|
Post by guest2 on Mar 26, 2014 15:03:52 GMT -5
Its nice that USA Volleyball is working to give more teams a chance to play internationally, but where are the young male players?
The three US teams that are in the World Cup plus the four teams playing off to get in are a rough approximation of the top 14 us players (maybe some at the bottom or top that should be in, but roughly)
There are 4 by my count that are younger than Kent Steffes was when he retired. (and two of those are only one year younger). The only young player we have with real star potential is Tri Bourne.
Of the top 4 teams
Phil/Sean Casey/Jake Ryan/Nick Todd/Theo John/Tri
There are the same amount of players over 40 as under 30 (and Theo will be 30 soon). Is this a crisis? A change in the way the game is played?
Thoughts?
Stoklos, Hovland, Blanton and Lambert won a combined total of 0 tournaments when they were Jake Gibb's age or older
|
|
|
Post by volleyballjim on Mar 26, 2014 16:11:44 GMT -5
GREAT post. Is it the demise of the AVP and/or the money and costs of travel now that FIVB is the only viable road to "riches" and I use that term "riches" quite loosely....
|
|
|
Post by thenetset on Mar 26, 2014 16:14:57 GMT -5
I'm guessing it's Title IX's fault somehow. That one never gets old.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 26, 2014 17:03:31 GMT -5
I'm guessing it's Title IX's fault somehow. That one never gets old. I think Title IX in the abstract has been an absolutely brilliant piece of social engineering. It has empowered tens of thousands of girls and had massive multiplier effects across society. That said, it has hurt mens college volleyball and I don't think there is a case to be made that it hasn't, but I doubt that has had anything to do with the lack of young beach players. After all back in the day there were even fewer college teams and plenty of up and comers. Where are the young Karches and Sinjins who are down at Cali beaches playing all day? At least in terms of big guys, its so much easier to make an impact than it used to be, so why aren't guys stepping up? Is it just the lack of money?
|
|
|
Post by crawdaddy on Mar 26, 2014 17:32:03 GMT -5
I've thought about this before, and here are my best guesses:
1. Collapse of the AVP. Not just because the money was gone, but young players didn't have professional role models.
2. Year-round indoor volleyball. This is a huge factor. When Karch and his contemporaries were in high school and college, they probably spent as much, if not more time playing beach than indoor. With club volleyball, US HP teams, off-season college training, many players barely have time to touch the sand. Compare the hours Karch logged on the beach by the time he graduated from college to say Tony Ciarrelli (one of our best young players who grew up in a similar beach environment to Karch) and I would bet it wouldn't even be close. So if kids out of college want to be beach players, they often have to first learn the basic skills. I don't think it's a coincidence that several of our top beach players (Sean, Jake, Phil, Nick) really didn't have extensive indoor careers.
3. Generational mindset. Just hypothesizing here, but a generation of indoor players that had their lunch packed by mom for every club volleyball tournament and have only played in hyper-organized clubs, leagues, and tournaments, might not be as suited to the more self-driven nature of beach volleyball.
4. Training and nutrition. Advances have made it easier for guys like Jake Gibb to play longer and stay on top.
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Mar 27, 2014 7:54:18 GMT -5
to your post crawfish, I think #1, lead to more players having longer indoor careers. Look at Paterson, He played in the PR indoor league as recently as 2012 I believe. There are some talented young players, but there is a lack of BIG young players outside of Bourne. Casebeer has potential at 6'5 (I hope Jennings sticks w him for a while), but I don't know other BIGs besides Ciarrelli - 6'6 & Garrett Wilson - 6'8 under 25 (of course I'm Florida, not privy to the players like GLM is(HINT,HINT)).
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 27, 2014 9:28:07 GMT -5
I don't get why guys don't try to do both now. Karch, Hov, Dodd, Casey, Lambert, a lot of top players have competed indoors abroad and then played beach in the summers. Especially now, when the crossover is easier than it has ever been, why hasn't a Priddy or a Salmon ever given it a shot? Maybe indoor plus national team is too much, but those are the same considerations previous generations faced.
A player like Matt Anderson could win AVP tournaments with absolutely minimal prep. I would put him as one of the top 5 big men with two months of practice.
