2007-2008 TEAM CHALLENGE Thread

discglfr05 · Post by **discglfr05** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:07 am

I think that scheduling all neutral challenges won't be very difficult at all...any team's home course can become a neutral course, so where does the difficulty lie? If someone can prove to me that it would be a colossal undertaking then by all means, have at it...I just don't see it.

Steve Solbo · Post by **Steve Solbo** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:24 am

Home course implies "advantage"... which we are trying to avoid. When scheduling a "neutral" challenge, a "home" course can NOT be a "neutral" site.. because it's not "netural"

I will draw up a schedule, basically you will see a flip flop of last year's schedule, but first, I need to know how many teams we will have, and where they will be hailing from.

With (6) teams scheduling was easy, November, December, January, February, March that's 5 months, 5 teams to play.

With more teams, we will have to "Balance" schedules, i.e. realistically look at skill levels of teams and make sure that every team's schedule is fair. With 2 years or results under our belt, and knowing most if not all golfers involved, this should be pretty easy to do. Again, this is just to make it fair.

This could make things a little bit easier to schedule actually, if more teams jump in, it is entirely possible that we could balance the schedules of teams on opposite ends of the league "geography" i.e. Wick and Burgess.. with balanced schedules, there would be no need for these (2) teams to play each other during the regular season...

Let me play devil's advocate against myself and ask,"Well, Steve, what if Wick and Burgess end up undefeated, and havent played eachother?"

My answer to this would be:

Scenario #1, it doesnt matter if we declare the finals location NOW. Due to the fact that we could simply start Wick and Burgess tied, since they are tied.

Scenario #2, 1st place team selects finals location, (not to be home course) we determine a tiebreaker in the event of a tie, (i.e. Record vs. Like opponents, or we keep track of a stat like avg. margin of victory.) and declare something as a back up tiebreaker, there has to be a list.

Scenario #3, 1st place team hosts finals... we go to the tiebreakers that have yet to be determined... (Hopefully we will not use that fandangled tiebreaker system I came up with last year, cuse it sucked.)

In the end, the more teams the merrier.

Again, I reiterate that we go back to the roots, big challenges, between courses, make the finals top 4 palying for the trophy, other teams playing for CTP prizes and consolation... cause realistically, if you come into finals in last place, you dont got a shot anyways. :twisted:

discglfr05 · Post by **discglfr05** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:37 am

Buff vs Burgess at MH (buff and Burgess are now neutral locales)
Womp vs Borderland at Buff (Borderland is now a neutral locale)
MH vs Wick at Borderland (Wick is now a neutral locale)

All challenges at neutral sites...to clarify what I mean, any team that's off to play another team at a neutral site, leaves their respective course open for another neutral site challenge....hence any "home course" can turn into a neutral challenge site

Steve Solbo · Post by **Steve Solbo** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:44 am

Yeah, that makes sense, I am saying that I hope more teams join, b/c it will be pretty boring to see the same courses, year in, year out.

New Blood!

:rambo:

Mike Dussault · Post by **Mike Dussault** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:46 am

All money should not go to CTP. The winners last year should have got a sum for their efforts. MH walking away with the lion's share even though they did not win was not how it should have been. Have a couple ctp's, but payout for team place overall.
With a second bambino on the way, not sure what my level of commitment will be this year. I hope to still make a couple challenges, just for the competition and comraderie of the event.

We would need the rules spelled out and clarified soon. How many on a roster? How many needed to field a team for a challenge? How much $ to play? Just a few off the top of my head, sure there are many other questions. :idea:

Steve Solbo · Post by **Steve Solbo** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:06 am

Mike,

I think we should increase the rosters this year, as you said, you dont know what your involvement will be this year, however, you should have an ample enough roster to make sure your team does play.

My first instinct is to go to a Mandatory 8 players, 12-14 man roster. Leaning towards 12, with the ability to play "smaller" challenges, i.e. 6 vs. 6 if needed.

I also agree that the winning team should get some sum of money, however, when you are splitting it 10-12 ways, you can't make it too lucrative, or there will be no incentive for lower ranked teams to make the trek and no money left in the budget for CTP's etc.

Maybe UP the $$$ thrown in this year... possibly to $200 a team? Basically if you get 10 players, $20 per player?

