|
|
Post by dugit10 on Mar 25, 2020 12:51:53 GMT -5
What exactly happened with Hughes and Summer? I know Summer was hurt, but with more time now (maybe), why would they not give it another shot? seems like Summer would be the best option at this point. Summer basically just stopped playing and ghosted Hughes. Saying all this stuff about her back injury and never showed Sara or USA beach any medical records and then vanished on Hughes while threatening lawsuits. Everyone is aware that summer is different. Let’s leave it there. Would you risk her quitting on you twice? |
|
|
|
Post by dugit10 on Mar 25, 2020 12:59:10 GMT -5
Summer basically just stopped playing and ghosted Hughes. Saying all this stuff about her back injury and never showed Sara or USA beach any medical records and then vanished on Hughes while threatening lawsuits. Everyone is aware that summer is different. Let’s leave it there. Would you risk her quitting on you twice? Depends on her options and how bad Hughes wants a shot at the Olympics. It’s a competitive US field, and she needs a top player to compete with to catch up. Summer and Sarah have 4.4k qualifying pts together. Unless someone has a direct quote from Sarah or Summer after the new qualification process is released, which requires a time machine, it doesn’t seem like you can rule them out. |
|
|
|
Post by ajm on Mar 25, 2020 14:01:07 GMT -5
What exactly happened with Hughes and Summer? I know Summer was hurt, but with more time now (maybe), why would they not give it another shot? seems like Summer would be the best option at this point. Summer basically just stopped playing and ghosted Hughes. Saying all this stuff about her back injury and never showed Sara or USA beach any medical records and then vanished on Hughes while threatening lawsuits. Everyone is aware that summer is different. Let’s leave it there. Would you risk her quitting on you twice? Lawsuits? What grounds would anyone have to sue? Are you suggesting that Summer was faking or embellishing her injury? |
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 25, 2020 15:51:31 GMT -5
Summer basically just stopped playing and ghosted Hughes. Saying all this stuff about her back injury and never showed Sara or USA beach any medical records and then vanished on Hughes while threatening lawsuits. Everyone is aware that summer is different. Let’s leave it there. Would you risk her quitting on you twice? Lawsuits? What grounds would anyone have to sue? Are you suggesting that Summer was faking or embellishing her injury? Possibly an objection to how the back was treated and maybe USAVolleyball was involved somehow. I dont know the people involved personally at all, but Sara has now had major personal issues with 3 of the top 4 US blockers. At what point is it her fault? |
|
|
|
Post by newbeach on Mar 26, 2020 15:23:32 GMT -5
What exactly happened with Hughes and Summer? I know Summer was hurt, but with more time now (maybe), why would they not give it another shot? seems like Summer would be the best option at this point. Summer basically just stopped playing and ghosted Hughes. Saying all this stuff about her back injury and never showed Sara or USA beach any medical records and then vanished on Hughes while threatening lawsuits. Everyone is aware that summer is different. Let’s leave it there. Would you risk her quitting on you twice? Say what you will about Summer, but Hughes does have some issues with partners. |
|
|
|
Post by beachindoor on Mar 26, 2020 16:39:10 GMT -5
Summer basically just stopped playing and ghosted Hughes. Saying all this stuff about her back injury and never showed Sara or USA beach any medical records and then vanished on Hughes while threatening lawsuits. Everyone is aware that summer is different. Let’s leave it there. Would you risk her quitting on you twice? Say what you will about Summer, but Hughes does have some issues with partners. What are some of those issues? Everyone always talks about the others, but no one seems to share anything from Sara's end of it. |
|
|
|
Post by acrossthepond on Mar 27, 2020 2:43:21 GMT -5
It seems to me that there are basically three options at this point: 1) Top 12 finishes, but extend the qualification period to 2021. 2) Top 12 finishes, extending the qualification period to 2021, but eliminate any points earned in 2018. 3) Start over from scratch with a new qualification period of 2020-2021. Maybe only take the top 6 finishes since there will likely be fewer events. Of course, existing entry points will still be important for getting into these events. This assumes that bids already earned via World Champs and the Haiyang Qualification Tournament will still count. Also, if they go with either of the first two options, they'll likely keep the star system around through 2021. With the third option, they can scrap the star system right away and immediately go with the three levels of events that were already planned for 2021. Results will 100% not be scratched. Why should all the results not count just because you guys want to see Budinger at the Olympics (where he would go 1-2 anyway)? All those teams put the effort in and got their results just for them to be invalid? Good luck with getting that across the player community. In the end not much will change with the Olympics delay. The number of events will pretty much stay the same as it was originally planned (assuming tournaments will start again in September/October). So not much will change anyway. New teams won't really have enough tournaments to compete in to really make a push. By the way, if (and that's a big if to me) the qualification system would really be changed, why then count the Haiyang event?!? Some of the best teams were not allowed (by their federation) to participate. It would be a farce if all historic points would not be granted and only this one tournament would count. But as I said, I don't see any reason to scrap the already earned points unless you want to find a scenario for Budinger to participate. |
