|
Post by ironhammer on May 14, 2018 19:19:18 GMT -5
How many of the NCAA players are NT material though? Every single USA National Team member in recent history, except for Kiba Phipps, has come through the NCAA at some point. There really isn't any other possibility, which is why the pipeline/development issue is relevant and important.I am not saying it isn't relevant. I am saying the current crop of NCAA players/soon-to-be graduates/recent graduates, how good are they really? Are they of NT material? We think some of them are...but Karch thinks otherwise. That's the crux of the issue, in a nutshell.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on May 14, 2018 20:23:12 GMT -5
Every single USA National Team member in recent history, except for Kiba Phipps, has come through the NCAA at some point. There really isn't any other possibility, which is why the pipeline/development issue is relevant and important.I am not saying it isn't relevant. I am saying the current crop of NCAA players/soon-to-be graduates/recent graduates, how are good are they really? Are they of NT material? We think some of them are...but Karch thinks otherwise. That's the crux of the issue, in a nutshell. That's not the crux of the issue for everyone. The specific roster for this tournament is the head coach's decision to make. No one is saying that he can't make that decision. The issue is whether the roster is good enough, whether the roster should provide developmental opportunities for younger athletes who might not compete for this quad, but perhaps future ones, etc. This is an opinion board, and continually pointing out that we can disagree, but Karch is the coach get used to it, has no value at all. No one is stopping you from saying it all you want, of course, but what's the point?
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on May 14, 2018 20:43:12 GMT -5
I am not saying it isn't relevant. I am saying the current crop of NCAA players/soon-to-be graduates/recent graduates, how are good are they really? Are they of NT material? We think some of them are...but Karch thinks otherwise. That's the crux of the issue, in a nutshell. That's not the crux of the issue for everyone. The specific roster for this tournament is the head coach's decision to make. No one is saying that he can't make that decision. The issue is whether the roster is good enough, whether the roster should provide developmental opportunities for younger athletes who might not compete for this quad, but perhaps future ones, etc. This is an opinion board, and continually pointing out that we can disagree, but Karch is the coach get used to it, has no value at all. No one is stopping you from saying it all you want, of course, but what's the point? Well, let's be honest, the roster will NEVER be good enough for everyone here. Someone will always be upset that so-and-so isn't on the team...
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on May 14, 2018 21:01:46 GMT -5
That's not the crux of the issue for everyone. The specific roster for this tournament is the head coach's decision to make. No one is saying that he can't make that decision. The issue is whether the roster is good enough, whether the roster should provide developmental opportunities for younger athletes who might not compete for this quad, but perhaps future ones, etc. This is an opinion board, and continually pointing out that we can disagree, but Karch is the coach get used to it, has no value at all. No one is stopping you from saying it all you want, of course, but what's the point? Well, let's be honest, the roster will NEVER be good enough for everyone here. Someone will always be upset that so-and-so isn't on the team... Of course, so why not join the bandwagon and tell us who you think should be on the roster?
|
|
|
Post by jay on May 14, 2018 22:56:10 GMT -5
Hey, I thought everyone knew by now that Ironhammer is actually Iron Spoon. He likes to stir the pot, not add any ingredients. Since this is mostly a word forum we never get to see him in that black pointy hat around that large iron cauldron. Ironically he can take the heat because no matter how hot the fire he is always ready to throw another log on....
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on May 14, 2018 23:02:23 GMT -5
Well, let's be honest, the roster will NEVER be good enough for everyone here. Someone will always be upset that so-and-so isn't on the team... Of course, so why not join the bandwagon and tell us who you think should be on the roster? So long as it will be a little more insightful than "Hooker-will-save-USA"....
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on May 14, 2018 23:04:36 GMT -5
Of course, so why not join the bandwagon and tell us who you think should be on the roster? So long as it will be a little more insightful than "Hooker-will-save-USA".... I wouldn't expect anything less. Fire away.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on May 15, 2018 7:02:55 GMT -5
So long as it will be a little more insightful than "Hooker-will-save-USA".... I wouldn't expect anything less. Fire away. I don't have such a beef with Karch over roster choices...YET. I'll see how USA does in week one first.
