|
|
Post by cardinalvolleyball on May 15, 2015 14:17:36 GMT -5
What are the big differences between how Kessel teaches the game at the younger age and how other countries handle their youth volleyball teams? Mini-Games, maximizing touches, utilize every opportunity for skill development, no position specialization seems to be pretty common in other countries so is Kessel teaching new ideas or is he trying to hammer home what he views as the best progression to develop youth volleyball players.
|
|
|
|
Post by dexter on May 17, 2015 11:04:06 GMT -5
I don't know John personally, but I think his definition of success has to do with getting young kids to keep playing (grow the game), as well as what leads to winning a gold medal. And they don't have to be mutually exclusive. His question about why have the US men won 3 and the US women won zero indoor Olympic golds (and other int'l competition success as well) when we have so many more female players and most men's vb players in this country do not start playing until a later age is a good one. With all the club programs and HS programs and so on that we have, why have the men been more 'successful'? I think he gets people to question things and not coach the way they were coached. As a grassroots coordinator, that is his job. His methods may not always be the best for a college or HS team, but having 10 year olds pass for an hour 'because if you can't pass, you can't play' does not encourage people to continue playing. Playing a traditional 6 vs 6 game for 14U teams who can't pass-set-hit just creates opportunities to fail and all they do is learn to rotate, not play the game. And so on. +1 I agree the question about success in men vs. women despite less opportunities is something to ponder deeply about (I know there is a better term to use than ponder deeply but can't think of it and too lazy to go to thesaurus). Even if you stick to your own coaching style, if he makes you question whether there is a better way is taking our game to another level...ergo "Growing the game." |
|
|
|
Post by dexter on May 17, 2015 11:09:57 GMT -5
What are the big differences between how Kessel teaches the game at the younger age and how other countries handle their youth volleyball teams? Mini-Games, maximizing touches, utilize every opportunity for skill development, no position specialization seems to be pretty common in other countries so is Kessel teaching new ideas or is he trying to hammer home what he views as the best progression to develop youth volleyball players. Sorry for a back-to-back post. He is teaching new ideas, some original, some "stolen" from other parts of the country/world. So technically it is both. It is new to some people, not necessary new to all and he is trying to hammer home what observations have been made throughout the world. Some of his viewpoints are very intriguing and the pictures he has to accompany them really speak for themselves. I can't speak to the difference between the younger age and other countries. |
|
|
|
Post by vbman100 on May 18, 2015 7:35:04 GMT -5
What are the big differences between how Kessel teaches the game at the younger age and how other countries handle their youth volleyball teams? Mini-Games, maximizing touches, utilize every opportunity for skill development, no position specialization seems to be pretty common in other countries so is Kessel teaching new ideas or is he trying to hammer home what he views as the best progression to develop youth volleyball players. I don't know if there is much difference. Maybe a few countries do drill,drill,drill. I think the point is about how things are done in this country in many gyms. I think if you walk into most gyms (and I mean most, way more than half) it will be a long time before the ball crosses the net. There will be a lot of un-game-like situations and un-game-like drills being used. I experienced it. I see it. I did it too. And then those coaches will not understand why their players cannot read the game. Or why they are not good at serve receive. And those coaches think it is the players' fault and do not analyze their methods. |
|
|
|
Post by bumpkill on May 18, 2015 17:14:00 GMT -5
I've seen successful juniors' and college teams that PLAY Bloody Knuckles because it provides opportunities to be competitive, communicate, read the attacker, give effort, achieve a goal and have fun. Ever see someone play that 4 on 4 game where you spike the ball under the net - it bounces all over the gym - attackers are figuring out crazy angles to hit so that it's not returnable - defenders are reading/evaluating/moving to where they should be only so one team loses the point, BE ANGRY? No, why? Cause it's fun as hell. AND it sounds like what's happening during the game. But someone's gonna ask - is that game like? Sure, as much as A) mini games (who plays half a game on half the court, anyway?) B) short court (see A) C) Queen of the Court/Monarch (what's the rest of the group doing while only 6 or 8 play at a time? See: Waiting) I use all of the drills/games I just mentioned because they all have their place in sport. What about having fun, growing a love for the game, helping kids learn and love sports by being active, etc? Does that fit in your purpose of coaching?
