USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 19, 2011, 10:09 am

USSSA Softball Questionnaire. This questionnaire is going to be sent out to all 2011 Conference Managers and Sponsors. If they return it to me, they will be included in a compiled analysis of the answers while their individual answers will remain anonymous to USSSA. I will share the overall results with USSSA and SoftballCenter.com readers. The 2011 season was bigger and better than ever and this questionnaire is just to get a feel for where the teams think improvements could be made. Tweaks if you will. Please discuss the questionnaire here on the message board and help me tweak the questions and answers or suggest additional questions. EQUIPMENT 1) Did opposing Conference teams use shaved bats against your team this year? A) Yes B) No 2) Should softball go back to using one piece aluminum bats? A) Yes B) No 3) Should there be bat testing at every conference tournament? A) Yes B) No 4) When should bats be tested during a tournament weekend? A) First game of tournament, final 8 on Saturday, and again Sunday morning B) First game of tournament, 6 PM on Saturday night, and again Sunday morning C) First game of tournament, and Sunday morning is fine 5) What ball should be used on non-baseball fields? A) 52/300 ball B) 40/325 Dudley ZN Conference Ball is fine 6) Should an independent firm be responsible for bat testing? A) No, USSSA has done a nice job B) Yes, an outside firm would be nice 7) Should bats that fail compression be examined further for alterations? A) Yes B) No 8) What should the punishment be for using an altered bat? A) 3 tournaments B) Remainder of season C) One Calendar year D) Remainder of season and following season TEAMS/PLAYERS 9) Should the number of Major players allowed per Major team be reduced? A) No, leave it like it is at unlimited. B) Yes, reduce it by 2 per year until it gets down to 5 starting in 2013 C) Yes, reduce it to 5 in 2013 D) Yes, reduce it to 3 in 2013 10) Should USSSA implement player ratings below the major level? A) Yes B) No Tournaments 11) Should the Western teams have more "double" tournament weekends A) Yes it would reduce costs B) No 11a) Should Conference tournaments be seeded on points? A) Yes, it rewards the teams that support the Conference B) No, random draw Conference Championships 12) Should teams be required to go to the Conference Championships if they qualify? A) Yes B) No 13) Do you like the Conference Championships? A) Yes B) It is ok C) No 14) Should the Conference Championship be moved to different locations around the country each year? A) Yes B) No 15) What format should be used for the Conference Championships? A) The 2011 format with the losers of the first two rounds falling into their own tournament B) Straight double elimination C) 3 game guarantee is fine D) Pool play followed by single elimination 'B' World Tournament 16) How should the 'B' World tournament be seeded? A) By Conference points like it is now B) By USSSA points like it was in the past 17) Where is the best place in Florida for the 'B' World tournament? A) Fortune Road in Kissimmee, Florida B) ESPN Wide World of Sports in Kissimmee, Florida only using the softball fields C) ESPN Wide World of Sports in Kissimmee, Florida with the stadium as the main field 18) Where should the 'B' World tournament be played? A) Should be moved around the country every other year and Florida every other year B) Should be moved around the country every year C) Should remain in Florida every year 19) What is the best weekend for the 'B' World A) The weekend before Labor Day Weekend B) Labor Day Weekend in conjunction with the Conference Championships C) The weekend after Labor Day Weekend D) 2 weeks after Labor Day Weekend like it is now E) Weekend of the Major 'A' World Tournament 20) Should local host 'C' teams and lower be allowed into the 'A' Worlds A) Yes, when you get the host teams in, it makes the bracket so none of the big teams go home 0-2 B) No, those teams didn't qualify and cause extra games in the heat 21) Where is the best place in Florida for the 'A' World tournament? A) Fortune Road in Kissimmee, Florida B) ESPN Wide World of Sports in Kissimmee, Florida only using the softball fields C) ESPN Wide World of Sports in Kissimmee, Florida with the stadium as the main field 22) Where should the 'A' World tournament be played? A) Should be moved around the country every other year and Florida every other year B) Should be moved around the country every year C) Should remain in Florida every year STATISTICS 23) Are teams cheating on their stats by counting FC's as hits or not including SAC's or HRO's? A) Yes B) No 24) Should stats be kept by both participating teams at all conference events on carbon copy triplicate scoresheets with one copy going to an official stat keeper for compiling and posting, one to USSSA for official record, and one to the team? A) Yes, stats will be 100% accurate if each game is available to see on the internet because you can see how many outs were made and how many innings played. B) No UMPIRING 25) Is the strike zone different for a Major team vs an 'A' or 'B' team? A) Yes B) No 26) Is the strike zone different for a Major player vs a Non-Major player? A) Yes B) No 27) Should the Conference Umpires be in a rotation behind the plate for all teams and all big games? A) Yes B) No OTHER 28) Do you wish another association had a competitive tournament schedule to play? A) Yes B) No 29) Do you have any questions that you would like to be included in the questionnaire? 30) Do you have any suggestions on how Conference USSSA can be improved? 31) Do you have any suggestions on how softball can be improved?

