Haves and Have-nots

This post will be a bit more topical. I don't know how many other league owners truly read all the other team blogs, but I at least pop in from time to time to see what's up with the other teams. Hopefully this will get seen.

I'll be up front. I think most of the changes to the league since the previous year have been good. I spent a lot of last year wondering about how to create value for defensive players within the BSL and our illustrious commissioner answered the call of duty before I even asked. I think those rules are going well. I have little to complain about except for the current condition of my team, for which I really only have myself to blame. There's one niggling issue that's bugging my about the current league setup though. I'm not sure I have a perfect fix available, or even an imperfect one, but I'd like to begin a discussion.

The new roster setup (15 players, 11 starters, 3 subs, 1 reserve) is pretty excellent all around and the expanded roster makes sense to include defenders (who are still under-represented in the BSL) however, the way the reserve rule has been implemented has resulted in what looks, to me, to be an issue. There are currently 12 BSL teams and 19 MLS teams. If you consider that not every MLS team has a top-notch starting keeper we're suddenly looking at a pretty tight supply of decent keepers who will get steady minutes. This problem is amplified by the way some teams have setup their rosters. Several teams are using the "reserve" slot to essentially horde a solid MLS level keeper. They never see play unless the first choice has a bye week. Essentially this reserve keeper serves two purposes. 1) Make sure you still have a top level keeper in case your first choice guy gets hurt. Go ask Colorado's Matt Pickens what that's all about. It happens and it make sense to prepare. And 2) make sure that a good percentage of other BSL teams you play against don't have the same solid keeper you do. This strikes me as an issue that needs solving.

Let me be clear. Nowhere in the current rules does it say this is forbidden. I'm not calling anyone a cheater. I'm simply suggesting that this feels a bit more like gaming the system than I'm comfortable with (perhaps similar to the totally legal but discouraged use of last minute bids on bidding wars). I have no clear suggestion on how to solve this problem and asking teams who are participating in this practice to voluntarily drop their second keeper gets tricky too. I just think we should have a civil discussion. Am I the only one seeing this or am I making some sense? Anyone have any ideas? Or am I just being whiny? Let me know in the comments.