I think all of Crawfish's reasons sound legit but I think 3 is probably the most valid. Not only is the upcoming generation accustomed to so much structure etc., but the new players didn't come up at a time when BVB was cool. They aren't like Metzger or Lambert who looked up to Karch, Stoklos, Hov and Sinjin. Dax, Nygaard, Todd etc. really that whole generation don't seem like the types who could have sold kids on the beach lifestyle
|
|
|
Post by vbpr on Mar 27, 2014 10:17:46 GMT -5
Young players are at work. I think it's the money. BVBINFO.com shows Karch earning 6 figures throughout the 90's. In 1996 with 22 events, he made $492,000 in prize money alone. I think sponsors were more generous back then, as well.
In 2013, Tri Bourne hooks up with a great established partner, plays in 7 events, and makes $25,000. After flights, hotels, and entry fees how much does he net? Add in opportunity cost since it's hard to hold a regular job while training and traveling at this level.
How can young players fund this? Any ideas?
|
|
|
Post by crawdaddy on Mar 27, 2014 10:28:59 GMT -5
How can young players fund this? Any ideas? Right now, I can't think of any other way than USA Volleyball funneling some % of those millions they collect from club volleyball parents to support young beach players.
|
|
|
Post by Semp12 on Mar 27, 2014 12:51:20 GMT -5
I'm guessing it's Title IX's fault somehow. That one never gets old. That is extremely ignorant if you actually believe Title IX does not affect men's volleyball here in the US. The answer is pretty simple. Indoor volleyball can actually support a professional career, although not in the US, while beach cannot for anyone outside of the top 10 teams (to be generous). So for a college guy, do you work with High Performance or go to the beach? Priddy has played some beach in the past. To me, he would be a stud if he put some serious training into it. Salmon plays beach now I believe, although not sure how serious he takes it. I thought I saw his name in results somewhere and he has been around playing. Matt Anderson could obviously be a very good player. I don't think "minimal prep" would win him tournaments against the top US teams, but he could do well pretty quickly. Rooney was a stereotypical indoor stud who played some beach and got a stud partner (Nick). He was good but I do think it takes a bit more to take you to the next level (Phil, Gibb, etc). Lastly, the indoor game has changed. More times than not, at 14 years old you get put in the middle if you are the tallest, and taken out in the back row for the libero as that is the "norm". Even with all the subs available, the specialization indoors is at a different level from the past.
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Mar 27, 2014 13:23:35 GMT -5
Hopefully the Boys will tag along as the girls junior's & college becomes more popular.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 27, 2014 15:31:22 GMT -5
Young players are at work. I think it's the money. BVBINFO.com shows Karch earning 6 figures throughout the 90's. In 1996 with 22 events, he made $492,000 in prize money alone. I think sponsors were more generous back then, as well. In 2013, Tri Bourne hooks up with a great established partner, plays in 7 events, and makes $25,000. After flights, hotels, and entry fees how much does he net? Add in opportunity cost since it's hard to hold a regular job while training and traveling at this level. How can young players fund this? Any ideas? I was thinking about the financial situation and I guess the overseas incentives are somewhat new, but I think to a large extent it works in reverse to how we are thinking. Lets say you are a 35-40 year old mid-level player, or even mid-top. When the money goes down you are much more likely to quit than a 25 year old. That's how it has always been in BVB with the young guys who can put in the time benefitting while the older guys with mouths to feed and jobs fall off. In the more recent era Andrew Smith and John Hanley had to put work first, or chose to, Dax got an offseason job, Kent Steffes quit, Hyden chose to become more of a part time player, etc. I think the economics argument should go the other way. There is something missing from the appeal of bvb that used to draw players.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 27, 2014 15:37:43 GMT -5
I'm guessing it's Title IX's fault somehow. That one never gets old. That Matt Anderson could obviously be a very good player. I don't think "minimal prep" would win him tournaments against the top US teams, but he could do well pretty quickly. Rooney was a stereotypical indoor stud who played some beach and got a stud partner (Nick). He was good but I do think it takes a bit more to take you to the next level (Phil, Gibb, etc). Lastly, the indoor game has changed. More times than not, at 14 years old you get put in the middle if you are the tallest, and taken out in the back row for the libero as that is the "norm". Even with all the subs available, the specialization indoors is at a different level from the past. Nick in those days was not the top 3 defender he became. I think a lot has changed since Rooney played. Specifically the game has adapted to the short court. I think if you look at how easily Brad Keenan adapted to the beach game just a couple years after Rooney, it shows how much easier it got for big guys. Also if you look at Theo and Ryan last year and the year before, it shows how much less is required of a big guy now. Anderson would be better than Ryan at every single skill except maybe setting within 45 days and he is a much better athlete. I think if he stated April 1 of this year to train beach, and got a good partner, he would make a final this year and probably get a win.