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 19, 2011, 10:24 am, in reply to "USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"

Personally I feel shaved bats were used in Conference play. The return of aluminum bats would be a great thing Bat testing should be at 100% of conference tournaments Bats should be tested the first game of tournament, final 8 on Saturday, and again Sunday morning I believe the 40/325 Dudley ZN Conference Ball is fine. I'm torn on the independent firm testing bats but its worth a try. I believe a bat per weekend should be cut open to send a message. And a one year suspension is sufficient. I would like to see the number of major players per team reduced gradually each year. If it isn't working it could always be put back the way it was. Player ratings for all classes would be great and easily implemented. I would say adding a second "double event" would be good in the West and don't make 'B' teams have to attend the Conference Championships. I believe Conference events should be seeded on Conference points including the A and B Worlds I don't mind the Conference Championships and would like to see them moved to the Conf tournament location that had the most Conference teams show up in the previous season. I love palm trees so Florida is fine for me for A and B worlds but moving it around once in awhile would be fun. I could see the 'b' World moving to the Labor Day weekend alongside the Conference championships. would be tough to cover as a reporter though. I think host teams should be able to round out the field at the 'A' World. Just have as few as possible. I'd like to see the 'A' World at Fortune. It can always be moved back to Disney. I think there have been teams that cheated on stats and the triplicate carbon copy sheets are the way to go. I think the conference umpires are the best thing going in upper level softball although the zone does seem a little tighter at times for top teams and top players, not just Resmondo. I think all conference umpires are excellent and should have an straight rotation behind the plate for all big games. I don't know if upper level ball has the support it needs for other associations?

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by Non-CONference player 50+ on October 19, 2011, 11:13 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
166.205.137.210

Here's a couple questions...... Do you think cost to sponsor CONference teams is a reason the upper division are losing teams? If you answered yes to question 1.....Do you regionalizing the game in some manner would reduce costs? If you answered yes to question 1....do you WANT strong limits on list players for Major the division?

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by Fan on October 19, 2011, 6:37 pm, in reply to "USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
166.147.102.5

Floating rubber? Safety bag at first? Measure the bases before the tourney starts? (World Series reference on the base lengths). Required number of fields at parks to get tournament done in reasonable time (Cinci). All conference parks must have internet access or 4G available, lol. Along with Cinci, shorten games if starting after 11pm. No discussing player contracts until the world series is over. HRs hit with wooden bats worth double. Non major teams can play with 11 fielders. New stats involving hitting solo HRs counting as an out on your average (non baseball fields). Illegal to swap catchers in the middle of an inning. No infield warmups between innings. One trip to the mound PER GAME. No throwing bats at the bucket, ever. Free beer for Ressie players at every tourney. Each team charged a bat fee which goes to the bat companies who ship brand new bats to each tourney that are shared by all teams. Build a dome in FLA that can house 4 325 ft fields. Ok, I think I'm done.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 19, 2011, 6:40 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
166.249.106.149

some good stuff in there

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 19, 2011, 6:41 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
166.249.106.149

