| Author |
 Topic  |
|
snipes
50 Posts |
 Posted - 12/28/2005 : 10:16:27 PM
|
Taz/Phil -
Tonight you mentioned a new thought with the Captains checks, who makes the final ruling => the players, the captains or the board? Also (separate issue), how many players do we have total in our area each year that pay dues to our league office?
|
|
|
Taz
USA
555 Posts |
Posted - 12/29/2005 : 07:44:56 AM
|
| The "final ruling" on any issue or change is made by the league office (that would be Phil & I). As to your second question, I don't understand what you are asking. APA memberships are renewed yearly, so everyone pays dues; however, those dues are not kept by the league office. We collect them and send them to the National Office. |
 |
|
|
Doug Gill
USA
92 Posts |
Posted - 12/29/2005 : 6:11:39 PM
|
First of all..............before anything was said about possible changes to the prize fund checks, Taz made sure that everyone understood that the checks are TEAM prize money........not the captains. Secondly, it is the "Taz bucks" program that is South Coast APA's way of thanking/rewarding the captains for doing a good job in making sure that the paperwork is done correctly, league info is given to all the team members, etc.. It REALLY p*sses me off whenever I hear of a team captain that doesn't share this money, or any other TEAM incentives/prize money, with his/her teammates.
As far as I am concerned, this constitutes THEFT and has no business in our leagues AND any captain found to have done this should be immediately and permantely banned from the APA.
Want to know how I really feel, email me and I'll tell ya! 
Good Shooting All! |
|
|
|
snipes
50 Posts |
Posted - 12/29/2005 : 11:47:29 PM
|
Taz/Doug -
This is my first year as captain so I did not know what to call the check I was making reference to, hence, "Captains checks". I did understand they were TEAM checks though! I was sure to keep the " ' " out of the word "captains" so that everyone knew I did not mean ownership. I agree with Doug (mostly) as to his thoughts on these checks. Until this year, I thought only the winning team received any type of "end of the season checks" and I haven't played for too many teams in the last 4 years so you figure that one(tee hee). I was interested in the suggestion Phil was making, I was only curious as to who was going to decide in the end, the office or the players?
Second, my other question was geared to how many people we have in our league, not who keeps the money. I was thinking about what Phil said regarding places to hold tournaments and that we could use a bigger place to play. Perhaps if there were enough people in our league, we could double the membership fees for a few years, forfeit team checks for a few years and get a place of our own. You know, a
South Coast pool room for such events. Maybe sounds stupid and far fetched, but knowing the numbers would have given me a better perspective as to my thoughts.
I hope I didn't offend anyone and sorry for being so vague!
Dittos to the "Good Shooting"!!!
|
|
|
|
Doug Gill
USA
92 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2005 : 07:15:48 AM
|
Snipes....no offense taken . You just happened to open a door that I upsets me and I had to walk through.
Good Shooting! |
|
|
|
Jinny
36 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2005 : 09:34:23 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by snipes
Perhaps if there were enough people in our league, we could double the membership fees for a few years, forfeit team checks for a few years and get a place of our own. You know, a
South Coast pool room for such events. Maybe sounds stupid and far fetched, but knowing the numbers would have given me a better perspective as to my thoughts.
What are you thinking snipes? I'm listening.
Jinny |
Edited by - Jinny on 12/30/2005 09:36:49 AM |
|
|
|
Kerry Randolph
USA
172 Posts |
Posted - 12/30/2005 : 12:34:03 PM
|
| You will have to excuse Doug he is a little sensitive since he missed his league championship match on Thursday. By the way Doug how did you guys do? |
|
|
|
Wyndy
USA
3 Posts |
Posted - 12/31/2005 : 2:51:29 PM
|
| Wow Doug....I have to say for all of the captains that spend our "OWN" money on a weekly basis (that adds up over the season) paying for players that leave before paying, don't have it that week or even a forfeit that you have no right to say that captains should have no right to a portion of the prize money....We have every right to be repayed for the personal money that we laid out so that players could continue playing without the whole team being penalized... |
|
|
|
snipes
50 Posts |
Posted - 01/04/2006 : 10:33:34 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jinny
quote:
Originally posted by snipes
Perhaps if there were enough people in our league, we could double the membership fees for a few years, forfeit team checks for a few years and get a place of our own. You know, a
South Coast pool room for such events. Maybe sounds stupid and far fetched, but knowing the numbers would have given me a better perspective as to my thoughts.
What are you thinking snipes? I'm listening.
Jinny
Jinny -
Depending on the amount of money, I thought we could lease a place for league play. I know a few people that might be interested in putting coin op. tables in. This would be a good place to hold tournaments, make-up matches, play-offs and could second as a league office. Put a few vending machines in etc. and the money made in the machines and tables would help pay rent. I know it may be a long shot, but it is possible with the right minds at work and correct management. We have a lot of resources in our membership and could probably get some really great deals. Those are some of my thoughts! |
|
|
|
Ron Y
11 Posts |
Posted - 01/04/2006 : 10:42:41 PM
|
If the final decision is up to Taz and Phil then why ask.
