Volleyball club- recap and thoughts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious to see what else happens at the 15 level for bids for CHRVA teams. VA Juniors finished second in USA division at NEQ, while MD Juniors finished 4th. American 15-1 finished 3rd in the American division at NEQ. Solid performance all around.

VA Juniors 15's is not messing around, was happy to see them do so well at NEQ. NEQ 15s open turned out to be a CHRVA battle- MDJRSs and BRVA lost to VA Juniors in the Gold Division.

In the USA Division…. VAJRS is not at all competitive compared to Metro and Paramount. Those two clubs play at a different level.

Yet metro and paramount consistently are at the bottom of open. Metro 15 was in flight at NEQ.

Why's it so hard for some people to give props to other good clubs in the region other than just Metro and Paramount? Girls at other clubs work hard, play well, and yes... get recruited D1. Crazy, right?!?!

I hear what you are saying but Metro is the only club (I think Paramount sending 1 next year) that consistently sent players to the P5/P4 conferences; they have definitely earned their recognition. Metro should have done a better job of helping to grow the sport in the region. There is no question that there are talented players at other clubs but they hardly ever stay with their club (can’t blame them) and the talent is inconsistent.

I guess the questions is what is the ultimate goal? If it's ranking in the country or playing in open? Is it a D1 scholarship? Bottom line, Metro and Paramount are fine but they aren't the only clubs in this region that produce D1 athletes.

etro and Paramount parents dominate this board and bring a clear biased, it's exhausting.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think anybody is making the claim that you can only play D1 if you play for Metro or Paramount. As someone mentioned, Metro has had the most power 5 commitments, but that is simply because up until the last two years with Paramount’s ascent, Metro has had a monopoly and stranglehold on all of the top talent, many of whom they pilfered from other clubs because Metro was the only club that could win and compete at the open level. That simply isn’t the case anymore. Several other clubs haven’t sent kids to P5 schools (including VAJRS)

The bottom line is that while players can still certainly play D1 playing for a club other than Metro or Paramount, those players will not be as ready to play at next level as a metro or paramount kid because they haven’t been playing against the most talented athletes on n the country. A player will only reach their full potential if they are playing against players who are more talented than they are. The only place you find that is in Open.

[Anonymous]

Metro's problem is their coaches that failed all these kids' talent. When all your 6 starters are from other top clubs' starters, shouldn't your team be the number 1 team in chrva by weaken other teams? Even Chrva number 1 should not be metro's goal or bragged for,they should get open bid at all age groups. Given good coaches, these kids should have been much better skill wise. Paramount coaching is much better but I heard some bad feedback.

[Anonymous]

I am not necessarily a Metro fan but to be fair Metro travel teams usually get open or national bids. Colleges also encourage their recruited DMV players to play for Metro before they get to campus so they must be doing something right, skill wise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anybody is making the claim that you can only play D1 if you play for Metro or Paramount. As someone mentioned, Metro has had the most power 5 commitments, but that is simply because up until the last two years with Paramount’s ascent, Metro has had a monopoly and stranglehold on all of the top talent, many of whom they pilfered from other clubs because Metro was the only club that could win and compete at the open level. That simply isn’t the case anymore. Several other clubs haven’t sent kids to P5 schools (including VAJRS)

The bottom line is that while players can still certainly play D1 playing for a club other than Metro or Paramount, those players will not be as ready to play at next level as a metro or paramount kid because they haven’t been playing against the most talented athletes on n the country. A player will only reach their full potential if they are playing against players who are more talented than they are. The only place you find that is in Open.

Then why not call out VA Elite- they play on open as well. PP makes a good point that there are good clubs with very talented girls other than paramount and metro but the posters on dcum are obsessed with promoting them as the only path. It's ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Metro's problem is their coaches that failed all these kids' talent. When all your 6 starters are from other top clubs' starters, shouldn't your team be the number 1 team in chrva by weaken other teams? Even Chrva number 1 should not be metro's goal or bragged for,they should get open bid at all age groups. Given good coaches, these kids should have been much better skill wise. Paramount coaching is much better but I heard some bad feedback.

Paramount coaching isn't for everyone. Plus the coaches didn't play volleybal. They are, however, obsessed with winning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Metro's problem is their coaches that failed all these kids' talent. When all your 6 starters are from other top clubs' starters, shouldn't your team be the number 1 team in chrva by weaken other teams? Even Chrva number 1 should not be metro's goal or bragged for,they should get open bid at all age groups. Given good coaches, these kids should have been much better skill wise. Paramount coaching is much better but I heard some bad feedback.

Paramount coaching isn't for everyone. Plus the coaches didn't play volleybal. They are, however, obsessed with winning.

John Cook (Nebraska Head Coach) and Kelly Sheffield (Wisconsin Head Coach) didn’t play volleyball either. Those are two of the most successful coaches for the most successful programs in D1 volleyball.

[Anonymous]

METRO, YOU KNOW!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anybody is making the claim that you can only play D1 if you play for Metro or Paramount. As someone mentioned, Metro has had the most power 5 commitments, but that is simply because up until the last two years with Paramount’s ascent, Metro has had a monopoly and stranglehold on all of the top talent, many of whom they pilfered from other clubs because Metro was the only club that could win and compete at the open level. That simply isn’t the case anymore. Several other clubs haven’t sent kids to P5 schools (including VAJRS)

The bottom line is that while players can still certainly play D1 playing for a club other than Metro or Paramount, those players will not be as ready to play at next level as a metro or paramount kid because they haven’t been playing against the most talented athletes on n the country. A player will only reach their full potential if they are playing against players who are more talented than they are. The only place you find that is in Open.