|
|
|
Post by volleyballer4life on Mar 28, 2014 14:12:29 GMT -5
I apologize to those that have heard my tangent on this multiple times: We as players are unknown by the masses. Even when the AVP was up and running, how many fans that walk into the event can name more than 4-5 players tops? Someone said earlier, there are no role models, no one for fans to identify with, no feeling of "Going to an event to support my team" like there is with the 4 Major Sports. While players may not like it, I firmly believe that we should be doing more to get involved with the local community. You can read my blog about what I'd like to see here, but I think the players should be spending time in the cities they're competing in Monday-Wednesday and doing clinics for juniors in that area. Charge an extra $10-15 and include tickets to the AVP event. A) The camp generates money B) It will increase attendance for your matches C) You can get a cult following, which will be more enticing if you're shooting for individual sponsorships. People can say players don't want to do this: I stand by the fact that while we always talk about the "Golden Era" for our sport, realistically we are at a spot similar to the NBA/NFL players of the 60's/70's, who regularly traveled by train/coach on planes, worked jobs in the off-season, etc. You want the money? Gotta find a way to appeal, being talented at what you do simply isn't enough. And I don't plan on relying on people like Donald Sun, who while I'm pleased with what he's trying to do, isn't relying on the younger players making a living in order to continue making his. You'd think USAv would jump all over this business model as they have such a good grip on the juniors scene. People that go with the "If you build it, they will come" and neglect the reality that sponsors are going to be cautious with the last few AVP runs are thinking more as volleyball fans than they are business-minded. We HAVE to get the interest up, and with the juniors scene booming, we're crazy not to make them are target demographic. Hell, have juniors events attached to the pro events! There's so much potential if people are willing to build a nice foundation for a few years instead of insisting on having their mansion now but putting it on quicksand.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 28, 2014 14:42:51 GMT -5
I apologize to those that have heard my tangent on this multiple times: We as players are unknown by the masses. Even when the AVP was up and running, how many fans that walk into the event can name more than 4-5 players tops? Someone said earlier, there are no role models, no one for fans to identify with, no feeling of "Going to an event to support my team" like there is with the 4 Major Sports. While players may not like it, I firmly believe that we should be doing more to get involved with the local community. You can read my blog about what I'd like to see here, but I think the players should be spending time in the cities they're competing in Monday-Wednesday and doing clinics for juniors in that area. Charge an extra $10-15 and include tickets to the AVP event. A) The camp generates money B) It will increase attendance for your matches C) You can get a cult following, which will be more enticing if you're shooting for individual sponsorships. People can say players don't want to do this: I stand by the fact that while we always talk about the "Golden Era" for our sport, realistically we are at a spot similar to the NBA/NFL players of the 60's/70's, who regularly traveled by train/coach on planes, worked jobs in the off-season, etc. You want the money? Gotta find a way to appeal, being talented at what you do simply isn't enough. And I don't plan on relying on people like Donald Sun, who while I'm pleased with what he's trying to do, isn't relying on the younger players making a living in order to continue making his. You'd think USAv would jump all over this business model as they have such a good grip on the juniors scene. People that go with the "If you build it, they will come" and neglect the reality that sponsors are going to be cautious with the last few AVP runs are thinking more as volleyball fans than they are business-minded. We HAVE to get the interest up, and with the juniors scene booming, we're crazy not to make them are target demographic. Hell, have juniors events attached to the pro events! There's so much potential if people are willing to build a nice foundation for a few years instead of insisting on having their mansion now but putting it on quicksand. Do people still say +1? If so consider it said. Great points all around.
|
|