I dont know exactly.. Joe, please chime in.

discglfr05 · Post by **discglfr05** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:26 am

What about purchasing a new basket as a prize for the winning team and their home course (could have it engraved with winning team name, etc)...then use the rest of the $$ for various CTPs and/or food n beer at the Finals.

Steve Dodge · Post by **Steve Dodge** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 4:05 pm

mike d wrote:All money should not go to CTP. The winners last year should have got a sum for their efforts. MH walking away with the lion's share even though they did not win was not how it should have been.

All because we decided, as a team, to save up our one good shot of the year, you decide to whine like a little whiny whine whiner.

That was the Maple Hill money shot baby! :afro:

Mike Dussault · Post by **Mike Dussault** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:13 pm

I hope you guys did not decide to SPLIT! :shock:

Gary Cyr · Post by **Gary Cyr** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:28 pm

I like the most of (if not all) money being up for CTP's. It made every hole exciting. Everybody got to play and, wanted to play both rounds because they still had a chance to contribute. Because of that people stayed around. If not for the rain I bet bunches of us would have hung around either at the course or have gone to Marco Polo's.

I'm not opposed to paying a little more but I don't want to see this "fun" off season activity turn into anything of great cost to people. It's already expensive enough between the time and the gas for some people. For me it's more of a chance to hang out with my team and meet other teams to put faces to names or talk to someone I wouldn't otherwise see till Spring. Unless Solbo idea is to make this a bigger "payout type" of event I would go any higher than $20.

What was the amount left for grabs at the event last year?

Matt DeAngelis · Post by **Matt DeAngelis** » Wed Aug 29, 2007 9:55 pm

The team challenge has always looked like a ton of fun. I'm going to have my fisrt opportunity to play this year. Seeing as how most of the people that compete during this winter league play in tourney's and put up at least $30 per tourney to play, I can't see putting up $20 or more to be that big of a deal. I wouldn't mind putting up $20 or more if it means more coming back to me during the course of the league.

Steve Solbo · Post by **Steve Solbo** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:14 am

Gary/Mass wrote:I like the most of (if not all) money being up for CTP's. It made every hole exciting. Everybody got to play and, wanted to play both rounds because they still had a chance to contribute. Because of that people stayed around. If not for the rain I bet bunches of us would have hung around either at the course or have gone to Marco Polo's.

I'm not opposed to paying a little more but I don't want to see this "fun" off season activity turn into anything of great cost to people. It's already expensive enough between the time and the gas for some people. For me it's more of a chance to hang out with my team and meet other teams to put faces to names or talk to someone I wouldn't otherwise see till Spring. Unless Solbo idea is to make this a bigger "payout type" of event I would go any higher than $20.

What was the amount left for grabs at the event last year?

Gary, I was thinking somewhere along the lines of $20 per team member. On average per team, that should be about $200, and the total pot should be up around $1200.00, making for a decent payout to top team, or something to that effect, and still having plenty to go around for CTP's/Food/Beer.

Steve Solbo · Post by **Steve Solbo** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:14 am

Then again, Joe has the ultimate say.

Joe Yaskis · Post by **Joe Yaskis** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 7:57 pm

Sorry I have been busy. I will post a couple of things on Monday of next week. Very busy weekend.

I also need to know if I have commitments from courses again this year. I want to run this team competition, but if there is lack of interest I will stop.

Buff is in

Due date for whether your team is in or not is September 7. We need time to come up with a schedule. Spread the word please.

Jason Southwick · Post by **Jason Southwick** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 8:28 pm

Okay no more posting after 8.

Steve Solbo · Post by **Steve Solbo** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 8:28 am

Burgess ... IN!

Matt DeAngelis · Post by **Matt DeAngelis** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:56 am

Who is going to Captain team Borderland?

Steve Solbo · Post by **Steve Solbo** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:58 am

Fu Man wrote:Who is going to Captain team Borderland?

Why does it matter, Borderland cant keep hiring mercenaries.

Matt DeAngelis · Post by **Matt DeAngelis** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:11 am

Who are you referring to tough guy?

Steve Solbo · Post by **Steve Solbo** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 10:15 am

We'll see you damn merc.

What are they paying you, Ill double it.

Jim Wills · Post by **Jim Wills** » Fri Aug 31, 2007 12:49 pm

Fu Man wrote:Who is going to Captain team Borderland?

Matt,
Try shooting Mike D. a pm about Team Borderland