A proposal has come in for a divisional re-alignment that would see an A B divisional makeup. The A league would be comprised of the top seven teams this year.
The B league would be comprised of the bottom 6 from this year.
I do not like the A B designation so if we did this, I would call them Platinum and Gold. We could still retain North South alignments and have cross divisional play in both Platinum and Gold.
The bottom 2 teams in each division would be sent down to the Gold. The top 2 teams in the Gold would be sent up to the Platinum.
A possible yo-yo effect is something to consider with a middle of the pack team bouncing up and down for a few years.
I'm putting this out here now for comment.
Thanks.
4 comments:
I do not think that this would be a wise course of action for this league. I think splitting the league into four divisions is just going to cause more scheduling headaches. Thankfully this year we have been blessed with great weather, but most years’ rainouts are prevalent. I think trying to schedule cross division match ups in four separate entities coupled with rainouts from week to week would be a logistical nightmare.
I go back and forth on this issue. This year our team has been able to be in all of our games and it's been fun so I'm thinking things seem great. However, the last two years we got our brains beat in on a pretty regular basis and that wasn't much fun at all so I would have probably been voting for a gold and platinum. I know that no one in the gold division wants to feel like they're in a "lesser" division but based on years past I know that it would be way for fun to be able to compete no matter what "quality" division I was in. All that said, if the scheduling issues could be worked out, I would probably be in favor of splitting it up.
I think it is clear that we do have a separation in the league in the two types of teams that play. We have some that come to WIN by building and maintaining their teams to do so and approach each game with that in mind. And we have others, and I count SOTP in this group, that comes to PLAY. Those teams are built a bit more “loosely” and although they don’t play to loose, but the style of play is clearly different. Do I think that one approach is better than the other for this league… not at all.
But with 26 or so teams and the multitude of methods of attracting players to the teams in each church, the level of experience some teams have over others, I think a separation in levels of competition is only a natural occurrence. Isn’t that why park districts have different levels of play…because the make-up and approach of the teams may vary?
I’ve never had to schedule games for a league before, so I don’t know if it would be a nightmare or not but, if it is possible to have two separate levels of play as is being proposed, I don’t think I would be opposed to the idea either.
Post a Comment