However,if do want a captains accounting of funds then here it goes.
Team check for Paddy Cakes +83.70
-------------dues discount -30.00
-------------forfeits -20.00
-------------candy for team -15.00 est.
-------------team dinner -128.62
--------------ulscer from players priceless
----------------Total cost to me $109.92
I think the checks help offset various costs and are a good thing. Perhaps if every captain had to post how the money is used then no one would feel cheated. The plan Phil outlined regarding rewarding the best teams could also be looked at as penalize the losing teams.
The current system rewards all teams and is fair. Please don't fix something that isn't broken.
Thank you,
Ron
|
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2006 : 02:36:53 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Y
If the final decision is up to Taz and Phil then why ask.
However,if do want a captains accounting of funds then here it goes.
Team check for Paddy Cakes +83.70
-------------dues discount -30.00
-------------forfeits -20.00
-------------candy for team -15.00 est.
-------------team dinner -128.62
--------------ulscer from players priceless
----------------Total cost to me $109.92
I think the checks help offset various costs and are a good thing. Perhaps if every captain had to post how the money is used then no one would feel cheated. The plan Phil outlined regarding rewarding the best teams could also be looked at as penalize the losing teams.
The current system rewards all teams and is fair. Please don't fix something that isn't broken.
Thank you,
Ron
Why ask? Do you know how many things we have decided NOT to implement based on feedback from our players?
I notice you included team dinner and candy in your calculations. If you take that out you are actually making about $33 and not losing $109.
Here's some accounting for you, in case you're interested.
Keeping Prize Checks
Amount collected for prize checks ----- $7/team/week
Number of teams each week ------------- 210
Number of weeks ----------------------- 12
Total amount collected ---------------- $17,640
Total amount of past due fees --------- $1499
Total amount deducted from checks ----- $1094
Total uncollected fees ---------------- $405
Ulcer from captains ------------------- Priceless, but 30 times yours
Pizza and candy for captains' meetings- $200
Total cost to League Management ------- $605
Implementing Money Tournaments
Amount collected for prize checks ----- $7/team/week
Number of teams each week ------------- 210
Number of weeks ----------------------- 12
Total amount collected ---------------- $17,640
Total amount of past due fees --------- $1499
Total amount deducted from checks ----- $0
Total uncollected fees ---------------- $1499
Prize money for tournaments ----------- $20,000
Ulcer from captains ------------------- Priceless, but 30 times yours
Pizza and candy for captains' meetings- $200
Total cost to League Management ------- $4059
If you were us, which would you choose?
Now, of course the prize money for the tournaments will even out over the course of a year, but even then it will cost us $1100 more per session in uncollected past due fees.
I asked a question in our Ojai meeting that got an interesting response. I asked how many of the captains there had never been on a team that won the playoffs. Nobody raised their hands. There's no such thing as the best team over the long run, not in a handicapped league.
Your calculations assumed you kept the check (and paid for dinner with the money). If you win the top payout in a session-ending tournament just once every seven or eight years, you cover your expenses.
Bottom line, it's a zero-sum game as far as the teams/players are concerned. However, we are trying to plan for growth here. We will eventually do the tricup tournaments to reduce the field for regionals whether there is money or not. We just can't get much bigger and keep doing it the way we do. In addition, as the league grows the money in the tricups will increase, meaning more teams get money and/or teams get more money. With the current system the checks will never grow (unless we increase fees). The average team will get back $7 per week. Always.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2006 : 02:50:21 AM
|
Snipes, the lease on a location big enough for 12-16 tables (what we'd need for regionals to improve the current situation) would eat up double membership fees in less than two months. If you want to purchase the property you'd probably need to collect about $4000 per member. And that's if you could get all the members to agree, even those who would probably never see the inside of the location except during regionals. That's pretty steep, especially when you consider other captains have issues with not being able to cover $40 a session for out-of-pocket expenses caused by players who don't even have $5 to play a match...
Now, if we doubled membership fees and gave the extra $20 per player to the captains, we could implement the money tournaments AND the captains wouldn't lose anything!
Phil
|
|
|
|
Doug Gill
USA
92 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2006 : 07:29:48 AM
|
There is one other thing you forgot in your calculations Ron. You forgot to adjust $15.00 (approx.) that you received from the League office (in the form of Taz Bux) for the same reasons I cited in my post above.
But then again, maybe I am making an assumption that all captains run their teams the same; from making their players stay current with their fees to making sure that all their paperwork is filled out correctly and in on time.
That's what I get for assuming!
Good Shooting!
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Y
If the final decision is up to Taz and Phil then why ask.
