|
Post by dragan11 on Apr 5, 2022 18:08:04 GMT -5
If we had smillar system for Tokyo, we would have Netherlands instead of Argentina or DR.
|
|
|
Post by chatchu-off moksri on Apr 5, 2022 18:13:32 GMT -5
I got curious... lets see how Europe has faced vs the top dogs at the Olympics since USA became relevant. Brazil 2008: W Russia, W Serbia, W Italy 2012: W Serbia, W Turkey, W Russia 2016: W Russia 2021: W Serbia, W Russia USA 2008: W Poland, W Italy 2012: W Serbia, W Turkey 2016: W Netherlands, W Serbia, W Italy, L Serbia, W Netherlands 2021: W Turkey, L Russia, W Italy, W Serbia China 2008: W Poland, W Russia 2012: W Serbia, W Turkey 2016: L Netherlands, W Italy, L Serbia, W Netherlands, W Serbia 2021: L Russia, L Turkey, W Italy With 2021 China being the outlier... seems like a lot of irrelevance to me. While I do agree with the points made, I think 2022 is truly a new era of volleyball. There's a crazy influx of new, young talent right now and we really don't know who is going to rise to the top at the end. There is more parity now, and we might see a lot of new faces/countries make a move starting this quad. I think anything can be possible this quad. The US is expected to be the favorites, but again, we haven't seen what the post-Larson/Akinradewo era is going to look like yet. Maybe Thailand somehow makes themselves the favorite from the AVC even if Zhu comes back. Maybe Lavarini creates another miracle and makes Poland a medal winning team. Who knows? Maybe even the Dominican Republic establishes itself as a force and gets a spot on the podium at a major event? The one-two punch of Gaila/Brayelin + Jineiry&Peña is a lot of firepower. Plus, if history really did repeat itself, the US would have flopped against Brazil in Tokyo and won another silver medal. I for one, and glad that history doesn't matter, and that things are changing. There are so many possibilities. It's certainly an exciting time to be a volleyball fan!
|
|
|
Post by ToddyJ on Apr 5, 2022 18:21:05 GMT -5
At the end of the day, I am glad the FIVB is changing the process up each quad for the time being. I just think that since the VNL is clearly going to play a more vital role in the Olympic qualification process, more teams should be shuffling in and out of the tournament each year. I'm sorry, but I for one am board watching Thailand and Korea get thrashed each season. They both should be relegated and have to earn promotion every other year. Instead they are safe as "core teams". Plus, as we start to see more federations strengthen as the game "grows", we will start to see teams from NORCECA, CSV and CAVB start to make their mark on the international scene. I get that Asia is a huge market for the FIVB, but it shouldn't be at the expense of other teams around the world that deserve their shot to make it among the sports elite teams. That's just my two cents. will we? this new system is awful for NORCECA, CSV, and AVC tbh. Their representation is going to decrease. Meanwhile instead of diverse countries... we get european cannon fodder. I don't think more CEV representation is a good thing, in the Olympic spirit anyways. (WCH is a different deal) Welp, if this process turns out to be trash, at least the FIVB is constantly changing these tournament structures and is shaking things up each quad. I've only been REALLY following the sport since 2016. Was the qualification process basically the same in past quads? It seems to me that in a shortened quad where Europe is hosting the two major tournaments (RIP World Cup), the FIVB finally threw CEV a bone. The more CEV teams that are in the tournament, the higher ticket sales are sure to be.
|
|
|
Post by avid 2.0 on Apr 5, 2022 18:23:12 GMT -5
I got curious... lets see how Europe has faced vs the top dogs at the Olympics since USA became relevant. I think anything can be possible this quad.That is my point. Under this system, we don't get KYK's 2012 performance. We wouldn't get Netherlands 2016. The ranking system qualification doesnt give anything to the underdog, unless they do it twice (but then, are they an underdog at that point?)
|
|
|
Post by ToddyJ on Apr 5, 2022 18:24:30 GMT -5
I think anything can be possible this quad. That is my point. Under this system, we don't get KYK's 2012 performance. We wouldn't get Netherlands 2016. The ranking system qualification doesnt give anything to the underdog, unless they do it twice (but then, are they an underdog at that point?) Hmmmm. I guess I am just happy to see more elite volleyball played at the Olympics.
