|
|
Post by callinup22 on May 18, 2009 19:40:07 GMT -5
I'm starting to try and work with local middle schools to try and create boys' teams. There are 4 currently in Houston and we're tryign to bump that up to get more support in Texas as a whole. The problem is that UIL will not acknowledge it as a sport, so that limits all public schools to club status. My personal goal right now is to get the private middle schools to have it as a sport and htose boys who play and go to public schools try to start teams there and soon UIL will have several club teams wanting legitimacy. Any thoughts or suggestions would be incredibly appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Post by rhinovb14 on May 19, 2009 6:42:00 GMT -5
I run a very low cost volleyball clinic for 4th through 8th graders at our local volleyball complex. Former and current collegiate and high school players help and model drills. The boys love it and word is spreading. This is the first year and I have 35 athletes. Next year I bank that number doubles. These kids will gravitate towards the Eden program and hopefully will strengthen our region even more.
So yes, it works. It just takes dedication, space, and heavy advertising. I sent flyers to all of our elementary and middle schools as well as to other local districts.
|
|
|
|
Post by ciscokeed on May 19, 2009 8:25:43 GMT -5
Some good points by the posters. TItle 9 certainly is one culrit, and USA volleyball which uses its resources ineffectively, and also screws development in order to fund travel, is also a culprit. I have long believed that the solution for Men's volleyball is to make our own organization at the college level. Why do we have to have an NCAA championship with our 22 D-1 teams. I would like to see an organization similar to our club model, only with the same academic requirements as true varsity programs. Rather than playing a NIRSA model, we could establish leagues and divisions of our own. USA volleyball should provide some start up grants if they have any sense at all, as we would be the development program for their future international success. The current D-1 programs are really not getting much from the NCAA- but the coaches are making a living doing what they love. Forming our own leagues, would unfortunately necessatate small stipends for coaching- at least until we could establish sponsors, etc., Maybe a model could be made where women's coaches coach both sports...With the current economic problems in athletics, a point could be made that for the same salary you could do both, and double the effect you have on campus and in the community- more bang for your buck...I just don't think we need to be beholden to either the NCAA or USA vb- neither program has proved to have the best interests of kids or our sport at heart...
In terms of our sport dying, it is no more dead than it has ever been. We won gold medals in the 80's and did not capitalize on them either. We are a niche sport in the USA, and I actually think there are far more kids playing now than ever before. Boys club volleyball has teams from all over the country. Some of the best players are coming out of the mid west, and that was unheard of in the seventies and eighties... with a few exceptions. Men's collegiate club continues to thrive- I remember the early years when there was one division and 12 teams entered the national championships...now there are several divisions all jam packed...Anyhow, I know that the entrenched sponsored programs will not want to change, but their are hundreds of collegiate clubs that might want to take it to a higher level...I nominate BarcelonaBob to start the new division!!
|
|
|
|
Post by ucsdfan on May 19, 2009 9:45:56 GMT -5
...to fund travel... I have long believed that the solution for Men's volleyball is to make our own organization at the college level. Why do we have to have an NCAA championship with our 22 D-1 teams. I would like to see an organization similar to our club model, only with the same academic requirements as true varsity programs. Rather than playing a NIRSA model, we could establish leagues and divisions of our own. USA volleyball should provide some start up grants if they have any sense at all, as we would be the development program for their future international success. The current D-1 programs are really not getting much from the NCAA- but the coaches are making a living doing what they love. Forming our own leagues, would unfortunately necessatate small stipends for coaching- at least until we could establish sponsors, etc., Maybe a model could be made where women's coaches coach both sports...With the current economic problems in athletics, a point could be made that for the same salary you could do both, and double the effect you have on campus and in the community- more bang for your buck...I just don't think we need to be beholden to either the NCAA or USA vb- neither program has proved to have the best interests of kids or our sport at heart... In terms of our sport dying, it is no more dead than it has ever been. We won gold medals in the 80's and did not capitalize on them either. We are a niche sport in the USA, and I actually think there