Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2018 21:58:46 GMT -5
Karch absolutely cannot win with some VT'ers. If they win, it'll be in spite of him and because no other country took it seriously. If he loses? Look out.
I don't think Karch is the greatest coach who ever lived. Know who else who doesn't think that? Karch. I too would like to see a little less animus. Maybe volleyguy is correct, however. I sure don't think I'm in a position to know for sure.
|
|
|
Post by eazy on Jun 30, 2018 21:59:37 GMT -5
Why don't you just give Karch all the credit for us? And why do you care so much that Karch isn't liked or respected so much as a coach? Karch isn't just along for the ride. He's in it to claim a legacy--for himself, for USAV, and, perhaps still, for Doug Beal. Karch's M.O. is abundantly clear: push the fast, robotic system continuously to wear out opponents. There isn't anything innovative or inspiring in that system any longer, it's just a race to the finish, and it doesn't require coaching as much as having enough horses widgets athletes to see it through. It's a stingy and short-sighted approach. We have some of the most physically talented volleyball athletes in the world. I would like for them to be (or become) the most skilled volleyball players in the world as well. That's not happening under Karch. I prefer a little balance. Give credit where it is due. The usual "Karch-has-nothing-to-do-with-USA-victories-but-everything-to-do-with-their-losses" just don't strike me as a very normal and balanced way to evaluate his performance. Like the match against China or Turkey. You usual suspects will just say it was simply because we had good players, the coach has NOTHING to do with that. But when the US loses, oh it must be Karch's fault. Oh Please. I’m not saying that those people aren’t biased, but there could be a reason. You put the best collection of players in the world (not saying we have that, but hypothetically) on a team and they can win with an average or great coach. It would take a really poor coaching performance to screw them up. That’s what people are saying I believe. Likewise, put a team of mediocre players together with a poor or average coach and they won’t win. But give them an amazing coach and they might win.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2018 22:08:42 GMT -5
The USA is not a level above most of the volleyball powers. When people start with the premise that the USA *is*, it leads to unreasonable expectations AND it undervalues what they *do* accomplish.
We all want a gold medal. It's going to take some luck and a special team.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jun 30, 2018 22:10:54 GMT -5
Why don't you just give Karch all the credit for us? And why do you care so much that Karch isn't liked or respected so much as a coach? Karch isn't just along for the ride. He's in it to claim a legacy--for himself, for USAV, and, perhaps still, for Doug Beal. Karch's M.O. is abundantly clear: push the fast, robotic system continuously to wear out opponents. There isn't anything innovative or inspiring in that system any longer, it's just a race to the finish, and it doesn't require coaching as much as having enough horses widgets athletes to see it through. It's a stingy and short-sighted approach. We have some of the most physically talented volleyball athletes in the world. I would like for them to be (or become) the most skilled volleyball players in the world as well. That's not happening under Karch. I prefer a little balance. Give credit where it is due. The usual "Karch-has-nothing-to-do-with-USA-victories-but-everything-to-do-with-their-losses" just don't strike me as a very normal and balanced way to evaluate his performance. Like the match against China or Turkey. You usual suspects will just say it was simply because we had good players, the coach has NOTHING to do with that. But when the US loses, oh it must be Karch's fault. Oh Please. That answer doesn't make sense to me. If someone doesn't like Karch's approach, either philosophically or tactically, to the National Team job, then winning or losing (i.e. specific results or outcomes) aren't the relevant point except in terms of how they relate to the approach. As an example, many of the so-called "Karch-haters" reacted positively to the use of the back row attack in one of the early round matches (that approach has since been abandoned apparently). Your approach to the issue imo fails to recognize the argument that is actually being made by many people.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 30, 2018 22:11:23 GMT -5
