|
|
Post by McAdoooo on Oct 16, 2019 11:46:02 GMT -5
SCVA posted Q1 draw yesterday. From what I understand, it has a new person doing the tourney draws this year, and it shows: 1. The 17-18's draw was pulled off line, and is not yet back up. 2. The seeding for 16's bears little resemblance to reality, with big clubs that didn't play 15's getting advantageous seeding. 3. In 16's, there are currently 15 pools of 4, and 4 pools of 5. If someone can explain why SCVA would have 4 pools of 5, I'd love to hear it, because it makes no sense to me in any fashion - more courts in use, necessitating putting two pools at ASC, and overly complicates the determination of the "top 10 3rds" for Q2. And why does Vegas United just happen to be in both the ASC pools? Relax, relax and then relax some more! It's a long club season, and kinks need to be worked out. Seedings may seem out of whack, but teams will find their comfort zone regardless of seedings, especially those for the first qualifier. |
|
|
|
Post by bealzabubba on Oct 16, 2019 12:28:23 GMT -5
SCVA posted Q1 draw yesterday. From what I understand, it has a new person doing the tourney draws this year, and it shows: 1. The 17-18's draw was pulled off line, and is not yet back up. 2. The seeding for 16's bears little resemblance to reality, with big clubs that didn't play 15's getting advantageous seeding. 3. In 16's, there are currently 15 pools of 4, and 4 pools of 5. If someone can explain why SCVA would have 4 pools of 5, I'd love to hear it, because it makes no sense to me in any fashion - more courts in use, necessitating putting two pools at ASC, and overly complicates the determination of the "top 10 3rds" for Q2. And why does Vegas United just happen to be in both the ASC pools? Relax, relax and then relax some more! It's a long club season, and kinks need to be worked out. Seedings may seem out of whack, but teams will find their comfort zone regardless of seedings, especially those for the first qualifier. It wouldn't be a proper tourney without some griping about seeding, and I'm here for that. (I'm fine with "ours," if you will, but ... it's seriously out of whack.) E.g. Seaside 16s and A4 15's drew together at 19-20. Both were open in their divisions last year. SMBC West, which was at the edge of open as 15's (but played club), and Central Cal (which was... bad) are seeded above both? 949 and Rockstar, which didn't field 15s are top 10? (Maybe they will be - we don't know because ... they didn't field a team last year.) It'll work out - it simply carries through into day 2, which can put one or two teams at a disadvantage is all. BUT: 4 pools of 5? |
|
|
|
Post by westcoastbias on Oct 16, 2019 12:58:47 GMT -5
It wouldn't be a proper tourney without some griping about seeding, and I'm here for that. (I'm fine with "ours," if you will, but ... it's seriously out of whack.) E.g. Seaside 16s and A4 15's drew together at 19-20. Both were open in their divisions last year. SMBC West, which was at the edge of open as 15's (but played club), and Central Cal (which was... bad) are seeded above both? 949 and Rockstar, which didn't field 15s are top 10? (Maybe they will be - we don't know because ... they didn't field a team last year.) It'll work out - it simply carries through into day 2, which can put one or two teams at a disadvantage is all. BUT: 4 pools of 5?Definitely appears a couple of the big brands got the benefit of the doubt in 16s with "new" teams to that division (no 15s last year)... but, as stated, should all shake out in the end. The integration of the new 15s teams also seems like a rough guesstimate - those teams were ordered based on BJNC finish, which makes sense. As for the 4 pools of 5 and the overflow to ASC, I just assumed it was a courts constraint. |
|
|
|
Post by bealzabubba on Oct 16, 2019 13:15:48 GMT -5
As for the 4 pools of 5 and the overflow to ASC, I just assumed it was a courts constraint. : The pools of 5 are each allotted two courts, so that's 8 courts for the 4 pools, vs 5 courts if it was pools of four. So all the 16's could be at Momentus, with one court left over. |
|
|
|
Post by westcoastbias on Oct 16, 2019 14:54:00 GMT -5
As for the 4 pools of 5 and the overflow to ASC, I just assumed it was a courts constraint. : The pools of 5 are each allotted two courts, so that's 8 courts for the 4 pools, vs 5 courts if it was pools of four. So all the 16's could be at Momentus, with one court left over. Ah, didn't realize those were spread across 2 courts. Yeah, strange. |
|
|
|
Post by KPI on Oct 16, 2019 15:09:04 GMT -5