are far more kids playing now than ever before. Boys club volleyball has teams from all over the country. Some of the best players are coming out of the mid west, and that was unheard of in the seventies and eighties... with a few exceptions. Men's collegiate club continues to thrive- I remember the early years when there was one division and 12 teams entered the national championships...now there are several divisions all jam packed...Anyhow, I know that the entrenched sponsored programs will not want to change, but their are hundreds of collegiate clubs that might want to take it to a higher level...I nominate BarcelonaBob to start the new division!! Excellent, excellent post! You hit the nail on the head. If somehow, someway the powers that be would be willing to dissolve from the NCAA, form a new governing body, and incorporate club teams, then the competitiveness increases and the travel costs decrease. The financial limits associated with college volleyball stem from travel costs more so than coaching salaries, so with more teams you have the option for more same day travel venues for regular season games. BYU and Hawai'i will be screwed by location, but adding Cal and another southern California club team to the MPSF in their place or adding six teams to develop a north and south division could seriously cut travel costs for everyone. Adding more midwest and east coast teams could have both a money saving impact as well as the chance for local kids to stay home and not head west to play college ball. Right now, the demographic seems to be better balanced than ever in terms of star players being from all around the nation. Having east coast and midwest teams as serious contenders for a title more often than once every ten years could propel the sport. The most significant obstacle I can see is from the big money schools that like the fact that they can get an NCAA championship more easily in men's volleyball than other sports. Why fight 200+ teams when you have a 1/22 chance in men's volleyball? You get a banner to hang and bragging rites about an NCAA title. It would be a hard sell to have them let go of the prestige (especially schools that make T-shirts and change the color of one of their letters of their uniforms to announce to the world their NCAA championship total). But if you could do that, and establish a new governing body that can uphold academic standards, then you might very well increase the pool of players that play beyond high school. Not being an NCAA sport that feeds into a pro league wouldn't do much to pull star athletes from sports such as basketball, but it would at least help to retain the marginal tall athlete in volleyball rather than losing them to basketball. |
|
beachdude
Junior
The Volleyball Made Me Do it!
Posts: 423
|
Post by beachdude on May 19, 2009 9:58:16 GMT -5
Yeah, the sport of women's volleyball is such a BIG PLAYA in the realm of spectator sports in the USA that Title IX is solely responsible for its popularity at the expense of men's volleyball, is that what you're saying beachdude? Well, lemme clue you in, NEITHER sport is popular in the scheme of things. All Title IX did was artificially bolster up volleyball participation amongst a non-diverse (aka WHITE) population of females, and then only temporarily (translation: these women play volleyball only for a limited number of years when scholarship opportunities make it viable to aspire to play volleyball in college, and while playing volleyball in college). The success of volleyball in the USA is not measured in Olympic-centric terms. Get that through your thick skull. Who cares how many Olympic medals the USA wins in the next 10 Olympics if NOBODY CARES and NOBODY WANTS TO PLAY. What do young boys in the neighborhood want to play in their free time? Oh yeah, volleyball is RIGHT UP THERE with basketball, baseball, skateboarding, and XBox isn't it beachdude? And what do the Joe Ham-n-Eggers of the world wanna play in their local rec league after work? Hint: Not volleyball. If you build interest in the sport of volleyball within the general public, then the sport will grow and prosper. Those little kids that played volleyball in the street will want to continue to play volleyball as they get older. Those Ham-n-Eggers who play in the local rec league and enjoy doing so will influence their talented athletic kids to gravitate towards volleyball. In the 8-18 year old male demographic, there's probably more kids that know how to play tetherball or kickball than know how to play volleyball. SOBB, they are plenty of players in many sports that just fade away after their college days--most notably in football. I agree, women quit after they play. Big deal. But what you are your ilk are saying is that volleyball should have a pro league. Volleyball should be played in every gym every night. Neither sport is popular in the scheme of things, but I have news for you: neither is hockey. The big three, football, baseball and basketball dominate the sports scene. Volleyball is a quadrennial sport. And I might add a very successful quadrennial sport. Go read Malcolm Gladwell's books on fads and popularity. We should be lucky volleyball is where it is. I agree men's volleyball needs more teams. They need more teams at the high school level. Period. What stops these teams from forming? Title 1X is just one reason. But it is not the efforts of USAV stopping these schools from adding a sport. If you want to do something about it, go start a club volleyball team in your area. That is exactly how it is done. Not anonymous complaint on a board. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyballer4life on May 19, 2009 11:20:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Mac on May 19, 2009 11:32:34 GMT -5
