to players, to parents. A lot of people to keep informed. Clubs like Padres have an excellent website which goes a long way to doing just that.
|
|
|
Post by williemays_hays on Mar 26, 2009 21:27:21 GMT 10
Take that #8 ranking with a grain of salt Ramsfan - the rankings are based on a points system accumulated from the tournaments each team plays in the last 4 years. It also ranks Chinese Taipei as 5th & Puerto Rico as 10th. I don't think anyone can honeslty say we are a better team than Puerto Rico.
|
|
|
Post by 44 on Mar 26, 2009 23:21:51 GMT 10
I go for the 15 clubs , one round then cut to 8 top teams A+B 2nd half. If teams cannot cut the mustard, they will soon be found out and then we get a serious 8 team premier league happening and 2nd Div and 3rd Div beer League.
If it is obvious one of the 15 is just going to get hammered each week, of course better for them and the comp they get relegated early back to div 2.
Hitdog mentioned 3 Major A games a week. not a bad idea at all for the 8 Team Premier League. I remember hearing from 2 knowledgable baseball people visiting here from the USA say that the only difference between top Young Aussie players and those from japan / USA / Dominican Republic was A: Lack of foot speed B: Lack of game time.
snoball said 5 games a week... only problem with that is our Major A players are not Pro here. they work, have family time etc. Also we just do not have the field space or time for 5 games a week along with every club's Juniors having training etc. There are still only a limited number of clubs with suitable lights also.
I'd say the ultimate 8 Premier team X 3 games a week is something to aim for. The 8 should go through the grading games process first. Who is going to name those 8 up front unless they play the grading rounds first ? As snoball said, Pitching depth will be an issue though, we still have the Saturday U20's and most of them make up Major A numbers also. NO Clubs I know in Brisbane have 4-5 decent Starters and a pen of 6 Relievers.
I'd hate to see D Grade Pitchers getting hammered every week just for the sake of more games played.
I go with what Homer said, bring on the 15 teams first then promote and relegate, It is by far the fairest option for all clubs and will generate a huge amount of interest in the Major A top 8 comp. If you do not make the criteria, you are bumped from the 8 and promote the next team up from div2 for the Premier 8.
|
|
|
Post by snoball on Mar 27, 2009 6:36:46 GMT 10
How will changing the Major League to 8 teams improve the league? How is Pine Hills, or any club, getting stronger by reducing the number of teams? What are you basing the "strength" of the league on? Your strongest teams? Or your weakest? Are you saying that because All Stars, Narangba, Toowoomba are in your league it is a weak league? Or do you want parity? -- No matter what the overall strength of the league, you want a situation where every week any team has a chance of beating another?
Sorry, I'm a little slow, (I've only seen around 100 games a year -- amateur, college and pro, MLB and Spring Training over the past 25 years) but how is reducing the number of teams going to improve the quality of the teams that are still in the "Premier" league?
|
|
|
Post by snoball on Mar 27, 2009 6:37:57 GMT 10
During the 80's, when you've said teams were at their strongest, most clubs had imports as well. And GREAT imports.
|
|
|
Post by puff on Mar 27, 2009 15:18:38 GMT 10
Can someone please explain to me how 1 of our A grade MVP awards went to a player who had a record of 6-2 and hit 247.
David Sutherland was 10-1 and hit 433 or Matt Kilby was 10-1 and hit 380. or Brad Dutton hit 454
I think the voting system must have a flaw in it.
|
|
|
Post by baseball12 on Mar 27, 2009 15:47:17 GMT 10
and the era winner has only pitched 42 innnings bearly a half a season, j staatz should have maybe got this award
|
|