Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2015 0:14:12 GMT -5
Any Drill that intentionally practices the pancake, especially partner drills where one partner tosses the ball a few feet in front of the other who has to time the ball for a pancake. Have literally seen girls try to pancake and get hit in the upper arm as a result of this drill. This (rather painfully) sums it up. And also made me hungry. |
|
moody
Banned
Posts: 18,679
|
Post by moody on Apr 30, 2015 7:58:26 GMT -5
Curtain over the net drill. Curtain over the net, coach on one side team on the other. Coach hits down ball at the team forcing team to react. Dumbest drill ever. when the curtain came out practice was essentially over. We would position 1 player on his hands and knees and watch where the coaches feet were pointing and point in that direction so the defender didn't have to react. Doesn't sound that bad to me. Sounds like the players were lazy. this drill actually teaches exactly what NOT to do. Players now focus on the ball and not on the players. |
|
|
|
Post by vbman100 on Apr 30, 2015 9:46:56 GMT -5
Hitting lines... Coach setting +1 Dumbest. Drill. Ever. And I will add having the coach toss, underhand, to the setter to set, while the attackers sit outside the court waiting to just hit. I guess I am a pretty bad coach then. I did this for a few minutes with 5th graders the other day (coach set for hitters). I tossed the ball to the 2nd person in line, they passed or set it to me, then I set the 1st person in line so she could hit. After about 3 minutes, I stepped out and told them to do it (be the setter). I guess I should have never done that. They should just know how real pass-set-hit volleyball looks at 10 years old. |
|
|
|
Post by vbman100 on Apr 30, 2015 9:57:55 GMT -5
Sorry, I just don't get this one for transfer.
It's relative:
And the classic (it is game-like!):
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2015 10:06:25 GMT -5
Sorry, I just don't get this one for transfer. It's relative: And the classic (it is game-like!): Great selection. Reminds of the Pakistani Chop Serve story where people fail to ask "why do we do this?" |
|
|
|
Post by vbc1 on Apr 30, 2015 10:49:20 GMT -5
+1 Dumbest. Drill. Ever. And I will add having the coach toss, underhand, to the setter to set, while the attackers sit outside the court waiting to just hit. I guess I am a pretty bad coach then. I did this for a few minutes with 5th graders the other day (coach set for hitters). I tossed the ball to the 2nd person in line, they passed or set it to me, then I set the 1st person in line so she could hit. After about 3 minutes, I stepped out and told them to do it (be the setter). I guess I should have never done that. They should just know how real pass-set-hit volleyball looks at 10 years old. Think of it this way: I will use the outside hitter as my example. The number one skill for outside hitters is passing. Anyone can hit a ball straight down, but if you cant get a pass to the setter, then you are not able to get a good set to hit in the first place. Any coach will tell you that passing is the premiere skill for that position. Now, you are a 12 year old girl/boy, and you are learning volleyball. You probably are in a "hitting-line" type drill for 20-50 reps per day (that is conservative). Multiply that by 3 days a week, and then as you get involved with your high school JV then Varsity, and then factor in club ball, well, you get the point. The average number of hitting line type attacks is in the 1,000's. (lets just say, for argument sake, that number is 10,000) by the time you are ready for college ball. Now, I don't know about you, but if I did something 10,000 times, versus 1,000 times, I am going to get pretty good at it. (provided my coaches didn't screw me up with their technique training). Sure, at your level, it is going to be ugly at first. Heck, it may even be ugly for that entire year! BUT, the reality is, you are supposed to be training them to be better volleyball players, and try to teach the ENTIRE game, not just a portion of it. You are, in fact, stealing valuable reps from the young kids, who need this time to construct their own foundations of skills. Have the hitter "set" the ball, not toss underhand (they NEVER do that in a game anyway, I don't for the life of me understand why this STILL happens), have the setter tip the ball at first back to them, the pass occurs, and the setter sets them. Simple. You are not doing this on purpose, I believe. You just wanted the kids to get a great set. Unfortunately, you are not playing in their matches, so they are not going to get great sets from their setter anyway. Let them hit the ugly sets from THEIR setter. In time, they will get better, and will be able to put the ball in a good spot for them. And your hitters, will get better at passing, so your setter is not running all over the place. Now, when they get to college, they are much better at passing, and the setter is much better at reading the pass and setting a realistic type ball, and the hitter learns how to read the pass, the set, and attacking a real setters set. See how that works? Capiche? |
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Apr 30, 2015 11:12:25 GMT -5