My point is maybe we don't have to create award winning practice plans with award winning drills every minute of every day to instill success in our teams.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 18:17:25 GMT -5
I've seen successful juniors' and college teams that PLAY Bloody Knuckles because it provides opportunities to be competitive, communicate, read the attacker, give effort, achieve a goal and have fun. Ever see someone play that 4 on 4 game where you spike the ball under the net - it bounces all over the gym - attackers are figuring out crazy angles to hit so that it's not returnable - defenders are reading/evaluating/moving to where they should be only so one team loses the point, BE ANGRY? No, why? Cause it's fun as hell. AND it sounds like what's happening during the game. But someone's gonna ask - is that game like? Sure, as much as A) mini games (who plays half a game on half the court, anyway?) B) short court (see A) C) Queen of the Court/Monarch (what's the rest of the group doing while only 6 or 8 play at a time? See: Waiting) I use all of the drills/games I just mentioned because they all have their place in sport. What about having fun, growing a love for the game, helping kids learn and love sports by being active, etc? Does that fit in your purpose of coaching? My point is maybe we don't have to create award winning practice plans with award winning drills every minute of every day to instill success in our teams. This can depend largely on what success means to different coaches. Anyone in the Big Ten will need "award winning drills" to win so they can keep their job. Lower level, club, and possibly even some high school coaches who don't just coach for a living (less stress/pressure to win) can use the fun games mentioned if their primary goal is to allow their players to have fun and grow a love for the game. I don't think anyone in this thread is stating that no successful teams have ever played or implemented these "worst volleyball drills ever." I think what most are saying is that there are better ways to maximize practice time. As for Bloody Knuckles, it can provide opportunities to be competitive, communicate, give effort, achieve a goal, and have fun, but I would argue that reading the attacker who is swinging with the intent to hit the ball under the net is not equivalent to reading an attacker swinging to hit the ball over the net. Perhaps shoulder positioning works, but I'm not convinced that equivalates either. Mini-games work on pass, set, hit, block, dig. I've never been a huge fan of short court. I find Queens useful for a warm-up game because it gets the players moving and focuses on basic serve, pass, set, hit, dig, (and sometimes block) skills. I think the most important takeaway from a practice should be to prepare athletes for what they will face in a game. And since that action occurs over the net, I'm keeping the ball in my practice over the net. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2015 23:53:16 GMT -5
I'll list two: *Dead fish *Spike the kitten Anyone else have some (un)favorites? (Try hard. I know you all can avoid the obvious joke here.) Not the worst ever, but I'd rather throw in a scamble ball and let them play it out. For those keeping track, this is St. Thomas, recent NCAA Division III National Champion. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2015 9:31:30 GMT -5
I like this one, actually. They're playing the game AND doing something else. But the something else involves a lot of touches and activity.
Do they explain what happens when a team hits the ball out? Do they pursue on the other side of the court?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2015 10:16:23 GMT -5
I like this one, actually. They're playing the game AND doing something else. But the something else involves a lot of touches and activity. Do they explain what happens when a team hits the ball out? Do they pursue on the other side of the court? This is certainly the most game-like of those mentioned in this thread that I can recall. Not sure about your questions. I guess this game is for the fun factor. The part I don't like is they have unlimited touches to get it back. If I wanted to work on crazy OOS plays, I would throw a scramble ball and give them two touches to get it over. But I guess that's why I'm not a very fun coach and Thanh Pham is a National Champion. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2015 11:13:48 GMT -5
The bouncing ball was on the losing team's side of the court in this clip. What happens if it's on the other side of the court?
I had the sound off for most of it, so maybe it's explained.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2015 11:19:07 GMT -5
The bouncing ball was on the losing team's side of the court in this clip. What happens if it's on the other side of the court? I had the sound off for most of it, so maybe it's explained. He explains the game for the first half of the video. The players seemed a bit confused and so was I. |
|
|
|
Post by oshkoshdadmjs on Jun 29, 2015 12:41:29 GMT -5
If you hit it out, you have to pursue it onto the other side and the points go against the hitting team.
|
|
|
|
Post by ciscokeed on Jun 30, 2015 16:16:15 GMT -5
John is such an interesting issue. Average player and average coach. He brings interesting ideas to the table. However he has never been elite as a player or coach. The answer is balance. GM 2 has great aspects. John has great aspects. You and I have great aspects. Players need a variety of drills and skills to get better. Sometimes hitting lines fit the bill. Sometimes 1v1 short court does....
|
|
|
|
Post by oshkoshdadmjs on Jul 1, 2015 0:56:34 GMT -5
John is such an interesting issue. Average player and average coach. He brings interesting ideas to the table. However he has never been elite as a player or coach. The answer is balance. GM 2 has great aspects. John has great aspects. You and I have great aspects. Players need a variety of drills and skills to get better. Sometimes hitting lines fit the bill. Sometimes 1v1 short court does.... +1 Recently I've gotten into listening to his ideas and trying to incorporate them into practices. I think his best ideas are that volleyball is learned over the net and that 95% of the game is being in the right spot. However, I think that isolating some specific moves can benefit teams (ie. hitting lines). His ideas should definitely be incorporated into way way way more gyms, but to follow GM2 exclusively seems excessive to me. |
|
|
|
Post by DaDawgFather on Jul 3, 2015 3:18:16 GMT -5
I like this one, actually. They're playing the game AND doing something else. But the something else involves a lot of touches and activity. Do they explain what happens when a team hits the ball out? Do they pursue on the other side of the court? Just tried it with my high school group. I varied the rules from the original explanation a little bit. My kids had a blast. We played for a while without getting bored. |
|