However,if do want a captains accounting of funds then here it goes.
Team check for Paddy Cakes +83.70
-------------dues discount -30.00
-------------forfeits -20.00
-------------candy for team -15.00 est.
-------------team dinner -128.62
--------------ulscer from players priceless
----------------Total cost to me $109.92
I think the checks help offset various costs and are a good thing. Perhaps if every captain had to post how the money is used then no one would feel cheated. The plan Phil outlined regarding rewarding the best teams could also be looked at as penalize the losing teams.
The current system rewards all teams and is fair. Please don't fix something that isn't broken.
Thank you,
Ron
|
|
|
|
Doug Gill
USA
92 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2006 : 07:54:43 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wyndy
Wow Doug....I have to say for all of the captains that spend our "OWN" money on a weekly basis (that adds up over the season) paying for players that leave before paying, don't have it that week or even a forfeit that you have no right to say that captains should have no right to a portion of the prize money....We have every right to be repayed for the personal money that we laid out so that players could continue playing without the whole team being penalized...
Wyndy.......in no way did I mean to infer that you were not intitled to recoup money that you spent(loaned?) out-of-pocket for your players/team. I was referring to those individuals who just automatically assume that the money is theirs. Lots of teams work out lots of ways to SHARE the prize fund check.
Sorry if my reply came off as harsh, again....it wasn't intended that way.
Good Shooting! |
|
|
|
waynec
USA
3 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2006 : 5:30:44 PM
|
I need to go over the details of this idea again. Sorry, but my memory isn't as good as it used to be, and if this had been presented in writing it would be easier to recall the facts when trying to restate the issue to others (my team, in specific).
As I recall it, the idea is that instead of playoffs to qualify for regionals, playoffs would be for qualifying for the local tournament. The prize money would be used as prize(s?) for first (and second? maybe third?) place in the tournament. Also, the first place winner of the tournament would be qualified for regionals.
Qualifiers for the local tournament would be the same as they are now for regionals (ie. 1st place in a division of 12 or more teams automatically qualifies for the tournament; 2nd, 3rd, 4th and wild card play playoffs to determine the qualifier for the local tournament; in divisions less than 12 teams, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and wild card play to determine the qualifier for the tournament).
This would mean that the prize checks we receive per session now would stop in leiu of the tournament. It would also mean that fewer teams would qualify for regionals, thereby making the regional tournament smaller and easier to facilitate.
Also, does this mean that in a division of 12 or more teams 2 teams will qualify for the tournament, but in a division with less than 12 teams only one team will qualify? Do I have the facts correct?
|
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2006 : 11:05:06 PM
|
You almost got it right, Wayne. Everything up through the end of playoffs would be the same as it is now. Teams would earn qualification the way it is now. The difference would be what they qualify for. Instead of qualifying directly for regionals, the teams would qualify for a tricup tournament. There would be about 16-20 teams in the 8-Ball tricup and 10-15 in the 9-Ball tricup.
The top eight finishers in the tricup tournament qualify for regionals. In the spring sixteen teams would qualify in 8-Ball, resulting in a field of 32 for the regionals. The field for 9-Ball regionals would be 24. Assuming we will be sending four 8-Ball teams and three 9-Ball teams to Nationals, that means every bracket in regionals would be eight teams (or less, see below). If we grow enough to send more teams, the brackets in regionals become even smaller.
To make the top eight in a tricup, an 8-Ball team would only have to win one or two rounds. In 9-Ball a team could make the top eight without even playing a match, depending on the draw.
The top four teams (or eight, depending on the money) in the tricup tournament would win money. Here is an example breakdown:
Top 2 receive $3000 each
Third place (2 teams) get $1000 each
Fifth place (4 teams) get $500 each
That's $10,000 in each tournament, or $20,000 total. We probably would only play down to the final two teams. These numbers increase as we grow.
In order to fund the tournament we would have to eliminate the end-of-session checks that currently go to every team. That seems to be the main point of contention with the captains.
Note that the smaller fields in regionals will also mean fewer matches there to win the trip to Nationals. Basically the tricup would be the first round or two of regionals. In addition, if a team qualifies more than once through the tricup tournaments, the field for regionals would be reduced even more. If we have byes in the regionals, they would first go to teams that qualified through more than one tricup tournament.
If a team does not qualify for regionals through the tricup, they are able to try again the following session. With the current setup, you get one chance. If you lose the first round of regionals (and half of the teams do), you're done until next year. With tricups, you could lose the first round in the summer tricup AND the first round in the fall tricup, but still make it to Nationals.
If a team is qualified for regionals and wins their division again, the highest-finishing non-qualified team (based on division standings at the end of the regular session) will be invited to the tricup. If there is money in the tricup, the division winner will also be invited to play.
That's basically it in a nutshell. Pretty simple eh?
Phil
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Captains Checks