Probably needs worded a little more clearly but I'll probably add something along these lines.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by TM50+ on October 19, 2011, 10:58 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
166.205.138.220

And another..... Would you like to have a commishioner committee.... One utrip official, one C team rep voted on by conference C teams, one B team rep voted on by Conference B teams, one A rep voted on by A Confernce team sponsors.... And one player rep voted on by ALL CONFERENCE PLAYERS. Final rulings during the season are voted on with majority rule. Any issues brought up that are asked for clarification by majority of committee are ruled on and enforceable.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 20, 2011, 5:21 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
207.133.71.241

Again, a decent idea to think about Tim but I don't think an 'A' team or Major team that is putting 100k plus into a team wants an equal vote to a 'C' team? I've sat in some of the managers meetings where there are votes and its pretty straight forward.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by TM50+ on October 24, 2011, 6:12 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
166.205.136.170

Please explain Dale.... I thought every CONference team paid the same to join the CONference? $5,000 How do teams put 100k into the COnference??? Oh yah. I forgot for a moment...... Those B and C teams putting up the same amount as those Major and A teams are supposed to put up their fee and just be quiet and take their beating a season long. The main problem with softball right now is the elites think the games only here for them.... From reading your post it kinda sounds like your warming up to join the choir. Look how well trying to cater to a couple major teams has turned out.... Upper Softballs swirling down the toilet.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 24, 2011, 7:33 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
98.27.169.32

I just don't think we will see eye to eye on this. Regional Upper level ball is 'C'. National upper level ball is the Conference. Two different things with teams that have two different sets of agendas. I am just a reporter, attempting to make as many top level tournaments as I can. I don't have the answers to bring back your glory days. This will be the 7th year in a row that national upper ball has taken a very small step forward however.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by hey DW on October 25, 2011, 7:04 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
74.113.43.85

I think TIm is on the right track.....I think if your on a A or Major team them you as the players should get to send a rep or 2 to a vote...as well as your manager, then I think a B team should get to send 1 player as their rep and/or a manager....lets truly get this game back to the players.... I think it is laughable that almost every questionaire that you posted had the guys answering that limiting major players to teams was the way to go...and Dale, the players have thought this way for more than a few years...you know this....but yet we still dont have any word from Don that this is in the plans..... this game is not ran by the players that is the only thing that is for sure in the conference....even the managers have little say in what goes on....I have seen with my own 2 eyes Don ask a manager a question about a sensitive subject, yet he asked it in front of almost every other manager in the room....sometimes when you dont want the truth, you ask it as if your putting them on the spot, if you want the truth, you ask it in annoynomys form and read it in private.....you do not put these managers on the spot and create an atomsphere where they can get bashed by other managers....even if they all agree, you still need some prefessionalism in the voting..

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 25, 2011, 8:06 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
207.133.71.245

I am sending the questionnaire that I created tonight. It is going to the Conference managers and Conference sponsors. I will post the totalled results. Noone will be able to see who voted for what. I would think the answers would either put an end to some of Tim's posts or back them up. Who knows.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by bash on October 25, 2011, 11:37 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
74.113.43.85

now if we could just get Don to do the same...its obvious what the players want..

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by TM50+ on October 25, 2011, 3:32 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
166.205.136.117

So let's see Dale..... Seven years ago 2004 national upper level ball was Major and A ball. How many Major teams were there?Five How many A teams were there?18 A teams at Worlds Now....please explain interns a lawn mower can understand..... How any MJor and A teams were there at Worlds last year? And..... If your going to try to fog the issue by saying B should be included....there are two things you must explain first...how could B ball have been upper ball back then when NO B team was at the World Series AND..... In 2004 36 actual b teams played in B worlds..... What was the b team number last year.....22 or 23.... Somehow...I just don't think we were in the same math class.... I never was smart enough to get into the new math class where 22 is great then 36, when looking at the b division.... Maybe you can do the math for 2004 major vs 2011 major numbers, and 2004 A Teams vs 2011 A teams at worlds???? But... For some reason.... I think I learned in first grade the math needed to figure out your statement of seven years in a row of upper ball making small steps foreword IS COMPLETELY WRONG.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by TM50+ on October 25, 2011, 3:53 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
166.205.136.117

