|
|
Post by volleyballer4life on May 20, 2009 10:17:16 GMT -5
Although I do believe USAV could do a much better job of promoting the sport, I also feel that it's fruitless if we don't get kids into it at a younger age - and that goes much deeper than Beal and crew.
I am just starting to get into the club volleyball scene for juniors. My question is this: Are clubs out there with the specific goal of making a profit, or is it for the growth of the sport? what's the ratio on that? How much could a club drop their fees while still paying all the bills/payroll, and would it make the game more affordable?
I remember when I was a junior in H.S, a parent who had a good background in volleyball started a club for 2 years simply so we were able to play. We certainly weren't the best club, our jersies were simple t-shirts, but we competed in many tournaments, and I think we paid 500 bucks (granted, this was late 2001, so I'll even exaggerate the inflation and equate it to 1,000 today). I know multiple clubs going for 2,500-3,000 dollars. Is this necessary, or do "elite" clubs decide that as their ability to pump out scholarship athletes is stellar, that they'll price gouge a bit? Not asking as an attack on those clubs, just trying to get a better understanding.
|
|
|
|
Post by preschooler on May 20, 2009 13:56:02 GMT -5
I really appreciate this thread. Sorry but I caught this thread at the end of a productive but still frustrating Jr boys season.  I have always made it my business to be involved in my kids interests whatever they were. Unfortunately for me and others that is how I got involved in the grassroots boys volleyball effort in Seattle. I have coached, chaperoned, championed and helped organized the boys league efforts in Seattle during the past 6 years but really I am "just a parent". First, youth/ Jr efforts always start with parents so this whole parent vs coach vs USAV thing is counter productive. We have mutual but not identical goals and everyone is annoying get over it. Although schools are perhaps the logical place to organize youth sports around in the US, sports are not a school's primary mission. Nor do they have the budget now or in the foreseeable future. The governing body of a sport USAV is the one's who's mission it is to promote the sport at all levels. In my experience in the past 6 years, there seems to be this USAV mind set that grassroots or developmental program should have everything in place and fully grown before you come to the table. The two grant programs currently available have too much of an expectation that Jr guys follow the Jr girls model. I would identify three quite legitimate concerns when working with minors that must be addressed 1) background checks 2) coach accreditation (the libero and setter to the big hitter question) of 3) who's insurance you operating under? For example, here in Seattle we have an established leagues for Jr boys volleyball CYO (catholic schools middle school ages)/USAV(middle school/high school) each requires a background check of coaches and participation in a "positive coaching" type initial accreditation class in order to coach. However we have been so far unsuccessful in getting USAV region or national to accept the school league's screening or accreditation credentials (CYO for middle school and WIAA for high school based teams) for the purposes of a Jr boys developmental league here in Washington. This puts a big road block in trying to mesh any school based team with or into a club model. Also, the requirements of sanctioning an grassroots tournament event via USVA in our region makes tournaments quite expensive. In a grassroots/ developmental league low fees are essential to getting off the ground. However, getting our local region office and the National office to help in this goal by helping to offset cost of gym rental, day officials, coach screenings has been frustrating at best despite submittal of grant proposals. Even partnering with the local men's USAV clubs has been mixed. The region office has concerns about allowing U18 boys to sign up for the men's events those guys aren't background checked. ::)The reaction from a few - mainly oldest men has been positive. I have been discouraged by the reception of some of the younger men's teams who present an attitude that it is a bother to have them show up even when tournament sponsors seek out a Jr team to make an event go. Hopefully in a few years they too will grow older and wiser. In the past six years there have been many who have made boys volleyball happen on a shoestring and a prayer. I cannot name them all here but I would like to publicly thank Bob Stewart Lindbergh High School, Mark West & Space Needle Volleyball, Scott Baumler & Cascade Volleyball Dave Weitl and WVBA, Bonnie Odegaard & High Velocity Volleyball, Dragan Karadzic & John Bryant in the PSR office, Seattle University and the University of Washington for the help and support of boys volleyball in Seattle. Last tournament of the year is coming soon and we need to get started on planning for next season.  |
|
|
|
Post by Mac on May 20, 2009 14:38:27 GMT -5
Seems to me the sport needs the equivalent of a baseball "T-Ball" league, to get kids age 6 and up to take it on when all the other sports are vieing seriously for their emotional attention. My impression is that the reason Manhattan Beach kids do so well with it, as well as Puerto Rican kids, is that their parents are focussed on volleyball from the moment of birth since it is so ingrained into their personal cultures.