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 27, 2020 7:41:24 GMT -5
It seems to me that there are basically three options at this point: 1) Top 12 finishes, but extend the qualification period to 2021. 2) Top 12 finishes, extending the qualification period to 2021, but eliminate any points earned in 2018. 3) Start over from scratch with a new qualification period of 2020-2021. Maybe only take the top 6 finishes since there will likely be fewer events. Of course, existing entry points will still be important for getting into these events. This assumes that bids already earned via World Champs and the Haiyang Qualification Tournament will still count. Also, if they go with either of the first two options, they'll likely keep the star system around through 2021. With the third option, they can scrap the star system right away and immediately go with the three levels of events that were already planned for 2021. Results will 100% not be scratched. Why should all the results not count just because you guys want to see Budinger at the Olympics (where he would go 1-2 anyway)? Results should be scratched and the whole system should be changed because of the incredible negative effect it has on beach volleyball. I agree on Chase and gave up on any US mens team doing anything over a year ago, but look at the purpose this system serves and the effects it has. Purpose: With the exception of Brazil and America, Russia for the men maybe, it only serves to confirm the participation of the same teams that would get in under virtually any system. Other than the two countries above, what half-decent team is on the qualifying bubble? (None is the answer) But almost any other system - other than a one-off qualifying tournament would see the same teams from Norway, Chile, Italy, etc. etc. etc. The only differences may be some quite lower half of the draw teams like Adrian being omitted. Negatives: 1) It forces teams to stay together that should have broken up long ago. Kerri/Brooke for example, the Brazilians that just broke up as soon as they found out they wouldnt qualify, etc. Duda is the best player in the world playing defense right now and Ana is the best Brazilian blocker. Why arent they playing together? 2) It prioritizes success long ago to a preposterous degree. Why should anything that happened more than a year before the Olympics, much less three years before, have anything to do with who gets in? 3) It potentially keeps great players out of the Olympics. Kerri may not qualify, Larissa certainly wont, even Phil. Phil is sort of a unique case but the scenario is valid as an illustration. He has to pick between Taylor and Nick. If he picks wrong, he is mostly stuck with that choice for 2 years? |
|
mike1
Sophomore
Posts: 168 
|
Post by mike1 on Mar 27, 2020 7:58:22 GMT -5
It seems to me that there are basically three options at this point: 1) Top 12 finishes, but extend the qualification period to 2021. 2) Top 12 finishes, extending the qualification period to 2021, but eliminate any points earned in 2018. 3) Start over from scratch with a new qualification period of 2020-2021. Maybe only take the top 6 finishes since there will likely be fewer events. Of course, existing entry points will still be important for getting into these events. This assumes that bids already earned via World Champs and the Haiyang Qualification Tournament will still count. Also, if they go with either of the first two options, they'll likely keep the star system around through 2021. With the third option, they can scrap the star system right away and immediately go with the three levels of events that were already planned for 2021. Results will 100% not be scratched. Why should all the results not count just because you guys want to see Budinger at the Olympics (where he would go 1-2 anyway)? All those teams put the effort in and got their results just for them to be invalid? Good luck with getting that across the player community. In the end not much will change with the Olympics delay. The number of events will pretty much stay the same as it was originally planned (assuming tournaments will start again in September/October). So not much will change anyway. New teams won't really have enough tournaments to compete in to really make a push. By the way, if (and that's a big if to me) the qualification system would really be changed, why then count the Haiyang event?!? Some of the best teams were not allowed (by their federation) to participate. It would be a farce if all historic points would not be granted and only this one tournament would count. But as I said, I don't see any reason to scrap the already earned points unless you want to find a scenario for Budinger to participate. 100% agree with this! The number of events may be slightly more (because there will be two years of September (or whenever play resumes) through February), so it will force teams who are currently in position to qualify to keep pushing and fend off other contenders longer, but it wouldn't make sense to make everyone start over. Everyone was playing under the same rules that the tournaments counted for Olympic points. To create more events within the qualifying period? Fine. To completely throw away points already earned? Absolutely not. I understand the desire for the best teams in a given moment to be playing in the Olympics, but there also needs to be an element of teams earning the bid over a period of time, especially when every player and team in the world was playing under the same knowledge that those tournaments generated Olympic points. |
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 27, 2020 8:12:57 GMT -5
