|
Post by rjaege on Jul 10, 2023 8:48:57 GMT -5
Couldn't agree more on the 21-201 comment. With how much these girls train and play the gap continues to grow smaller from the girls on all the lists to the girls that aren't. There’s also the fact that volleyball is more competitive in terms of appeal compared to other sports. Women’s basketball in particular, which emphasizes many of the same physical characteristics. Volleyball continues to be a bigger and more compelling draw. That’s going to continue to raise the bar in terms of overall talent available. IMO women's volleyball is more popular than women's basketball with fans and many players. Also more popular than men's volleyball at the HS and college levels. In that regard, gymnastics and volleyball are unique, although probably true of ice skating and dance too, maybe others?
|
|
|
Post by practicesafesets on Jul 10, 2023 9:01:14 GMT -5
Who are the top U17 euro talents?
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Jul 10, 2023 9:10:38 GMT -5
There’s also the fact that volleyball is more competitive in terms of appeal compared to other sports. Women’s basketball in particular, which emphasizes many of the same physical characteristics. Volleyball continues to be a bigger and more compelling draw. That’s going to continue to raise the bar in terms of overall talent available. IMO women's volleyball is more popular than women's basketball with fans and many players. Also more popular than men's volleyball at the HS and college levels. In that regard, gymnastics and volleyball are unique, although probably true of ice skating and dance too, maybe others? I’d want to see some metrics to back this. I feel like volleyball is growing at a rapid pace, and will continue to do so, but my impression is that basketball is still ahead. That said, they’re not selling out any football stadiums for a regular season basketball game. But that’s kind of Nebraska specific.
|
|
|
Post by stanfordcardinal18 on Jul 10, 2023 9:27:13 GMT -5
Does anyone have any insight on where devyn wiest is looking?
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Jul 10, 2023 9:49:17 GMT -5
IMO women's volleyball is more popular than women's basketball with fans and many players. Also more popular than men's volleyball at the HS and college levels. In that regard, gymnastics and volleyball are unique, although probably true of ice skating and dance too, maybe others? I’d want to see some metrics to back this. I feel like volleyball is growing at a rapid pace, and will continue to do so, but my impression is that basketball is still ahead. That said, they’re not selling out any football stadiums for a regular season basketball game. But that’s kind of Nebraska specific. I don't have the numbers at my fingertips, but I did a comparison of WBB and WVB at the Division-1 level recently, in terms of home attendance. IIRC WVB draws, on average, a little less than half the attendance of WBB at most schools nationally. Oddly consistent through the samples I saw. The Big Ten is an exception to that, with some schools drawing about the same numbers for both sports. This is all a rough recollection, so take that for what it's worth. I also looked at some D-II and D-III schools and that ratio of 2-to-1 held up there, as well. So I agree that there is some ground to make up, but it is well-understood that WVB is a fast-growing sport at the youth levels (maybe the fastest?). My data was in a thread on here comparing the sports. I could probably find it if needed. I have no doubt that the sport will continue to draw new fans, and will probably draw even with WBB eventually. Just a matter of time. Maybe it will overtake WBB in the Big Ten soon.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Jul 10, 2023 10:00:43 GMT -5
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 12,860
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jul 10, 2023 10:29:40 GMT -5
Do people get the sense, with the increase in popularity of the game, that there is less obvious separation between "elite" recruits and everyone else? I get the impression that there is a fair amount of disagreement among rankings. That could be because there is no consensus ranking, as there was in the Tawa PV days, but even he said it was getting increasingly hard to do the rankings toward the end. I imagine a more competitive recruiting pool could flatten the recruiting hierarchy a bit. Having gone through this process very recently here's my $.02 as parent and strictly from what some coaches conveyed during the process. There definitely is a top tier. There is a handful of girls that are world killers or game changers. We've had the pleasure of playing with some and there definitely are kids that, even at the highest level, separate themselves physically (mostly) but also just in raw talent, athleticism or IQ that make them difference makers. The number of these per class varies but I would put it at 5-10 players. To have all the bases covered, let's say there's 20 of those. Once you get past that, its gets a lot mushier in terms of difference. The difference between 21 and 201 is a lot less than it used to be in their eyes. While the ceiling has gone up for sure due to better coaching, resources and players, the floor has come way up where the difference between the top of this range and bottom is much less noticeable. That lessening of range brings a lot