|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Sept 9, 2014 9:03:56 GMT -5
With just 1 AVP, and 1 FIVB left here are some of my thoughts heading into the off-season:
#1 Ross/Day - Do they see a need to change it up? are there better options for these players? Could Ross make a play for Fendrick?
#2 Men's top 5 teams stay or go? - at some point throughout the year, all 5 teams have been discussed about what is best for each of them
A. Casey/Jake - They have cleaned up on the AVP, but only 1 FIVB medal. Both have looked better in earlier years
B. Phil/Sean - Slow start to the season started the questioning, but 3 FIVB wins in the middle quelled that talk. Phil's injury keeps them for being the team of the year on the men's side
C. Tri/John - probably the most steady team with only 2 of 10 finishes on the FIVB outside the top 10 with 6 of their first 7 coming from the Q. I think the season has worn this team down a bit, Hyden's 1st full FIVB season since 2002 and Tri's 1st full season ever. Question of this team, does John want to make the push for the Olympics? If No, who does Tri call?
D. Nick/Ryan - I think they did about as good as the probably could this year, made it out of Pool in 8 of 9 FIVBs including 2 podiums. Their worst losses on the AVP were to Casebeer/Jennings (not too bad), both of those stats show an improved consistency level throughout a full season. Question is if Tri called, would Nick move on?
D. Theo/Todd - team did decent, the only tournament they didn't get out of pool on the FIVB, they didn't make it through the Q. The last 2 AVPs, got a 9th & 13th. The question remains if Todd is wanting to hang it up?
#3 Laura & Brooke - pretty good year, everyone assumes they'll stay together, but many thought that last year with Fopma and Brooke.
#4 Lane, Whitney & Fopma - These seem like the next 3 best players after the top 2 teams. Lane has 5 3rds on the AVP, where does she go? Is Kim the answer for 2015? Whitney and Jen did not get off to a good start on the FIVB, and then Jen had an injury, but they were pegged to be the 1st team to break anyway. What is in store for those 2?
#5 Men's next level - Players like Casebeer, Slick, Jennings, Adrian & Crabb. These guys are good enough to get to the Semis, can they find the right partner to over the hump? Can any of them push into the top 4 FIVB teams?? Movement by the top 5 teams will affect this group of players the most, both good and bad.
#6 Young bloods - both genders saw some infusion of young players, are any of them going to make the full time commitment to the beach? Can any of them have a top 4 team effect?? The quantity of players under 25 who made main draws was large, but what is the true quality of these players? At MB, on the women's side 10 players 25 or younger finished top 13, 6 on the men's side. You can surely see the effect that NCAA sand (and JRs for that matter) on the women's side. The Boys Junior is growing too, just not as fast as the women's which I don't think anyone is surprised.
#7 Domestic tour growth - Does the AVP expand draws? and dates? Can the NVL take another huge step up in their event promotions? I thought the AVP made some nice changes to their site setups, I would like to see them support larger tournaments, where the top 10 team's players made at least 20k for the season. The NVL has grown a ton over the last year, they have become a major factor in Junior tournaments and have followed through on their "Pro" tour. Al B is working hard as the face of this tour & have some teams that would be winning matches on the AVP, however from what I have seen the fanbase is way behind the AVP.
|
|
|
|
Post by vballjj on Sept 9, 2014 9:25:40 GMT -5
Nice observations Jim!
Would be hard to see Crabb and Billy splitting after playing well the past couple of events.
Adrian and Slick will more than likely split up.
Women's side will definitely have some partner changes. Day/Ross have been inconsistent this year after having a great showing in 2013
If the AVP and NVL could get along then it would benefit both tours tremendously. It's a shame there has been little audience this year and let's hope the Hermosa stop has a fanbase. Speaking of which, any of you going?
