Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 338

Thread: Wmlb?

  1. #21
    Because it would have to be during softball season.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Out There
    Posts
    2,434
    Quote Originally Posted by NotAboutEgo View Post
    I've seen so many female baseball players with tons of talent... from around the U.S., Canada, and Australia. Many of the women's teams I've played against and have seen play could beat many men's amateur teams hands down, because they are better players and have better fundamentals and mechanics.
    But the womens teams you are seeing are the cream of the crop. The mens amateur teams you have seen are nowhere near the cream of the crop of mens teams. They are comprised of players not even good enough to make the lowest rung of professional baseball, unless it's a summer collegiate league in which case I doubt your teams are better.

    Isn't it true when you see these womens teams, you are seeing some of the best womens players in existence? When you see a mens amateur team, aren't you seeing just one team of a league of about 8 teams? Now if you take the best women all on one team, I can believe they can compete. But suppose they wanted to expand the league so there were 8 mens teams and 8 womens teams, with 4 of each in two different divisions.

    In such a league, you would now need 120 women, assuming 15-person rosters. If you want to take the cream of the crop of womens players and join the league, they might be competitive. I don't see you filling out 8 teams and being competitive. (I'm not talking about a call to all women in the world to play in this league. I'm just talking about the females in the general area of this league -- the same geographic area in which the men come from; remember, this is just a local amateur league.)

    As far as women having better mechanics and fundamentals than men, I assume you are comparing amateur teams again. That I can believe. Why? Because in my experience with amateur leagues, the men aren't out there to prove anything. They are out there for fun. Some guys go up there to try to jack the ball out of the park every time. It's just a fun way for them to play a little baseball. However, if you are talking about summer collegiate leagues, like the Cape Cod League, I'd love to see womens teams as fundamentally and mechanically sound as those players.

    But the real issue here is why isn't there a womens MLB. I am assuming that M is for Major and not Minor. The simple reason is that even if your teams are better than mens amateur teams, they are nowhere near the level of mens MLB. That alone makes it a hard sell.

    I know baseball and softball are different, but I've been to major division ASA national womens softball tournaments. Other than spouses and kids, the paying attendance is less than 10. How would you propose to draw crowds for a womens MLB?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island, NY - Dallas, TX
    Posts
    472
    Quote Originally Posted by Utility07 View Post
    Because it would have to be during softball season.
    and that has to do with ANYTHING because..... ???????

  4. #24
    NotAboutEgo Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Macker View Post
    But the womens teams you are seeing are the cream of the crop. The mens amateur teams you have seen are nowhere near the cream of the crop of mens teams. They are comprised of players not even good enough to make the lowest rung of professional baseball, unless it's a summer collegiate league in which case I doubt your teams are better.

    Isn't it true when you see these womens teams, you are seeing some of the best womens players in existence? When you see a mens amateur team, aren't you seeing just one team of a league of about 8 teams? Now if you take the best women all on one team, I can believe they can compete. But suppose they wanted to expand the league so there were 8 mens teams and 8 womens teams, with 4 of each in two different divisions.

    In such a league, you would now need 120 women, assuming 15-person rosters. If you want to take the cream of the crop of womens players and join the league, they might be competitive. I don't see you filling out 8 teams and being competitive. (I'm not talking about a call to all women in the world to play in this league. I'm just talking about the females in the general area of this league -- the same geographic area in which the men come from; remember, this is just a local amateur league.)

    As far as women having better mechanics and fundamentals than men, I assume you are comparing amateur teams again. That I can believe. Why? Because in my experience with amateur leagues, the men aren't out there to prove anything. They are out there for fun. Some guys go up there to try to jack the ball out of the park every time. It's just a fun way for them to play a little baseball. However, if you are talking about summer collegiate leagues, like the Cape Cod League, I'd love to see womens teams as fundamentally and mechanically sound as those players.

    But the real issue here is why isn't there a womens MLB. I am assuming that M is for Major and not Minor. The simple reason is that even if your teams are better than mens amateur teams, they are nowhere near the level of mens MLB. That alone makes it a hard sell.

