|
Post by guest2 on Sept 1, 2014 10:17:11 GMT -5
GLRA: I think we're taking a "snapshot" of the current AVP and "playing" it over the next 2 years. Are Summer/Day as BAD as all say? Hey, Summer is 21 and in 2 years, will be a formidable player to address. Retro, Tyra/Wacholder? I'm wondering why they weren't pulling on every hit of Wacholder, but have been told "that wouldn't work"...still not convinced. Then to JJJ/Davis, always close, but something was missing...Kessy/Ross, pretty early on for those 2, but they were finishing VERY similar to Fendy/Brooke sans the back problems in the "May/Walsh-day"...Brooke Niles...sorry; Lindquist sisters (no blocking!), not a viable AVP nor FIVB threat......anyway, from my "armchair", I'm not so sure GLRA's list of '07 is that compelling, but WOULD like to hear some other views (NOT that GLRA is not the holy grail of VT)...What about Gysin (only know of the Santa Cruz history of the family), but what is SHE doing in 5th place seeded 11th! Day/Engle finishing as they were seeded? How long will that continue and how good are they!? Can't Pavlik hold her own with the "'07 bunch"? Oh, well, Monday will be here soon.... Whitney absolutely could not have held her own with the 2007 bunch. Not even close I think one problem with Summer getting significantly better over the next couple years is where does that improvement come from. Usually with a player at 21 who has had some success but matures into an elite player is that the improvement comes in skills. A good example would be Jose Loiola, Swatik, Whitmarsh, April Ross, Lane Carico etc. All of those players had great athletic ability that you could see and their skills eventually caught up with that ability (or might in Lane's case). With Summer, assume she has elite level ball control, wouldnt she still be slow? Wouldnt she still have a weak swing and a poor jump? To put it another way, make a list of the ten best athletes on the AVP (not even the FIVB, just the AVP) is Summer even on that list?
|
|
|
Post by tree on Sept 1, 2014 13:57:18 GMT -5
@ Guest2 it was 2009 when Krossy won the World Championship. Unfortunately for Fendi her having no career wins is a product of the era she came up in.While she always had pretty good partners she never had what one would call an "elite" partner. Fendi has got better skill wise as the years have passed and I hope she makes it to the 2016 Olympics. As for Summer Ross I still think she will be a future star but she has to really commit herself in the off season to the gym and sand drills to work on speed and power. No one is born naturally talented its earned.
|
|
|
Post by stevek on Sept 1, 2014 15:00:46 GMT -5
GLRA: I think we're taking a "snapshot" of the current AVP and "playing" it over the next 2 years. Are Summer/Day as BAD as all say? Hey, Summer is 21 and in 2 years, will be a formidable player to address. Retro, Tyra/Wacholder? I'm wondering why they weren't pulling on every hit of Wacholder, but have been told "that wouldn't work"...still not convinced. Then to JJJ/Davis, always close, but something was missing...Kessy/Ross, pretty early on for those 2, but they were finishing VERY similar to Fendy/Brooke sans the back problems in the "May/Walsh-day"...Brooke Niles...sorry; Lindquist sisters (no blocking!), not a viable AVP nor FIVB threat......anyway, from my "armchair", I'm not so sure GLRA's list of '07 is that compelling, but WOULD like to hear some other views (NOT that GLRA is not the holy grail of VT)...What about Gysin (only know of the Santa Cruz history of the family), but what is SHE doing in 5th place seeded 11th! Day/Engle finishing as they were seeded? How long will that continue and how good are they!? Can't Pavlik hold her own with the "'07 bunch"? Oh, well, Monday will be here soon.... To me, the thing that stands out is comparing 08 Olympic qualifying to now. Im 08, the US women had four teams in the top 8 for qualifying, with Kessy/Ross and Tyra/Rachel right behind the two teams that went to the Olympics. Now, as GLM says, we're in danger of not having a 2nd team in the top 16! That says it all right there. All that said, last year we were thinking that we were entering another golden age of women's volley, with many US teams getting on the podium on the FIVB. Hopefully, this year will just be a blip and we'll see some shake ups, some recoveries and some renewed focus next year when qualifying starts. But I agree, it doesn't look great now.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Sept 1, 2014 15:25:16 GMT -5
@ Guest2 it was 2009 when Krossy won the World Championship. Unfortunately for Fendi her having no career wins is a product of the era she came up in.While she always had pretty good partners she never had what one would call an "elite" partner. Fendi has got better skill wise as the years have passed and I hope she makes it to the 2016 Olympics. As for Summer Ross I still think she will be a future star but she has to really commit herself in the off season to the gym and sand drills to work on speed and power. No one is born naturally talented its earned. They did win in 2007 though, Stavanger. Fendi is the same age as April Ross. I like her too, but there are a lot of players her age or younger who have won tournaments. Ross, Fopma, Brooke, Day, Summer Ross, Pavlik, etc. Fendrick has played with partners as good as or better than the partners all of those players won with, other than Whitney and April
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Sept 1, 2014 15:31:22 GMT -5
There is a really interesting choice for Fendi this offseason. Right now Brooke is better than Carico (if Brooke is healthy) but Lane is a partner with whom Fendrick could eventually make some noise internationally. Does Fendi stay loyal to Brooke, or make the jump?