Good points being made. You have to capture the kids when they're young. That's when their loyalties are set. By the time my kid was six he already had a year in on baseball, basketball and soccer. Another couple of years and he was immersed in roller hockey. Flag football entered in then too, and volleyball was not only not on the radar, but was a completely foreign sport to me, other than knowing they played it in the Olympics. At age 5, 6, 7, the ball is too big, the court to large and the net too high. All the other sports make an accommodation for these dimensions, volleyball should too. As the women's side grows in numbers, the children and siblings of the female players are learning of volleyball at earlier ages. This is the time to instill the love of the game. Otherwise the other sports have had their chance to lay claim to the emotional commitment. |
|
|
|
Post by ciscokeed on May 19, 2009 12:01:12 GMT -5
They do adapt the court in other countries... In Italy it is called mini volei. They sinch the court down to 6', They bring the attenaes in several feet on either side, lay tape down for a small court, and they play with a larger, lighter ball...Pretty cool, because they are playing something that looks remarkably like the real game at a very young age. Their 10's are actually playing pass set hit...Other countries also have adaptations. In Brazil everyone plays a 6-6 until 14's... maybe through 14's. So everyone learns every skill. There are a lot of positive changes that could and should be made to our youth teams to grow the sport...
|
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on May 19, 2009 12:04:28 GMT -5
Yeah, the sport of women's volleyball is such a BIG PLAYA in the realm of spectator sports in the USA that Title IX is solely responsible for its popularity at the expense of men's volleyball, is that what you're saying beachdude? Well, lemme clue you in, NEITHER sport is popular in the scheme of things. All Title IX did was artificially bolster up volleyball participation amongst a non-diverse (aka WHITE) population of females, and then only temporarily (translation: these women play volleyball only for a limited number of years when scholarship opportunities make it viable to aspire to play volleyball in college, and while playing volleyball in college). The success of volleyball in the USA is not measured in Olympic-centric terms. Get that through your thick skull. Who cares how many Olympic medals the USA wins in the next 10 Olympics if NOBODY CARES and NOBODY WANTS TO PLAY. What do young boys in the neighborhood want to play in their free time? Oh yeah, volleyball is RIGHT UP THERE with basketball, baseball, skateboarding, and XBox isn't it beachdude? And what do the Joe Ham-n-Eggers of the world wanna play in their local rec league after work? Hint: Not volleyball. If you build interest in the sport of volleyball within the general public, then the sport will grow and prosper. Those little kids that played volleyball in the street will want to continue to play volleyball as they get older. Those Ham-n-Eggers who play in the local rec league and enjoy doing so will influence their talented athletic kids to gravitate towards volleyball. In the 8-18 year old male demographic, there's probably more kids that know how to play tetherball or kickball than know how to play volleyball. SOBB, they are plenty of players in many sports that just fade away after their college days--most notably in football. I agree, women quit after they play. Big deal. But what you are your ilk are saying is that volleyball should have a pro league. Volleyball should be played in every gym every night. Neither sport is popular in the scheme of things, but I have news for you: neither is hockey. The big three, football, baseball and basketball dominate the sports scene. Volleyball is a quadrennial sport. And I might add a very successful quadrennial sport. Go read Malcolm Gladwell's books on fads and popularity. We should be lucky volleyball is where it is. I agree men's volleyball needs more teams. They need more teams at the high school level. Period. What stops these teams from forming? Title 1X is just one reason. But it is not the efforts of USAV stopping these schools from adding a sport. If you want to do something about it, go start a club volleyball team in your area. That is exactly how it is done. Not anonymous complaint on a board. Beachdoof, You need to organize yourself a little better on this thread: 1. I never said anything about volleyball needing a pro league. That was someone else. I couldn't give a flying flaming rat's ass if volleyball had a pro league in this country or not. 2. Hockey is popular in this country. More popular than volleyball that's for sure. Just because you live in an area where it isn't played much doesn't mean the rest of the country isn't playing it. Believe it or not the world doesn't revolve around Southern California. 