Paid Additional Coach Clinics During Volleyball Season
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Droooop it. You've made the same point 23 times now and we all get it. We’re sorry you hate it. Maybe you should check out the crew teams are better than volleyball from a few weeks ago! |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
We have seen this scenario play out. Pay to play into the highest levels unfortunately. I think once my DD realized it the pressure she felt before wasn’t as bad anymore. |
Anonymous
Do some bigger clubs make lots of money? Yes, of course. Since most clubs fees and costs for clinics and camps are published, you don't need to be much of a math whiz to do a back of the envelope estimate of revenue and for many clubs it easily goes to the hundreds of thousands or more. Accurately figuring out how much profit that revenue results in is a little tougher, but it's safe to say some local club owners make a pretty decent living. While most of the local CHRVA clubs are still independently owned, like many other industries, private equity has been getting involved in club volleyball and driving up costs across the board (Google "3 Step Sports"). There are entities at almost every level of the whole enterprise extracting their piece of the pie. In addition to club fees, costs for everything from tournament entry fees for teams, gym rentals for practice, tickets for parents/families to get into big tournaments, stay-to-play travel services and on and on are driving up costs for families. So I completely agree that club volleyball has become too expensive and that having parents that can afford to pay gives a player much better odds of success. Does that money flow down to individual club coaches? In most instances, I don't think so. Different clubs pay in different ways, but for the most part for the knowledge/skills required and hours involved in coaching a club team , it's not really very much money. Even though I agree that club volleyball has gotten too expensive, I still don't love the phrase "pay to play" in this context. To me, it suggests that parents are literally bribing their way onto top teams and even into playing time, which I don't believe to be commonplace, but maybe I'm naive. As others have suggested, it's more plausible that a player who is able to attend extra sessions and lessons and other non-required training that cost money, is seen in a more favorable light because they are perceived as working harder than teammates who don't. But from what I have seen, for local teams in which winning is the highest priority (e.g., Metro Travel, Paramount), the players that make these teams and get the most playing time are those that give the team the best chance at winning. |
Anonymous
How many other families need to show up with this kind of stories before we accept that there is a conflict of interest? I am going to droooop it preemptively.
|
Anonymous
My DD was on a competitive team a few years ago with a player whose parent believed the only conceivable reason that their special little snowflake wasn't a starter was that other parents were bribing the coach/club or there was some sort of secret handshake, backroom deal. They could not even consider the possibility that their DD was not a starter because she wasn't the best player in her position, which is what the rest of us parents saw. It's really hard to be objective about your own kid. |
Anonymous
| I don't really understand the game. Are starters always the best player in the position? My DD is not the starter, but she always gets subbed in when team is struggle (with the so called starters) and is able to catch up with the points and changes the game. |
Anonymous
It's also easy to tell when the coaches plays favorites for one reason or another. Our coach is also a varsity coach for the school where she teaches. A bunch of players on our team are from the varsity team and they are definitely getting preferential treatment. You can call it secret handshake or backroom deal, but stop trying to sell this theory that the coaches are immune to conflicts of interest. Or you can drink the cool aid and live in a world where the coaches are always fair and nothing in their personal space can influence their decisions on the court. |
Anonymous
I will agree with the PP who mentioned that coaches can evaluate players more objectively than their parents. We disagree though on whether the coaches always make decisions based on that more objective assessment. You should ask your DD to talk to the coach if the stats are clear. Even if you have the stats to prove that your DD turns games around when she is subbed in, the coach may still keep their favorite player as a starter. They can always find excuses on how this (favorite) player works better with the players on the court in the starting rotation, so they can shut you up no matter what the stats really say. The closer in skill level the two players are, the easier it is for the coach to play favorites because the stats may not even support a theory or another. |
Anonymous
| PLAYERS RESPOND TO COACHES WHO REALLY HAVE THEIR BEST INTEREST AT HEART. |