|
|
|
Post by tree on Sept 1, 2014 15:46:27 GMT -5
I do not think that Fendi can make that switch next year with it being a qualifying year. Carico probably has a good future ahead of her but I do not think by 2016. Lauren is 32 right now and this may be her best shot at a run. I do agree that she does have some tough decisions to make. I was thinking maybe Nicole B or taking a shot at Summer and working real hard with her in the off season. Very tough decisions.
|
|
|
Post by stevek on Sept 1, 2014 17:01:41 GMT -5
With three or maybe four Opens after San Paulo, makes you wonder if all the US teams will shut it down or use those as an opportunity to try out some new partners prior to qualifying starting next season.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Sept 1, 2014 18:32:44 GMT -5
I do not think that Fendi can make that switch next year with it being a qualifying year. Carico probably has a good future ahead of her but I do not think by 2016. Lauren is 32 right now and this may be her best shot at a run. I do agree that she does have some tough decisions to make. I was thinking maybe Nicole B or taking a shot at Summer and working real hard with her in the off season. Very tough decisions. Thats why I think its such an interesting choice. I think Lauren has to look at this year and think she will qualify with Brooke. Likewise I think she looks at this year and thinks she cannot medal with Brooke. With Lane much less chance of qualifying, but a realistic, albeit long, shot at a medal
|
|
|
Post by klazk on Sept 1, 2014 19:05:43 GMT -5
As for the U.S. #2 team, I think Fendrick and Sweat have answered that question for the time being. But is that good enough for the U.S. to even qualify for two teams at Rio? I think it's a legitimate concern that as of right now, USA is a lock for one spot at the Olympics, but a second U.S. team qualifying in the top 16 looks shaky. I honestly don't think the risk is that high. Assuming they use about 75% of the grand slams (which would be similar to 2012 rules) and using 2014 as a "mock" period, it would look something like this right now. The below includes eliminating the #3 and worse teams for countries with more than 2 in the top 16. #13 Fendrick/Sweat #18 Day/Ross (#17 if you eliminate Fendrick/Sweat as another US team) So in a year where everyone thinks the US teams have not lived up to their potential, they have one inside the top 16 and one just barely on the outside. I will accept the caveat that Day/Ross have benefited from advantageous seeding based on their 2013 performance that they will not have going into next year. On top of that, there is also the continental cup option. So, IMHO, if the US doesn't have 2 women's teams in Rio it is a combination of overconfidence/arrogance on the part of USAV and the US players. To elaborate on that a little, Hunkus/DiCello have 3 golds and 2 bronzes at NORCECAs this year. If the US is really in danger, USAV should send Day/Ross, Fendrick/Sweat or a similar highly ranked team to take care of the continental cup option. No disrespect to Hunkus/DiCello, but if they can have that record in 5 NORCECAs, then it would take some really bad luck or bad playing for one of our "top" teams to not get a second team in through the continental cup.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Sept 2, 2014 8:09:49 GMT -5
How are entries to things like the Continental Cup/NORCECA decided? I had always assumed it was mostly based on who was interested in going (hence Will Montgomery constantly participating). Is there a way using those points that a lesser team could overcome an FIVB pots deficit?
|
|
|
Post by klazk on Sept 2, 2014 8:40:00 GMT -5
How are entries to things like the Continental Cup/NORCECA decided? I had always assumed it was mostly based on who was interested in going (hence Will Montgomery constantly participating). Is there a way using those points that a lesser team could overcome an FIVB pots deficit? USAV has held qualifiers for NORCECAs with the winner getting the first choice of entry for the next "x" number of NORCECAs. After the winner, I'm not sure how it is decided (i.e. 2nd place team gets second chance, 3rd third chance, etc. etc.) The max from a NORCECA event is 140 points for first place, except for the continental final where first is 250 (individual points, not team). So, to put it in perspective, I think Day/S. Ross currently have 900 points each right now. If an individual won 5 NORCECA events AND the NORCECA final, they would have 950.
|
|
|
Post by volleyballjim on Sept 2, 2014 10:37:21 GMT -5
guest2: So am I to understand that Whitney Pavlik could not "hold her own" against Rachel Wacholder? And, even under "not even close" conditions? Man, that is a hard one to agree with . . .
