ich freu mich auf Samstag !!
Oberliga Ba.-Wü. 2010
I did not finish my thought on the AC/DH game. I meant to say it appears the AC offense faded at the end, but the DH defense also gave up a lot of points in the last two games. It will be an interesting game...but more interesting will be who goes up. Not sure DH has enough players to move up, so may stay in the OL even if they win. If that happens, would the league send up a 2nd place team? And if AC "backs" into the RL, is that a good idea? Ravensburg is hanging on in the RL, but not sure I would want to go up with 2 losses and 2nd place. This game is more important for AC to win than for DH. AC must win and win big, not only to prove they can go to the RL, but for their organization. They may draw more players or keep players in practice if they win outright. They will need that next year.
Crailsheim should stay in the OL. They improved all year and proved they are competive in their last two games, they gave us big trouble and AC in their last two games. Since HB already dropped, that should not be a problem for the OL as in the number of teams. Keep CT in the OL!
Crailsheim should stay in the OL. They improved all year and proved they are competive in their last two games, they gave us big trouble and AC in their last two games. Since HB already dropped, that should not be a problem for the OL as in the number of teams. Keep CT in the OL!
Coach Mike
"Individual commitment to a group effort - that is what makes a team work" - Vince Lombardi
"Individual commitment to a group effort - that is what makes a team work" - Vince Lombardi
Stimmt so glaub ich net ganz TomBigTom75 hat geschrieben:Naja... So spannend wird das nicht! Wenn's s mehr als einen Absteiger gibt muss das vor der Saison bekannt sein! Und mit Heidelberg steht der Absteiger ja laut BSO fest!
Es hängt eben auch damit zusammen, wieviel von oben runter kommen und wieviel hoch gehen. Außer man verändert dann die Ligengröße noch
Coach, you are actually contradicting yourself here...remember CT "backed" into the OL after the 2009 season and that didn't seem to work very well for them in 2010 but you advocate them staying in the OL in 2011 despite not posting any wins.Casciaro hat geschrieben: And if AC "backs" into the RL, is that a good idea?
Granted improvement is one thing but teams should "earn" the right to be (and stay) in higher leagues or else the concept of Aufstieg loses its shine. CT has a good program and are always competitive when they step on the field BUT in my opinion losing all your games does not seem to support a decision that would keep CT in the OL. Honestly, that's like two smacks in the face to the teams that 1) earned the right to move up to the OL and 2) those that earn the right to stay there.Casciaro hat geschrieben:Crailsheim should stay in the OL. They improved all year and proved they are competive in their last two games, they gave us big trouble and AC in their last two games.
Also, in my opinion suggesting that HD should be counted as the "Abstiegkandidat" is a stretch. I say this because officially, since HD no longer has a license for the 2010 season, they actually do not exist as a team. And since only official teams can be considered as an "Aufstiegkandidat" then likewise only official teams should be considered as an "Abstiegkandidat". With that in mind, the last place team in the OL would be CT.Casciaro hat geschrieben:Since HB already dropped, that should not be a problem for the OL as in the number of teams. Keep CT in the OL!
Just a little food for thought...
WHOA!
Wall-E
All good points. However, I have not seen a team come up to the OL and completely fail. That last few teams that came up actually did okay, not getting blown out completely. That is rarely the case when going up to the RL., We have seen plenty of teams go to the RL, then get slaughtered only to drop back down the next year. HT was the exception and RV is hanging in there. I liked having 12 games this year. If we drop two off the bottom and one climbs, we will have only 10 games next year.
All good points. However, I have not seen a team come up to the OL and completely fail. That last few teams that came up actually did okay, not getting blown out completely. That is rarely the case when going up to the RL., We have seen plenty of teams go to the RL, then get slaughtered only to drop back down the next year. HT was the exception and RV is hanging in there. I liked having 12 games this year. If we drop two off the bottom and one climbs, we will have only 10 games next year.