Nope: The pools of 5 are each allotted two courts, so that's 8 courts for the 4 pools, vs 5 courts if it was pools of four. So all the 16's could be at Momentus, with one court left over. Ah, didn't realize those were spread across 2 courts. Yeah, strange. |
|
|
|
Post by KPI on Oct 16, 2019 15:12:00 GMT -5
Nope: The pools of 5 are each allotted two courts, so that's 8 courts for the 4 pools, vs 5 courts if it was pools of four. So all the 16's could be at Momentus, with one court left over. Ah, didn't realize those were spread across 2 courts. Yeah, strange. Could the 16s teams at ASC be due to coaching staff/chaperones for the Vegas teams? I feel like it was the same last year. Vegas all at the same gym. |
|
|
|
Post by bealzabubba on Oct 16, 2019 15:43:44 GMT -5
Ah, didn't realize those were spread across 2 courts. Yeah, strange. Could the 16s teams at ASC be due to coaching staff/chaperones for the Vegas teams? I feel like it was the same last year. Vegas all at the same gym. That's probably it! You're right that Vegas U was typically at ASC even when the rest of us were at Momentus. But why does it need to be at ASC (edit: because of the 17s/18s is likely). This really is unimportant, unless you happen to have two kids playing, and they're split between Momentus and ASC. It just struck me as odd, initially. Another Q: Since the "10 top 3rds (sic) place teams" progress to gold for Q2, doesn't that favor teams in the 5 team pools? How is top 10 determined? I assume it's match %, set %, then point ratio, which would tend to favor the teams in the 5 team pools - 3rd in 5-team pools typically finish 2-2, whereas 3rd in a 4 team pool typically finishes 1-2. Not a fan of that from an equity perspective, candidly. It won't impact "my" team, but ... it will impact somebody, and I prefer tourneys be "fair" unless there's a good reason for the deviation. And I just don't see the good reason, yet. Also - 18's were posted this morning, but not the flow chart. Direct link for 18s for those interested: www.scvavolleyball.org/home/180020323/180020323/Images/Boys%2018%20Q1-Q3%202019%20day%201%2010.16.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by VolleyFanFL on Oct 17, 2019 7:15:58 GMT -5
I can't wait to see the seeds for the JBI. Then we'll see some serious griping!
|
|
|
|
Post by bealzabubba on Oct 17, 2019 11:57:26 GMT -5
Could the 16s teams at ASC be due to coaching staff/chaperones for the Vegas teams? I feel like it was the same last year. Vegas all at the same gym. : Since the "10 top 3rds (sic) place teams" progress to gold for Q2, doesn't that favor teams in the 5 team pools? How is top 10 determined? I assume it's match %, set %, then point ratio, which would tend to favor the teams in the 5 team pools - 3rd in 5-team pools typically finish 2-2, whereas 3rd in a 4 team pool typically finishes 1-2. I was reminded last night that in last year's Q1, only 1st and 2nds stayed gold eligible for Q2. One pool had a three way tie for 1st - the tiebreaker was set percentage. All three of those teams were fairly good - Ohana 16, Coast 15, and OCVC 15's - and the latter ended up doing very poorly in qualifiers because they lost that tie, but medalled at HC/JBI. So the new procedure appears to be the remedy for that situation. |
|
servite dad
Sophomore
The eyes can't see what the mind does not understand
Posts: 224
|
Post by servite dad on Oct 17, 2019 17:00:51 GMT -5
Yup, club season is here
|
|
|
|
Post by bealzabubba on Oct 17, 2019 18:15:44 GMT -5
And since it is, here's some more things that may interest only me (16s division, only), between last season and this: Total Teams decreased from 86 to 80 (I believe 2 were scratches at Q1, but I'm going off the draw). As we discussed earlier in this thread, there are a number of teams with larger rosters this year, so that may/may not mean a decrease in overall participation. 15's:Decreased slightly: 26 to 24. Last year, 3 teams were explicitly "15/16," this year only 1 I believe (Rockstar). Neither OCVC nor Seaside are fielding 15's, which is a shame. Clubs with multiple 15s: BB (3), with Wave, SG and Pulse all fielding 2 each. Over all: BB is fielding 5 teams in 16's (!). There are 14 clubs fielding -2s (or 8 in 16s only) There are seven -3s, with six in 16s only (BB, OCVC, SMBC, Pulse, SG, & Wave). SMBC South appears to be gone from the division (consistent with some rumblings I've heard). There are a few "new" clubs I don't recall from last year (in 16s - some may have played 14s): IMUA, West Edge, So Cal Legends, WEST, Momentous, PCH, NOCA, and Universal. Pretty sure IMUA fielded 14s last year, and I've heard of West Edge, but no more than that. The others - anyone know? |