Results will 100% not be scratched. Why should all the results not count just because you guys want to see Budinger at the Olympics (where he would go 1-2 anyway)? All those teams put the effort in and got their results just for them to be invalid? Good luck with getting that across the player community. In the end not much will change with the Olympics delay. The number of events will pretty much stay the same as it was originally planned (assuming tournaments will start again in September/October). So not much will change anyway. New teams won't really have enough tournaments to compete in to really make a push. By the way, if (and that's a big if to me) the qualification system would really be changed, why then count the Haiyang event?!? Some of the best teams were not allowed (by their federation) to participate. It would be a farce if all historic points would not be granted and only this one tournament would count. But as I said, I don't see any reason to scrap the already earned points unless you want to find a scenario for Budinger to participate. 100% agree with this! I understand the desire for the best teams in a given moment to be playing in the Olympics, but there also needs to be an element of teams earning the bid over a period of time, especially when every player and team in the world was playing under the same knowledge that those tournaments generated Olympic points. Why? The Olympics and BVB generally are spectator sports designed to entertain. Why does there need to be an element of earning the bids over time if thats not necessary to determine the best teams. If there were a somewhat dull TV show or movie and midway through, a catastrophic event happened that gave the producers the chance to sort of scrap what they had and restart with lessons learned, do you think they would hesitate for a second? Especially with no financial implications? Then why should BVB? |
|
|
|
Post by Semp12 on Mar 27, 2020 9:48:18 GMT -5
100% agree with this! I understand the desire for the best teams in a given moment to be playing in the Olympics, but there also needs to be an element of teams earning the bid over a period of time, especially when every player and team in the world was playing under the same knowledge that those tournaments generated Olympic points. Why? The Olympics and BVB generally are spectator sports designed to entertain. Why does there need to be an element of earning the bids over time if thats not necessary to determine the best teams. If there were a somewhat dull TV show or movie and midway through, a catastrophic event happened that gave the producers the chance to sort of scrap what they had and restart with lessons learned, do you think they would hesitate for a second? Especially with no financial implications? Then why should BVB? The argument is not about who is better, but statistically to determine the best team you actually need data, which means results over a period time to collect. To me, a year is about an appropriate amount of time (although part of the current issue is the time before the run to start building points). In this instance though, I do not believe we should throw away results that everyone in the world thought were important to qualify, the athletes put in the work and earned it up to this point. Comparing a fictional TV show/movie to sports is a little far-fetched. Why don't we just put 50,000 fans in the stands at every event and pay our mid-level beach players 2 million dollars a year? Because this isn't a fictional story. |
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 27, 2020 11:00:55 GMT -5
Why? The Olympics and BVB generally are spectator sports designed to entertain. Why does there need to be an element of earning the bids over time if thats not necessary to determine the best teams. If there were a somewhat dull TV show or movie and midway through, a catastrophic event happened that gave the producers the chance to sort of scrap what they had and restart with lessons learned, do you think they would hesitate for a second? Especially with no financial implications? Then why should BVB? The argument is not about who is better, but statistically to determine the best team you actually need data, which means results over a period time to collect. To me, a year is about an appropriate amount of time (although part of the current issue is the time before the run to start building points). In this instance though, I do not believe we should throw away results that everyone in the world thought were important to qualify, the athletes put in the work and earned it up to this point. Comparing a fictional TV show/movie to sports is a little far-fetched. Why don't we just put 50,000 fans in the stands at every event and pay our mid-level beach players 2 million dollars a year? Because this isn't a fictional story. Its as fictional as reality television. The events are constantly manipulated through rule changes, seeding, CQs, etc. Just like every other professional sport, BVB is an entertainment property. And all those changes are made to produce with the goal of producing a better entertainment product - which the FIVB happens to be absolutely terrible at. Lets look at two scenarios: (Both assume Corona is done by July - probably a pipe dream) 1) Qualification starts today, previous results don't count at all. This stinks for the players who already have a ton of excellent results or who have qualified. Its massively better for fans and for making sure the best players have a chance to form the best teams to qualify. Also much better for ensuring the players actually show up at events that are schedule between now and the Olympics 2) The current system stays in place Much worse for fans, the same boring teams we have seen for two years are the same teams that continue going forward, despite