3. Why does "forming a club in my area" equate to increasing popularity of volleyball as a sport? There you go again pitching the construct that USAV wants people to believe is the way to organize volleyball in this country. Why do we a need a "club" to play volleyball? That infers dues, by-laws, unnecessary structure, and revenue generated for USAV. We don't need clubs to spread the sport, there are already mechanisms in place for increasing volleyball awareness without having to form "clubs" and pay money to do so. Why not get USAV involved with local Boys'/Girls' clubs so that these organizations can finally get individuals who can coach the sport correctly and teach fundamental sport skills, instead of the well-intentioned volunteers who have no background in the sport of volleyball trying to run volleyball programs. Why not get USAV to reach out to community youth leagues and help get qualified people in to start programs within the community and use their existing facilities such as community gyms and recreation centers? Wanna know why? I'll tell you exactly why. Because USAV is not interested in partnering with anyone or any organization to try and spread the participation level of volleyball in the USA if it means taking numbers and revenue away from their precious JO club monopoly. Yeah, that's right. You know that is the core reason, beachdude, yet you don't want to admit it. If volleyball programs are started within local community leagues, and YMCAs, and Boys'/Girls' clubs, these programs will be much CHEAPER than the hundreds to thousands of bucks that parents pay to have their kids in a JO club from the time they are 10-12 years old until they graduate from high school in the 18-under division. And we all know that the tens of thousands of average athletes playing JO club ball, who will never get scholarship offers from any NCAA school despite playing and paying for club volleyball and going to all the tournaments for years, are the ones who generate revenue so that the whole JO structure and gear itself as the developmental and recruiting ground for the 1% of elite volleyball athletes the USAV gears the whole regional and national JO tournaments towards. It's a win-win situation for USAV and college programs. USAV makes tons of money off the masses and caters to the elite JO athletes, and college programs and coaches get one-stop shopping for all their athletes at the major JO tournaments. Meanwhile, the average volleyball players, the ones upon whose backs the sport should be growing and prospering as a participation sport in the USA, get jack squat. Yeah, that's a wonderful model right there. No wonder volleyball doesn't grow in this country. Let's have this discussion again in 10 years and see who was more correct in their assessment of the sport of volleyball in the USA. You already know who will win that argument in the future. |
|
|
|
Post by notsocal2 on May 19, 2009 12:47:36 GMT -5
On a slightly different swing to this topic - let me share a story supporting USAV from the clubs perspective.
One might think that the local clubs would be very, very supportive of kids in their programs participating in the A1, A2 camps and programs. Maybe a utopic type of idea, but USAV wanting to support v-ball - either mens and womens, and then the clubs wanting to support USAV with participation, etc, etc.
There are two known clubs in Chicago, one being Adversity which couldn't be more supportive of the USAV and one that is almost opposed to USAV participation - that being SPRI.
From an idealistic perspective, I'd like to think the clubs would be more like the Adversity model, but from perhaps an individual perspective (or perhaps its just money or ego) there may be clubs like SPRI that simply turn their back. I even know of situations in the past where players where high school player's "team motives" were challanged for choosing to go to USAV sponsored sessions vs the club's. Which seems to be incredibly selfish from the club's perspective - you'd think they'd want to encourage this - for the good of the player, for the marketing it brings to the club, for the spirit of supporting USAV. Hey - I guess not in America, where the club is 1st - and screw USAV or anything else.
Wondering if there are others of you out there who have heard of this type of respect or lack of respect by club teams vs USAV - or visa versa, or is this more of an isolated incident. Speaking of the NorCal area I don't see much of this type of problem around here, but then again there isn't the scale of clubs here vs SoCal or the Chicago area.
|
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on May 19, 2009 13:17:29 GMT -5
SPRIs antagonistic attitude towards USAV has nothign to do with any ideological perspectives, and everything to do with individuals and incidents which have happened in the past.
