View Full Version : Siphoning Best Players From Weak League Teams

09-25-2002, 10:05 AM
I play in a local league and have been on a struggling roster, be it the team I'm on now or the previous teams(regrouped after folding up.) My gripe is that there isn't any stops in place from established teams in the upper 60-70% rungs for eventually stacking A- to A+ players, and just recently one of the more proficient players we had was siphoned off to one of the mid-upper grade teams, leaving a definite, last minute hole in the line-up of this struggling team. It seems to me that local leagues should maintain an incentive to the "forming" teams to continue, and allowing teams to evolve into stacked, A class players at the expense of sucking away the advancing players from the struggling teams is, in the long run, counter productive to the overall league.

I could have personally made myself available across this league for switching to a "bigger" team, but in my heart it seems much more "right" to try and build something out of the good people whom I know on the persistent, struggling team. BUT I'll admit...with the eventual fact looming that players will be enticed to leave as their talent rises to the top has me disillusioned about the attitude of this league's administration.

What will this mean in time? IMO, it will compress the league into a group of stacked teams who count on taking advantage of struggling teams and running up points for their over all standings. Just how long do you think that an existing team running home with only double digits on their total for the night, will call it quits? It ain't fun, even when you happen to find one other team you can beat...it only means that it's a race to see who quits first.

I simply believe that the attitude isn't for the development of future teams, but instead is for the growth of stacked teams. My answer: "Limit the number of A-players who can play on any given night." Otherwise I truly believe that the league will dwindle in size, will reduce themselves to a bunch of "well knowns" and will miss out on the friendship with new, interesting players. Only other answer is to move to a different league with a different viewpoint whether it be some form of handicap or the actual incorporation of limiting the number of A-players on any given team. I have played in leagues like that in the past, and even though I have many friends in this league...I'll have to consider where the fun factor really is next season...sid

09-25-2002, 10:34 AM
This league seems destined for eventual failure, or at best will have just a few really good teams and nobody else. Nobody wants to spend money and time just to get their brains beat out every week.

The APA has a handicap system ranging from 2 to 7 as you're probably aware. The total handicaps of the 5 players on league night can not exceed 23. This eliminates the scenario you are describing.

I admire you for not jumping to a stacked team.

09-25-2002, 10:46 AM

Sorry to hear that this is happening in your league. From the sounds of it, it sounds like the league will probably fold in the near future, from lack of new interest. Unfortunately, leagues should be designed to have fun and improve your playing ability. My only thought would be to try and divide the league into two distinct leagues, one for beginner players and one for intermediate and advanced players. But that all depends on how many players want to play. Beginner players would be allowed to play in the upper level league with the understanding that they will most likely be beaten week after week. By splitting the league, it keeps it competitive and fun and it prevents teams from being stacked and if they are, then they will fight it out with other stacked teams... Good luck

09-25-2002, 01:18 PM
Some leagues not only have a 5 player handicap total limit but also 4 and 3 player limits. This helps as well. I've been on all sides of this issue and I've learned a couple of things. First, You need to have a team that stays together for a couple of years so that you progress together and share the satisfaction of helping each other improve. The only way to do this is to create a group of people who LIKE each other and enjoy one another's company. I've been on stacked teams before that were very strong but the people didn't really care for each other and eventually the team fell apart for that very reason.
Secondly. you have to have a KNOWLEGABLE leaque operator that has some integrity in handicaping players. A leaque operator cannot distinquish the subtle differences betwen a 6 and 7 or B+, A-, A+ player IF, they aren't an experienced player themselves; even if they are honest. Lastly, a leaque operator HAS to be willing to break up teams when they become too stacked for the overall health of the league. He/she has to raise their handicaps to a level where they can no longer compete or they can't field a team under the mandated limit. Period. Sometimes this is hard when a team's success may reflect well on the league operator at the national level. Who wants to play in a league where the same quys win session after session. No one. They get discouraged and quit.

09-25-2002, 02:24 PM
I actually hope the league does not go away, it is better that another league it competes with as far as fees and payback, just that the team structuring is brutal to the forming teams(IMO.) As Anon said, there really needs to be a split division in the league, but that's difficult at this time due to the total number players available. I can see the checks and balances in those regards, but I do not agree with the policy on stacking at the expense of the strugglers quitting(given enough time and anguish)...sid

09-25-2002, 03:43 PM

The main incentive in our league for "stacking" a team is the desire to do well at BCA nationals. There's a BCA rule that requires at least 3 players on a team at nationals to be from the same original team. This drives us to try and have five or more solid "A" players, so that we can get at least 3 to make the trip and then pick up two subs. Ideally, I'd like to have all 5 players be my friends from the original team, but I've seldom been able to do that because of everyone's personal priorities.

Unfortunately, our particular league organization isn't large enough to allow a separate division for "B" players, so it does punish the struggling teams. But on the other hand, several years ago my best player dropped out because he felt that he didn't get enough competition. Can't please everyone, I guess.

One fortunate by-product of stacking is that we have begun to attract other stacked teams from other league organizations. These guys formerly looked down at our league because they thought we weren't strong enough, now they are defecting from Brand X to join us. Our overall level of play has elevated greatly over the past three years.

ps - As you know, most of my guys have been playing together for nearly ten years, ever since we were handicap shooters, and we'd hate to split up /ccboard/images/icons/wink.gif


09-25-2002, 06:14 PM
So basically what you're saying is, no fair, you guys play better than me and I can't win. Why punish the stronger players by forcing them to break up their teams? That's their reward for getting so good? If you were to improve to an A level, you'd be a wanted commodity too. This sounds like a sour grapes complaint. If the other teams are unhappy, maybe they should quit and form their own B-or lower class league and compete among themselves. This way they can still be big fish in a small pond. Leagues are competitive. If you're looking for funzies, play among yourselves.