I know there is a grass court league that plays in Long Beach at the park next to Long Beach St. The LBS people could "adopt" that program (if they haven't already) and as an outreach to grow the sport, could help develop and promote it.
More "demand" from youngsters coming up creates more interest at the high school level, and so on.
Somehow the good college club programs have got to be incentivized to start D1 programs.
|
|
|
|
Post by ucsdfan on May 20, 2009 15:18:13 GMT -5
Grand SoBB has reiterated a point in several posts that all the fly-by Beal defenders who jump on for a post or two have completely ignored. What are they doing about expanding the demographics? Grand SoBB is about tracking ethnicity, but I'd prefer an economic tracker. They may prove to run parallel to one another, but it's critical information. If we are to make all of these changes to grow the sport, it starts by making volleyball affordable to the masses at the youth level.
The game is an amazing spectator sport (LIVE) that will draw fans if they have a chance to watch. The local colleges get this and do a great job of letting clubs come for free certain nights. UCLA and UCI also let elementary school kids come to watch (probably other schools do this too, but I'm only aware of UCI and UCLA). They are reaching out. I personally love bringing my daughter's teammates to their first college volleyball game. We can all do something at every level. But what we really need to do is reach out to communities that get ignored. Even tennis and golf (about as elitist as sports come) reach out to lower income communities. We have to do this to grow the sport.
I'm sure most everyoen knows the club prices, but just in case, here is what our family pays. I have two kids playing club volleyball (10 and 14). It costs me $2600 for the first kid, although I get a great discount down to $2550 for the second one. On top of that, it costs $1100 each for their trip to Phoenix in a month. In addition, there are the optional camps over the summer for $450/week that if they don't attend, they have a lesser chance of getting on a given coach's radar. So for two kids, I will drop $9250 for two weeks of summer and a sport from January through June. The kids love the experience so much that it's a price we will pay. But compared to USYVL, which runs $140 per season (twice per year), it's worlds different. USYVL has been the entry port for about half of the club kids in our area. If we could move the USYVL model to the YMCAs, then as Grand SoBB points out, we'll be on to something good.
And as for this thread, I think it's great. There are some amazing doers here. We all want the sport to grow and have various ideas on how to do it. No matter what, we are all doing something to promote and advance the sport. That said, I still feel that Beal is not the leader of choice. I don't need to know him personally; I just need to look at how the sport has been marketed over the past decade.
|
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on May 20, 2009 15:43:05 GMT -5
Even tennis and golf (about as elitist as sports come) reach out to lower income communities. We have to do this to grow the sport. That's an excellent point. The PGA of America has The First Tee program nationwide, partnering with both public and private courses to offer low-cost opportunities for kids from any economic demographic the opportunity to participate and learn the sport of golf and more importantly GOLF ETIQUETTE and LIFE LESSONS from a PGA Professional (note: a PGA professional is NOT THE SAME as a PGA Tour Professional). Volleyball lacks an equivalent. EDIT: Ok, on this point I am in error. Volleyball has an equivalent in the Starlings Volleyball and USYVL programs. Hopefully, these programs continue to grow and prosper (and be left alone to continue on their own path by USAV). Oh, and on the club thing, the #1 factor that drives the cost of participation up is paying for the salaries/stipends of the club director, board, and coaches. |
|
|
|
Post by notsocal2 on May 21, 2009 15:35:52 GMT -5
Thanks for the post rogero1 - from Chicago re: the Adversity and SPRI clubs. A few more comments - and a question of two from you.
To follow up a little - I've heard a few complaints on the Adversity brown-nosing w/ USAV, but if it helps out there kids, so be it. They probably have more than their share of participants because of this.
As for SPRI - also no complaints on techniques. But of the 6-7 kids talked to, there is definately something more than that - for a reason of not actively supporting USAV. Who in their right mind wouldn't want a set of 3,4,5 or whatever college coaches for a week or two training your players? Sorry - not buying it, as this is more than a one off, and we are talking of several different years and genders. There is more to it - and I find it unfortunate. and of course - just an opinion.