|
|
|
Post by donut on May 15, 2018 8:31:57 GMT -5
The overall pipeline isn't empty - look at the NCAA. If the 2020+ pipeline for the NT is empty (which is many people's argument) that is the NT's fault. There is a shut-off valve before the NT for NCAA players who don't fit the system. Pre-2012, the best NCAA players were making the NT. Since then, I don't think that is true. The fact we are bringing veterans, who won't and shouldn't be making the Tokyo roster, over younger players is a poor investment decision. How many of the NCAA players are NT material though? That's my point though -- we don't know because none of them get enough of a chance in the gym. This isn't supposed to be an exact science, but one interesting thing to look at is the median roster age using graduation year: 2010 WGP: 2008 or -2 years (!!!) 2012 OG: 2007 (and we had 1993 Scott-Aruda in there) or -5 years 2016 OG: 2010 or -6 years 2018 VNL Roster: 2011.5 or -6.5 years We aren't trending in an encouraging direction. In 2010, 12 of the 20 players on the WGP roster graduated in 2008 or 2009. At this year's VNL, 2 players graduated within the last 2 years and they are both liberos. Players like Jordan, Christa, Megan, Foluke and Destinee got to where they were/are because of the investment put into them. Drews is the only "young" pin hitter we are apparently investing in, and let's be honest, that's because she's a leftie. What's sad to me (had this thought the other day) is that under the current USA volleyball philosophy/system/framework, if Megan Hodge/Easy had graduated recently (post 2012), I don't think she would be making any rosters because she doesn't fit the "mold." Food for thought.
|
|
|
Post by hornshouse23 on May 15, 2018 12:41:20 GMT -5
How many of the NCAA players are NT material though? That's my point though -- we don't know because none of them get enough of a chance in the gym. This isn't supposed to be an exact science, but one interesting thing to look at is the median roster age using graduation year: 2010 WGP: 2008 or -2 years (!!!) 2012 OG: 2007 (and we had 1993 Scott-Aruda in there) or -5 years 2016 OG: 2010 or -6 years 2018 VNL Roster: 2011.5 or -6.5 years We aren't trending in an encouraging direction. In 2010, 12 of the 20 players on the WGP roster graduated in 2008 or 2009. At this year's VNL, 2 players graduated within the last 2 years and they are both liberos. Players like Jordan, Christa, Megan, Foluke and Destinee got to where they were/are because of the investment put into them. Drews is the only "young" pin hitter we are apparently investing in, and let's be honest, that's because she's a leftie. What's sad to me (had this thought the other day) is that under the current USA volleyball philosophy/system/framework, if Megan Hodge/Easy had graduated recently (post 2012), I don't think she would be making any rosters because she doesn't fit the "mold." Food for thought. when you break it down this way, this seems wholly unsustainable. Eventually we’ll be staring down a quad with a mostly rookie roster. Oh well, let the games begin!
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on May 15, 2018 12:46:49 GMT -5
How many of the NCAA players are NT material though? That's my point though -- we don't know because none of them get enough of a chance in the gym. This isn't supposed to be an exact science, but one interesting thing to look at is the median roster age using graduation year: 2010 WGP: 2008 or -2 years (!!!) 2012 OG: 2007 (and we had 1993 Scott-Aruda in there) or -5 years 2016 OG: 2010 or -6 years 2018 VNL Roster: 2011.5 or -6.5 years We aren't trending in an encouraging direction. In 2010, 12 of the 20 players on the WGP roster graduated in 2008 or 2009. At this year's VNL, 2 players graduated within the last 2 years and they are both liberos. Players like Jordan, Christa, Megan, Foluke and Destinee got to where they were/are because of the investment put into them. Drews is the only "young" pin hitter we are apparently investing in, and let's be honest, that's because she's a leftie. What's sad to me (had this thought the other day) is that under the current USA volleyball philosophy/system/framework, if Megan Hodge/Easy had graduated recently (post 2012), I don't think she would be making any rosters because she doesn't fit the "mold." Food for thought. I'm not a huge fan of a lot of our current decisions, but what you're also looking at here is the U.S. having its "Golden Generation" (those who were in college in the late 00s) in this period. They took over young because they were better than the prior generation on the whole and are sticking around until they are aging out. I do agree overall that we need to be doing a better job of getting future NT contributors meaningful experience (i.e., not Pan-Am Cup) but that's a separate point.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on May 15, 2018 12:52:43 GMT -5
That's my point though -- we don't know because none of them get enough of a chance in the gym. This isn't supposed to be an exact science, but one interesting thing to look at is the median roster age using graduation year: 2010 WGP: 2008 or -2 years (!!!) 2012 OG: 2007 (and we had 1993 Scott-Aruda in there) or -5 years 2016 OG: 2010 or -6 years 2018 VNL Roster: 2011.5 or -6.5 years We aren't trending in an encouraging direction. In 2010, 12 of the 20 players on the WGP roster graduated in 2008 or 2009. At this year's VNL, 2 players graduated within the last 2 years and they are both liberos. Players like Jordan, Christa, Megan, Foluke and Destinee got to where they were/are because of the investment put into them. Drews is the only "young" pin hitter we are apparently investing in, and let's be honest, that's because she's a leftie. What's sad to me (had this thought the other day) is that under the current USA volleyball philosophy/system/framework, if Megan Hodge/Easy had graduated recently (post 2012), I don't think she would be making any rosters because she doesn't fit the "mold." Food for thought. I'm not a huge fan of a lot of our current decisions, but what you're also looking at here is the U.S. having its "Golden Generation" (those who were in college in the late 00s) in this period. They took over young because they were better than the prior generation on the whole and are sticking around until they are aging out. I do agree overall that we need to be doing a better job of getting future NT contributors meaningful experience (i.e., not Pan-Am Cup) but that's a separate point. A related issue we're facing now is player retention. Our top young players at multiple positions chose not to come back for this quad. Banwarth was in her second quad but she also retired relatively young.
