Softball trending down?

[fastpitchdad8]

Why is it a problem to have 'too many' teams?

Depends on what kind of teams you want. If you want to have lots of teams so everyone can play, then that's awesome. If you want to have a few travel ball teams that can compete at tournaments that are out of the immediate area so the girls can experience the travel aspect and compete at a high level we have too many and most of them will struggle at the B level. Again..just my opinion.

 

[left turn]

Our program is down by a third since 2007. Below is the total registration for the girls' programs (K-9th grade) in a town of 10,000 in northern New Jersey over the past 8 years:
2007 - 307
2008 - 289
2009 - 292
2010 - 274
2011 - 263
2012 - 239
2013 - 209
2014 - 205 (Estimated, registration is not quite complete)

 

[CoogansBluff]

Depends on what kind of teams you want. If you want to have lots of teams so everyone can play, then that's awesome. If you want to have a few travel ball teams that can compete at tournaments that are out of the immediate area so the girls can experience the travel aspect and compete at a high level we have too many and most of them will struggle at the B level. Again..just my opinion.

I understand the theory, and your ideas are as good as mine, but it makes more sense to me to believe that 300 kids playing travel ball is going to be better than 200 in the long run.

For one thing, there will probably be several in the 201-300 range that will become 1-100 players in the future because they got that opportunity to play entry-level travel ball instead of rec.

Further, if the best 50 players in the state play for the same five teams, then that's good for those 50, but then the next 50 and the next 50 after that aren't exposed to those elite players, either as teammates and role models or opponents, and so upward mobility is limited, which is never a good thing for the long run.

And finally, it seems that every area claims that they are watered down and that this keeps them from competing nationally. But somebody obviously is competing nationally. Doesn't make sense to me that the ones competing nationally are those places that are restricting travel ball to only those who are competent at it.

My guess is that the teams that compete nationally often come from areas where there are tons of players at all levels. But some areas have very successful organizations that establish dominance and are able to attract the top talent, whereas other areas have lots of organizations vying to be top dog, but none can corner the market.

And it's hard to corner the market when many girls aren't as interested in playing nationally as their parents are. That is, many would rather play on the 12th best team in the state with their friends and coaches that they like than play on the state champion and not have a friend on the team.

Again, just a theory. Would be curious to hear others.

 

[fastpitchdad8]

Oh I understand what you're saying and you're not wrong.

I did type my "immediate area" and I should have added this isn't a big city. Around here in the last few yrs and especially coming into this season we've had new teams pop up where the dad's that have coached a little in little league start their own teams. Their daughters plus some of their daughters friends left other teams for the startups. Which is fine..I understand and it's great IMO that these guys wanna coach. But there's not enough good players in the area to fill their teams or frankly replace the girls that left the established teams. They'll fill, but they're taking players that aren't good. At all. (before anyone says coach them up, these girls can't play a good game of catch) So now there's 5 below average 14u teams instead of 3 average (with the potential to be above average). That's all I'm saying..and again, it's just my opinion

I understand the theory, and your ideas are as good as mine, but it makes more sense to me to believe that 300 kids playing travel ball is going to be better than 200 in the long run.

For one thing, there will probably be several in the 201-300 range that will become 1-100 players in the future because they got that opportunity to play entry-level travel ball instead of rec.

Further, if the best 50 players in the state play for the same five teams, then that's good for those 50, but then the next 50 and the next 50 after that aren't exposed to those elite players, either as teammates and role models or opponents, and so upward mobility is limited, which is never a good thing for the long run.

And finally, it seems that every area claims that they are watered down and that this keeps them from competing nationally. But somebody obviously is competing nationally. Doesn't make sense to me that the ones competing nationally are those places that are restricting travel ball to only those who are competent at it.

My guess is that the teams that compete nationally often come from areas where there are tons of players at all levels. But some areas have very successful organizations that establish dominance and are able to attract the top talent, whereas other areas have lots of organizations vying to be top dog, but none can corner the market.

And it's hard to corner the market when many girls aren't as interested in playing nationally as their parents are. That is, many would rather play on the 12th best team in the state with their friends and coaches that they like than play on the state champion and not have a friend on the team.

Again, just a theory. Would be curious to hear others.

 

[MsDinosaur]

Don't know if the numbers nationwide are trending down or not. This thread isn't a scientific sample.

But I do think that other sports are more appealing at the start. Lots of standing around and waiting. Lots of failure. The ball is hard, and it's scary.

Many people push rec leagues to speed things up and make it full-blown fastpitch as early as possible, and while that's fine for those advanced players, it's pretty intimidating for newcomers. If my DD had not started at age 7, I don't think she would've stayed with it because she's not the kind who picks up a new sport quickly. Starting at 10U would've been less than fun.

Yep, the dreaded soccer is a much better sport for 3-6 year olds. Run and kick the ball. Kick the ball into the net. Repeat. It's simply a better fit for little ones' skill sets.

Softball/baseball are wayyyy more complicated: all those rules, a separation between defense and offense, that scary ball hurtling at you, no longer is only running necessary, but now you need all that eye-hand coordination... I'm glad DD started t-ball at around 4 or 5; I agree with CB, starting to play softball at 10U would have been terrifying!

 

[imnobrn]

My immediate area is trending up. The amount of girls that tried out for HS was a lot more than last year, and half of the girls are freshmen. TB teams and LL are at an increase as well. And LAX is huge around here too. In fact, older DD played rec LAX from 10y/o to HS sophomore before she lost interest (read discovered boys).

 

[riseball]

Yep, the dreaded soccer is a much better sport for 3-6 year olds. Run and kick the ball. Kick the ball into the net. Repeat. It's simply a better fit for little ones' skill sets...

Everyone plays, tie games so there is no loser, juice boxes and cupcakes after each game, and everyone gets a trophy for just being there. Helicopter parents in sweaters reading 50 shades on a Kindle driving home in a hybrid. Shoot me now!!!

 

[JAD]

I have not done any scientific studies, but I know there are several posts on the GA message boards saying there is not enough quality pitching available for the number of teams. The pitching talent is getting diluted and we are ending up with a bunch of "average" teams instead of a couple of really good ones.

 

[riseball]

I have not done any scientific studies, but I know there are several posts on the GA message boards saying there is not enough quality pitching available for the number of teams. The pitching talent is getting diluted and we are ending up with a bunch of "average" teams instead of a couple of really good ones.

Is the problem that there are not enough skilled pitchers or is the problem that there are not enough coaches with the skill to develop the pitchers?

 

[JAD]

Is the problem that there are not enough skilled pitchers or is the problem that there are not enough coaches with the skill to develop the pitchers?

Probably a combination of the two.