|
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Sept 9, 2014 9:32:49 GMT -5
Nice observations Jim! Would be hard to see Crabb and Billy splitting after playing well the past couple of events. Adrian and Slick will more than likely split up. Women's side will definitely have some partner changes. Day/Ross have been inconsistent this year after having a great showing in 2013 If the AVP and NVL could get along then it would benefit both tours tremendously. It's a shame there has been little audience this year and let's hope the Hermosa stop has a fanbase. Speaking of which, any of you going? My questioning of Billy & Trevor comes from not knowing Billy's future plans. Billy turns 33 next month. Trevor could have the pick of players outside the top 4 teams (maybe including his Bro). If Adrian and Slick split, Adrian loses in this, IMO. I guess he'll be back to Steve G or Belov. Slick could go after whomever he wanted. (I'd like to see him with Casebeer personally). |
|
|
|
Post by crawdaddy on Sept 9, 2014 10:34:47 GMT -5
All great questions. I'll tackle just one now. I think it is imperative for the health of beach volleyball, that the AVP and the NVL get on the same page so that there can be a full schedule of tournaments for those players who are not competing on the FIVB tour. The AVP cannot survive just be filling in the dates left open by the FIVB - it just doesn't feel like a real tour and it creates a two-tiered set of players - those who are competing full-time and those who are really part-time professionals who just play in the AVP events.
Whether this means the AVP sanctions the NVL events that occur on those FIVB weekends or the AVP starts putting on its own events on those weekends, it has to happen for there to be a healthy domestic tour and to develop both talent and a revitalized fan base in this country.
|
|
|
|
Post by klazk on Sept 9, 2014 11:18:30 GMT -5
The AVP cannot survive just be filling in the dates left open by the FIVB - it just doesn't feel like a real tour and it creates a two-tiered set of players - those who are competing full-time and those who are really part-time professionals who just play in the AVP events. What evidence do you have of this? Or do you just not like the "feel?" Do you have access to their financials? Have you talked to sponsors? I don't have access to them, and I'm not saying that you are wrong. But we don't really know. We may not like it, but for all we know that is exactly what the AVP has to do to survive. Especially over the next 2 years of Olympic qualifying. I can't imagine it would be easy to expand and find sponsors if you tell them that your top 4 teams per gender won't be attending the events that conflict with FIVB events (mainly Walsh/Ross, but I'm sure the others have at least some minimal appeal to sponsors). |
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Sept 9, 2014 12:14:36 GMT -5
The AVP cannot survive just be filling in the dates left open by the FIVB - it just doesn't feel like a real tour and it creates a two-tiered set of players - those who are competing full-time and those who are really part-time professionals who just play in the AVP events. What evidence do you have of this? Or do you just not like the "feel?" Do you have access to their financials? Have you talked to sponsors? I don't have access to them, and I'm not saying that you are wrong. But we don't really know. We may not like it, but for all we know that is exactly what the AVP has to do to survive. Especially over the next 2 years of Olympic qualifying. I can't imagine it would be easy to expand and find sponsors if you tell them that your top 4 teams per gender won't be attending the events that conflict with FIVB events (mainly Walsh/Ross, but I'm sure the others have at least some minimal appeal to sponsors). I'm not sure Crawfish is really talking about finances, just the health of a tour. Take Jeremy Casebeer, part of a top 8 team. This year, he'll make about $15K on the AVP. As a 25 year old, he can do other things to supplement his income. At some point, he'll want to get married, have kids. He'll need a real job, so while he may play in some AVPs he's really not suited to push any of the top pros. And at some point, fans aren't really going to like to watch Phil beat the computer analyst 21-10, 21-12. Compare that to the Tennis US Open, where they just had 2 players ranked outside the 10 ten in the finals on the Men's side! Because those guys are able to train and make a real living as Pro athletes make that possible. To having events without the top 4 teams, well if the tour was healthier we'd have more than 4 teams competing for an AVP title. A few years ago when Ryan and Casey P were winning the domestic events, they were being raised up into the public eye. Then they beat Todd and Phil that year too. Which created a lot of hype. The same would happen if the top 4 are gone and they would still lose matches to those not on the FIVB. I'm hoping Mr. Sun is working on some new sponsors to take the AVP through the Olympics, raising the brand awareness beforehand. |
|
|
|
Post by crawdaddy on Sept 9, 2014 12:18:28 GMT -5
