Easton just voluntarily removed a truckload of bats from ASA certified bat list

[YOCOACH]

Even if we entertain the idea that these bats are "too hot", why now? If they knew this a few years back when the new standards came out, it would have been nice to get some notice so that you don't get a sudden crash in value.

Disclaimer - I don't own any of these bats so it basically doesn't effect me.

Actually, we did know. When the new standards came out it was said that they will grandfather the older bats in but once a particular model fails 3 attempts or rounds of testing, it will no longer be on the approved list. Since many of these models have 2 strikes and most will not pass a third round of testing, it was just a matter of time before they were all banned. The question was, who would be the bad guy...ASA or Easton?

That said, don't forget the culpability of those that spent the money buying these bats which only further drove the prices up. They had the choice of buying a bat that would perform, right out of the wrapper, close to or at the top of the new ASA allowed performance, and stay within those parameters for the life of the bat,or they could buy a bat that they knew going into the purchase that after a certain amount of lifespan, the bat would not only exceed the ASA performance parameters and be illegal but somewhere down the road, the bat would fail testing and be removed from the ASA approved list. So now the time has come. Yet all of these same people who made that choice are up in arms since they knowingly spent money on one of these bats and now it comes home to roost?

Sorry, I call BS. Contrary to society's belief that it's always someone else's fault, this rests solely on those that made the choice of buying a bat that they knew would become illegal over the life of the bat and had the strong possibility of being removed from the approved list.

ETA: Don't be surprised if the other manufacturers jump on the wagon and pull their older bats off the approved list as well. Now that would be the money grab everyone's talking about.

 

[quincy]

Personally I blame JAD for this whole thing.

 

[Jdaddy]

My DD used OG Eastons from 10U up until last year when she switched to Demarini. I never paid more than $200 for any of the 1Bs and 4Bs she used and never more than $100 for 8Bs, which were all in very good condition. So, if anybody actually paid $400+ for these bats, shame on you. I believe ASA urged Easton to remove these bats "voluntarily" to save face with the softball community and Easton quickly complied seeing an opportunity to sell more bats.

These OG Eastons are no different than any of the older bats which continue to get hotter with use such as the Phenix, CF3 (DDs gamer), or yellow Catalyst. If anybody believes these bats don't perform as well as the OGs, have your DD swing one. So, the game isn't safer by removing just these bats. If ASA is so concerned about safety, why not introduce a new stamp of their own? Oh wait, some teams may quit playing their tournaments, just ask USSSA. Don't forget USSSA's we are making the game safer with our new standards/stamp, even though dealers could send their CF5s, SRVs and SSRs back to the manufacturer and slap that "safety stamp" on a bat that was no different than the ones sold without it.

For the record, I saw several OGs being used at ASA Nationals last year that passed compression tests. These bats that pass compression testing are no more dangerous than any new bat made. I believe ASA realized that compression testing at all of their tourneys is not cost effective and would have some directors switching sanctioning bodies costing ASA even more money.

Money, money, money. This is what matters to both sides in this matter.

 

[90210]

ASA instituted mandatory testing of bats before nationals last summer. In the 30 minutes i was in line and could see the test bench, the bats that failed significantly more than most ... old Easton bats.

Maybe that has something to do with this.

Old bats fail more than new ones, and most old bats are Eastons, so that is expected. Plus this whole anecdote doesn't sound reliable.

That was the notice. It's like a stock tip.

I own 2 Easton buckets. One has served me very well. The other is garbage.

I'll say that I don't have much sympathy for anyone who paid huge for one of these bats, but it still is a cash grab.

Actually, we did know. When the new standards came out it was said that they will grandfather the older bats in but once a particular model fails 3 attempts or rounds of testing, it will no longer be on the approved list. Since many of these models have 2 strikes and most will not pass a third round of testing, it was just a matter of time before they were all banned. The question was, who would be the bad guy...ASA or Easton?