I prefer a little balance. Give credit where it is due. The usual "Karch-has-nothing-to-do-with-USA-victories-but-everything-to-do-with-their-losses" just don't strike me as a very normal and balanced way to evaluate his performance. Like the match against China or Turkey. You usual suspects will just say it was simply because we had good players, the coach has NOTHING to do with that. But when the US loses, oh it must be Karch's fault. Oh Please. I’m not saying that those people aren’t biased, but there could be a reason. You put the best collection of players in the world (not saying we have that, but hypothetically) on a team and they can win with an average or great coach. It would take a really poor coaching performance to screw them up. That’s what people are saying I believe. Likewise, put a team of mediocre players together with a poor or average coach and they won’t win. But give them an amazing coach and they might win. Perhaps. But not necessarily in all cases, otherwise we wouldn't even need a coach to be there, the players could just coach themselves.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 30, 2018 22:14:26 GMT -5
I prefer a little balance. Give credit where it is due. The usual "Karch-has-nothing-to-do-with-USA-victories-but-everything-to-do-with-their-losses" just don't strike me as a very normal and balanced way to evaluate his performance. Like the match against China or Turkey. You usual suspects will just say it was simply because we had good players, the coach has NOTHING to do with that. But when the US loses, oh it must be Karch's fault. Oh Please. That answer doesn't make sense to me. If someone doesn't like Karch's approach, either philosophically or tactically, to the National Team job, then winning or losing (i.e. specific results or outcomes) aren't the relevant point except in terms of how they relate to the approach. As an example, many of the so-called "Karch-haters" reacted positively to the use of the back row attack in one of the early round matches (that approach has since been abandoned apparently). Your approach to the issue imo fails to recognize the argument that is actually being made by many people. I recognize it all too well. React positively to use of back row attack? They just said it was nice change, yet almost none of them actually acknowledged it was Karch's decision to change. Admit it, there is an inherent bias against Karch here.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 30, 2018 22:15:46 GMT -5
The USA is not a level above most of the volleyball powers. When people start with the premise that the USA *is*, it leads to unreasonable expectations AND it undervalues what they *do* accomplish. We all want a gold medal. It's going to take some luck and a special team. Precisely. USA is one of the top teams in volleyball, it is NOT the top team in volleyball. Big difference there.
|
|
|
Post by eazy on Jun 30, 2018 22:17:58 GMT -5
I’m not saying that those people aren’t biased, but there could be a reason. You put the best collection of players in the world (not saying we have that, but hypothetically) on a team and they can win with an average or great coach. It would take a really poor coaching performance to screw them up. That’s what people are saying I believe. Likewise, put a team of mediocre players together with a poor or average coach and they won’t win. But give them an amazing coach and they might win. Perhaps. But not necessarily in all cases, otherwise we wouldn't even need a coach to be there, the players could just coach themselves. That’s not what I said. You need at least an average coach just to manage people and keep them on the same path. A bad coach, or no coach, could screw it up. Look at the warriors. They lost their head coach for a while and won with Luke Walton coaching them. Texas is probably a good parallel. They have some of the best talent in the country, but have slightly underperformed lately and people blame Elliot. Underperforming for them is still make a decent tournament run, but that doesn’t mean that he’s doing a great job.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jun 30, 2018 22:18:47 GMT -5
That answer doesn't make sense to me. If someone doesn't like Karch's approach, either philosophically or tactically, to the National Team job, then winning or losing (i.e. specific results or outcomes) aren't the relevant point except in terms of how they relate to the approach. As an example, many of the so-called "Karch-haters" reacted positively to the use of the back row attack in one of the early round matches (that approach has since been abandoned apparently). Your approach to the issue imo fails to recognize the argument that is actually being made by many people. I recognize it all too well. React positively to use of back row attack? They just said it was nice change, yet almost none of them actually acknowledged it was Karch's decision to change. Admit it, there is an inherent bias against Karch here. So, you are saying the players decided unilaterally on their own to use the back row attack? And, Karch subsequently shut it down? You're just not making sense with this.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 30, 2018 22:30:45 GMT -5
I recognize it all too well. React positively to use of back row attack? They just said it was nice change, yet almost none of them actually acknowledged it was Karch's decision to change. Admit it, there is an inherent bias against Karch here. So, you are saying the players decided unilaterally on their own to use the back row attack? And, Karch subsequently shut it down? You're just not making sense with this. Nope, you are the one that is not making sense. Or maybe you are intentionally twisting my post. They just said it was good move, but no, it was so hard for them to acknowledge it was Karch's decision-making. As if actually crediting Karch would spell their demise.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 30, 2018 22:34:12 GMT -5