|
|
|
Post by avid 2.0 on Apr 5, 2022 18:27:14 GMT -5
will we? this new system is awful for NORCECA, CSV, and AVC tbh. Their representation is going to decrease. Meanwhile instead of diverse countries... we get european cannon fodder. I don't think more CEV representation is a good thing, in the Olympic spirit anyways. (WCH is a different deal) Welp, if this process turns out to be trash, at least the FIVB is constantly changing these tournament structures and is shaking things up each quad. I've only been REALLY following the sport since 2016. Was the qualification process basically the same in past quads? It seems to me that in a shortened quad where Europe is hosting the two major tournaments (RIP World Cup), the FIVB finally threw CEV a bone. The more CEV teams that are in the tournament, the higher ticket sales are sure to be. I don't think its about CEV tbh. It's about decreasing matches (by eliminating continental qualifiers).... but then just use continental championships imo. 2008: Host, 3 2007 World Cup, 5 Continental Qualifiers, 3 from 1 IOQT 2012: Host, 3 2011 World Cup, 5 Continental Qualifiers, 3 World qualifiers 2016: Host, 2 2015 World Cup, 5 Continental Qualifiers, 3 World Qualifiers, 1 Second World Qualifier (its a bit sketchy here)
|
|
|
Post by avid 2.0 on Apr 5, 2022 18:28:45 GMT -5
That is my point. Under this system, we don't get KYK's 2012 performance. We wouldn't get Netherlands 2016. The ranking system qualification doesnt give anything to the underdog, unless they do it twice (but then, are they an underdog at that point?) Hmmmm. I guess I am just happy to see more elite volleyball played at the Olympics. Im not convinced. It's still going to be the same teams (China, Brazil, USA, Serbia, Russia, Italy) beating up on the rest. But instead of having a goal for federations to aspire to achieve and make their programs better... there's no longer that and less representation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2022 18:29:11 GMT -5
I think anything can be possible this quad. That is my point. Under this system, we don't get KYK's 2012 performance. We wouldn't get Netherlands 2016. The ranking system qualification doesnt give anything to the underdog, unless they do it twice (but then, are they an underdog at that point?) but didn’t you just make this exact opposite argument about CL? How you didn’t care about the underdog and the top teams should win anyway? Or only when it concerns VB? Or?
|
|
|
Post by chatchu-off moksri on Apr 5, 2022 18:33:01 GMT -5
I think anything can be possible this quad. That is my point. Under this system, we don't get KYK's 2012 performance. We wouldn't get Netherlands 2016. The ranking system qualification doesnt give anything to the underdog, unless they do it twice (but then, are they an underdog at that point?) I see your point. I guess we'll have to see if this method will truly be the best way to have countries qualify for the Olympics. I didn't hate the World Qualifiers that they used to do to decide the last Olympic spots. It was always fun to watch. Maybe if there are a lot of complaints this quad about the qualification process, they bring it back?
|
|
|
Post by ToddyJ on Apr 5, 2022 18:35:54 GMT -5
That is my point. Under this system, we don't get KYK's 2012 performance. We wouldn't get Netherlands 2016. The ranking system qualification doesnt give anything to the underdog, unless they do it twice (but then, are they an underdog at that point?) I see your point. I guess we'll have to see if this method will truly be the best way to have countries qualify for the Olympics. I didn't hate the World Qualifiers that they used to do to decide the last Olympic spots. It was always fun to watch. Maybe if there are a lot of complaints this quad about the qualification process, they bring it back? To me...this reads "Take the VNL seriously, or else" from the FIVB. I mean, the 2021 tournament was a joke but that was due to the sheer amount of volleyball going down that season as the world got out of the pandemic. Most teams didn't take it seriously. I GUARANTEE you that won't be the case in 2024. The qualified teams will want to get into shape (looking at you Serbia and Italy) and the rest will be biting and clawing to improve their ranking so that they can nab one of those last 5 spots.
|
|
|
Post by avid 2.0 on Apr 5, 2022 18:36:26 GMT -5
That is my point. Under this system, we don't get KYK's 2012 performance. We wouldn't get Netherlands 2016. The ranking system qualification doesnt give anything to the underdog, unless they do it twice (but then, are they an underdog at that point?) but didn’t you just make this exact opposite argument about CL? How you didn’t care about the underdog and the top teams should win anyway? Or only when it concerns VB? Or? I explained why the CL is why it is. The goal of the Champions League is to determine the best team in Europe. "its still the same as any other volleyball match though.
you win a match 3-0, 3-1 you get three points. you lose 2-3, you get one.
if you want to upset someone, you need to be better than just one day (and even marginal that that)
We've seen Stuttgart do it. Busto Arsizio did it last year.