    I know baseball and softball are different, but I've been to major division ASA national womens softball tournaments. Other than spouses and kids, the paying attendance is less than 10. How would you propose to draw crowds for a womens MLB?
    The current women's players and teams that are the cream of the crop can't be compared to the men's teams and players that are the cream of the crop, because women's baseball does NOT have the SAME opportunities and levels YET as men do. We do NOT have umpteen girls' youth leagues, we do NOT have girls' high school baseball, we do NOT have women's collegiate baseball, we do NOT have women's minor or Major League baseball, we have NEVER had women's Olympic baseball, and the USA Baseball-sanctioned women's national team just came about in 2004, so the level of development for even the women's national team is NOT even close to being the same as it is for males. Female amateur players who are the best at this point play FAR LESS games a season than do many guys who play in city leagues and local league like the MSBL and others. So get off your high horse and stop making excuses to discredit women. Like I said, on average, the women's teams play far less games a season than do many/most men's amateur leagues, so therefore, at this point, comparing the best female players to amateur men's players is more than FAIR.

    Furthermore, many guys who play amateur baseball have had high school, collegiate, minor league, AND MLB experience. No woman in this day who's playing baseball has had minor league or MLB experience. There are just a handful of women who've had collegiate baseball experience, even though the numbers are slowly growing as a few people out there are open-minded enough to give women who are capable of playing at that level the chance to do so, and umpteen girls across the country are playing high school baseball. The opportunities that women have had to this point compared to men are a far cry from the opportunities that men have had.

    Remember, at this point, women's baseball is still at the amateur level... with a lack of the opportunities and experience men have had since the beginning of organized baseball. You are talking like women's baseball has the exact opportunities that men have... which is so wrong.

    Many of the women who play today are some of the best female players right now, but not all who play are the cream of the crop... yet, they are talented, solid baseball players. We don't have nearly the infrastructure that men have, so of course there is going to be more of a gap between the typical male amateur player compared to the MLB player than that of the best female players compared to the average female player.

    Until women have the same opportunities, the gap between the best female players and the average play isn't going to be as big the gap between the best male players and the average male amateur player (notice, I said "average male player", separating the best male players... meaning the pro players... from the average player who has never had a chance of being a pro player... women can only dream of being a pro baseball at this point, until things change).

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Out There
    Posts
    2,434
    Quote Originally Posted by NotAboutEgo View Post
    The current women's players and teams that are the cream of the crop can't be compared to the men's teams and players that are the cream of the crop, because women's baseball does NOT have the SAME opportunities and levels YET as men do.
    If what you say here is true, and I believe it is, how could what you said earlier be true, specifically: "Many of the women's teams I've played against and have seen play could beat many men's amateur teams hands down, because they are better players and have better fundamentals and mechanics."


    So get off your high horse and stop making excuses to discredit women.
    Womens baseball, for the reasons you cited, is not on par with mens baseball. It's not even on par with Single A baseball. If any women are talented enough to play pro baseball, I'm behind them all the way. But they are a long ways from having a womens MLB. No high horse about it. Simple facts.

  6. #26
    NotAboutEgo Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Macker View Post
    If what you say here is true, and I believe it is, how could what you said earlier be true, specifically: "Many of the women's teams I've played against and have seen play could beat many men's amateur teams hands down, because they are better players and have better fundamentals and mechanics."

    Womens baseball, for the reasons you cited, is not on par with mens baseball. It's not even on par with Single A baseball. If any women are talented enough to play pro baseball, I'm behind them all the way. But they are a long ways from having a womens MLB. No high horse about it. Simple facts.
    I'm talking amateur ball here. I'm not talking the minors and majors, because women don't have that... and we don't even have women's high school or collegiate teams. As I've already stated, women's baseball is still at the amateur level with far less opportunities than men have, yet there are plenty of women who can and do compete on men's amateur teams and there are women's teams that can beat men's amateur teams. Bringing Single A into the picture, or even college baseball, is a moot point, because women don't have collegiate baseball or pro baseball opportunities. Some women who play today (very few) have played high school ball. Most of the girls who have had the opportunity to play on their boys' high school teams are still in high school.

