Get ready folks

Carlsbad7 said:
How would you accommodate school districts who's cutoff date is before 9/1? This is the bigger issue if you're trying to address all captured players. Rules that allow X number of players to play down won't work when 18 players that are playing down eligable are on a team from a district with an earlier school start date.

A way to get around this would be to provide different districts different numbers of players that can play down. But you can see how this would get hard to maintain
Click to expand...

You must choose between accommodating all trap players or maintaining the game's fairness. You can not have both. So between accommodating a very few percentage of trap players left for whatever reason after the switch or be fair to the other 95% players. I think the 12-month range is the maximum to keep the youngest players still in the game. I agree with ECNL 8/1 or 9/1 cut off for 12 months age group with No wavier.
 
CAZZZ said:
You must choose between accommodating all trap players or maintaining the game's fairness. You can not have both. So between accommodating a very few percentage of trap players left for whatever reason after the switch or be fair to the other 95% players. I think the 12-month range is the maximum to keep the youngest players still in the game. I agree with ECNL 8/1 or 9/1 cut off for 12 months age group with No wavier.
Click to expand...
There's give and takes for all the different grouping definitions. Once all the math is on the table and everyone understands what the give an takes are it comes down to what you personally prefer.

I prefer BY

I don't mind a modified SY that addresses all trapped players. I say this because it just seems like a lot of effort to switch from BY to SY and not address all trapped players along the way. Also it seems like you're double screwing over the much smaller group of trapped players if it's not eliminated entirely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top