|
2021 HP?
Jul 9, 2021 11:19:31 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by vbfamily on Jul 9, 2021 11:19:31 GMT -5
The athlete is selected and sent an invite, but they don’t have to pay for the camp and accept the invite. The NDTP 24 person roster is paid for but the 72 (or however many it is) is pretty pricy. So athletes could have chosen to attend other camps and forgo the USA invite. If an athlete is chosen for the NDTP, I believe they must have a USAV membership to be chosen for insurance purposes. Yes, but you can add a membership at any time including just the summer.
|
|
|
Post by BigTenVball on Jul 9, 2021 16:32:32 GMT -5
The USA All-Star Region Championships are 2 weeks away, speaking of HP. They capped and got 44 teams. All games are streamed on BallerTV. For being put together in under 4 weeks, this is pretty impressive.
|
|
|
2021 HP?
Jul 9, 2021 18:29:31 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Bud Kilmer on Jul 9, 2021 18:29:31 GMT -5
Not true. If you look at the list of girls that made U18 and the developmental camp you’d see that there are girls from plenty of clubs outside of Texas. Unless I'm misreading what your response meant, I believe the OP is saying that players specifically in Texas will have a hard time getting a USAV look if they don't play for the big clubs in the Dallas/Houston areas. Yes that’s what I meant..basically you have to play for one of the national club brands to get a look. Alamo is also a well known in TX that had one girl in the U16 age but she is a 6’5” lefty rs/setter that a total newbie to volleyball could pick out as a potential star. In other words unless your a obvious star or playing on a name brand club you had zero shot.
|
|
|
Post by Bud Kilmer on Jul 11, 2021 13:09:35 GMT -5
Unless I'm misreading what your response meant, I believe the OP is saying that players specifically in Texas will have a hard time getting a USAV look if they don't play for the big clubs in the Dallas/Houston areas. Thank you so much for the clarification! I didn't pick up on that. My bad. Ha found this article that listed all the setters selected from Texas. All big name clubs, just lazy "scouting". I wonder if they even watched at all or just used the clubs selection for their top teams as a selection process? I guess its assumed if you play for a big name club you are better than everyone else? I would love to see a process where kids are assigned a number and with the coaches didnt know them....they strictly watched and made the selections without knowing who is a TAV or Skyline player. Setters Alexa Ankerstar – Austin Juniors – 2025 Cayley Hanson – Houston Skyline Jrs. – 2024 Harmony Sample – Texas Advantage – 2022 Harley Kreck – Skyline Juniors – 2023 Madeleine Waak – Houston Skyline Jrs. – 2022 Margot Manning – Houston Skyline Jrs. – 2023 Taylor Anderson – Alamo Volleyball Association – 2023
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Jul 11, 2021 23:58:00 GMT -5
Thank you so much for the clarification! I didn't pick up on that. My bad. Ha found this article that listed all the setters selected from Texas. All big name clubs, just lazy "scouting". Is it lazy scouting or efficient scouting or simply a matter of the scouts going where the most possible girls could be seen? In other words... what can be done to ensure that talent from smaller clubs with less exposure can be seen in a cost effective way?
|
|
|
Post by Bud Kilmer on Jul 12, 2021 14:27:15 GMT -5
Ha found this article that listed all the setters selected from Texas. All big name clubs, just lazy "scouting". Is it lazy scouting or efficient scouting or simply a matter of the scouts going where the most possible girls could be seen? In other words... what can be done to ensure that talent from smaller clubs with less exposure can be seen in a cost effective way? I guess what I am trying to say is, I am not sure how much actual in person "scouting" happened vs calling up your local big name club and saying hey who do you want to nominate? Were the scouts watching when our smaller no named club took down both H Skyline and Alamos top team in back to back games in which the best players on the court were on our side of the court? Nope...I dont think there is any film watched or anything...I think it was basically going to the big clubs and asking for their recommendations.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Jul 12, 2021 18:33:45 GMT -5
Is it lazy scouting or efficient scouting or simply a matter of the scouts going where the most possible girls could be seen? In other words... what can be done to ensure that talent from smaller clubs with less exposure can be seen in a cost effective way? Were the scouts watching when our smaller no named club took down both H Skyline and Alamos top team in back to back games in which the best players on the court were on our side of the court? Where did that happen?
|
|
|
Post by volleyparent on Jul 12, 2021 19:30:26 GMT -5
Covid happened. Shutdown happened. Recruiting in person was halted. Of course there are 13 and 14 year old girls that got missed. But if someone’s daughter is in the top 35 of her age, at some point soon the college coaches will see that. If a girl is in the top 100 of her age and she wants to play in college. She should be emailing highlight to coaches.
USA should invest some time into developing a 6’3” talented OH over a 5’9” OH. That’s just how it works.
If someone’s daughter got missed, it isn’t the end of the road for her. Being the top 35 in the nation isn’t a great percentage. If she is destined to go to the Olympics, being missed at age 14 won’t stop her.
|
|
|
Post by Bud Kilmer on Jul 13, 2021 9:29:35 GMT -5
Were the scouts watching when our smaller no named club took down both H Skyline and Alamos top team in back to back games in which the best players on the court were on our side of the court? Where did that happen? Lone Star Regional Championships. Beat Skyline in semis and Alamo in the finals...both in 2 sets.