Then why not call out VA Elite- they play on open as well. PP makes a good point that there are good clubs with very talented girls other than paramount and metro but the posters on dcum are obsessed with promoting them as the only path. It's ridiculous.

VA Elite should be doing better so maybe that is why they are not really in the conversation. It’s like they are stuck; Paramount came way after them and have surpassed them to be the number 2 team in the region. Maybe it’s the players choice but a lot of them go to DIII schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Metro's problem is their coaches that failed all these kids' talent. When all your 6 starters are from other top clubs' starters, shouldn't your team be the number 1 team in chrva by weaken other teams? Even Chrva number 1 should not be metro's goal or bragged for,they should get open bid at all age groups. Given good coaches, these kids should have been much better skill wise. Paramount coaching is much better but I heard some bad feedback.

Paramount coaching isn't for everyone. Plus the coaches didn't play volleybal. They are, however, obsessed with winning.

Dismissing coaches who didn't play as young athletes is short-sighted. Fran DuVall learned how to coach on the job and she was very successful. Stop being snobby about play experience - this doesn't necessarily translate in good coaching. The same way as lack of play experience doesn't necessarily translate in poor coaching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Metro's problem is their coaches that failed all these kids' talent. When all your 6 starters are from other top clubs' starters, shouldn't your team be the number 1 team in chrva by weaken other teams? Even Chrva number 1 should not be metro's goal or bragged for,they should get open bid at all age groups. Given good coaches, these kids should have been much better skill wise. Paramount coaching is much better but I heard some bad feedback.

Paramount coaching isn't for everyone. Plus the coaches didn't play volleybal. They are, however, obsessed with winning.

Players are sometimes the worst coaches so I wouldn’t hold that against them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think anybody is making the claim that you can only play D1 if you play for Metro or Paramount. As someone mentioned, Metro has had the most power 5 commitments, but that is simply because up until the last two years with Paramount’s ascent, Metro has had a monopoly and stranglehold on all of the top talent, many of whom they pilfered from other clubs because Metro was the only club that could win and compete at the open level. That simply isn’t the case anymore. Several other clubs haven’t sent kids to P5 schools (including VAJRS)

The bottom line is that while players can still certainly play D1 playing for a club other than Metro or Paramount, those players will not be as ready to play at next level as a metro or paramount kid because they haven’t been playing against the most talented athletes on n the country. A player will only reach their full potential if they are playing against players who are more talented than they are. The only place you find that is in Open.

Then why not call out VA Elite- they play on open as well. PP makes a good point that there are good clubs with very talented girls other than paramount and metro but the posters on dcum are obsessed with promoting them as the only path. It's ridiculous.

VA Elite should be doing better so maybe that is why they are not really in the conversation. It’s like they are stuck; Paramount came way after them and have surpassed them to be the number 2 team in the region. Maybe it’s the players choice but a lot of them go to DIII schools.

And to be fair, some very good D3 schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not necessarily a Metro fan but to be fair Metro travel teams usually get open or national bids. Colleges also encourage their recruited DMV players to play for Metro before they get to campus so they must be doing something right, skill wise.

National bid just means the team is #1 or 2 in CHVAR region. Given these kids' talent,even there 90 years old grandma can coach them and win chrva region. Open bid is what they should get normally. The Metro coaches failed these talents.
I talked with ufl coach last year,they just think Metro have more physically talented player so they encourage them to Metro 18, not because good skill coaching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Metro's problem is their coaches that failed all these kids' talent. When all your 6 starters are from other top clubs' starters, shouldn't your team be the number 1 team in chrva by weaken other teams? Even Chrva number 1 should not be metro's goal or bragged for,they should get open bid at all age groups. Given good coaches, these kids should have been much better skill wise. Paramount coaching is much better but I heard some bad feedback.

Paramount coaching isn't for everyone. Plus the coaches didn't play volleybal. They are, however, obsessed with winning.

Dismissing coaches who didn't play as young athletes is short-sighted. Fran DuVall learned how to coach on the job and she was very successful. Stop being snobby about play experience - this doesn't necessarily translate in good coaching. The same way as lack of play experience doesn't necessarily translate in poor coaching.

Agree with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not necessarily a Metro fan but to be fair Metro travel teams usually get open or national bids. Colleges also encourage their recruited DMV players to play for Metro before they get to campus so they must be doing something right, skill wise.

National bid just means the team is #1 or 2 in CHVAR region. Given these kids' talent,even there 90 years old grandma can coach them and win chrva region. Open bid is what they should get normally. The Metro coaches failed these talents.
I talked with ufl coach last year,they just think Metro have more physically talented player so they encourage them to Metro 18, not because good skill coaching.

As far as I know CHRVA regionals do not give open bids. To earn an open bid teams have to play at qualifiers like NEQ, sunshine classics etc against clubs from top volleyball regions like Texas, Ohio, California. To say that Metro fail its players if they get a national bid is ridiculous because what does that mean for teams like Paramount, VAElite who are getting bids below national. Most of metro players go to D1 colleges and some go to power conferences so their coaching must be good enough.