Dale....don't you think voting should be done on a one vote per team basis. Every Conference team from last year is sent one vote only. Some teams have multiple sponsors/coaches and this could bias the outcome????

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 25, 2011, 6:05 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
98.27.169.32

I am giving one vote to each sponsor and each manager. Two per team. And the teams that get the two votes have to have finished a complete season. So it looks like 23 teams and 46 votes.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 25, 2011, 6:12 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
98.27.169.32

http://www.usssa.com/sports/ConferenceUSSSA.asp?SeasonID=15 Conference Team Totals 2006 - 18 Teams 2007 - 32 Teams 2008 - 34 Teams 2009 - 37 Teams 2010 - 34 Teams 2011 - 40 Teams 2012 - 40+? Thats 7 years in a row Tim. And the quality each year has gone up as well, regardless of the class totals. But you would only know that if you went to the tournaments. And I'm not going to take the time to add them up but each year in the Conference more teams played in Conference tournaments and the tournaments averaged more teams each year.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by player on October 25, 2011, 6:30 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
99.165.60.24

Still trying to figure out why someone who idoesnt play/coach/sponsor worries about what happens in the conference - obviously since it grows each year enough people that play it and care keep coming back......when will all the whining ever go out of style with this guy

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by Tm50+ on October 26, 2011, 12:20 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
166.205.138.132

Dale, I now understand. You have been brain washed into believing as long as the mighty CONference is growing it doesn't matter that the A Division has lost around 65% of their teams since 2003. B has lost over 50 % and C has seen declines. Maybe you can pull your head out of that Florida sand long enough to answer these questions... How many less A teams have played in the A World since 2003? How many less B teams have played in the b world since 2003? Since Don created the CONference he has been forced to create places for b and now C teams.... Do you care to guess why he was forced to do that? Do you think it just might of had something to do with A teams numbers dropping and now the b teams loosing numbers in the same manner the A program did when Don feed them to the major teams? Come on Dale..... The game needs methods to reduce costs and less separation between the divisions. Even you have to know that? Quit selling out the game just to feel like your in the in croud. The game needs changes to reduce costs and balance out the divisions.... AT LEAST ADMIT DON HAS FAILED THE GAME ON THESE TWO ISSUES. To do anything less then that, just shows everyone your selling out the game.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by Hey DW...bash on October 26, 2011, 5:30 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
74.113.43.85

Dale....I am not going to sit here and agree with everything that Tim has posted...it is obvious that his debating methods are not in a 3rd graders league....but Tim is correct in almost all that he posts as far as a blanket statement....yes the conference is growing and doing better, but its doing it at the expense of other classes.... all that hogwash aside, lets say tim is wrong, OK...now we have seen you post interviews from a ton of conference players, some from the top few teams in the conference and almost 100% of them agree that spreading out the talent across all teams would make the conference stronger and more competetive and overall better.....and its not even close, its almost every single player wants this, even the Resmondo guys want it..... I put my few years in the conference and this is not the 1st year that the players wanted this...this has been talked about by the players since 2007....it is not even a question of what the players want anymore....they want bat testing and they want major players spread out evenly between teams..... It seems we have 30+ teams every year in the conference but we only want to "give in" to one team and do whats best for them....Travis Resmondo has proven that he can get the best team regardless of what rules are in place, the guy has an eye for talent and team players and he has the money to go get them, lets give him another challenge....I would think he would want that challenge....Travis is a HOF sponsor but until he does with limitations in place he is only going to remembered as the guy with the biggest payroll. Lets get back to the topic of Tim....even if he is wrong in all that he posts, why is Don not limiting players to 5 or less per team as about 90% or more of the players want and have asked for? if this is our conference then why is this rule not in place? its not like this is a topic that is split down the middle in votes....its dam near a 100% agreement...... finally, I think if the conference would just spread the talent and help protect the pitcher a little better, I think you would see a ton of better games and I know you would see a jump in participation.....