That said, don't forget the culpability of those that spent the money buying these bats which only further drove the prices up. They had the choice of buying a bat that would perform, right out of the wrapper, close to or at the top of the new ASA allowed performance, and stay within those parameters for the life of the bat,or they could buy a bat that they knew going into the purchase that after a certain amount of lifespan, the bat would not only exceed the ASA performance parameters and be illegal but somewhere down the road, the bat would fail testing and be removed from the ASA approved list. So now the time has come. Yet all of these same people who made that choice are up in arms since they knowingly spent money on one of these bats and now it comes home to roost?

Sorry, I call BS. Contrary to society's belief that it's always someone else's fault, this rests solely on those that made the choice of buying a bat that they knew would become illegal over the life of the bat and had the strong possibility of being removed from the approved list.

ETA: Don't be surprised if the other manufacturers jump on the wagon and pull their older bats off the approved list as well. Now that would be the money grab everyone's talking about.

You have a source for your first paragraph?


Also, a lot of the bats on this list aren't considered good. Why were those models banned (SCN11BH, SCN5, SCN7, SCN7B, SCN8, SCN9)?

And what about the rec player who bought one of these "bad" bats new back in the day, uses it 100 times a year and now has to go out and buy a new one?

 

[YOCOACH]

You have a source for your first paragraph?

http://www.asasoftball.com/iowa/pdfs/03_Updated_FAQs.pdf

Also, the NCAA uses the ASA as their guide on approved bats and they pass testing data back and forth on them. I couldn't find the past NCAA approved list with the number of strikes against many of these models but they were on there with 1 or 2 strikes against them in the very recent past.

I think you'll find this interesting too considering you seem to think that it's mostly the older Eastons that fail.

https://nfca.org/web_docs/NCAARulesPowerpoint.pdf

As far as rec players go, as you can read in the FAQ's by ASA, it'll be up to the league.

 

[CoreSoftball20]

Says the guy in the business of selling bats...

What's the logic behind the sudden removal of these bats other than to get people to buy new bats? Don't say safety, because most (all of the slowpitch ones, not sure about fastpitch) of them perform worse than the new bats.

Even if we entertain the idea that these bats are "too hot", why now? If they knew this a few years back when the new standards came out, it would have been nice to get some notice so that you don't get a sudden crash in value.

Disclaimer - I don't own any of these bats so it basically doesn't effect me.

Before you start spouting off about me just being a bat store owner...maybe learn a little about bats as well. As some knowledgeable people have said after your post, ASA instituted a new standard a while ago. THAT was your warning and if you have learned anything by new stamps/standards, this is exactly what happens. After a couple years, the bats go bye bye. ASA wasn't going to let these bats live forever. The older model Eastons are fierce and get hotter and hotter and will keep going well below failing until they blow up. ASA didn't tell people to go out and spend stupid money on these old bats and sure as hell aren't worried if someone bought one 2 months ago and now its useless. That's your problem. And I'm sorry, most people buying the old Eastons KNOW exactly why they are buying them.

And for the slowpitch ones...glad they are gone. Was more than sick of seeing 10 year old shaved Extendeds/Flex being hit by all the pansies
out there.

 

[JAD]

Personally I blame JAD for this whole thing.

I take full responsibility.....should I feel badly that I just sold my DD's backup SCN1B on Ebay for more than I paid for it???

 

[quincy]

Yes for about as long as it took you to read this.

 

[CoreSoftball20]

Also, a lot of the bats on this list aren't considered good. Why were those models banned (SCN11BH, SCN5, SCN7, SCN7B, SCN8, SCN9)?

If people don't think some of these bats aren't good, then they haven't swung some of them. Most that you listed were darn good when broke in.

I really doubt many rec players bought one of these bats 10 years ago and only put 40 swings/year on it. What I more saw, was the rec teams that
would buy 1 or 2 bats and they would get a 50 swings a double header on them because the whole team used it. By the end of the season, those darn
bats would have a thousand hits on it...haha

 

[CoreSoftball20]

I take full responsibility.....should I feel badly that I just sold my DD's backup SCN1B on Ebay for more than I paid for it???

I say great timing...haha