|
Post by Murina on Apr 14, 2014 12:29:23 GMT -5
I can't speak for Asia but in most of Brazil kids up to about 10 are playing Viva Valley after school (well, at least the last time I was paying attention). The program is 2 days a week for between 1 and 1.5 hours a day. They play 3 v 3 or 4 v 4. This leaves time for the kids to also play soccer, basketball and other sports and avoid the burnout and overuse.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using proboards
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on Apr 14, 2014 13:35:33 GMT -5
Although the basic skills from the Thai kids are very impressive, I bet the net is about 6'6" or a little higher, which is about standard for that age group. also wonder if bump sets are mandatory?
|
|
|
Post by ja on Apr 14, 2014 13:46:35 GMT -5
This is not about us doing something wrong, it's about them doing better in popularizing volleyball! We need to bring volleyball to elementary and middle schools, like we have basketball, baseball/softball, soccer, swimming just to name few. We need USAV to be more aggressive in advertisement and our best players to be a household names! Without extensive and aggressive media campaign this is just impossible! As for the talent level and level of play on this video, come to A2/A3 camps for youth select and you will see plenty of that! Our young girls do know how to play! Who is A2/A3 affiliated with? Is that AAU? I wish USAV would do something like that to get more kids involved. Then they could put a video out to show Thailand how it's done!!! A2 and A3 are USAV High Performance programs! This is age definition for the program: Girls' Youth- Girls born in 1998 and 1999 Girls' Select- Girls born in 2000 and 2001 Girls’ Future Select- Girls born in 2002 and 2003 and after. Hundreds girls in summer camps went through this training. Last time I checked NT roster most of our NT players went through USAV HP program at some point. As for the video of HP Championship it would be great to have it! You can find some staff on YouTube, not sure about the quality.
|
|
|
Post by rockhopper on Apr 14, 2014 15:04:37 GMT -5
At Girls AAUs in 2013: 10 and under - 1st and 2nd, and 6 of the top 8 teams were from Puerto Rico. 15 teams overall, 8 from PR. 11 and under - 1,2,3 and 6 of top 8 from PR. 45 teams entered overall. 12 Open - 3rd,5th, 4 of top 8 from PR. 25 teams overall. Not sure what that all means, just putting the facts out there about results. There are also not a lot of US teams entering at 10s and 11s. So maybe OVA or Munciana or KIVA or whatever would win 10s, 11s if they had a team in there. How are those kids from Japan and Thailand and Brazil playing so much? Aren't they getting burned out? Aren't they getting overuse injuries? There are always a ton of PR teams at AAU nationals. They can just sign up to go without the expense of qualifying. OVA always plays in AAU nationals. It is, after all, played in their backyard. According to AES, the 2013 results for AAU nationals for those three clubs are... 10 age group- KIVA red finished 9th and OVA 10A finished 10th 11 age group- OVA 11A tied for 3rd, Munciana tied for 15th, KIVA tied for 21st 12 open age group- OVA 12A finished 1st, Munciana 2nd, KIVA tied for 9th
|
|
|
Post by rockhopper on Apr 14, 2014 15:06:16 GMT -5
Anyone else noticed that about 90% of the time the hitters faced only one blocker? And there was a 5 man serve receive.
|
|
|
Post by junior1 on Apr 14, 2014 17:53:25 GMT -5
Visit Puerto Rico sometimes, it is pretty cool to visit for a volleyball fan. With those 10 professional men's teams and those 10 professional women's teams located on an island that one can drive from the north to the south in an hour and half... or west to east in three to four hours. I've read of it being compared to the size of Connecticut. Twenty teams in a rather compact space leads to a culture where the game is very much appreciated.
Most of the municipalities sponsor their own squads. Their larger junior tournaments quite frequently have 8under levels - 23under. ...and boys and girls teams are usually at the same site at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by kokyu on Apr 14, 2014 18:45:10 GMT -5
Although the basic skills from the Thai kids are very impressive, I bet the net is about 6'6" or a little higher, which is about standard for that age group. also wonder if bump sets are mandatory? There were overhand sets in the video. I liked the 75 foot soccer kick save by the libero at 8:40, doubt you'll find an American kid same age with that ability (and plays volleyball).
|
|
|
Post by coachwpassion on Apr 14, 2014 18:58:57 GMT -5
I pose a question to the group: is the fact that most USAV regions/clubs are focus more on making a profit vs growing volleyball a cause for our lackluster forage into 10-14 age groups? Another question: Several of the countries mentioned (excluding Russia) are not typically known for their height. Does this mean Volleyball because the sport of choice for females and males vs basketball? Basketball still being the leading sport for girls in the US, and I believe a top 2 for boys.
|
|
|
Post by planetasia01 on Apr 15, 2014 0:09:33 GMT -5
One of the reasons I put up this video was to sort of troll who have that way of thinking that some skills can't be taught to younger players. Coming from a shorter, Asian type of volleyball career, I was especially impressed at the level of ball control and pure defense these young kids could play. And they probably didn't have to pay thousands of dollars.