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 26, 2011, 6:18 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
207.133.71.245

Tim, lets leave the brain washing out of this. I can think for myself. I have spent hours creating a questionnaire and tracking down email addresses for the teams. The results will be posted on November 7th. What you absolutely FAIL to understand is that today: MAJOR = SUPER MAJOR from the past A = MAJOR from the past B = A or AA from the past C = average 'A' team from the past This is undisputed. Ask any player or manager that had an average 'A' team in the early 1990's and has a 'C' team now. they all say its equal. So please tell me how todays setup is different. The top 3 divisions in your day (super, major, AA) got on a plane every weekend to play. The top 3 divisions today (Major, A, and B) travel every weekend to play. C is your regional upper division. What you should lobby for is to increase the C divisions homeruns and you have 1990 all over again.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 26, 2011, 6:27 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
207.133.71.245

The conference I believe is about maxed out on participation as it is. Tournaments are pretty well full of the best teams in a particular area every weekend. At this point we simply need to grow sponsors to increase the quality of teams. By the way, the first 3 out of 4 teams that responded to my questionnaire said to keep the number of Major players per team at unlimited and 4 out of 4 said they didn't want to go back to aluminum. We'll see. Remember the questionnaire went to the sponsors and the managers. The beauty of the Conference is that the teams all have a different agenda. A 'B' team is trying to dominate regionally and going to their 6 conference events to compete against the best and taking their lumps so that when worlds comes they are prepared to try and win it. 'A' teams are trying to win the smaller conference events, compete against the best, and win 'A' worlds. Major teams are trying to win the Major World Series and every Conference event they get in. It is a true pecking order just like it has always been. At times it is frustrating for the lower teams, but they keep their eye on the prize and once they get the Conference bug, they usually don't lose it for awhile. The Cleveland Indians, my team, cannot compete for a world series every year like the Yankees but they still play. Different agenda.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by TM50+ on October 26, 2011, 11:27 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
166.205.138.105

Dale.... There was no association in the past that had the top three divisions flying out. ASA had.... Super (fly out 90% of the time) Major (maybe fly three times, IF they qualified for the Super World) A...... You know..... All those old teams you now say are C teams (they flew out to worlds and MAYBE one other event) USSSA in the AA eras. I say eras because there really were two distinct eras. Early AA era had... Major.. (fly out 95%) AA.... Flew about three times. (Two regional events and AA World/World Series if qualified)... I played in the first AA World. Our team came in fourth.... Our season included traveling ONCE to Los Angeles and going to Florida for the worlds. The team that came in second was American Reality.... They traveled to LA, PHX and the world in Florida... I cannot remember cor sure but I think they qualified for the series and picked up some Stalter Stagg players, or vice versa. The third tier Division was A..... The A teams were LOCAL teams that if they travelled only traveled within their region. ............. Then came the later AA era...... Dan Smith, Mike Winkel, Labtech and a few other sponsors started budgeting teams of $250,000 plus and were traveling (95% of the time) exactly like the major divisions. This pushed the lower talent/funded AA teams to either disband/drop to A, or accept facing an ever increasing up hill battle that was almost impossible to win(this is where my old teammates decided to stay). teams stat stuck around with inferior funding usually did it because they wanted see if they could qualify for the major world series, and pull of a few wins at the World and Series.... They did NOT have any delusions of winning a title. The A teams at this time were built with local talent and player regionally. Please remember the 99 or 2000 aftershock team that won A Worlds in Detroit was the first team to run an A team AA style..... They had players on their roster during the year from Arizona. Ca, the deep south/ Tatum brothers, I think they even tried out a couple guys from Texas and Michigan. Aftershock traveled about six times (unheard of for an A team at that time). Bryson was on this team... Maybe he can Fill in what I am missing. Untill that Aftershock team NO A TEAM IN MY SOFTBALL ERA WAS BUILT WITH MULTI STATE/REGION PLAYERS. So Dale...... Maybe you can teach me about all those three division teams that traveled Like the usssa three divisions are doing today. I just have to once again re affirm you misunderstanding of the past..... ASA Major was equal to usssa A for the most part. On occasion the ASA major division had usssa AA style teams slip in (riverside) but mostly when you went to ASA Major Worlds you were facing $15,000 to $20,000 budget teams that only traveled two or three times at most.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 26, 2011, 11:41 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
207.133.71.245

