Having the meeting on short notice I can understand the problem of not yet knowing the exact location. Changing a sucessful league format that has been in place for 5+ years to now possibly exclude upwards of 200 men from playing is my biggest problem.

Last year there were 400 men and 200 women in spring league. It appears this year that they'll need an equal number of men and women (Male registrations will be restricted). So unless the league doubles the number of women playing, many will be left out.

geez, that is insane! that's the dumbest thing i've ever heard; i hope that if they do that, at least they'll give the option of having an all-mens league. otherwise it's total bullshit. and why have exactly equal numbers if the teams are 4-3? clearly i should check out the details because there must be something i'm missing.

I am not sure Akira makes a point here or if he does I am not sure I understand it. He wants the ratio to change and then for suddenly more women to sign up or is he okay with less men being able to play. Or does changing the ratio somehow mean more women will sign up including club plaers and new players.

Final comment the posted ratio is 4:3 offense chooses, so actualy was Gary was right.

yeah i am not an expert by any stretch but i would think trying to force new players to bring a girl would make it less likely that they will play, not more likely. and by 'they' i mean both the new player and the token girl they are forced to bring. i dont know how were gonna grow 100 women and blocking 135 dudes from playing seems insane for a sport that wants to attract a borader audience.

it seems like the two tiers of leagues is a good idea though. i mean having a league that is more competitive might be nice for those club players that don't want to play... ahem, casual ultimate.

you know what would be sweet? if they instituted some kind of incentive for starting on time. i mean one thats NOT cool points cause that doesnt seem to work. especially in spring league and fall league when half the time you literally have to get your ass out of bed to make it to the field. like maybe put donuts in the parking lot, but only like 25. russell and i will for sure get them cause were always on time.

looks like the town meeting is a good idea. its cool that theyre doing it.

Here's what will happen as I see it. There should be equal # of men and women, maybe slightly more men because the actual play ratio will probably be something like 3.75/3.25. But what will happen is that in order to get as many men in as possible rosters will be made at 13/8 when they really should be 11/10.

Men will be forced to play less, women that need rests won't be able to get them, this is already a problem in the leagues to a certain extent, I see this as just exasberating it.

The other option is to have a men only league, but with only 120 or so leftover men (not all of which will want to play single gender) you are left with about 6 teams which sucks, plus most of the higher level men will have gotten into the CoEd league because they have groups they normally play with.

Women's growth is something the league desires, and I fully support that. But for years the league has tried to foster growth and they've had some sucess, but you aren't going to get a 50% increase in one season. If there is a huge increase an you get 25% more women, you still only have 250, which means you should probably cap the men at around 280 and I don't see where excluding 100 men that want to play as being a positive.

In addition you are going to have other competitive problems. With an influx of women you are gong to presumably have a bunch of new womens players. This means that most of the additional women should play the Simpson's league. Seinfeld league has always been 5/2 so now where are all the women for the more competitive Seinfeld league going to come from? Only about 90 women played in the 16 teams Seinfeld league last year. If you are to have a 16 team Seinfeld league this year, you are going to need to have 150 or higher level women.

I'm not a rock star at math, which is why it's good I'm a lawyer. Nonetheless, I was thinking that if there was a cap on guys, we'd be able to put more women on each team. In other words, instead of having to create 35 teams, to accomodate the sheer amount of guys, and then divvying the women among them, we'd only have 20 teams, but each team could have a few more women. When people refer to women being new or being tired, that's really only an major issue when there are 5-6 of women assigned to the team and 3 show, putting a lot of mental and physical pressure on those three.

Posted By: danielbaker1 I'm not even sure if we're limiting the registration for men to an 'exact' 4/3 ratio.

This is the problem, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. So you let a bunch more men on the teams, but now they get a lot less PT and they won't be happy. Once you commit everyone to 4/3 you are going to have men playing either less or not at all. Since we know approx numbers maybe it is time to say, male registrations close at 250, and there will be an 8 or more team Men's league as an alternative. I could go with that, but then the men's divison is a must.

One final comment, I swear, unless I decide to make fun of Baker or Akira some more. Since the League already announced the changes taking place, at least, with regards to gender ratio in spring league isn't it a fait accompli, paricularly since registration opens the next day. The town hall may discuss the changes, but as far as I can tell the policy has already been changed.

Also, wouldn't it make sense to distribute survey results prior to the meeting so people could talk more intelligently about why decisions are being made.