Volleyball club- recap and thoughts

[FPYCparent]

With the 18s season ending much earlier than younger age groups, are there that many more qualifiers left on the schedule for a CHRVA team to earn a bid? Just a quick check only shows NEQ and MEQ remaining on the schedule for some of the most-discussed CHRVA clubs. I also see an Under Armour event in Louisville, but I don't know if that event is considered a qualifier.

[Anonymous]

FPYCparent wrote:With the 18s season ending much earlier than younger age groups, are there that many more qualifiers left on the schedule for a CHRVA team to earn a bid? Just a quick check only shows NEQ and MEQ remaining on the schedule for some of the most-discussed CHRVA clubs. I also see an Under Armour event in Louisville, but I don't know if that event is considered a qualifier.

Nope, 18s season is winding down quickly. The final national qualifiers are always really tough to get an open bid at because there are typically anywhere from 8-15 teams in each of these tournaments that already have open bids, which means that a team does not currently have an open bid would have to displace several of these already-qualified teams to earn the Open Bid (not impossible, but difficult for sure). The Under Armour event is trying to take the place of AAU Nationals for the 18s age group. AAU Nationals for the 18s age group are effectively dead (mainly because they refused to change their date). This event is not a qualifier; it's meant to be an end-of-season event, so I guess you could say it's a championship event for teams that don't qualify for USAV GJNC (for teams that have qualified for USAV GJNC, it would more aptly be described as a great warm-up for Nationals).

[FPYCparent]

Anyone have a better "understanding" of Blue Ridge? Although previous posts here indicate that the club focuses on the beach VB season (which is fine), they seem to produce fairly strong indoor teams ... at least by CHRVA standards. I think I've also read here that the club seems to decline USAV bids that their teams have earned. I do find it odd that some BRVA teams still go to qualifiers. In fact, three of the teams in the high school age groups are going to MEQ the same weekend "we" have Bid Regionals.

If they aren't likely to accept any earned USAV bid, why even get on a plane to play at qualifiers? Do they go to those larger events just for varied (and hopefully quality) competition?

[FPYCparent]

The final teams for the CHRVA Bid Regionals have now been "accepted."

https://advancedeventsystems.com/events/37628

I wonder if some teams that are currently "ranked" in the top 12 of their age group didn't get selected for not meeting the requirements (two local/CHRVA events, one of those at the Open level).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

FPYCparent wrote:With the 18s season ending much earlier than younger age groups, are there that many more qualifiers left on the schedule for a CHRVA team to earn a bid? Just a quick check only shows NEQ and MEQ remaining on the schedule for some of the most-discussed CHRVA clubs. I also see an Under Armour event in Louisville, but I don't know if that event is considered a qualifier.

Nope, 18s season is winding down quickly. The final national qualifiers are always really tough to get an open bid at because there are typically anywhere from 8-15 teams in each of these tournaments that already have open bids, which means that a team does not currently have an open bid would have to displace several of these already-qualified teams to earn the Open Bid (not impossible, but difficult for sure). The Under Armour event is trying to take the place of AAU Nationals for the 18s age group. AAU Nationals for the 18s age group are effectively dead (mainly because they refused to change their date). This event is not a qualifier; it's meant to be an end-of-season event, so I guess you could say it's a championship event for teams that don't qualify for USAV GJNC (for teams that have qualified for USAV GJNC, it would more aptly be described as a great warm-up for Nationals).

Metro 18 Travel got an open bid today at NEQ. 9 teams out of 30 came in with open bids so as noted, they had to beat out teams with bids to make the gold pools. 6 of the 8 teams in gold already had open bids so Metro and an OTVA team were the only 2 teams to get bids that didn’t already have one. Interestingly, the 3rd 18 open bid that was available at NEQ will go to back to USAV and given out as an at large bid - the policy is they won’t let a bid roll down lower than the gold bracket.

Va Elite 18s are undefeated in the USA division at NEQ and have a good shot at getting a bid tomorrow. MVSA 18 Chaos and MDJRs 18 Elite Black are both in gold in the Liberty division with a shot at upgrading the Freedom bids they earned at Regionals. If one or both of them get a Liberty bid, their Freedom bids would presumably roll down to one of the teams tied for 5th at regionals.

One other interesting tidbit is Paramount 18s didn’t make the top half in 18 Open at NEQ and they dropped out of MEQ next weekend, seemingly content with their American bid they got at regionals or maybe hoping that CHRVA will be reallocated another National bid that they would be in line for.

So it’s looking pretty good for a few more CHRVA 18s teams to get USAV bids.

[Anonymous]

Posting in this forum as well. King Abdullah Academy just announced that the school will be closing at the end of this school year. This is where VAJRS practices. Any idea what they will do for practice space? Practice space is notoriously hard to find in Northern Virginia, in addition to being costly. Cassel's at one point was the hub for many Northern VA clubs (and even Metro during the pandemic).

[Anonymous]

Did anyone watch the final game of metro 16 vs paramount 16 at Regionals?

[Anonymous]

Did anyone watch the final game of metro 16 vs paramount 16 at Regionals?

Didn't see it, but was kind of surprised that Metro won, Paramount beat Metro 16 AND Metro 17 in a recent tournament.

Congrats to the qualifying teams. Will be curious to see the formula used for the teams who didn't finish in the top 4 but will get reallocated bids, as CHRVA did not have seeding playoffs this year.

[Anonymous]

A few CHRVA teams earned higher bids at Big South which will result in some additional teams getting trickle down bids.

Metro 17 Travel earned an Open bid so based on results from regionals, it seems like VA Elite 17s will get a Freedom bid assuming the bids roll down to the next highest finisher.