|
|
|
Post by westcoastbias on Oct 18, 2019 13:00:51 GMT -5
15's:Decreased slightly: 26 to 24. Last year, 3 teams were explicitly "15/16," this year only 1 I believe (Rockstar). Neither OCVC nor Seaside are fielding 15's, which is a shame. Clubs with multiple 15s: BB (3), with Wave, SG and Pulse all fielding 2 each. .....Pretty sure IMUA fielded 14s last year, and I've heard of West Edge, but no more than that. The others - anyone know? Two other 14s teams from last year who are not fielding teams this year are SMBC and EPIC. Both were open teams with good players, especially SMBC who made gold bracket at BJNC. Apparently, they had a couple exception kids who had to jump to 16s and a few others went to other clubs (heard one of their good middles went to SCVC 15s). So that team basically dissolved and players moved on. No clue about EPIC... IMUA is good and fun to watch. They aren't big or super athletic, but they make up for it with good ball control and great energy and team play. But now I'm confused, weren't one of the trolls predicting 15s gold for Seaside??  |
|
|
|
Post by bealzabubba on Oct 18, 2019 16:09:41 GMT -5
15's:Decreased slightly: 26 to 24. Last year, 3 teams were explicitly "15/16," this year only 1 I believe (Rockstar). Neither OCVC nor Seaside are fielding 15's, which is a shame. Clubs with multiple 15s: BB (3), with Wave, SG and Pulse all fielding 2 each. .....Pretty sure IMUA fielded 14s last year, and I've heard of West Edge, but no more than that. The others - anyone know? Two other 14s teams from last year who are not fielding teams this year are SMBC and EPIC. Both were open teams with good players, especially SMBC who made gold bracket at BJNC. Apparently, they had a couple exception kids who had to jump to 16s and a few others went to other clubs (heard one of their good middles went to SCVC 15s). So that team basically dissolved and players moved on. No clue about EPIC... IMUA is good and fun to watch. They aren't big or super athletic, but they make up for it with good ball control and great energy and team play. But now I'm confused, weren't one of the trolls predicting 15s gold for Seaside?? Maybe you're confusing these reply with the Trolls? (I have the trolls blocked, so unless someone else quotes them, I no longer see their posts. ). sandygears info seems spot on, given the three Wave teams in 16s, and KPI 's might explain Epic. ETA: We met two of last years SMBC 14's at a beach tourney a couple weeks ago. Both were quite good, legit 15's, and neither is playing club this year. Per those two/parents - their only choices for club were SMBC or Mamba - the former looked to be "bad" to them, and the latter was too expensive, given how much activity their HS had for them (beach and indoor teams/practices, which made me jealous). A ton of movement in San Diego for the 17s and 18s. Still trying to figure out who went where. I do know the biggest change was for that Epic 17s team from last year, they seem to have all moved to various other clubs (wave and coast for sure and maybe Seaside. ... Now, on the moves... I haven't seen much of either Wave or Coast to know exactly who ended up where, we only have 1 yr of Travel under our belt and we just spent a lot of time trying to understand brackets, times and what court to show up to.  We didn't play against the other SD clubs consistently enough to get familiar with specific players.
That said, Wave created a new 16-1 team and brought maybe 3 players from last year's 15's team into the 16-1, the rest came from outside the club. I don't know how many of those that didn't move into the 16-1 team stayed to roster on the 16-2 team, but assume some tried their luck elsewhere...
I'm sure Seaside lost/picked up players, but think they likely didn't come out as far ahead as the other 2.  At least one Seaside player went to Wave 16-1.
Coast did have some movement, but it was filling in the existing team roster, so not as big of changes, but likely more strategic by position. Genuine VBC (Vista in N. County) had a solid core at 15's and that team essentially dissolved;  4 to Wave 16-1, 2 to Coast 16-1(spots opened by 2 Coast to Wave) and 1 to Wave 15's (was playing up last year at Genuine 15). |
|
|
|
Post by bigfatethanhawke on Oct 19, 2019 13:43:09 GMT -5
But what rules have I broken Is there a rule against being a wanker? Only if you're religious |
|