|
|
|
Post by donut on May 15, 2018 13:11:41 GMT -5
That's my point though -- we don't know because none of them get enough of a chance in the gym. This isn't supposed to be an exact science, but one interesting thing to look at is the median roster age using graduation year: 2010 WGP: 2008 or -2 years (!!!) 2012 OG: 2007 (and we had 1993 Scott-Aruda in there) or -5 years 2016 OG: 2010 or -6 years 2018 VNL Roster: 2011.5 or -6.5 years We aren't trending in an encouraging direction. In 2010, 12 of the 20 players on the WGP roster graduated in 2008 or 2009. At this year's VNL, 2 players graduated within the last 2 years and they are both liberos. Players like Jordan, Christa, Megan, Foluke and Destinee got to where they were/are because of the investment put into them. Drews is the only "young" pin hitter we are apparently investing in, and let's be honest, that's because she's a leftie. What's sad to me (had this thought the other day) is that under the current USA volleyball philosophy/system/framework, if Megan Hodge/Easy had graduated recently (post 2012), I don't think she would be making any rosters because she doesn't fit the "mold." Food for thought. I'm not a huge fan of a lot of our current decisions, but what you're also looking at here is the U.S. having its "Golden Generation" (those who were in college in the late 00s) in this period. They took over young because they were better than the prior generation on the whole and are sticking around until they are aging out. I do agree overall that we need to be doing a better job of getting future NT contributors meaningful experience (i.e., not Pan-Am Cup) but that's a separate point. I agree with you but I don't think that invalidates my point. It's not as if those players came in perfect - Larson had to improve her offensive game, Hodge had to improve her passing/OOS game, Foluke had some connection issues with setters, etc. Regardless, I find it unbelievable that players who graduated between 2012-2016 can't take roster spots from Gibby, Danemiller, Bartsch, etc. When you factor in the late start USA players get joining FIVB competition, why are we further waiting until they are 24 or 25 to give them their first shot at high-level competition? As for your second paragraph - this year is pivotal for Tokyo. I think this tournament marks the starting point for the final stretch. That "meaningful experience" should be starting with this roster.
|
|
|
Post by donut on May 15, 2018 13:20:53 GMT -5
I'm not a huge fan of a lot of our current decisions, but what you're also looking at here is the U.S. having its "Golden Generation" (those who were in college in the late 00s) in this period. They took over young because they were better than the prior generation on the whole and are sticking around until they are aging out. I do agree overall that we need to be doing a better job of getting future NT contributors meaningful experience (i.e., not Pan-Am Cup) but that's a separate point. A related issue we're facing now is player retention. Our top young players at multiple positions chose not to come back for this quad. Banwarth was in her second quad but she also retired relatively young. +1 Lowe and Vansant were both big losses.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on May 15, 2018 13:21:54 GMT -5
I'm not a huge fan of a lot of our current decisions, but what you're also looking at here is the U.S. having its "Golden Generation" (those who were in college in the late 00s) in this period. They took over young because they were better than the prior generation on the whole and are sticking around until they are aging out. I do agree overall that we need to be doing a better job of getting future NT contributors meaningful experience (i.e., not Pan-Am Cup) but that's a separate point. I agree with you but I don't think that invalidates my point. It's not as if those players came in perfect - Larson had to improve her offensive game, Hodge had to improve her passing/OOS game, Foluke had some connection issues with setters, etc. Regardless, I find it unbelievable that players who graduated between 2012-2016 can't take roster spots from Gibby, Danemiller, Bartsch, etc. When you factor in the late start USA players get joining FIVB competition, why are we further waiting until they are 24 or 25 to give them their first shot at high-level competition? As for your second paragraph - this year is pivotal for Tokyo. I think this tournament marks the starting point for final stretch. That "meaningful experience" should be starting with this roster. Robinson is there. Drews made the roster. And there are a few 2016s on this week (Hancock, JWO, Benson) Lowe and Kreklow were competing for (and occasionally, winning) starting spots and quit. Vansant and Hagglund were making rosters and quit. I don't know if Eckermann ever got in the gym. Hamson didn't pursue next-level VB. That's the gap.
|
|