Perhaps. But not necessarily in all cases, otherwise we wouldn't even need a coach to be there, the players could just coach themselves. That’s not what I said. You need at least an average coach just to manage people and keep them on the same path. A bad coach, or no coach, could screw it up. Look at the warriors. They lost their head coach for a while and won with Luke Walton coaching them. Texas is probably a good parallel. They have some of the best talent in the country, but have slightly underperformed lately and people blame Elliot. Underperforming for them is still make a decent tournament run, but that doesn’t mean that he’s doing a great job. Great job or lousy job is often in the eye of the beholder. Some people think just because you got a few talented players on a team you can do wonders with them. But sometimes it's not quite that easy. If all it takes was to just throw a bunch of good players and they will win championship, who really needs on-court coaching. Like you said, a coach has to manage people. Keep them pursing a common goal for the team. It's easy to type that out but it can be far harder to implement in practice.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jun 30, 2018 22:37:51 GMT -5
So, you are saying the players decided unilaterally on their own to use the back row attack? And, Karch subsequently shut it down? You're just not making sense with this. Nope, you are the one that is not making sense. Or maybe you are intentionally twisting my post. They just said it was good move, but no, it was so hard for them to acknowledge it was Karch's decision-making. As if actually crediting Karch would spell their demise. It's obvious to everyone that Karch made that decision and the positive reaction was about his willingness to be less rigid, to be open to change and to be flexible. It must be your own bias that doesn't allow you to see that is what people were saying.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 30, 2018 22:42:47 GMT -5
Nope, you are the one that is not making sense. Or maybe you are intentionally twisting my post. They just said it was good move, but no, it was so hard for them to acknowledge it was Karch's decision-making. As if actually crediting Karch would spell their demise. It's obvious to everyone that Karch made that decision and the positive reaction was about his willingness to be less rigid, willing ng to change and be flexible. It must be your own bias that doesn't allow you to see that is what people were saying. Ha. Karch was not listening to VT to be "less rigid", he was making a decision on his own. Let's see here in this match. If US can beat Turkey to win the championship, will any of you so much as give a tiny credit to Karch? Or will it be the same old, "it's-just-the-players-and-the-coach-has-nothing-to-do-with-that" or "the-VNL-doesn't-matter".
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jun 30, 2018 22:48:19 GMT -5
It's obvious to everyone that Karch made that decision and the positive reaction was about his willingness to be less rigid, willing ng to change and be flexible. It must be your own bias that doesn't allow you to see that is what people were saying. Ha. Karch was not listening to VT to be "less rigid", he was making a decision on his own. Let's see here in this match. If US can beat Turkey to win the championship, will any of you so much as give a tiny credit to Karch? Or will it be the same old, "it's-just-the-players-and-the-coach-has-nothing-to-do-with-that" or "the-VNL-doesn't-matter". This isn't all about Karch. Guidetti getting this Turkey team to the finals, with wins over USA and Brazil along the way, is the story of this tournament. Guidetti isn't the strongest tactical coach or the highest volleyball IQ coach, but he's a good student of the game, and he has what Karch lacks: emotional IQ.
|
|
|
Post by ironhammer on Jun 30, 2018 22:53:24 GMT -5
Ha. Karch was not listening to VT to be "less rigid", he was making a decision on his own. Let's see here in this match. If US can beat Turkey to win the championship, will any of you so much as give a tiny credit to Karch? Or will it be the same old, "it's-just-the-players-and-the-coach-has-nothing-to-do-with-that" or "the-VNL-doesn't-matter". This isn't all about Karch. Guidetti getting this Turkey team to the finals, with wins over USA and Brazil along the way, is the story of this tournament. Guidetti isn't the strongest tactical coach or the highest volleyball IQ coach, but he's a good student of the game, and he has what Karch lacks: emotional IQ. Well look here, we actually agree on something. It's debatable who is the "best" coach (or what criteria to judge the "best"), but Guidetti is certainly one of the best coach out there. To bring a young and inexperienced team all the way to the finals, is quite an accomplishment. But as for EQ-How do you know Karch has none of it?
|
|