having little or no chance to actually succeed at the Olympics. Many players who have already qualified start skipping events they dont like (many players have spoken about wanting to do this) or not playing to conserve entry points, take precautions against injuries etc. Several excellent players (Sara Hughes, F'n Larissa, Andre, Kira are locked out of the process while inferior players - Brooke, Rebecca, Kozuch etc. are in or close to it) In both systems, the top players still get in. (Alix/April/Duda/Kerri/Ludwig/Aussies/Ana/Evandro/Mol etc) But in one system, we spend the next year watching high stakes matches between the top teams in the world in the best possible combinations. In the other we spend the year watching Tri/Trevor battle Adrian/Rossi to see who is the 14th best team to secure automatic qualification while almost everybody else is already qualified. |
|
|
|
Post by newbeach on Mar 27, 2020 16:33:59 GMT -5
Say what you will about Summer, but Hughes does have some issues with partners. What are some of those issues? Everyone always talks about the others, but no one seems to share anything from Sara's end of it. Sorry, I was not clear with what I wrote. I will only say that I know that some of Sara's partner's have had issues with her as well. There were some people who wanted to slam Claes after her split with Hughes. Somehow it was all because Kelly was lazy, spent all her time with her boyfriend etc. But, the majority of that "news" came from a couple of VT'ers (one in particular). Again, when Summer and Sara split, we hear it was Summer because she bailed on Hughes. Both parties had issues. Not all partnerships are meant to be, but some people want to paint Sara as the poor innocent victim of crappy partners. It just isn't so. |
|
|
|
Post by Guest3 on Mar 27, 2020 17:10:58 GMT -5
What are some of those issues? Everyone always talks about the others, but no one seems to share anything from Sara's end of it. Sorry, I was not clear with what I wrote. I will only say that I know that some of Sara's partner's have had issues with her as well. There were some people who wanted to slam Claes after her split with Hughes. Somehow it was all because Kelly was lazy, spent all her time with her boyfriend etc. But, the majority of that "news" came from a couple of VT'ers (one in particular). Again, when Summer and Sara split, we hear it was Summer because she bailed on Hughes. Both parties had issues. Not all partnerships are meant to be, but some people want to paint Sara as the poor innocent victim of crappy partners. It just isn't so. I can say without hesitation Claes last partner was not shy in calling her lazy as she waited for her hour after hour to show up in the gym and was never on time and always wanted to quit early. I watched and heard that first hand. |
|
|
|
Post by Guest3 on Mar 27, 2020 17:14:30 GMT -5
The argument is not about who is better, but statistically to determine the best team you actually need data, which means results over a period time to collect. To me, a year is about an appropriate amount of time (although part of the current issue is the time before the run to start building points). In this instance though, I do not believe we should throw away results that everyone in the world thought were important to qualify, the athletes put in the work and earned it up to this point. Comparing a fictional TV show/movie to sports is a little far-fetched. Why don't we just put 50,000 fans in the stands at every event and pay our mid-level beach players 2 million dollars a year? Because this isn't a fictional story. Its as fictional as reality television. The events are constantly manipulated through rule changes, seeding, CQs, etc. Just like every other professional sport, BVB is an entertainment property. And all those changes are made to produce with the goal of producing a better entertainment product - which the FIVB happens to be absolutely terrible at. Lets look at two scenarios: (Both assume Corona is done by July - probably a pipe dream) 1) Qualification starts today, previous results don't count at all. This stinks for the players who already have a ton of excellent results or who have qualified. Its massively better for fans and for making sure the best players have a chance to form the best teams to qualify. Also much better for ensuring the players actually show up at events that are schedule between now and the Olympics 2) The current system stays in place Much worse for fans, the same boring teams we have seen for two years are the same teams that continue going forward, despite having little or no chance to actually succeed at the Olympics. Many players who have already qualified start skipping events they dont like (many players have spoken about wanting to do this) or not playing to conserve entry points, take precautions against injuries etc. Several excellent players (Sara Hughes, F'n Larissa, Andre, Kira are locked out of the process while inferior players - Brooke, Rebecca, Kozuch etc. are in or close to it) In both systems, the top players still get in. (Alix/April/Duda/Kerri/Ludwig/Aussies/Ana/Evandro/Mol etc) But in one system, we spend the next year watching high stakes matches between the top teams in the world in the best possible combinations. In the other we spend the year watching Tri/Trevor battle Adrian/Rossi to see who is the 14th best team to secure automatic qualification while almost everybody else is already qualified. I don’t know why for the life of me you think the US Players would change partners when 2 teams go and the teams 2-4 are jammed together so close in talent and points. Swap around to be in the same spot? You’re going to form a new partnership with weeks of practice and drop your partner of 2 years for what? Because maybe you’ll play better together? Don’t see it. |
|