The AVP cannot survive just be filling in the dates left open by the FIVB - it just doesn't feel like a real tour and it creates a two-tiered set of players - those who are competing full-time and those who are really part-time professionals who just play in the AVP events. What evidence do you have of this? Or do you just not like the "feel?" Do you have access to their financials? Have you talked to sponsors? I don't have access to them, and I'm not saying that you are wrong. But we don't really know. We may not like it, but for all we know that is exactly what the AVP has to do to survive. Especially over the next 2 years of Olympic qualifying. I can't imagine it would be easy to expand and find sponsors if you tell them that your top 4 teams per gender won't be attending the events that conflict with FIVB events (mainly Walsh/Ross, but I'm sure the others have at least some minimal appeal to sponsors). Evidence? This is a chat board klazk, I don't need to have evidence:) You raised good points. I'm not questioning the AVP's strategy up to this point. They needed (or need) the top players, particularly Kerri, at every event to reestablish themselves. Longer term though (and whether the longer term is next year or after the Olympics is a good question) it just can't be sustainable to have prime summer weeks and months go by when you are not putting on events and when your brand is receiving almost no media attention. Also, the NVL keeps putting on professional events with even less big name talent than the AVP would have without the FIVB teams, so there must be some way to make events without the top teams work financially. |
|
|
|
Post by klazk on Sept 9, 2014 13:05:36 GMT -5
Also, the NVL keeps putting on professional events with even less big name talent than the AVP would have without the FIVB teams, so there must be some way to make events without the top teams work financially. Sure, reduce the prize money to almost nothing. No NVL player is making a living playing beach volleyball, either. The winners are making less than a 5th on the AVP. 2nd place is the same as a 9th on AVP. Finishing third or lower and you are making less than than a team that goes uno dos in an AVP event. I see what you both are talking about, but I think this is the level that beach has been at since the "golden age," "the good old days" or whatever other label you want to give the time when players outside the top 4 or 5 teams where able to make a living. Seems tours are faced with staying small, making it "semi-pro" for most of the players or trying to grow it and risk bankrupting the whole thing all over again. |
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Sept 9, 2014 13:56:38 GMT -5
Also, the NVL keeps putting on professional events with even less big name talent than the AVP would have without the FIVB teams, so there must be some way to make events without the top teams work financially. Sure, reduce the prize money to almost nothing. No NVL player is making a living playing beach volleyball, either. The winners are making less than a 5th on the AVP. 2nd place is the same as a 9th on AVP. Finishing third or lower and you are making less than than a team that goes uno dos in an AVP event. I see what you both are talking about, but I think this is the level that beach has been at since the "golden age," "the good old days" or whatever other label you want to give the time when players outside the top 4 or 5 teams where able to make a living. Seems tours are faced with staying small, making it "semi-pro" for most of the players or trying to grow it and risk bankrupting the whole thing all over again. Yeah, but their are only 6 teams making the same or more than a 5th on the AVP. I don't have an issue with the money actually, I'd just like to see more events. Billy Allen in 2009 made $25k for the summer and his average finish was right around 9th. That's not too bad, you can easily supplement that. This year, he'll be lucky to reach $15k even though he's finishing higher. The difference is there were more tournaments in 2009 (14). There haven't been double digit tour stops since 2009, which 5 years is a big cycle of talent to not be making enough money. |
|
|
|
Post by boxarox on Sept 9, 2014 13:59:54 GMT -5
Kewl -- Al's paying his announced prizes these days? Last I heard, there was some discord in that area......
|
|
|
|
Post by klazk on Sept 9, 2014 14:52:17 GMT -5
Kewl -- Al's paying his announced prizes these days? Last I heard, there was some discord in that area...... I have no idea about that. I was going off what is published on BVBinfo.com. |
|
|
|
Post by klazk on Sept 9, 2014 14:58:51 GMT -5
Billy Allen in 2009 made $25k for the summer and his average finish was right around 9th. That's not too bad, you can easily supplement that. This year, he'll be lucky to reach $15k even though he's finishing higher. The difference is there were more tournaments in 2009 (14). There haven't been double digit tour stops since 2009, which 5 years is a big cycle of talent to not be making enough money. You are just emphasizing my point.... "in 2009". And the very next year the tour went belly up. You are looking at it from a player's perspective only. And short term. Obviously it would be great if the tour could grow and support more players. But that hasn't happened in a long time. If the choices are stay small, try and find new revenue sources or ways to attract additional sponsorships and stay alive or try and grow and go bankrupt (again), isn't it better to stay small until you can figure out how to make money as you grow? Seems like the "leap of faith" or "build it and they will come" philosophy has been tried (and failed) multiple times. Why would it be any different this time if nothing has changed? Then again, maybe that is your argument and I was misunderstanding. If the argument is the AVP has to find a way to bring in more revenue and grow or it is going to die eventually anyway, then maybe I agree. I just don't think that growing the number of tour stops is the answer by itself. The answer has eluded everyone for a long time and we just have to hope AVP (or NVL or some combination) ownership can find it. |