    Of course women are a ways away from having a WMLB. No one has argued against that here. We have stated on here many times before in other threads that in order to have a solid women's pro league, many other things need to happen first, including creating more girls' youth leagues, making baseball a sport for girls in high school, making baseball a varsity collegiate sport for women, and developing some sort of minor league system... perhaps with some of the women's amateur teams that exist now.

    The person who started this thread asked if the reason there isn't a WMLB is because of the strength issue. The purpose of my post was to point out that that isn't the reason there isn't a WMLB, and I stated some of the main reasons why there isn't. I went on to say (supporting my statement that the strength issue isn't a reason for not having a WMLB) that there are plenty of women around the country who play on men's teams and in men's leagues who don't have any problem with doing so and being successful, and there are women's teams that could beat some men's teams because they are better fundamentally and mechanically and that the strength issue doesn't come into play all the time. I'm talking about amateur baseball here, not about collegiate baseball or minor league ball or MLB.

    You stated something to the fact that saying that the women who can play against/amongst men and the women's teams that can beat men's teams are the cream of the crop for women and therefore, it isn't valid to say they can beat men. You stated it as if saying the best female players of today are pro players or something, and therefore it isn't fair to compare them to the average "Joe" who plays. Like I've already stated, 99.99% of us female players have never played high school baseball or collegiate baseball. Most of us play less than 15 games per summer, which I know is far less than what most men's leagues play.
    Last edited by NotAboutEgo; 09-16-2007 at 06:25 PM.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Utility07 View Post
    Does it go to 11? Because at that age, the girls are becoming women, and the boys arent going to become men for 2 more years. Girls are hitting puberty earlier and earlier due to hormones in our foods, and the boys dont seem to be effected as much.
    Utility 07, but I just have to answer your post - that is after I get all the drink off my screen that I splurted out when I read your post. Let me say that I know this is a baseball forum, but the science that is being used as reasoning is false science.

    The thing that got me going was your comment about hormones in the food. For starters you are mistaken on a few counts. The fact that girls hit it earlier than boys has nothing to do with hormones in the food, but rather hormones in the body and the time clock that's been there since time immemorial. It's just the way it is - always has been - always will be. Reaching puberty in girls is far more closely related to weight. Here in Australia where we use metric weights, we say "she'll hit puberty when she hits 50kg" that's about 110lb. It's almost invariably correct. If children, are eating more and exercising less, they will hit that 'magic' mark earlier than in the past. It has nothing to do with hormones coming from the food. Boys' switch for puberty is not so much weight related, and will always be later than the girls in any case.

    Because this is a baseball forum rather than a dietry/scientific one, I'll leave the issue of whether or not there are hormones in certain foods and the effect they have or don't have on the people who eat them, other than to suggest that Utility 07 reads up on the issue before using it to support his argument.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    374
    Quote Originally Posted by Baseball Mum View Post
    Utility 07, but I just have to answer your post - that is after I get all the drink off my screen that I splurted out when I read your post. Let me say that I know this is a baseball forum, but the science that is being used as reasoning is false science.

    The thing that got me going was your comment about hormones in the food. For starters you are mistaken on a few counts. The fact that girls hit it earlier than boys has nothing to do with hormones in the food, but rather hormones in the body and the time clock that's been there since time immemorial. It's just the way it is - always has been - always will be. Reaching puberty in girls is far more closely related to weight. Here in Australia where we use metric weights, we say "she'll hit puberty when she hits 50kg" that's about 110lb. It's almost invariably correct. If children, are eating more and exercising less, they will hit that 'magic' mark earlier than in the past. It has nothing to do with hormones coming from the food. Boys' switch for puberty is not so much weight related, and will always be later than the girls in any case.

    Because this is a baseball forum rather than a dietry/scientific one, I'll leave the issue of whether or not there are hormones in certain foods and the effect they have or don't have on the people who eat them, other than to suggest that Utility 07 reads up on the issue before using it to support his argument.
    His question was simple enough to understand and mine will be also.
    You are making a statement without hard proof. I look at the girl of today VS the girls I went to school with. There is no doubt that the girls are developing way faster, as a matter of fact I heard a Dr on a show saying that girls are reaching puberty 1.5yr's earlier then 15yrs ago. He said they were eating BETTER food with more hormones which is the cause for the change. If you have somewhere I can read different please post it as Iím not afraid to be proven wrong.