the CL won't ever be a pure knockout. (because then we'd get complaints about being home/away for matches)"
That's not the goal in the Olympics or World Championships. If it were, they would use double elimination.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2022 18:37:46 GMT -5
I got even more curious.... so lets look at WCH Brazil 2010: W Netherlands, W Italy, W Czech Republic, W Germany, L Russia 2014: W Serbia, W Bulgaria, W Turkey, W Russia, W Netherlands, W Italy 2018: L Serbia, L Germany, W Netherlands USA 2010: W Germany, W Croatia, W Czech Republic, L Italy, W Netherlands, L Russia 2014: W Russia, W Netherlands, W Turkey, W Bulgaria, W Serbia, L Italy, W Russia, 2018: W Russia, W Azerbaijan, W Bulgaria, W Turkey, L Italy, L Netherlands China 2010: L Turkey, L Russia, L Serbia, W Poland, L Poland 2014: W Belgium, W Azerbaijan, W Germany, W Croatia, L Italy, W Italy 2018: L Italy, W Bulgaria, W Turkey, W Azerbaijan, W Russia, W Netherlands, L Italy, W Netherlands Excluding 2010 China, there is exactly one match where a European team upset a Big 3 member. but yes, we need more Europeans. not that It disproves your point (although I’m not sure why you’re even making it because Brazil has had a strangle grip on the Olympics for a while and i just don’t think the euro teams were better) but Serbia beat both China and the Usa in 2016
|
|
|
Post by avid 2.0 on Apr 5, 2022 18:40:35 GMT -5
I got even more curious.... so lets look at WCH Brazil 2010: W Netherlands, W Italy, W Czech Republic, W Germany, L Russia 2014: W Serbia, W Bulgaria, W Turkey, W Russia, W Netherlands, W Italy 2018: L Serbia, L Germany, W Netherlands USA 2010: W Germany, W Croatia, W Czech Republic, L Italy, W Netherlands, L Russia 2014: W Russia, W Netherlands, W Turkey, W Bulgaria, W Serbia, L Italy, W Russia, 2018: W Russia, W Azerbaijan, W Bulgaria, W Turkey, L Italy, L Netherlands China 2010: L Turkey, L Russia, L Serbia, W Poland, L Poland 2014: W Belgium, W Azerbaijan, W Germany, W Croatia, L Italy, W Italy 2018: L Italy, W Bulgaria, W Turkey, W Azerbaijan, W Russia, W Netherlands, L Italy, W Netherlands Excluding 2010 China, there is exactly one match where a European team upset a Big 3 member. but yes, we need more Europeans. not that It disproves your point (although I’m not sure why you’re even making it because Brazil has had a strangle grip on the Olympics for a while and i just don’t think the euro teams were better) but Serbia beat both China and the Usa in 2016 I know (i made a post about the olympics) My point was, besides the big 3 (Russia, Italy, Serbia)... they're (europeans) not beating the top dogs. The whole argument against equal representation is to make it more competitive... meanwhile those teams that are replacing the CSV #2, AVC #2, etc... aren't beating the top teams either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2022 18:41:48 GMT -5
not that It disproves your point (although I’m not sure why you’re even making it because Brazil has had a strangle grip on the Olympics for a while and i just don’t think the euro teams were better) but Serbia beat both China and the Usa in 2016 I know (i made a post about the olympics) My point was, besides the big 3 (Russia, Italy, Serbia)... they're (europeans) not beating the top dogs. The whole argument against equal representation is to make it more competitive... meanwhile those teams that are replacing the CSV #2, AVC #2, etc... aren't beating the top teams either. Serbia beat both the usa and China in the Olympics is what I’m saying. So that makes 2. Also wouldn’t Serbia be considered in the big 3 over China in recent years ?
|
|
|
Post by avid 2.0 on Apr 5, 2022 18:43:44 GMT -5
I know (i made a post about the olympics) My point was, besides the big 3 (Russia, Italy, Serbia)... they're (europeans) not beating the top dogs. The whole argument against equal representation is to make it more competitive... meanwhile those teams that are replacing the CSV #2, AVC #2, etc... aren't beating the top teams either. Serbia beat both the usa and China in the Olympics is what I’m saying. So that makes 2. Also wouldn’t Serbia be considered in the big 3 over China in recent years ? im confused. im not talking about Serbia. The big 3 are the best non-european teams. not the "big 3" as in best in the world
|
|