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Sept 9, 2014 15:13:06 GMT -5
Billy Allen in 2009 made $25k for the summer and his average finish was right around 9th. That's not too bad, you can easily supplement that. This year, he'll be lucky to reach $15k even though he's finishing higher. The difference is there were more tournaments in 2009 (14). There haven't been double digit tour stops since 2009, which 5 years is a big cycle of talent to not be making enough money. You are just emphasizing my point.... "in 2009". And the very next year the tour went belly up. You are looking at it from a player's perspective only. And short term. Obviously it would be great if the tour could grow and support more players. But that hasn't happened in a long time. If the choices are stay small, try and find new revenue sources or ways to attract additional sponsorships and stay alive or try and grow and go bankrupt (again), isn't it better to stay small until you can figure out how to make money as you grow? Seems like the "leap of faith" or "build it and they will come" philosophy has been tried (and failed) multiple times. Why would it be any different this time if nothing has changed? Then again, maybe that is your argument and I was misunderstanding. If the argument is the AVP has to find a way to bring in more revenue and grow or it is going to die eventually anyway, then maybe I agree. I just don't think that growing the number of tour stops is the answer by itself. The answer has eluded everyone for a long time and we just have to hope AVP (or NVL or some combination) ownership can find it. I DO think if they stay in this format, they will not succeed for the #1 reason, that being static isn't what TV networks and other sponsors look for. I DO think at some point there has to be a leap of faith in your product. I'm not sure the AVP is running the model to make that leap yet though. I'm not sure with other stops, but the promoters they've used in St. Pete have had no contact with the volleyball community. The event is about half of where it should be. I have a ton of faith in Mr. Sun as he has seen these events 1st hand and has been patient, but he is finishing year 2 of a rebuild without a defined path. |
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Sept 9, 2014 16:41:46 GMT -5
The few, rare tournaments is a huge issue. Lets say you are someone who saw the AVP in St. Pete this year, you want to follow the tour so you get on line and look for the next event you can watch.
You see the AVP streams tournaments and you cant wait to watch sexy cougar Nicole Branagh battle it out with the dynamic dwarf Brooke Sweat. Or perhaps you enjoy seeing the mismatched team of Ryan and Nick awkwarding their way to victory. In either case you get to avp.com, click on next event and then . . . its eight weeks away. By the time it comes you have lost all interest.
But lets say you stick out the two month break, then enjoy Milwaukee, then there is another month until the third event.
The AVP needs to take advantage of the lack of anything else in the summer. I would like to see the AVP run tournaments most weekends in June and July when nothing else is happening. The players could get together and work to try to always have a few top teams play, basically rotating which two or three of the top six go play FIVB.
The AVP is building some nice roots in places like Salt Lake and Cincy, but I would like to see it get back to some other great traditional markets like Hermosa, Chicago, maybe Belmar.
A strong domestic tour is in these players long term interests too, especially the younger ones, who need to play a lot, and dont get to do that as much with the FIVB travel. Also the FIVB money isnt that great. The aberrational season aside, the top American players are more likely to make 60,000 per year than $100,000. Factor in the ability to build player recognition and grow sponsors in America, and for every team that doesnt have Phil or Kerri on it, you are talking about a gap that can be bridged. Would a player like John Mayer get rich? No, but he would be able to afford to stick with the sport. Yes.
Take this year, if the AVP ran 12 tournaments between the start of May and the end of August, (including Long Beach as one because its in America), the top American teams would need to miss around 4 Grand Slams, and in return would get four more AVPs. Thats not a great trade, but its workable,
|
|
|
|
Post by crawdaddy on Sept 9, 2014 17:14:03 GMT -5
100% agree with guest2, although every point klatz made is also accurate. At some point the AVP is going to have to put on events on prime summer weekends that conflict with FIVB events - let's just hope they can figure out how to do that and remain financially viable.
One other observation/question about Sun's AVP. At least for MBO, I thought the promotion of the event was weak, if not nonexistent. Of course, you can get a decent crowd at Manhattan by just rolling out the balls, but contrast Manhattan with Long Beach (where Armato's promotion was relentless) and you can see the difference. I'm sure Leonard's advertising budget is bigger than the AVP budget for Manhattan, but I was surprised there was so little work done to promote the event. This was clearly reflected in the relatively meager crowd by MBO standards. For those of you in other markets, has it been the same?
Perhaps the AVP is putting its promotional dollars in markets where they are charging for tickets?
|
|