  9. #29
    NotAboutEgo Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by freddy View Post
    His question was simple enough to understand and mine will be also.
    You are making a statement without hard proof. I look at the girl of today VS the girls I went to school with. There is no doubt that the girls are developing way faster, as a matter of fact I heard a Dr on a show saying that girls are reaching puberty 1.5yr's earlier then 15yrs ago. He said they were eating BETTER food with more hormones which is the cause for the change. If you have somewhere I can read different please post it as Iím not afraid to be proven wrong.
    If the hormones in the food of today are causing girls to develop faster, why isn't it affecting boys and making them develop faster, too? Are the hormones partial to only affecting girls in making them develop faster than they used to?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    374
    Quote Originally Posted by NotAboutEgo View Post
    If the hormones in the food of today are causing girls to develop faster, why isn't it affecting boys and making them develop faster, too? Are the hormones partial to only affecting girls in making them develop faster than they used to?
    They did not discuss boys/men but I can only guess we are made differently
    Maybe thats why women are taking over the business world. New generation hey wait, maybe we should send our food to the middle East in 15yrs the women will run the countries!!!!!!! No bombs just hormonal food for women!!

  11. #31
    NotAboutEgo Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by freddy View Post
    They did not discuss boys/men but I can only guess we are made differently
    Maybe thats why women are taking over the business world. New generation hey wait, maybe we should send our food to the middle East in 15yrs the women will run the countries!!!!!!! No bombs just hormonal food for women!!
    We are made differently? Other than having some variations on a few body parts and having different levels of the same hormones and having a difference in core strength... generally speaking... we aren't that different from one another. Do you really believe that? Give me a break!!!!!!!!!!!!

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by freddy View Post
    His question was simple enough to understand and mine will be also.
    You are making a statement without hard proof. I look at the girl of today VS the girls I went to school with. There is no doubt that the girls are developing way faster, as a matter of fact I heard a Dr on a show saying that girls are reaching puberty 1.5yr's earlier then 15yrs ago. He said they were eating BETTER food with more hormones which is the cause for the change. If you have somewhere I can read different please post it as Iím not afraid to be proven wrong.
    A quick look for an article has turned up this one. Of course there are gaps in it, though I'm not going to go looking further right now. It is a reasoned article and the science is quite sound. http://www.livescience.com/health/07...d_puberty.html

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    374
    Quote Originally Posted by Baseball Mum View Post
    A quick look for an article has turned up this one. Of course there are gaps in it, though I'm not going to go looking further right now. It is a reasoned article and the science is quite sound. http://www.livescience.com/health/07...d_puberty.html
    I read the article, and he touches on all the points without pointing one in particular. All I know is when I was in school you new who the heavy chester girls were all 2 of them. Now my daughters are 13 and 17 and I cant believe that I missed this developement in High School as I have 20/20 vision. Whatever it is a change has occured for the better or worse doesnt change a thing in my world, as I dont judge on looks alone. I married a teacher Have a nice evening

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    374
    Quote Originally Posted by NotAboutEgo View Post
    We are made differently? Other than having some variations on a few body parts and having different levels of the same hormones and having a difference in core strength... generally speaking... we aren't that different from one another. Do you really believe that? Give me a break!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Are you kidding me. Men and Women are to completely different animals.
    We might look the same but we are so different. Im not saying one is better then the other just stating a point

  15. #35
    NotAboutEgo Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by freddy View Post


    Are you kidding me. Men and Women are to completely different animals.
    We might look the same but we are so different. Im not saying one is better then the other just stating a point
    No... we're not two completely different animals. We are two different genders of the same species, and we have way more in common than most people think. Our differences are about variations, not complete differences in kind. Talk to experts on it, and they will back me up with what I'm saying.

    It's social conditioning that makes us seem so different, and social conditioning is a bunch of crap. It's what creates the status quo, and that has to do with how individual minds think, how people act and react, is based on insecurity, etc. It has nothing to do with gender... meaning, gender doesn't create it or determine who likes what or who does what. The social conditioning of people has been what determines most things in our culture/society. Gender doesn't determine them, contrary to popular belief.