|
|
|
Post by Bud Kilmer on Jul 13, 2021 9:35:49 GMT -5
Covid happened. Shutdown happened. Recruiting in person was halted. Of course there are 13 and 14 year old girls that got missed. But if someone’s daughter is in the top 35 of her age, at some point soon the college coaches will see that. If a girl is in the top 100 of her age and she wants to play in college. She should be emailing highlight to coaches. USA should invest some time into developing a 6’3” talented OH over a 5’9” OH. That’s just how it works. If someone’s daughter got missed, it isn’t the end of the road for her. Being the top 35 in the nation isn’t a great percentage. If she is destined to go to the Olympics, being missed at age 14 won’t stop her. I dont disagree but hope they go back to tryouts vs this "scouting" method.
|
|
|
Post by justahick on Jul 13, 2021 10:20:24 GMT -5
Covid happened. Shutdown happened. Recruiting in person was halted. Of course there are 13 and 14 year old girls that got missed. But if someone’s daughter is in the top 35 of her age, at some point soon the college coaches will see that. If a girl is in the top 100 of her age and she wants to play in college. She should be emailing highlight to coaches. USA should invest some time into developing a 6’3” talented OH over a 5’9” OH. That’s just how it works. If someone’s daughter got missed, it isn’t the end of the road for her. Being the top 35 in the nation isn’t a great percentage. If she is destined to go to the Olympics, being missed at age 14 won’t stop her. I dont disagree but hope they go back to tryouts vs this "scouting" method. Not a chance of this happening. There was too much manpower being put into evaluating players who had no chance of entering the pipeline and too many players who might enter the pipeline were self-selecting themselves out. As things return to normal post-Covid, this method will evaluate a much high percentage of kids with NT potential. Remember, the "scouts" are primarily college coaches. Coaches who have a vested interest in finding and reaching the players with potential - they will be casting the net as far as they can.
|
|
|
Post by Friday on Jul 13, 2021 13:01:18 GMT -5
I dont disagree but hope they go back to tryouts vs this "scouting" method. Not a chance of this happening. There was too much manpower being put into evaluating players who had no chance of entering the pipeline and too many players who might enter the pipeline were self-selecting themselves out. As things return to normal post-Covid, this method will evaluate a much high percentage of kids with NT potential. Remember, the "scouts" are primarily college coaches. Coaches who have a vested interest in finding and reaching the players with potential - they will be casting the net as far as they can. Coaches who also have a vested interest in seeing their recruits/potential recruits selected.
|
|
|
Post by fatandfurious on Jul 13, 2021 13:18:28 GMT -5
Not a chance of this happening. There was too much manpower being put into evaluating players who had no chance of entering the pipeline and too many players who might enter the pipeline were self-selecting themselves out. As things return to normal post-Covid, this method will evaluate a much high percentage of kids with NT potential. Remember, the "scouts" are primarily college coaches. Coaches who have a vested interest in finding and reaching the players with potential - they will be casting the net as far as they can. Coaches who also have a vested interest in seeing their recruits/potential recruits selected.
I don’t disagree. Definitely a vested interest when John Cook (for example) gets to say “look how many of my commits were invited to this program.” Also, kids on Open level teams at large tournaments had an advantage. However, I scanned the list of college coaches selected to scout the two National Training Teams (U20 and U18) and for the NTDP then I scanned the lists of committed players. There is obviously overlap among players going to programs like Nebraska and Florida and the coaches/scouts from those schools. However, there were also a large number of committed players whose college coaches weren’t among the scouts. No. The scouts didn’t look at all the players. And Yes, lots of quality talent was overlooked or missed. Clubs did not nominate players or have anything to do with the selections. The USAV process is probably more fair than the UA All-American selection where ONE person ultimately gets paid to decide the final list of nominations and players had to travel to Orlando or Vegas on their own dime to tryout.
|
|
|
Post by AmeriCanvbdad on Jul 14, 2021 7:07:41 GMT -5
Covid happened. Shutdown happened. Recruiting in person was halted. Of course there are 13 and 14 year old girls that got missed. But if someone’s daughter is in the top 35 of her age, at some point soon the college coaches will see that. If a girl is in the top 100 of her age and she wants to play in college. She should be emailing highlight to coaches. USA should invest some time into developing a 6’3” talented OH over a 5’9” OH. That’s just how it works. If someone’s daughter got missed, it isn’t the end of the road for her. Being the top 35 in the nation isn’t a great percentage. If she is destined to go to the Olympics, being missed at age 14 won’t stop her. I dont disagree but hope they go back to tryouts vs this "scouting" method. First of all, congratulations with the success your team had at the Regional qualifier. Those were clubs with a well known pedigree that you guys defeated. I personally hated the "tryout" method. You had a bunch of evaluators and no consistency of evaluation. In Minnesota the whole process was always a bit of a mess and we saw girls that were evaluated on week 1 getting higher scores than girls that were stronger at that position and went to the week 2 evaluation. I don't think coaches should be expected to go to regional qualifiers to see if there is potential talent but I also don't know how to make sure girls don't slip through the cracks.
|
|
|
Post by eazy on Jul 14, 2021 7:44:34 GMT -5
I dont disagree but hope they go back to tryouts vs this "scouting" method. First of all, congratulations with the success your team had at the Regional qualifier. Those were clubs with a well known pedigree that you guys defeated. I personally hated the "tryout" method. You had a bunch of evaluators and no consistency of evaluation. In Minnesota the whole process was always a bit of a mess and we saw girls that were evaluated on week 1 getting higher scores than girls that were stronger at that position and went to the week 2 evaluation. I don't think coaches should be expected to go to regional qualifiers to see if there is potential talent but I also don't know how to make sure girls don't slip through the cracks. Probably by attending other big name tournaments. That's where the coaches are. Looks like that team didn't play in very many strong tournaments. A few good wins, but not enough to turn heads, and none at major events.
|
|