Thanks Phaedrus for providing the cultural context, which most likely led to the high level of play shown in this video.
|
|
|
Post by loki on Apr 15, 2014 6:39:27 GMT -5
Volleyball in the USA would work so much better without the parents. Brave New Volleyball with Coach Huxley.
|
|
|
Post by vbman100 on Apr 15, 2014 7:19:57 GMT -5
One of the reasons I put up this video was to sort of troll who have that way of thinking that some skills can't be taught to younger players. Coming from a shorter, Asian type of volleyball career, I was especially impressed at the level of ball control and pure defense these young kids could play. And they probably didn't have to pay thousands of dollars. Thanks Phaedrus for providing the cultural context, which most likely led to the high level of play shown in this video. ... and the right answer is however the hell they were training these kids. This was covered about 10 days ago by some of us.
|
|
|
Post by rockhopper on Apr 15, 2014 14:29:46 GMT -5
I liked the 75 foot soccer kick save by the libero at 8:40, doubt you'll find an American kid same age with that ability (and plays volleyball). Did you notice that the crowd hardly reacted at all to that amazing kick?
|
|
|
Post by spikeninja on Apr 15, 2014 21:51:27 GMT -5
I'm not a big believer in patting ourselves on the back and hanging our hat on a handful of successes as justication that we are doing it right. While all the responses have validity, the one thing I would like to point out is the differential in resources that we as a country possess versus the resources of other countries. It's hard to believe we are not completely dominant, not just "doing ok".
Some of our success could be attributed to a perfect storm of talent or simply timing. Take Michael Phelps for example. Did our swimming development programs magically just produce him, or is he genetically gifted athlete who also possessed a work ethic to maximize his talent? Men's USA tennis at one point was dominant in the world, now its an afterthought.
If there is a trend of success, those trends cannot and should not be falsely attributed to, "we are doing things pretty well, just look at the results" because it could be reason completely unrelated. If you look at the resources of Thailand, this video is impressive. Considering all the athletic talent to draw from, programs, coach education, technology and investment we have vs. what Thailand has, we BETTER be completely dominant, not just doing ok.
I think whoever posted this is making the point, this is pretty darn good and we could learn something. And I agree, considering its freaking Thailand! No disrespect intended.
|
|
|
Post by volleytology on Apr 15, 2014 22:18:33 GMT -5
I'm not a big believer in patting ourselves on the back and hanging our hat on a handful of successes as justication that we are doing it right. While all the responses have validity, the one thing I would like to point out is the differential in resources that we as a country possess versus the resources of other countries. It's hard to believe we are not completely dominant, not just "doing ok". Some of our success could be attributed to a perfect storm of talent or simply timing. Take Michael Phelps for example. Did our swimming development programs magically just produce him, or is he genetically gifted athlete who also possessed a work ethic to maximize his talent? Men's USA tennis at one point was dominant in the world, now its an afterthought. If there is a trend of success, those trends cannot and should not be falsely attributed to, "we are doing things pretty well, just look at the results" because it could be reason completely unrelated. If you look at the resources of Thailand, this video is impressive. Considering all the athletic talent to draw from, programs, coach education, technology and investment we have vs. what Thailand has, we BETTER be completely dominant, not just doing ok. I think whoever posted this is making the point, this is pretty darn good and we could learn something. And I agree, considering its freaking Thailand! No disrespect intended. But aren't we completely dominant over Thailand in volleyball in adult events that matter ? Are we really concerned about results in international 11 and under competitions ?
|
|
|
Post by vbman100 on Apr 15, 2014 22:45:00 GMT -5
Resources? What pro leagues do we have for men and women in the US? As opposed to Brazil, Russia, Turkey, Thailand...
Michael Phelps was discovered young to have the physical qualities that are found in great swimmers. And he stuck with it. Many others do not. We never hear about them. One person dominating an individual sport does not mean a country is dominant.
Women's tennis was dominated by the US for a little while. Well, actually, by 2 sisters. And a couple other US tennis players won a major here and there. An individual sport dominated by a couple of people does not make a country dominant.
Men's tennis was dominated by the US by McEnroe and Connors, but only them. And not really dominated. Borg, Lendl, and many others won as well. Then Sampras and Agassi came along, but again, many others not from the US were winning too. An individual sport dominated... A case could be made for Australia being the most dominant country in men's tennis, mostly attributed to Laver, Rosewall, Newcombe, Emerson, Stolle. But not anymore.
I think the bigger question is why with all of the programs for women/girls vs men/boys in the US, why does the US men win Gold 3 out of 8, and women win Gold 0 out of 8? Perfect storm of talent? Timing?
Sure, maybe that would not be the case if Beach VB was available in 84 and 88 for Men, or if Kerri and Misty played indoor. But the same could be said of Brazil, China, Russia, Cuba...
|
|