Such Kessel-esque condescension. Think of it this way: I will use the outside hitter as my example. The number one skill for outside hitters is passing. Anyone can hit a ball straight down, but if you cant get a pass to the setter, then you are not able to get a good set to hit in the first place. Any coach will tell you that passing is the premiere skill for that position. Now, you are a 12 year old girl/boy, and you are learning volleyball. You probably are in a "hitting-line" type drill for 20-50 reps per day (that is conservative). Multiply that by 3 days a week, and then as you get involved with your high school JV then Varsity, and then factor in club ball, well, you get the point. The average number of hitting line type attacks is in the 1,000's. (lets just say, for argument sake, that number is 10,000) by the time you are ready for college ball. Now, I don't know about you, but if I did something 10,000 times, versus 1,000 times, I am going to get pretty good at it. (provided my coaches didn't screw me up with their technique training). Sure, at your level, it is going to be ugly at first. Heck, it may even be ugly for that entire year! BUT, the reality is, you are supposed to be training them to be better volleyball players, and try to teach the ENTIRE game, not just a portion of it. You are, in fact, stealing valuable reps from the young kids, who need this time to construct their own foundations of skills. Where did this coach say that they don't practice passing? If I pass 100 balls then attack 100 balls, my number of reps is the same if I pass-to-attack 100 times. By the time I'm in college, is it good to work on being able to do those two extremely different skills back-to-back? Of course. However, these are 5th graders. You just claimed that number of reps was very important. If this team of 5th graders is anything like the 5th graders I've coached in the past, if the attacker only gets the chance to hit the ball after a successful set-tip-pass-set sequence, they'll get AT MOST 10% of the attacking reps they'd get if I were tossing the ball for them to hit. So if I don't have anybody on my team that can set a hittable ball, I shouldn't allow my attackers to practice attacking. Is your goal to get your players better or prepare them to win matches in their 5th-grade league? You're right, if your goal is to win 5th-grade matches, by all means have them practice getting unhittable sets and bump the ball over the net (in fact, I'd recommend just bumping the first ball over the net to eliminate the chance of error). If you want to expose them to the skill of attacking and work on technique, they need to start with a hittable ball. I probably wouldn't have responded to this if it weren't for how you signed off. That's the way to grow the game - taunt and belittle people who teach the game differently than you. When I coach, I use a combination of these methods, so by no means am I saying your methods are wrong, but you presenting it as dogma and that every coach that disagrees with you is in need of rehabilitation is sickening. The majority of the most successful youth clubs in the country DO NOT do what you (and John Kessel) are suggesting. Again, that doesn't make your method wrong. It just makes saying your method is the only way to be a successful coach is wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by 642fiddi on Apr 30, 2015 11:21:24 GMT -5
Curtain over the net drill. Curtain over the net, coach on one side team on the other. Coach hits down ball at the team forcing team to react. Dumbest drill ever. when the curtain came out practice was essentially over. We would position 1 player on his hands and knees and watch where the coaches feet were pointing and point in that direction so the defender didn't have to react. Doesn't sound that bad to me. Sounds like the players were lazy. You may be right. If your a coach give it a try. If your in the drill for longer than 3 minutes you should probably reevaluate you career choice and your players, lazy or motivated, should run for their volleyball lives. |
|
|
|
Post by jcvball22 on Apr 30, 2015 11:37:52 GMT -5
Such Kessel-esque condescension. Think of it this way: I will use the outside hitter as my example. The number one skill for outside hitters is passing. Anyone can hit a ball straight down, but if you cant get a pass to the setter, then you are not able to get a good set to hit in the first place. Any coach will tell you that passing is the premiere skill for that position. Now, you are a 12 year old girl/boy, and you are learning volleyball. You probably are in a "hitting-line" type drill for 20-50 reps per day (that is conservative). Multiply that by 3 days a week, and then as you get involved with your high school JV then Varsity, and then factor in club ball, well, you get the point. The average number of hitting line type attacks is in the 1,000's. (lets just say, for argument sake, that number is 10,000) by the time you are ready for college ball. Now, I don't know about you, but if I did something 10,000 times, versus 1,000 times, I am going to get pretty good at it. (provided my coaches didn't screw me up with their technique training). Sure, at your level, it is going to be ugly at first. Heck, it may even be ugly for that entire year! BUT, the reality is, you are supposed to be training them to be better volleyball players, and try to teach the ENTIRE game, not just a portion of it. You are, in