By the way - would be interested in your "ranking" of the top 5-6 girls and boys programs in the midwest these days. You seem to be as expert as anyone else on this site. Would be interesting to hear. Obviously the st. louis program where troy came from, the milwaukee program w/ mathews probably fit in for boys might be in the mix and then also the Milwaukee Sting program, and one from Madison for girls seems to be up and coming, and I coincidently saw the girls Celtic program last year - and these girls were the scrappiest kids I've literally ever seen, not too big but nothing hit the floor.
Please share your thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by cyberVBmidwest on May 21, 2009 16:19:30 GMT -5
Thanks for the post rogero1 - from Chicago re: the Adversity and SPRI clubs. A few more comments - and a question of two from you. To follow up a little - I've heard a few complaints on the Adversity brown-nosing w/ USAV, but if it helps out there kids, so be it. They probably have more than their share of participants because of this. As for SPRI - also no complaints on techniques. But of the 6-7 kids talked to, there is definately something more than that - for a reason of not actively supporting USAV. Who in their right mind wouldn't want a set of 3,4,5 or whatever college coaches for a week or two training your players? Sorry - not buying it, as this is more than a one off, and we are talking of several different years and genders. There is more to it - and I find it unfortunate. and of course - just an opinion. By the way - would be interested in your "ranking" of the top 5-6 girls and boys programs in the midwest these days. You seem to be as expert as anyone else on this site. Would be interesting to hear. Obviously the st. louis program where troy came from, the milwaukee program w/ mathews probably fit in for boys might be in the mix and then also the Milwaukee Sting program, and one from Madison for girls seems to be up and coming, and I coincidently saw the girls Celtic program last year - and these girls were the scrappiest kids I've literally ever seen, not too big but nothing hit the floor. Please share your thoughts. All good questions but off topic for this thread especially the girls club program part...  |
|
|
|
Post by ciscokeed on May 21, 2009 20:12:34 GMT -5
Heading back to the original thread... A few thoughts... Men's D-1 volleyball is really diminishing-not in level of play- it dramatically improves every decade- but for numbers it truly is dying...there were over 50 D-1 programs in the 70's- but Men's Collegiate Club is thriving- more teams and more participants then ever...Women's collegiate vb- absolutely growing- in numbers and in TV exposure. Junior volleyball- far more participants both male and female (not judging the club system- just numbers...) Also, in terms of tv and in terms of legitimacy, volleyball is doing better. When I played college vb in the seventies, and people asked me what sport I played, they looked at me as if I was some kind of fool for playing college vb- like why didn't I play a real sport...Now the general public understands it is a legit sport...However, in terms of a spectator sport we have done very little to bring it to a bigger status. Our club kids who spend all this money and time trying to become a college player rarely attend college matches. The gym should be full of our youngsters- if this is truly their dream, why aren't they showing at their local colleges...The volleyball community does not support itself. Beach players should be at indoor events. Indoor players should flock to the beach events when they hit their hometown...Adult rec leagues should be involved...We lose so much legitmacy when they show the tv game of the week in these enormous arenas with just a smattering of fans who look somewhat bored....When we have had our fledgling pro leagues our community has not supported itself. I saw amazing matches with 50 people in the stands...in an area where we had thousands of volleyball enthusiasts... So basically we have far more participants, but we have never sold our own on actually attending matches... Sorry, I am wandering a little...can't quite get a grip on what I am trying to say...
|
|
|
|
Post by vbvet1 on May 21, 2009 20:41:56 GMT -5
The discussion without the venom is good. Most people in volleyball are working for the sport to grow. Yet, some that have been targeted as thriving on control are working the hardest to grow the sport. Some that are viewed as trying to grow the sport at the club level are only working to protect their self interest. An interesting situation. Yet, the solution to growth will not come from the volleyball structure either USAV or NCAA.
The environment of sport in the USA is different from the rest of the world. Sport in the US is school based. If we want men's volleyball to grow, it must grow in the schools. Develop the sport in the grade schools and it will grow at all levels below the D1 college level including club. There is the possibility of state association high school certification of boy's volleyball in Colorado, Vermont, and other areas in the near future. If this happens there will be an explosion in these states. Illinois is a great example.
It is unlikely that volleyball will ever break into the pro arena of the US. The traditional sports dominate the available market. Yet, the sport can grow without a pro league. The grassroots are linked to the schools. We can hope that NCAA women's sand volleyball will provide the opening in Title 9 for collegiate men's volleyball to expand.
The process will be incremental at best.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mac on May 21, 2009 20:42:15 GMT -5
Heading back to the original thread... A few thoughts... Men's D-1 volleyball is really diminishing-not in level of play- it dramatically improves every decade- but for numbers it truly is dying...there were over 50 D-1 programs in the 70's- The numbers over the last ten years are pretty much the same. It's not dying. It's being threatened, but basing that comment on the numbers in the 70s is not appropriate. The clubs are thriving because it's a popular sport amongst players so there are plenty of them, but those involved can't get their administrators to create a D1 team, so club status it remains. M-VB is a horribly marketed sport in this country. I want to encourage all of you to approach your school's academic marketing professors and department heads to get them to assign a permanent marketing internship team to each of your teams with bona fide marketing professors and local professionals leading the strategies and mentoring the teams. Tap into your market's sports marketing organizations for pro bono support and give them all the encouragement and kuddos you can. Each school is sitting on an untapped golden resource of help right under your noses. |
|
|
|
Post by cyberVBmidwest on May 21, 2009 21:11:44 GMT -5
So basically we have far more participants, but we have never sold our own on actually attending matches... ... This is something I noticed as well. I have been meeting a lot of people that have been playing volleyball for over 20 years but have never attended a college match. A couple of them made it to the World League last year but that is about it. I never asked them but I guess they would much rather just play the sport they love than watch someone else play it. I am wondering if that is unique to some sports versus football, basketball or baseball. Not many 40, 50 and 60 year olds playing those sports like you can find in volleyball. Anyone else notice this??? |
|
|
|
Post by bunnywailer on May 21, 2009 22:22:07 GMT -5
The discussion without the venom is good. Most people in volleyball are working for the sport to grow. Yet, some that have been targeted as thriving on control are working the hardest to grow the sport. Some that are viewed as trying to grow the sport at the club level are only working to protect their self interest. Unless you are willing to supply specific, concrete examples of how those "targeted" for venom are actively working to grow the sport, then my venom (and those of a couple other posters) still win because they are concrete and real. |
|
|
|
Post by beenthere on May 22, 2009 0:25:51 GMT -5
Wow, reading these replies I haven't had a movement like this in years, ty. All of the remarks pro and con are only good if something is done in a pro-active way and not reactive way, will it happen, NOT.
In terms of USAV and junior club programs, well to put it mildly, it's a self-serving, controlling don't rock my boat organization. It's who you know and don't bud in.
Regarding the demographics, well I can count on one hand how many (luckily) players come out of the inner city, why, because the effort, the marketing, the teaching is not there and most of all, the finances of the players familes are not there. (Hello USAV with helping in grants, sponsorships or financial considerations).One of the biggest girl clubs in the suburbs of Chicago will open a girls team as long as they have nine players and grab a parent or desperate college player looking to make some money to be the teams coach. Is it to enhance the players skills or give them goals to shoot for, hell no, ching ching ching ching, the money is flowing in.
With D1 volleyball, think about if your a male in middle school or high school, hardly any exposure about the sport even in the local papers, only one frickin team makes it out three regions of this huge country of ours with one wild card team and how many choices of schools do you have as male high school player. Don't even start with high school volleyball, the breeding ground for inept coaches due to unions and tenure can ruin a kid forever. One local boys high school coach has not had a winning season with the girls or boys since he started about 5 years ago but who cares, the volleyball program is not on the radar.
The biggest thing to think about is the flow of children in school. Presently that flow is juniors in high school to seniors in college. That range of kids is moving towards college and out of college, therefore there will be a big drop in players at the grammar school level and high school level in the near future.
In terms of Adversity, Spri and Ultimate in the Chicago area. They have the geographical area captured, north, south and west (east is the lake), however, they were smart by opening 2nd, 3rd teams minor league teams like "select" "south", etc and the allure of the name blinds the kids with grandiose dreams. Another ching ching for the club. Only if you are over 6' tall or a very good friend of the program will you be on the elite team. I just don't understand it, if you're in high school would you rather sit on the bench and get 5 minutes of garbage time or enjoy the sport and play with a competitive club but not pay big bucks and be a cheerleader. College coaches are sharp enough to evaluate players from all clubs, names of the clubs don't matter. Also Spri has hooked up with the JVDA and now the JVDA is trying to hook up with the AAU, which is more than the USAV has done in years.
I could go on for pages but I won't but I have to admit and I agree that this sport at the club level is so expensive and it is elitist no matter how hard you try to make it work. Now the USAV came out with another brainstorm, if you don't use there hotels at the JO's that they contracted with they won't allow you to enter the tournament. It is so controlling that it really has lost its primary goal, a sport for the kids to play, be competitive and enjoy.
|
|
|
|
Post by rhinovb14 on May 22, 2009 10:00:50 GMT -5
Judging a high school coach on win/loss alone is sometimes an unfair assessment. In the Erie (Buffalo) county of NY all the top programs come a single division (ECIC 1). The coaches of these schools are primarily standout varsity/club volleyball players. They all coach club, run youth leauges, and attend coaches clinics on a regular basis. A winning record in that division is truly an accomplishment. The teams at the bottom of this division routinely beat up on many of the top teams from other divisions. Thus, evaluating a coach strictly on win/loss is misleading. Rather look at their commitment to the sport and the time they invest in developing a program. Sometimes 5 years is just not enough to get the interest....especially if they were a losing team for many years.
|
|
|
|
Post by vbvet1 on May 22, 2009 10:48:05 GMT -5
Some info for Bob to complain about. I must say your posts are entertaining.
The prime legal responsibility of an NGB/USAV are national teams and championships. While we can all say what we want out of USAV, the organization is not capable of everything we in the vb community want with the limited resources available. For one, the Region structure limits grassroots growth, drives costs, and blunts national efforts.
Here are somethings that have been done by USAV national:
National Teams
The USA has just had it's most successful quad ever.
The USA has regained lost political standing in the FIVB.
The US men are back in the World League and reigning champions.
Both men and women are playing full international schedules.
Both teams have national training programs on top of the senior squads, most of who are playing pro much of the year.
Both teams are now based in Anaheim with access to all of the best players and coaches in the US.
Keeping Hugh on staff even though it is with the women. (No surprise as his future employment is greatly enhanced if he can be successful with women. Too bad Speraw would not go for the men, but UCI gave him a nice 5 year deal to stay.)
This has taken effort. The work with the national teams continue in the face of significant funding cuts by the USOC, ie. the WUG team and more. Getting Anaheim on board with the women's team is huge and took a tremendous effort. This will pay-off.
International
You may recently have noticed that USAV is now hosting international events. They include various NORCECA Championships, the Pan-AM Cup, and the World League. How about the 2012 beach qualifier. This all takes effort.
Men's College
Who do you think worked vigorously to help get the Carolinas Conference together? Jamie did most of the work, but USAV was involved in the effort. USAV continues to push for programs to be added. The D3 expansion is an example. Soon the NCAA may actually have 2 men's collegiate championships. Some day maybe 3, D1, D2, D3.
High Performance
The high performance programs have expanded immensely in recent years due to an application of resources. USA is now represented in most major FIVB competitions and is competing for medals. Plus, the introduction of the High Performance Championship. This did not happen before.
Junior beach
Have you noticed the growth of the junior beach tour?
USOC forced re-organization
Do you know about the changes in the organization and the new board with media, business, and AVP affiliations?
We should want more, but the staff of USAV is working hard on a wide range of levels. These people should not be characterized as control freaks. While Beal does not have the sweetest of dispositions, he is working for the sport and is willing to take on some of the organizations that are only interested in the almighty dollar at the expense of the sport. He is doing some things that others did not have the guts to do.
Give them some credit. They are the people that have gotten Hugh, Karch, Jenny, Speraw, Knipe, Dunphy, Larson, and others involved. Are these not the people you want pushing to grow the game?
I am a former player and long time fan of the game. Above are things that did not exist in the past. While the regions have let many good things of the past die, such as quality adult vb, the programs identified above may keep the sport moving forward against some difficult odds. I wish them well.
Sorry many of you do not share my views, but the discourse is interesting.
|
|