That's all I'm gonna say. Last time this topic came up on VT, the mods took alot of heat from some SPRI bullies and I had to go into a self-imposed exile for many months.
|
|
|
|
Post by cyberVBmidwest on May 19, 2009 15:01:54 GMT -5
Checking for common threads in the comments so far... It appears that getting out into the community to create a playing experience (team, league, etc…) at the youth age level is one of those common threads. I grew up in St. Louis where soccer was big even in the 60's and 70's. When I moved to Chicago years later, I found I was one of the few parents who actually had played some soccer (at least among US born parents). There were youth soccer leagues playing in St. Louis even back in those days. Soccer wasn't a big sport then, it is now. To the best of my knowledge, it didn't have anything to do with the national organization representing soccer. It had to do with someone with a passion to take the time to organize teams and then a league. There was a brief pro league in which St. Louis had a team but it folded. (I did get to high five Pele when the Cosmos played the Stars).  In summary, my point is similar to other comments; there are business models for growth of youth sports that have nothing to do with national organizations like USAV and NCAA. It is a lot easier to point to reasons why something isn’t working or who we can blame than it is to take action and do something about it. Of course this is a forum to discuss these topics and there are lessons learned from past mistakes. That is why listening to those who do criticize previous attempts can be valuable. So…Just Do It! Fire away! |
|
|
|
Post by notsocal2 on May 19, 2009 16:33:04 GMT -5
Grandson - interesting post. I was not aware of any previous materials on this - and also glad to hear you made it back from exile. While I may not always agree with the contents of all your posts - they are up there with some of the most entertaining!
I don't know much about the Chicago based SPRI, but the girls teams are outstanding (seems to be an absolute machine of a club - they seem to be like a Balboa boys level except girls), and the guys teams also seem well prepared technically, and I have seen them make some nice runs at JOs over the years.
So I have no beef w/ the kids or the talent - but there does seem to be some history here with USAV - or whatever. Hey not my problem - just seems like it shouldn't have to be that way - and looks like the kids end up losing - and probably USAV as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on May 19, 2009 16:41:47 GMT -5
In summary, my point is similar to other comments; there are business models for growth of youth sports that have nothing to do with national organizations like USAV and NCAA. It is a lot easier to point to reasons why something isn’t working or who we can blame than it is to take action and do something about it. Of course this is a forum to discuss these topics and there are lessons learned from past mistakes. That is why listening to those who do criticize previous attempts can be valuable. So…Just Do It! Fire away! I agree with your points, but the whole topic of this thread was laid down in the first post in which the poster referenced the fact that Lloy Ball stated that men's volleyball in this country is dying, and that Doug Beal and Co. have "done all they can" to try to help it. My arguments (and others on this thread) merely state that Mr. Beal (and, by default, USAV since he is CEO/Grand Poobah/Head Idiot in Charge) is full of crapazoola and has done very little to really advocate men's volleyball in this country. They like it exactly the way it is now so they can be 100% in control of it. Since they would have zero control over the game if other organizations started to grow participation in the sport, they will do everything they can to keep it within only their sphere of influence. |
|
|
|
Post by shaqtastic on May 19, 2009 17:22:42 GMT -5
Volleyball is an incredibly dynamic team sport. I loved playing it although I could never get past my goofy-footed approach due to years of playing basketball. I wish I'd had the opportunities to play when I was in HS that kids now have. My question is this:
Why is the sport so popular everywhere but the USA and it was developed here?
My own guesses would be:
1. It's not violent enough.
2. There's no physical contact between players - in fact a net separates them.
3. It may be too fast, at least on the men's side.
4. It's a "girls" game
5. It's a backyard picnic game
6. You can't truly use your hands (ie Throw and Catch) which seems to be a prerequisite for US sports although non-Americans thrive in sports where you don't use your hands - Soccer/VBall
7. It's not violent enough
I also think Volleyball is not a good television sport because it's tough to follow the ball or know where it's going for the cameras. It's very fast and can be dull to neophytes if there's a lot of quick side-outs due to unstoppable offense or bad serving.
I have a tough time watching our pro sports except NFL football. NBA Bball has gotten so far from the pure sport it was and the reffing is so subjective and inconsistent that it's almost a caricature of what the game used to be. Baseball is just too long and boring of a season.
On another note, I believe in Puerto Rico they start the kids out at 4 and 5 years old. I think they play on a smaller court with a lower net and everyone plays every position. Serving is controlled by restricting service points so the game doesn't hinge on serve receive. It must work because players from the island are usually very fundamentally sound.
|
|