fact, stealing valuable reps from the young kids, who need this time to construct their own foundations of skills. Where did this coach say that they don't practice passing? If I pass 100 balls then attack 100 balls, my number of reps is the same if I pass-to-attack 100 times. By the time I'm in college, is it good to work on being able to do those two extremely different skills back-to-back? Of course. However, these are 5th graders. You just claimed that number of reps was very important. If this team of 5th graders is anything like the 5th graders I've coached in the past, if the attacker only gets the chance to hit the ball after a successful set-tip-pass-set sequence, they'll get AT MOST 10% of the attacking reps they'd get if I were tossing the ball for them to hit. So if I don't have anybody on my team that can set a hittable ball, I shouldn't allow my attackers to practice attacking. Is your goal to get your players better or prepare them to win matches in their 5th-grade league? You're right, if your goal is to win 5th-grade matches, by all means have them practice getting unhittable sets and bump the ball over the net (in fact, I'd recommend just bumping the first ball over the net to eliminate the chance of error). If you want to expose them to the skill of attacking and work on technique, they need to start with a hittable ball. I probably wouldn't have responded to this if it weren't for how you signed off. That's the way to grow the game - taunt and belittle people who teach the game differently than you. When I coach, I use a combination of these methods, so by no means am I saying your methods are wrong, but you presenting it as dogma and that every coach that disagrees with you is in need of rehabilitation is sickening. The majority of the most successful youth clubs in the country DO NOT do what you (and John Kessel) are suggesting. Again, that doesn't make your method wrong. It just makes saying your method is the only way to be a successful coach is wrong. GM2 motto: "We are right (ignore the fact that we can't even explain our so-called data) and everyone else is an idiot!" |
|
|
|
Post by donneyp on Apr 30, 2015 14:21:34 GMT -5
Sorry, I just don't get this one for transfer. It's relative: And the classic (it is game-like!): The first one is to teach the hitters to get their feet to the ball. They say so in the video. The second is to teach the hitters to get their feet to the ball and line the ball up over and in front of their shoulder, but it is less entertaining for the coaches. The 3rd drill, yeah, I got nothing.  |
|
|
|
Post by lesmizuno on Apr 30, 2015 17:36:58 GMT -5
Doesn't sound that bad to me. Sounds like the players were lazy. You may be right. If your a coach give it a try. If your in the drill for longer than 3 minutes you should probably reevaluate you career choice and your players, lazy or motivated, should run for their volleyball lives. If the drill was explained as a simulation for a back row attack where your eyesight was blocked by front row players or simulation for contact off the block would it have made it any better? It doesn't sound like an awful drill in a small group or if it was explained differently. |
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Apr 30, 2015 17:43:54 GMT -5
You may be right. If your a coach give it a try. If your in the drill for longer than 3 minutes you should probably reevaluate you career choice and your players, lazy or motivated, should run for their volleyball lives. If the drill was explained as a simulation for a back row attack where your eyesight was blocked by front row players or simulation for contact off the block would it have made it any better? It doesn't sound like an awful drill in a small group or if it was explained differently. Except the drill seems to be structure with no blockers up. If you wanted to practice digging off the block, wouldn't it be more realistic to put the coach up on a box and have him tool balls off the block? |
|
|
|
Post by Not Me on Apr 30, 2015 17:57:31 GMT -5
I once worked with a coach who would make kids warm up using their opposite hand.
|
|
|
|
Post by lesmizuno on Apr 30, 2015 18:15:23 GMT -5
If the drill was explained as a simulation for a back row attack where your eyesight was blocked by front row players or simulation for contact off the block would it have made it any better? It doesn't sound like an awful drill in a small group or if it was explained differently. Except the drill seems to be structure with no blockers up. If you wanted to practice digging off the block, wouldn't it be more realistic to put the coach up on a box and have him tool balls off the block? Yes but that's not quite controlled enough to start off with in MY opinion. You could use the "curtain" drill as the first progression since the focus is to react to a spontaneous play/contact. |
|
ballller12
Freshman
Enter your message here...
Posts: 55 
|
Post by ballller12 on Apr 30, 2015 19:07:18 GMT -5
I once worked with a coach who would make kids warm up using their opposite hand. That doesn't seem that bad, being able to develop a players non-dominate hand can be very useful. I do this sometimes when doing partner ball control warm up during practice. I'm not saying they need to be able to hammer kills with their opposite hand but being able to use it is useful. |
|
