2008/7/8 Rich Dean Shelmerdine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > I think the growth of the sport is limited by top teams hoovering up all > > the good players and leaving the feeder clubs to survive on scraps. > > > > Personally I think it is likely that we would find that successful clubs > > would head towards a 2 team structure. > > > What is to stop the top teams hoovering up all the good players for two > (instead of one), three (instead of two) etc teams and still leaving the > feeder clubs to survive on scraps? >
Nothing really, and its not really the point of the proposed rule change, just a likely benefit. I have no problem with big teams taking the best players, its always going to happen. I do have a problem with the extra advantage caused by sheer volume of players which I think is detrimental to the sport as a whole. I think players would be less inclined to go to a 2nd team if they felt they had a good chance of pulling their current team up towards the top of the rankings, but I guess it would depend on personal preference. And if it didn't change anything about feeder clubs losing their players then fine, at least there would be twice as many good teams fighting out at the top. I still think the principle is a good thing for the sport. > > > > Open and Mixed Tour are already at breaking point if you ask me. > > > > What is your proposal for mixed? > Er - did someone say I had a proposal for mixed? I would use the same rules as for Open. By being at breaking point I just mean in terms of venue size - not many places can cope with 42 teams. > > > Dean. > __________________________________________________ > BritDisc mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc > Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed > __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [email protected] http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed
