|
Post by Gorflorg Orshforg on Aug 13, 2012 20:28:14 GMT -5
It is out of toppic but..... I've noticed that at this whole tournament (both men and women): - The GM and BM contenders (both men and women) came out from the same pool. - The teams who finished higher in pool play finished lower overall - In 3 out of 4 medal games the teams played 2nd time and all 1st match losers came on top in the medal game. ? It was a weird Olympics.
|
|
|
Post by bobk3333 on Aug 13, 2012 21:30:52 GMT -5
The "will-to-win" was the difference. My best memory of the Olympics is from 1976, when the East German women who had never done anything in swimming, came in and kicked ass like no one had ever done before. It was obvious that they had used massive amounts of steroids -- we haven't seen women with such massive muscles and deep voices since. The East Germans won every race but the last one, the 4x100 freestyle, where a determined group of United States women swam out of their minds to win. They beat the American record by 10 seconds and the world record, set by the East Germans, by 4 seconds. It was mind over matter, determination over steroids. It is a feat the likes of, we are not likely to see again. What those U.S. women had in that last race in 1976 was "the will-to-win." The Brazilian womens vollyball team had it in spades this weekend and the U.S. team had very little of it. I agree with most of the assessments about the coaching moves in the game against Brazil, but even if all the correct moves were made, it would not have made much of a difference. It was not talent, strategy or coaching moves that were the determining factors. The will-to-win, or lack of it, was the biggest reason the Brazilians won and the U.S. lost. Lindsey Berg stated strongly, several times during the Olympics that, "we *are* a gold medal team," implying that winning gold was a foregone conclusion and playing the actual games were just a formality. If that isn't over-confidence, what is? She even continued that line of thinking after they lost saying, "We are still a gold medal team, even if we lost." What the hell does that mean? That kind of thinking is totally screwed up. With that kind of thinking -- from their captain no less -- it is no wonder they lost. Hugh McCutcheon is from the same school of thought as Jim McLaughlin, the University of Washington womens volleyball head coach. They are all about white boards, stats, and continually improving the stats. I have had problems, the last few years, with McLaughlin stating that his only goal is improving. (UW has not done anything significant since he started spouting that nonsense.) Winning does not have to be a goal, according to their school of thought. McLaughlin and McCutheon believe that if the stats on the white board keep improving, the wins will surely come. Many of the U.S. women players believed this. They were overconfident and thought that with their talent and positive white board numbers, the gold medal was inevitable. This team -- which was coached like emotionless robots, where only cold statistics mattered -- had no heart, no emotion and no real will-to-win. If the problem is not addressed, we will no chance at a gold medal in Rio, on their home turf, where the Brazilians will be even more motivated than they were in London. We need winners with heart and fire to match the Brazilians: Karch Kirely as head coach and Courtney Thompson as captain. Kirely's will-to-win is the greatest in the history of the sport, one of the greatest in all sports. Thompson comes from a long line of West Point graduates and military heroes. Her grandfather won a medal of honor for charging up a hill against machine guns in Korea, and more importantly, getting his men to follow him. Courtney Thompson is the best leader I have ever seen in any sport. She is capable of leading people up a hill to take out machine guns. She is the real deal. She should have been put in the game against Brazil. Her fire and tremendous will-to-win could have turned things around. Once again, we will have more talent than any other team in Rio, but talent alone will not win it. We will not win with a group of all-stars and will not win with a group of players with great stats, but without deep desire. We need to match the Brazilians at the psychological level. We need to give Karch and Courtney the keys and let them drive. They will instill a deep desire to win that will more than match the Brazilians. .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2012 9:54:33 GMT -5
The "will to win" is another one of those unproven -- can it ever be proved? -- maxims that floats around in sports. "Who wants it more?" is its corollary.
First of all, someone has to lose. That's the nature of the beast.
Second, too much is being inferred from one match.
Finally, there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to disprove the counter theory: The USA lost because they wanted it TOO MUCH.
The most likely reason? Brazil played better in this specific match.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 14, 2012 9:59:58 GMT -5
You can't always get what you want, but if you try sometime you just might find you get what you need.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Aug 14, 2012 12:52:16 GMT -5
GM2 does not necessarily lead to "emotionless robots" - if anyone is a refutation of that it is Courtney Thompson, an uber-competitive paragon of the "will to win" (in her four years at UW, she took her team to an elite eight, final four, national championship, and final four). Christal Morrison was not a robot. Krista Vansant is not a robot.
The real problem, it seems to me, might have been that on the national team it was experience and seniority that largely (although not entirely) determined rosters, not the cauldron, with the tendency being for the next player in line to inherit their position when the previous starter retired. That is because players are seen as investments, because of the time required to develop them. Now, the result might not have been any different if everyone was thrown into the cauldron, but at least they would have had to fight (like dawgs?) for their spot.
The biggest problem was that this team lacked vocal leadership on the floor. Tom was a quiet, not a vocal, leader. The only potentially vocal leader was Thompson, who was left on the bench.
|
|
|
Post by VolleyTX on Aug 14, 2012 13:26:09 GMT -5
Exactly! I mentioned in another thread how several starters (most notably Berg and Hooker) were not in their typical game play attitude. They were quite "intoverted" on the court. Playing for that one thing you've wanted since you were a little girl can disctract the mind from the real goal: Winning the match. I'm not saying they didn't give 100% on the court. They looked distracted.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Aug 14, 2012 16:50:20 GMT -5
How one can expect to win when we've never won a gold (even if the coach had) is beyond me. You can't take anything for granted. Any other attitude is complacency.
After the first set, we believed it was going to be like stealing candy from a baby.
|
|
roger
Sophomore
Posts: 211
|
Post by roger on Aug 16, 2012 3:38:24 GMT -5
Unfortunately I saw little of the Gold Medal match with the confusion NBC had on letting my area know when it was going to be on TV. From what I saw Brazil just was more alert, determined and passed 3's all day long while the US on occasion seemed to be counting on miracles(Hooker and Hodge) We got out dug as if we did not know that defense is critical and the mantra says the "Defense wins Championships"
|
|
roger
Sophomore
Posts: 211
|
Post by roger on Aug 16, 2012 3:45:51 GMT -5
Alisha Glass won a lot of National Championships and managed to lead a team that needed it when the chips were down(Texas ahead by 2 PSU wins in 5) She also blocks, attacks and quietly gets the job done. Why is Thompson the automatic inherited one althouygh I admit she has great talent?
|
|
|
Post by setter on Aug 16, 2012 9:41:08 GMT -5
Glass would be a great fit, I agree with roger she has the winning resume!
|
|
|
Post by Murina on Aug 16, 2012 10:50:13 GMT -5
Alisha Glass won a lot of National Championships and managed to lead a team that needed it when the chips were down(Texas ahead by 2 PSU wins in 5) She also blocks, attacks and quietly gets the job done. Why is Thompson the automatic inherited one althouygh I admit she has great talent? There is going to be a new coach, so no one will be "the automatic inherited" setter. The new coach has a lot of great choices! Glass, Thompson, Lloyd and Spicer at the top of the list. Several more potentials coming through as well. That will be one of the more interesting position battles going on around the world!
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Aug 16, 2012 11:20:40 GMT -5
The new coach has a lot of great choices! Glass, Thompson, Lloyd and Spicer at the top of the list. Several more potentials coming through as well. That will be one of the more interesting position battles going on around the world! Those four would seem to be the obvious frontrunners. I doubt if any of them should be automatically presumed to be the default choice. New coaching staff might mean a new outlook on what the role of the setter should be.
|
|
|
Post by Phaedrus on Aug 17, 2012 5:54:27 GMT -5
Alisha Glass won a lot of National Championships and managed to lead a team that needed it when the chips were down(Texas ahead by 2 PSU wins in 5) She also blocks, attacks and quietly gets the job done. Why is Thompson the automatic inherited one althouygh I admit she has great talent? While I count myself a Glass fan, you can not simply take her laurels from American college athletics and extrapolate that into international success. As many have stated before, the leap is monumental. She is well on her way but the conclusion is as yet unsettled. Playing internationally is like hitting driver in golf: every weakness, kink, and fault in your technique gets amplified a hundredfold. Sent from my iPad using ProBoards app
|
|
mrad
Sophomore
Posts: 208
|
Post by mrad on Aug 19, 2012 1:55:33 GMT -5
Larson had a terrible olympics. Although she is still young , I do not trust her. They need another OH besides Hooker. Hodge is useless because she can't receive/pass the ball. Once Hooker was off a little bit, there was no one else there.
I though Kristin Richards could have helped if she was on the final team. Richards is a better all around player than Hodge
The roster selection was questonable. Arruda over Bown?
Come on, the B team beat the same Brazil team in Grand Prix. The talent was there.
Heather Bown also could have helped because of her experience. Harmotto was good but too in-experienced.
Here hoping that Karch will be the next HC. Hugh did an incredible job. The team took over #1 ranking.
|
|
|
Post by spalding on Aug 20, 2012 0:27:37 GMT -5
Alisha Glass won a lot of National Championships and managed to lead a team that needed it when the chips were down(Texas ahead by 2 PSU wins in 5) She also blocks, attacks and quietly gets the job done. Why is Thompson the automatic inherited one althouygh I admit she has great talent? While I count myself a Glass fan, you can not simply take her laurels from American college athletics and extrapolate that into international success. As many have stated before, the leap is monumental. She is well on her way but the conclusion is as yet unsettled. Playing internationally is like hitting driver in golf: every weakness, kink, and fault in your technique gets amplified a hundredfold. Sent from my iPad using ProBoards app Glass has 5 Gold Medals for Team USA in a short two years. The leap has not been monumental at all for her. Whenever she has been given the chance, she has come thru beautifully. Glass should never have been left off that team after what she contributed to Team USA the last two years and the victories she led them to. Classic example of over-coaching that started with that move and ended with more over-coaching in the Gold Medal match.
|
|