MVSA 16 Sparks earned a USA bid at Big South which is higher than the Freedom bid they earned at regionals. Looks like Columbia 16 Black should be next in line for that Freedom bid.

Also of note is that Paramount 16s finished tied for 5th in 16 Open at Big South with a record of 7-1. Great performance but didn’t get them an open bid yet.

[FPYCparent]

I am about to update my bid tracker in the other thread (https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/436/1219014.page)

Has CHRVA clearly defined how they will handle tiebreakers from the 5th place teams from Bid Regionals? In the case of the 16s, there are four teams that finished 5th. Columbia 16 Black has the highest point percentage (Pt. %), but they lost more sets than the other 5th place finishers ... and they also lost one more match than two other 5th-place teams.

The same thing could happen with the 15s (and possible other age groups) if additional bids are earned at qualifiers or are re-allocated.

[Anonymous]

FPYCparent wrote:I am about to update my bid tracker in the other thread (https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/436/1219014.page)

Has CHRVA clearly defined how they will handle tiebreakers from the 5th place teams from Bid Regionals? In the case of the 16s, there are four teams that finished 5th. Columbia 16 Black has the highest point percentage (Pt. %), but they lost more sets than the other 5th place finishers ... and they also lost one more match than two other 5th-place teams.

The same thing could happen with the 15s (and possible other age groups) if additional bids are earned at qualifiers or are re-allocated.

For 18s, it isn’t clear how they decided between teams tied for the same finishing position at regionals - Columbia had a better match win % than VA Jrs, but VA Jrs had a better set record and point differential and VA Jrs got the extra bid when the region got another national bid and the other bids rolled down. I guess it’s possible they offered it to Columbia and they turned it down. I can’t find anything on the CHRVA site that explains how the decision is made. Personally, I think the most fair way to break a tie would be to look first at match win %, then look at set win %, and then point differential.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

FPYCparent wrote:I am about to update my bid tracker in the other thread (https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/436/1219014.page)

Has CHRVA clearly defined how they will handle tiebreakers from the 5th place teams from Bid Regionals? In the case of the 16s, there are four teams that finished 5th. Columbia 16 Black has the highest point percentage (Pt. %), but they lost more sets than the other 5th place finishers ... and they also lost one more match than two other 5th-place teams.

The same thing could happen with the 15s (and possible other age groups) if additional bids are earned at qualifiers or are re-allocated.

For 18s, it isn’t clear how they decided between teams tied for the same finishing position at regionals - Columbia had a better match win % than VA Jrs, but VA Jrs had a better set record and point differential and VA Jrs got the extra bid when the region got another national bid and the other bids rolled down. I guess it’s possible they offered it to Columbia and they turned it down. I can’t find anything on the CHRVA site that explains how the decision is made. Personally, I think the most fair way to break a tie would be to look first at match win %, then look at set win %, and then point differential.

The CHRVA Region is incredibly disorganized and behind-the-times relative to the more established Regions where volleyball is stronger. It doesn't say in their Handbook how ties are broken in terms of Regionals finishes, but I know for a fact that they break ties based on set % from the tournament.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

FPYCparent wrote:I am about to update my bid tracker in the other thread (https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/436/1219014.page)

Has CHRVA clearly defined how they will handle tiebreakers from the 5th place teams from Bid Regionals? In the case of the 16s, there are four teams that finished 5th. Columbia 16 Black has the highest point percentage (Pt. %), but they lost more sets than the other 5th place finishers ... and they also lost one more match than two other 5th-place teams.

The same thing could happen with the 15s (and possible other age groups) if additional bids are earned at qualifiers or are re-allocated.

For 18s, it isn’t clear how they decided between teams tied for the same finishing position at regionals - Columbia had a better match win % than VA Jrs, but VA Jrs had a better set record and point differential and VA Jrs got the extra bid when the region got another national bid and the other bids rolled down. I guess it’s possible they offered it to Columbia and they turned it down. I can’t find anything on the CHRVA site that explains how the decision is made. Personally, I think the most fair way to break a tie would be to look first at match win %, then look at set win %, and then point differential.

The CHRVA Region is incredibly disorganized and behind-the-times relative to the more established Regions where volleyball is stronger. It doesn't say in their Handbook how ties are broken in terms of Regionals finishes, but I know for a fact that they break ties based on set % from the tournament.

Looks like the additional 17 Freedom bid went to VA Elite and the 16 Freedom bid went to Premier Edge.

[Anonymous]

At Big South, I watched Legacy 14-1 from Michigan defeat a talented Atlanta A5 team to win the 14 Open. Legacy 16-1 also won the 16 Open.

Legacy 14-1 has 10 players, and Legacy 16-1 has 11. They also have 14-2 (10 players), 14-3 (10 players), 16-2 (11 players), and 16-3 (10 players). When you have 10 or 11 players, everyone gets playing time.

In contrast, Metro 14 Travel has 13 players, Paramount 14-1 has 15 players, and 14-2 has 14 players. Paramount could easily have three teams of 10 or 11. Metro could form another travel team of 10 or 11. All players would receive quality training and playing time, and those on the second and third teams would be motivated to work hard and move up.

It seems that smaller teams benefit everyone. Maybe there aren't enough strong players or skilled coaches in this region for that to happen?

[Anonymous]

"It seems that smaller teams benefit everyone. Maybe there aren't enough strong players or skilled coaches in this region for that to happen?"

I think more the latter. Especially with clubs that play at the higher end (and therefore a brand name/rep to protect), finding and retaining commensurate level coaches is going to be tough (if you keep their compensation at the same levels as I imagine they are today). Couple that with high overhead for facilities in NoVA especially, and I think the availability of sufficient caliber coaches (and asst coaches to groom) becomes the limiting factor.