of other factors into play in recruiting where things like personality, regionality, etc. become deciding factors. In my opinion, its made it much harder for "really, really good players" to find homes. You may have spent an entire club career positioning yourself and be better than this kid or that kid but in the coaches eyes, that difference isn't really that big of a deal and they'll take a kid that is closer to them that they've seen more vs. an out of state kid that they've only seen a couple of times because the chances of the local kid leaving from being homesick are lower. Or they just know the kid better because of growing up coming to camp. Anecdotally, I played men's club in college. Our starting middle on our women's team was 5'10 and all conference multiple times. Great athlete and had an awesome career. Her measurables are no where near what most of the #21 to 201 kids are now. 6'0 or 6'1 OHs are a dime a dozen now and the difference is quite small so standing out, even with a 10'+ attack touch is tough and there are a lot more factors at play in finding a home. It's great for the game because you are seeing more and more programs being able to compete at high levels year over year so the product overall is getting really great and seeing some mid majors become perennial powers from really wise recruiting is awesome. The gorillas are still the gorillas and will continue to be with the physical difference they bring to the table. But on any given night, with ball control a little off and the IQ/talent on some of these other teams, anything can happen and its great for the game. Tough for recruiting but great for the game. I don't have a good perspective on how the 2025 class compares to other classes - specifically 5+ years ago. From what I have seen - the list of very talented players is much larger than usual (just my perception). But this is in part due to the very large number of outstanding prospects at the pins for this year. I mean - I think someone like Vander Wal is an elite prospect for D1 - but their are many potential impact OH's in this class (and 2024 also had a large number) that are very close Vander Wal. Texas, Nebraska and Stanford are the beasts in recruiting - but it isn't sustainable for them to be the only programs to materially be getting the best players as it relates to real playing time on the court. This number is getting close to expanding - maybe Wisconsin is already there. Kentucky, Minnesota, USC, Florida are or will be knocking on the door - and at least a dozen right behind them. But there is another factor that is temporarily expediting this - that Covid 5th year. This is limiting the number of players those top programs can take. It is creating more (in some ways - much more) talent in D1 right now. And that is the formula for more parity. What we don't know - what happens once that Covid year goes away? Covid 5th year made it easier for teams other than those big 3 to win. And to a certain extent - it has made it tougher for them to 'corner the market' on new recruits. And then you have a year like this year - and there are going to be a lot of programs that are going to bring in at least one of those major players - not to mention the continued depth down the line (difference between #21 and 201 continues to get smaller).
|
|
|
Post by rjaege on Jul 10, 2023 10:57:39 GMT -5
IMO women's volleyball is more popular than women's basketball with fans and many players. Also more popular than men's volleyball at the HS and college levels. In that regard, gymnastics and volleyball are unique, although probably true of ice skating and dance too, maybe others? I’d want to see some metrics to back this. I feel like volleyball is growing at a rapid pace, and will continue to do so, but my impression is that basketball is still ahead. That said, they’re not selling out any football stadiums for a regular season basketball game. But that’s kind of Nebraska specific. Yes, I am personally and geographically biased. I am a relatively new VB fan, which may also increase my bias.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Jul 10, 2023 11:13:55 GMT -5
100% agree. Top talent riding the bench at a handful of schools doesn’t make the game any better. It’s a natural extension of giving players freedom of choice. Either you have a system that dictates to some degree where players can and can’t enroll, or you have a system where talent tends to collect at a few places. It doesn’t have to be static that the few places remain the same year after year, although it will tend to. But a different level of investment, a change in coaches, a different level of success can move a program up or down the ladder. But there’s always going to be a ladder. Unless we suddenly have rules that forbid top players from going to top programs depending on the talent already amassed. Which is entirely unrealistic. I don’t blame people for being frustrated to some degree, but this isn’t new. This is college athletics. I like it that kids have a choice where they want to go, and I like it even more that Texas tends to have some competitive advantages when it comes to talent acquisition. In all sports. To change that would be a case of the cure being worse than the disease. To me the real solution is for more programs to make themselves even more appealing. Which I do think is happening to some degree. I don’t disagree with this.