    Anyway, when girls or women beat boys or guys at something, why do people have to dig for excuses for why it has happened? That's another perfect example of social conditioning... making an excuse for something that someone can't accept based upon their insecurity.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Q.U. Hectic
    Posts
    5,135
    Quote Originally Posted by freddy View Post


    Are you kidding me. Men and Women are to completely different animals.
    We might look the same but we are so different. Im not saying one is better then the other just stating a point
    Entirely different, except for the human genome project's irrefutable proof that we are 99.999...% the same!

    Read Mum's initial response again, it doesn't contradict the anecdotal trend that you see in your experiences. If female puberty is triggered by reaching a certain weight, and the food and lifestyle our culture has adopted (different from even 15 years ago) is causing our children to gain more weight at an earlier age (not anecdotal by the way - empirical, verifiable data), then, hormones notwithstanding, our girls are going to hit puberty earlier.

    If puberty is not triggered by a certain weight in males, then that change won't influence the age at which puberty will begin for them.
    THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT COME WITH A SCORECARD

    In the avy: AZ - Doe or Die

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Q.U. Hectic
    Posts
    5,135
    Quote Originally Posted by NotAboutEgo View Post
    Anyway, when girls or women beat boys or guys at something, why do people have to dig for excuses for why it has happened? That's another perfect example of social conditioning... making an excuse for something that someone can't accept based upon their insecurity.
    Well, it's not really making a new excuse. If the reason people attribute to the higher level of male baseball is the strength differential, it would be a natural conclusion that if girls excelled at younger ages, it too would have to do with strength. The truth of course is not purely physiological, social, or psychological. It is a combination of all these things.
    THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT COME WITH A SCORECARD

    In the avy: AZ - Doe or Die

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Q.U. Hectic
    Posts
    5,135
    Quote Originally Posted by Macker View Post
    Womens baseball, for the reasons you cited, is not on par with mens baseball. It's not even on par with Single A baseball. If any women are talented enough to play pro baseball, I'm behind them all the way. But they are a long ways from having a womens MLB. No high horse about it. Simple facts.
    While I am inclined to agree with you in regard to the elite female amateur teams being more talented, relative to the overall body of female ball players, than men's amateur teams are to the pool of male players, I don't really know how the above conclusion follows.

    Women's professional baseball would be its own discreet entity; the standard for a women's major league would be entirely independent of the standard for the current MLB. Women's major league baseball would simply represent the best that women's baseball has to offer (just like MLB does), what that best is, is irrelevant.

    If that league is unable to support itself because of an insufficient fanbase, then so be it. But comparisons to MLB are ill conceived.
    THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT COME WITH A SCORECARD

    In the avy: AZ - Doe or Die

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Out There
    Posts
    2,434
    If that league is unable to support itself because of an insufficient fanbase, then so be it. But comparisons to MLB are ill conceived.
    The WNBA is the highest level of womens basketball. However, I know a lot of people you couldn't pay to go to one of the games. Why? Not specifically because they are women, but because it is not on the level of the mens NBA. They might as well go see a CBA game, just as most fans would be more interesting in going to a A or AA baseball game than a WMLB game. That's why comparison to the level of MLB is relevant.

    I'd go to WMLB games. I just don't believe it would have the fan support it would need to survive unless things occur first (as specified in NotAboutEgo's post above.)

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Q.U. Hectic
    Posts
    5,135
    Gotcha Macker.

    What threw me off was your comment about, "if any woman is talented enough to play pro ball." That implied that the standard determining whether a Womens' Professional Baseball leave CAN EXIST had something to do with a comparison of their skill level to men who play in professional leagues. The standard is of whether that league COULD SUCCEED is whether there would be a fanbase to support it.

    It's just like any other business - you don't have to make better widgets than I do, you just gotta get enough people to buy em to keep your factory open. So long as you are being paid to make widgets, you are a professional widget maker.
    THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT COME WITH A SCORECARD

    In the avy: AZ - Doe or Die

Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •