|
|
Post by VolleyballMag on Jan 8, 2018 13:19:50 GMT -5
We cover a wide range of topics. He says there won't be any change to the Olympics beach-volleyball qualifying process but hopes to get more weight to tournaments later in the quad: volleyballmag.com/jamie-davis-010818/ |
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Jan 8, 2018 14:40:35 GMT -5
sounds like he got plenty of input on the subject.
|
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jan 8, 2018 14:57:26 GMT -5
In response to "Give me an example of how the USA Volleyball community will see the advantage of having adidas invest in our sport, perhaps on the regional level."
The answer he gave was Adidas will make volleyball gear that you can buy???
The trials decision is very unfortunate. Last Olympics the two top teams had to take extreme actions just to get in because of the ridiculous length of the process (Nick/Phil had to play anything available and Kerri had to play left-handed). But sure lets stick to that.
|
|
|
|
Post by tamz on Jan 8, 2018 21:51:54 GMT -5
I rather they follow the FIVB ranking points rather than a one-off trial tournament. That way, teams EARN their way in and not because they win one tournament.
Also, with FIVB rankings, they’ll be playing against the worst.
Trials would be like an AVP event.
Just my two cents.
|
|
|
|
Post by haze on Jan 8, 2018 22:49:50 GMT -5
I rather they follow the FIVB ranking points rather than a one-off trial tournament. That way, teams EARN their way in and not because they win one tournament. Also, with FIVB rankings, they’ll be playing against the worst. Trials would be like an AVP event. Just my two cents. I dont like 1 tournament either. Not a true representatove of the best team. Too bad they cant do something with the AVP using points. Or else have a 3-5 tourbament trial system. |
|
|
|
Post by Semp12 on Jan 9, 2018 11:06:59 GMT -5
In response to "Give me an example of how the USA Volleyball community will see the advantage of having adidas invest in our sport, perhaps on the regional level." The answer he gave was Adidas will make volleyball gear that you can buy??? The trials decision is very unfortunate. Last Olympics the two top teams had to take extreme actions just to get in because of the ridiculous length of the process (Nick/Phil had to play anything available and Kerri had to play left-handed). But sure lets stick to that. I mean, it is not like Adidas has their own TV network where they can start showing volleyball 24/7. If they get apparel into the stores, that is a step in the right direction and one that needs to happen. There were OLYMPIC years in the past where you could not even order a Mizuno Team USA Volleyball jersey online.. Outside of bankroll all of USAV and a pro league, I am not sure exactly how much more you want from the apparel company. From what I understand, none of the top players want trials, so not sure where the fight about that is (although I do think that is a great TV opportunity to have something to show). They are looking to make it weighted heavier later on, which seems like it could be a fair enough compromise.. |
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jan 9, 2018 11:23:52 GMT -5
In response to "Give me an example of how the USA Volleyball community will see the advantage of having adidas invest in our sport, perhaps on the regional level." The answer he gave was Adidas will make volleyball gear that you can buy??? The trials decision is very unfortunate. Last Olympics the two top teams had to take extreme actions just to get in because of the ridiculous length of the process (Nick/Phil had to play anything available and Kerri had to play left-handed). But sure lets stick to that. I mean, it is not like Adidas has their own TV network where they can start showing volleyball 24/7. If they get apparel into the stores, that is a step in the right direction and one that needs to happen. There were OLYMPIC years in the past where you could not even order a Mizuno Team USA Volleyball jersey online.. Outside of bankroll all of USAV and a pro league, I am not sure exactly how much more you want from the apparel company. From what I understand, none of the top players want trials, so not sure where the fight about that is (although I do think that is a great TV opportunity to have something to show). They are looking to make it weighted heavier later on, which seems like it could be a fair enough compromise.. None of the top players want trials is why there should be trials. The current system heavily favors teams that are the best the year or year(s) before the Olympics. Any qualification system wherein the following could occur is %*$#: A team wins the final three 4 or 5 stars before the Olympics and does not qualify. The current players are interested in protecting their spots and no issue there, but there is no reason USA Volleyball should defer to them. |
|
|
|
Post by acemand23 on Jan 9, 2018 14:11:04 GMT -5
Keeping the Olympic Qualification process based on FIVB standings is selectively limiting our countries ability to grow the game. If AVP or any US national event could make a series of qualification events, then we could go after bigger sponsors that currently only want to sponsor the "Best" volleyball.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnbar on Jan 9, 2018 14:27:11 GMT -5
What if instead there was a system where all of each country's FIVB results for six to twelve months were accrued to the country as a whole, ending two months before the Olympics. Based on that, each nation would be awarded zero, one or two spots per gender for the Olympics (if you want to get radical, stretch it to a maximum of three, and increase the field). This would allow partners to switch up more easily, without fear of completely missing out. It would be the pool of the country's talent that earned the spots.
Then the USAV (possibly in association with the AVP or another organization) would hold the three(?) qualifying tournaments in the month or six weeks before the Olympics to choose the teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jan 9, 2018 16:34:55 GMT -5
What if instead there was a system where all of each country's FIVB results for six to twelve months were accrued to the country as a whole, ending two months before the Olympics. Based on that, each nation would be awarded zero, one or two spots per gender for the Olympics (if you want to get radical, stretch it to a maximum of three, and increase the field). This would allow partners to switch up more easily, without fear of completely missing out. It would be the pool of the country's talent that earned the spots. Then the USAV (possibly in association with the AVP or another organization) would hold the three(?) qualifying tournaments in the month or six weeks before the Olympics to choose the teams. This is not how I would do it, but Johnbar's method would work just fine. This is my main issue with the USAV. There are a dozen ways to do this that all work better than the previous system which was very close to excluding both April/Kerri and Nick/Phil. Instead of choosing one, the USAV allows pressure from players with specific interests to block needed and effective change |
|
|
|
Post by johnbar on Jan 9, 2018 20:15:59 GMT -5
There are certainly other ways to pick the Olympians. My main point was to help decouple the country earning spots in the Olympics from particular teams that are playing the FIVB events. Obviously, playing FIVB events is critical experience and an important factor in choosing who should go.
|
|
