It would be Howard
is it time to start a coup?
- Thread starter randomname
- Start date
It would be Howard
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Darn. That would be too far away for most of the women I know.
You know, maybe some of the dudes here who have captained mixed would have some ideas if you started a thread. Honestly, you might have to take a bunch of higher 3.5s, as there are not nearly enough 4.0 women to go around, and the best of them have teams already. You might not win much, but partnering with a 3.5 in 8.0 mixed might be more satisfying than partnering with a 3.0 in 7.0 mixed.
You know, maybe some of the dudes here who have captained mixed would have some ideas if you started a thread. Honestly, you might have to take a bunch of higher 3.5s, as there are not nearly enough 4.0 women to go around, and the best of them have teams already. You might not win much, but partnering with a 3.5 in 8.0 mixed might be more satisfying than partnering with a 3.0 in 7.0 mixed.
Jim A
Professional
+1 for Cindy's comments, even though you want to scream from the rooftops, best to just work on finding/creating a new team
I"m co-captaining this year. Coming from coaching youth hockey, having to deal with the parents as players for once is eminently frustrating..haha
We are carrying the typical 12 people on the roster and have a 9 week season. The main captain (not me) has had everyone fill out an availability sheet online and we have a Google Docs section with all relevant info etc.
On paper the plan is to play #1/#2 Singles & #1 Doubles whenever they are available. For our 2-3 toughest matches we'll play our best matchups. Even with the others alternating between 2/3 it works out that all play a min of a half season. Factoring in typical life issues, vacations and such, we should all play ~7 matches and still be competitive (as long as I don't play as I did today..off
...)
I"m co-captaining this year. Coming from coaching youth hockey, having to deal with the parents as players for once is eminently frustrating..haha
We are carrying the typical 12 people on the roster and have a 9 week season. The main captain (not me) has had everyone fill out an availability sheet online and we have a Google Docs section with all relevant info etc.
On paper the plan is to play #1/#2 Singles & #1 Doubles whenever they are available. For our 2-3 toughest matches we'll play our best matchups. Even with the others alternating between 2/3 it works out that all play a min of a half season. Factoring in typical life issues, vacations and such, we should all play ~7 matches and still be competitive (as long as I don't play as I did today..off
...)
CrocodileRock
Rookie
Some good comments here, but this topic has been discussed a lot of times. My own 2 cents: Cent #1 - the captain shouldn't change the team's agenda single-handedly, but if the majority want to, I think that's fine. Cent #2 - If the weaker players want personal court time to supercede the team's prospects, that's just plain selfish. Go play singles tournaments if you want individual glory. In all team sports, the stars have more playing time than the benchwarmers. It's the captain's duty to advance the team as far as possible. I'd rather have one or two mad at me for stupid reasons than 10 mad at me for a legitimate reasons.
Wrong. If a captain tells a weak player that they are going to get playing time, and the weak player commits to that team and pays their fees, then they deserve exactly what was promised to them. I don't see any reason why a weak player would want to join a team where they don't get to play when there are several other teams they could choose in which they would get to play. It is selfish for a captain to waste a player's entire year of league play by lying to them about their intentions.