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Sept 2, 2014 11:26:01 GMT -5
guest2: So am I to understand that Whitney Pavlik could not "hold her own" against Rachel Wacholder? And, even under "not even close" conditions? Man, that is a hard one to agree with . . . You could not have picked a better person because I never thought much of Rachel's game but even so, Whitney is not close to as good as Rachel was. Compare Rachel's season and a half with EY to Whitney's season with Kerri. Most people think EY was the third best player on tour in those days. On a much deeper tour, with the third best player, Rachel won 5 of 23 events and was in the finals 60% of the time. On a shallow tour, playing with the best player, Whitney won 1 of 5 and was in the finals 40% of the time. In addition Kerri/Whitney were repeatedly embarrassed by Ross/Day. Out of 12 games against Ross/Day, Whitney/Kerri failed to score 18 pts 8 times (I left out the one fifteen pt game they played. At best, Whitney is barely in the top 10 now. Day/Ross, Walross, Fendi/Sweat, Carico, and Hochevar all have better finishes this year. Besides all that, Rachel not only won a couple FIVBs, but she had better finishes in her one FIVB season with Tyra Turner than Whitney has had in her whole FIVB career.
|
|
|
Post by geddyleeridesagain on Sept 2, 2014 13:45:33 GMT -5
As for the U.S. #2 team, I think Fendrick and Sweat have answered that question for the time being. But is that good enough for the U.S. to even qualify for two teams at Rio? I think it's a legitimate concern that as of right now, USA is a lock for one spot at the Olympics, but a second U.S. team qualifying in the top 16 looks shaky. I honestly don't think the risk is that high. Assuming they use about 75% of the grand slams (which would be similar to 2012 rules) and using 2014 as a "mock" period, it would look something like this right now. The below includes eliminating the #3 and worse teams for countries with more than 2 in the top 16. #13 Fendrick/Sweat #18 Day/Ross (#17 if you eliminate Fendrick/Sweat as another US team) So in a year where everyone thinks the US teams have not lived up to their potential, they have one inside the top 16 and one just barely on the outside. I will accept the caveat that Day/Ross have benefited from advantageous seeding based on their 2013 performance that they will not have going into next year. On top of that, there is also the continental cup option. So, IMHO, if the US doesn't have 2 women's teams in Rio it is a combination of overconfidence/arrogance on the part of USAV and the US players. To elaborate on that a little, Hunkus/DiCello have 3 golds and 2 bronzes at NORCECAs this year. If the US is really in danger, USAV should send Day/Ross, Fendrick/Sweat or a similar highly ranked team to take care of the continental cup option. No disrespect to Hunkus/DiCello, but if they can have that record in 5 NORCECAs, then it would take some really bad luck or bad playing for one of our "top" teams to not get a second team in through the continental cup. 13th is a few bad finishes away from 17th and out of the Olympics. But I'll rephrase: I think it's more probable that the US will qualify two teams than not, but the margin is much thinner than I'd like to see. USAV took the 2012 Continental Cup very seriously, but the players did not. Every top team declined to participate. Will that change? We'll see. And pinning qualification hopes on the Continental Cup is a dangerous proposition, even if a team like Fendrick/Sweat or Doherty/Lucena played - one bad match and you're out, not to mention (generally speaking) tough playing conditions, occasionally dodgy NORCECA refereeing, and less-than-objective tournament officials. But I hope you're right.
|
|
|
Post by klazk on Sept 2, 2014 14:35:37 GMT -5
I think it's more probable that the US will qualify two teams than not, but the margin is much thinner than I'd like to see. 100% percentage agree with this. Would like to see one or two teams step up and make this less of a concern. I think the real risk with the women's side being that shallow is injury. It isn't inconceivable that someone goes down with an injury that prevents them from playing in the necessary number of tournaments. If that were to happen, there is a distinct possibility there wouldn't be another team there to step up and get into the top 16. In 2012, Fendrick/Niles would have gone if it wasn't for the other teams. Branagh/Akers were 18th with only 11 events - meaning if someone had gotten hurt, they likely could have played in a couple more events and broken into the top 16. Obviously Fuerbringer/Lucena would have been top 16 in 2012 if either of the top 2 teams hadn't qualified.
|
|