Although I don't know you, or at least if I do I don't know that I do, I have read so many posts over the years that I feel like I know you. I have always thought your posts were well done and some of the hitting talk I found to be very interesting.
For all of the reasons previously stated and others I prefer that college players not return after they go to college but I also think there are things such as our younger kids facing them that are good.
On the other side, does it really promote the growth of the college player? Would she not be better served playing against people further along in the game than her level?
One of the things I believe would happen if there were no such kids in GOLD is that the 23U, which is now a wasteland, would grow to be significant.
Time will tell but I know we hope to incorporate an older college-friendly Divison once we get the first tournament off the ground.
Hey, Gary, thanks for the kind words. Wish you were able to post more on the boards yourself, as your perspective is unique and enjoyed by all.
We have certainly casually met, when the NorCal Shockers (I've been an assistant coach for Paul for 4 years, but am about done now) have played the Batbusters. And we've talked briefly on occasion. If you are so inclined, you can see my picture on the Sorcerer Academy web site, as I work at Phil's place when I give lessons.
I really want to see 23U expanded as well. It looks as if the Shockers are forming a 23U team next year. My daughter, who will be a sophomore playing for Ferrin at LMU, plans to play on that 23U team next summer. Almost certainly, she would have done so this PAST summer if the opportunity had been there. As I said, college freshmen in 18G is a close call for me. In my perspective, there are some benefits. In counterbalance, I think you have very well stated the reasons why it is less than ideal.
Best regards,
Scott