|
|
|
Post by notvballdad on Jul 10, 2023 12:34:34 GMT -5
I don't have a good perspective on how the 2025 class compares to other classes - specifically 5+ years ago. From what I have seen - the list of very talented players is much larger than usual (just my perception). But this is in part due to the very large number of outstanding prospects at the pins for this year. I mean - I think someone like Vander Wal is an elite prospect for D1 - but their are many potential impact OH's in this class (and 2024 also had a large number) that are very close Vander Wal. Texas, Nebraska and Stanford are the beasts in recruiting - but it isn't sustainable for them to be the only programs to materially be getting the best players as it relates to real playing time on the court. This number is getting close to expanding - maybe Wisconsin is already there. Kentucky, Minnesota, USC, Florida are or will be knocking on the door - and at least a dozen right behind them. But there is another factor that is temporarily expediting this - that Covid 5th year. This is limiting the number of players those top programs can take. It is creating more (in some ways - much more) talent in D1 right now. And that is the formula for more parity. What we don't know - what happens once that Covid year goes away? Covid 5th year made it easier for teams other than those big 3 to win. And to a certain extent - it has made it tougher for them to 'corner the market' on new recruits. And then you have a year like this year - and there are going to be a lot of programs that are going to bring in at least one of those major players - not to mention the continued depth down the line (difference between #21 and 201 continues to get smaller). I've been completely in your shoes and the hardest lesson that I'm still learning is that my assessment of talent and depth essentially means nothing at all. It's 100% up to the college coaches to assess the depth of the talent level and where players fall. It's even harder because that is a black box that they do not divulge to anyone so you don't get to see any lists of what they think and to complicate things even further, there are so many varying standards by which they measure this, it's next to impossible to try to project outside of the absolute slam dunk kids. It's an exercise that will drive you to madness if you try to figure it out beyond their top 3 on their board (all they really recruit now). I struggle with it to this day and still want to make sense of it. In terms of the Covid 5th year, this is completely conjecture on my part with a little information from our recruiting process and discussion. The 5th year (and 6th and 7th) players once they clean out of the system will lessen the log jam a little but it won't solve the problem for HS kids trying to reach P5 schools. You may grad out as a P5 prospect by college coaches, consultants, scouts, your recruiting coordinator at your club that's done this for 25 years, etc. but it just doesn't matter. High school players do not win games at the RPI 50 level and definitely not at the National Championship or NCAA tournament level. Look at the average age of the All American team last year. Look at the makeup of the final 4 teams last season. They are grown women playing the game. Their physical, emotional and intellectual maturity win championships and consequently, secure jobs for staffs. That's a long way of saying, even when the glut cleans out of the portal, the P5 schools view mid majors as the ones doing the recruiting work now. P5 will still continue to mine the portal year over year for grown women to help them win championships with a very few super elite kids they "develop" by offering them 2-2 that are low risk scholarships. The number of older kids will lessen in the portal but that will still be the primary shopping ground for P5s and new coaching staffs trying to turn things around quickly. What I'm curious to see (and I completely agree with you) that non top 25 and mid majors have started getting some really great players. Those players are going to get coached and developed well (not collected) and thrive. After two years or so, the big boys are going to come calling. They'll have real data on the girls that overperformed and are now way more mature and developed and those will be the targets. Will those girls stay with the schools that brought them along or will they jump ship to the big brands? I don't know the answer and can't wait to see. For 21-201 you almost need to just get a ticket to the game that's the best fit for you, work hard, play hard, develop and then if you wanted to play P5, in two years, you may get your chance. I promise i'm not trying to be cynical. This is just what I've been able to put together within my limited experience and the coaches/consultants we've talked to. Love to hear other perspectives.
|
|
vballfreak808
Hawaiian Ohana
2020 All-VolleyTalk 1st Team, All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2023, 2022, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk HM (2021, 2019, 2018), 2017 Fantasy League 1st Runner-up, 2016 Fantasy League Champion
#GoBows
Posts: 13,127
|
Post by vballfreak808 on Jul 10, 2023 12:40:43 GMT -5
Does anyone have any insight on where devyn wiest is looking? She’s heading to Utah
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016) All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team 2023
Posts: 12,860
|
Post by bluepenquin on Jul 10, 2023 13:14:35 GMT -5
Does anyone have any insight on where devyn wiest is looking? She’s heading to Utah Ha! - if I give you another name, can you post/confirm where they are going in less than 5 hours?
|
|
|
Post by hipsterfilth on Jul 10, 2023 14:11:11 GMT -5
I personally do not think of other schools as tier 2 or tier 3. The fact remains those three top schools in recruiting very rarely lose any recruiting battles other than to each other. That’s all it means. It doesn’t mean they’re better in any other way. Obviously there are factors allowing them to get first dibs regarding the players they bring in, but it doesn’t put them on an untouchable tier...except in recruiting. Does Stanford lose a lot of recruiting battles? I gotta think, for a PSA with the academics to qualify for Stanford, it's a slam-dunk. Nunneviller and Snyder come to mind? Outside of that, not sure.
|
|
|
Post by 2Close4Missiles on Jul 10, 2023 14:17:53 GMT -5
Does Stanford lose a lot of recruiting battles? I gotta think, for a PSA with the academics to qualify for Stanford, it's a slam-dunk. Nunneviller and Snyder come to mind? Outside of that, not sure. Kristen Simon just chose Wisconsin over em
|
|
|
Post by uofaGRAD on Jul 10, 2023 14:19:38 GMT -5
Does Stanford lose a lot of recruiting battles? I gotta think, for a PSA with the academics to qualify for Stanford, it's a slam-dunk. Nunneviller and Snyder come to mind? Outside of that, not sure. Stanford lost Brooke themselves. they were #1 or #2 on her list IIRC but neither of her top schools were going to let her hit:/
|
|