Report scores, discuss upcoming games, WCLL week 12

[Bluevelvet]

Because SB could be negatively affected?

Did you ever consider that UCSD and SSU could also be negatively affected?

I hope the board is more amenable to fixing the problem for 2007.

[Aaron Myers]

win and you don't have to worry about anything.

[Bluevelvet]

win and you don't have to worry about anything.

Nice cliche! But, we are talking about next year. How would you like to work hard all year and get rewarded by a random seeding in the playoffs?

[WCLLPREZ]

Bluevelvet,

The Board isn't going to fix "a problem" that the rank and file membership hasn't identified.

Give it a rest!

[Bluevelvet]

Bluevelvet,

The Board isn't going to fix "a problem" that the rank and file membership hasn't identified.

Give it a rest!

I don't agree with that statement. I'm pretty sure it will come up next year. Do think that everyone is satisfied with the staus quo?
Gary- you make it sound like this is some complex proposal with all kinds of ramifications. It is simple and easy and to the point. Why not consider it now that the present system has resulted in some unwanted inequities?

[WCLLPREZ]

unwanted inequites as perceived by who? You, a parent with a vested intrest! The entire league membership discussed this in October and what the possible match ups and their implications could be AND CHOSE NOT TO ACT ON THE ISSUE!

Present at the meeting were coaches and team reps from UCSB, UCSD, SSU, and nobody seeemd to have an issue with it based on HOW QUICKLY the topic was dismissed. If all of a sudden those teams have an issue with the match ups, then I am sure they will make a point of bringing the issue up for discussion again when the league meets in October 2006. Until then, nothing more needs to be said or done, as nothing will be changed for this season.

[Aaron Myers]

Bluevelvet,

The current system is meant to encourage parity over several years. This year didn't work out as well as others in terms of national rankings, which are a mess and something I'll leave to a later discussion. However, UCSB did lose to Arizona so what does that mean. Playing them again would be easier than playing UCSD? Now that victory is not so certain we resort to crying wolf and trying to revise the system? I expected more from a player who had as much success as you during your career.

[Bluevelvet]

Bluevelvet,

The current system is meant to encourage parity over several years. This year didn't work out as well as others in terms of national rankings, which are a mess and something I'll leave to a later discussion. However, UCSB did lose to Arizona so what does that mean. Playing them again would be easier than playing UCSD? Now that victory is not so certain we resort to crying wolf and trying to revise the system? I expected more from a player who had as much success as you during your career.

Champ-
We are talking about next year. The teams will be different. None of your post is relevant, and I had zero success as a player.
Gary-
I have been talking about next year and years to come, when I have no supposed "vested interest". If you look back at my posts on the subject they are all about next year or the future. Those words are highlighted in bold in many cases. I see no reason to make accusations that I am interested in changing this year's tournament to help UCSB. That is ridiculous and you know it. Myself and other fans are interested in having the best product for the WCLL championship. If that includes a simple adjustment to the final four seeding, so be it. I hope the board takes it up and acts on it for next year.

[WCLLPREZ]

I completely understand you issues and desire to change the format of the WCLL playoff structure however what I am trying to get you to understand is that the Board is not going to change something unless the membership desires to have it changed. Thus far, they have not and therefore the Board will not fix anything that the membership does not perceive as broken.

[Sean Lenihan]

The "system" is not broken because they all believe they will win and it won't be their problem. The team(s) that loses will work over the summer to put the issue to the membership. At that point the membership will have seen "what can happen" and may strongly consider this more appropriate playoff structure.

No one will complain about this year, nor should the Board address it now. All the parties involved are professional enough for that. And after this season passes, together the league members will recognize that the WCLL Playoffs should provide the league its best shot sending its best to the Tournament.

[Bluevelvet]

Sean and Gary-
I understand what both of you are saying. My question is whether the fan has any input into the playoff format.
I can see the teams/members thinking the format won't matter because they are confident that they can win regardless of the matchups. Thus the member/teams will not address the problem.
On the other hand, the public, that attends these events, probably will not like this year's matchup in the final. It should be interesting to see whether the attendance falls off for the final if the perceived "two best teams" meet in the semi's.
So, if the lack of fan appeal is felt at the boxoffice, will that be sufficient to bring it to the board?

[Sonny]

On the other hand, the public, that attends these events, probably will not like this year's matchup in the final. It should be interesting to see whether the attendance falls off for the final if the perceived "two best teams" meet in the semi's.
So, if the lack of fan appeal is felt at the boxoffice, will that be sufficient to bring it to the board?

Huh?

One or two people complaining about the system in a public message board equates to the "public." Sounds like a pretty big stretch, IMHO Bluevelvet. Or at least a self-fullfilling prophesy if your team doesn't make it to the final game.

[Bluevelvet]

One or two people complaining about the system in a public message board equates to the "public." Sounds like a pretty big stretch, IMHO Bluevelvet. Or at least a self-fullfilling prophesy if your team doesn't make it to the final game.

It's not one or two people on the message board, Sonny. The final is on Sunday and the semi's are on Saturday. It should be easy to tell if there is a fall off in attendance for the final.
For the final time, there is no "my team" next year.
BTW, Sonny how does the SELC seed their tournament?

[ucdlax]

Maybe this discussion should be saved for after the games are played. If Zona or Poly beats Noma, UCSD or UCSB in the final game, everyone is going to feel pretty foolish about arguing over this for so long. If Cal, UCLA, or Davis pulls a first round upset it would have a similar effect. Not saying it is likely, but there is a lot of parity in the league this year and on any given day...

[Sonny]

One or two people complaining about the system in a public message board equates to the "public." Sounds like a pretty big stretch, IMHO Bluevelvet. Or at least a self-fullfilling prophesy if your team doesn't make it to the final game.

It's not one or two people on the message board, Sonny. The final is on Sunday and the semi's are on Saturday. It should be easy to tell if there is a fall off in attendance for the final.
For the final time, there is no "my team" next year.
BTW, Sonny how does the SELC seed their tournament?

Since the WCLL Final Four is in somewhat remote Santa Barbara, I think it's safe to say that attendance will be positively enhanced by the participation of the host Gauchos. If they aren't there on Sunday (or Saturday for that matter) and attendance suffers, I doubt it has anything to due with the WCLL seedings.

For the SELC Division A - 6 teams make the tournament (held over one 3-day weekend at one neutral site). Top two teams get byes directly into Saturday evening's semifinals - The remaining four teams play in the two quarterfinals on Friday evening (3 v. 6 and 4 v. 5).

There were three divisions for A this year in the SELC. So one division winner wouldn't get a bye. After tiebreakers, that team was Va Tech. Georgia and Florida State get the two byes at the top two seeds. Details in the SELC Fourm here:
http://forums.uslia.com/viewtopic.php?t=4583