Coach Mike
"Individual commitment to a group effort - that is what makes a team work" - Vince Lombardi
"Individual commitment to a group effort - that is what makes a team work" - Vince Lombardi
Das ist eine Ansicht, aber sie ist leider völlig falsch.wall-e hat geschrieben:Also, in my opinion suggesting that HD should be counted as the "Abstiegkandidat" is a stretch. I say this because officially, since HD no longer has a license for the 2010 season, they actually do not exist as a team. And since only official teams can be considered as an "Aufstiegkandidat" then likewise only official teams should be considered as an "Abstiegkandidat". With that in mind, the last place team in the OL would be CT.
Auf- und Abstieg sind geregelt. Im Normalfall steigt der Erste der Tabelle auf und der Letzte ab (jetzt mal allgemein betrachtet und unabhängig von der OL). Ein Blick auf die Tabelle der OL zeigt Dir: Der Tabellenerste wird am WE ausgespielt und der Tabellenletzte steht mit den Bulls fest.
Mit dem Rückzug der Bulls wurden alle Spiele der Heidelberger gewertet, auch die Gespielten, um eine Verzerrung zu vermeiden, d.h. sie existieren in der Tabelle und der Liga als Team sehr wohl noch, aber nur auf dem Papier. Und damit können und werden sie auch absteigen - was alleine schon der Rückzug gemäß BSO erfordert (min. 2 Ligen tiefer, also LL).
Da die Sollspielstärke der OL 8 Teams sein müssten, es aktuell aber nur 7 sind, kann es sein, dass evtl. auch 2 Teams aus der VL aufsteigen dürfen. Es werden auch eher Aufsteiger hochgezogen denn Absteiger gehalten, da die Tendenzen da schon eine Richtung vorgeben. Hängt aber davon ab, ob AC oder DH überhaupt aufsteigen wollen. Wenn es keinen Aufsteiger aus der OL in die RL gibt, dann reicht auch ein Aufsteiger, um die OL zu komplettieren.
In den vergangenen Jahren war es meist so, dass die OL-Teams in der RL gut mitgehalten haben.Casciaro hat geschrieben:That is rarely the case when going up to the RL., We have seen plenty of teams go to the RL, then get slaughtered only to drop back down the next year. HT was the exception and RV is hanging in there.
2000 - Hammers 6.
2001 - Longhorns 6. (*9)
2002 - Cougars 7.
2003 - Hammers 3.
2004 - Arrows 2. (*5)
2005 - Bandits 4. (*6)
2006 - Crusaders 3.
2007 - Wilddogs 8. (*9)
2008 - Sacristans 3. (*7)
2009 - Wilddogs 8. (*9)
Die Ausnahme waren also nur die Wilddogs und die Cougars
(* Anzahl Teams, wenn nicht 8 )
"Wenn aus dem Auspuff eines Autos so wenig herauskäme wie aus dem EU-Ministerrat, wäre die Welt in Ordnung."
Siegbert Alber
Siegbert Alber
Also ich bin mir ziemlich sicher,daß egal ob Danube oder Albershausen aufsteigt, keiner von beiden in der RL abgeschlachtet werden würde.
@rooster : Wie kommst du auf eine Spielstärke von 8 ? das habe ich in der OL noch nie erlebt, war ja froh dass wir dieses jahr 7 hatte, damit es 12 Spiele hätte geben sollen. Aber 14 Spiele in der OL halte ich doch für sehr viel, wobei 10 ( bei 2 Gruppen ) fast zu wenig sind
@rooster : Wie kommst du auf eine Spielstärke von 8 ? das habe ich in der OL noch nie erlebt, war ja froh dass wir dieses jahr 7 hatte, damit es 12 Spiele hätte geben sollen. Aber 14 Spiele in der OL halte ich doch für sehr viel, wobei 10 ( bei 2 Gruppen ) fast zu wenig sind