We've been over this a lot. The exact words I said was todays Major, A, and B travel to play, I didn't say get on an airplane. Very rarely except for worlds does a B team get on an airplane in today's game. Yes, there are less teams and sponsors. People lead busier lives, entertain themselves by watching sports on tv, and sponsors don't have the tax breaks they did in the 1990's. What I would like you to do is describe what the competitive atmosphere would be under Regional rules. I can tell you. Resmondo will have the best team in the game. Florida has the most talent and best major players. Then you'll have dominating teams out of California, Michigan, Ohio, Texas, and North Carolina. So a few teams will dominate. And there is no way to put a salary cap on anything. If they went to a strict list of player rankings and regional requirements then people would just complain about who is on the major list and who is not. There really are not very many people in the top levels that are complaining about anything right now. I think you might be in the minority.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by player on October 26, 2011, 12:27 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
205.144.127.75

TM50 is going to whine until the end of time why waste space with the guy. NSA/ASA/whoever has no top level. The conference keeps a top level of play in USSSA call it major/a/b/whatever TM wants the conference to fold so there is no top level in USSSA so he can wag his finger and say I told you it wouldnt work yet it grows....now what whiney

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by TM50+ on October 26, 2011, 2:32 pm, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
166.205.138.105

I agree the major/elite list is the tuffest to control. BUT.... if the Conference had an open process to vote on who is on the list committee every year it would be "pretty" fair. Travel is travel... Driving six hour plus or flying is all the same. If you regionalized the game some areas would be stronger then others but if you allowed players to play outside their area to be counted as one of the teams upper player limits it still would allow for more competition. Second...... If you held the constitution rule that no more then any four or five players can stay together from a championship team... You would continually. Turn over the top division. It seems interesting to read that B teams do not fly to anything other then worlds now...... Maybe I'll have to look into it but I think your off on that one.... B Worlds, B CONference, Major World and I am sure a few other events at the very least. It saddens me to see/read that with softball swirling down the toilet the Conference guys cannot see what's happening to the health of softball. The Conference has made it almost impossible to C teams to move up..... This has forced lower B teams down to C... Which has forced C teams to D, and D teams to E. The COnfernce could be a major part of saving competitive softball.... Unfortunately.... Right now Don is not trying to build a system where teams move in an upward manner... Division by division.... Instead the Only division growing is E. Dale...... I don't know when the utrip convention is but.... The cONference meeting is not the important meeting... The general over view of softball meeting is what's needed. A vision statement on what softball should look like and how to achieve it is needed.

Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion

Posted by DW on October 27, 2011, 5:32 am, in reply to "Re: USSSA Conference Questionnaire discussion"
207.133.71.241

Unless you are west coast, a conference B team normally does not get on an airplane except for worlds is what I said. B Worlds, A Worlds, Conference Championships, and Major World are all World tournaments. Conf Champ and Major World are only for the top 16. Not mandatory for anyone else. I guess my vision right now would be: Conf = M, A, B Non-Conf upper (regional upper) is C and add some homeruns D is for the majority of teams. E would be for players playing tournaments for their first 2 years maximum and players that are not wanted by any D team.