During the last World Cup, ESPN wrote an article about what USA's world cup team would look like if we had the best athletes in the country playing soccer. They looked at other sports, and drew the best examples from those sports to populate a team.
What if that were the case in volleyball? What would your "dream team" look like if you could select any current professional athlete? You'll have to choose 2 outsides, 2 middles, 2 setters, 1-2 opposites, a Libero, and a coach. Post your thoughts on the comments below.
Without putting too much thought into it, here's my initial list:
1 Outside: Lebron James (NBA) - Strong, fast, and most of all creative. He's a playmaker, and leaving him outside will let him carry the offensive and defensive load. I assume he would also be a primary in serve-receive.
2 Outside: Kobe Bryant (NBA) - I hate to pick two basketball guys for the outsides, but it just seems to fit. Also creative, fast, and can read a defense.
1 Middle: Mario Williams (NFL) - A 300 pound 6'7" Defensive End in the NFL with a 4.65 40 and a 40" vertical leap. He may not get up high enough to outreach all middles, but knowing how to read and being accustomed to controlling a line will do just fine. And he'll be faster than any opposing team's middle when moving from one pin to the other to put up blocks.
2 Middle: Matt Morgan (Wrestler) - 300 lbs, 7 feet tall, and aggressive. With a former D1 basketball background and an intimidating physique, he'll at least be worth the intimidation factor. Should be fast from pin to pin as well.
1 Setter: Tom Brady (NFL) - So, this isn't his best season. Good decision maker, stays with the game plan, and makes progressive reads. Good hands player who thrives on competition. Right leadership.
2 Setter: Steve Nash (NBA) - Great assist man, good decision maker. Should be able to score on the OPP from back row (he's the 2, not the primary). Makes good offensive reads, predicts well.
Libero: Urijah Faber (WEC Fighter) - Everyone agrees his hands are just too fast. In a sport where predictive reads are the difference between being #1 and spending some time in the hospital, Faber has a history of making the right choices. I like his ability to read and make quick reactions - and his affinity for diving and rolling would help too.
Coach: Undecided at publishing time.
I look forward to your reponses.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
IQ and U (you)
Don't ask me how I came across this article. It's a terrible piece of writing which doesn't address anything, but it did make me think about intelligence.
I won't tell you my IQ, although I'm interested to know what you think. It's like asking somebody what age they think you are before you tell them but far more insulting. People always guess low on age, so I assume you would guess high on IQ. Anyway.....
The article misses the point in that if you know anything about IQ, it is not a measure of the best people in the world. It measures aptitude to learn, and does a pretty good job of giving you the opportunity to succeed in many scenarios. It's also adaptive, which is better than most measurable skills you are ever assessed on in any manner (tests, quizzes, job reviews). By the way a lot of video games are adaptive now too. But that's a talk for another time......
It does not measure depth of knowledge. So, your doctor doesn't need a high IQ score. He just needs to know a lot about medicine. I bring this up because I think the article takes the position that IQ tests are not accurate, which is completely incorrect.
Think of it like standardized tests. Yes, I have no problem with those either. A standardized test measures the normal, (standard) items that a student should know. The statistics are there, as more people fail and abandon standardized tests, the more people there are that have trouble in higher education.
I want to see the volleyball IQ test. A test specifically designed to measure the aptitude for succeeding in volleyball. And the standardized volleyball exam. Anyone?
I won't tell you my IQ, although I'm interested to know what you think. It's like asking somebody what age they think you are before you tell them but far more insulting. People always guess low on age, so I assume you would guess high on IQ. Anyway.....
The article misses the point in that if you know anything about IQ, it is not a measure of the best people in the world. It measures aptitude to learn, and does a pretty good job of giving you the opportunity to succeed in many scenarios. It's also adaptive, which is better than most measurable skills you are ever assessed on in any manner (tests, quizzes, job reviews). By the way a lot of video games are adaptive now too. But that's a talk for another time......
It does not measure depth of knowledge. So, your doctor doesn't need a high IQ score. He just needs to know a lot about medicine. I bring this up because I think the article takes the position that IQ tests are not accurate, which is completely incorrect.
Think of it like standardized tests. Yes, I have no problem with those either. A standardized test measures the normal, (standard) items that a student should know. The statistics are there, as more people fail and abandon standardized tests, the more people there are that have trouble in higher education.
I want to see the volleyball IQ test. A test specifically designed to measure the aptitude for succeeding in volleyball. And the standardized volleyball exam. Anyone?
Friday, October 30, 2009
If you build it......
I remember that was the tag line for field of dreams, but I don't remember exactly what the movie was about. I guess that's marketing.
I was reading my BSF lesson today and thought about how difficult it is to aggregate like minded people into a group with a purpose. It isn't hard to form a group with a purpose - any team, church, business, class, etc has already done that. Neither is it uncommon to pull like minded people together. All radio shows, magazines, or groups of teenagers have already done that too. To combine the two is rare.
I hope that the idea of "community" and keeping the mission of the club in mind will help steer us towards a successful season. Like minded people working towards the same purpose. I guess everyone would need to state their purpose out loud so that we can be sure they all agree.....
I was reading my BSF lesson today and thought about how difficult it is to aggregate like minded people into a group with a purpose. It isn't hard to form a group with a purpose - any team, church, business, class, etc has already done that. Neither is it uncommon to pull like minded people together. All radio shows, magazines, or groups of teenagers have already done that too. To combine the two is rare.
I hope that the idea of "community" and keeping the mission of the club in mind will help steer us towards a successful season. Like minded people working towards the same purpose. I guess everyone would need to state their purpose out loud so that we can be sure they all agree.....
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Culture of Success
So, as I listen to ESPN radio (podcasts) on a regular basis, now and again I come across something that prods me to reflect on my personal life. Today it was yesterday's podcast from the Collin Cowherd show. Collin remarks about the lack of parity in the NFL (this season), and muses that it is a fact that good teams will be good and bad teams will be bad.
Of course, the "team" is made up of ownership, management, coaches and players. It takes a lot of people to make something work, or not work. If you have like minded people then you will have consistency - good or bad.
So this gets me to thinking about the success that I've been fortunate enough to experience with volleyball. I don't put a list of my former players' accomplishments on our website (it seems a bit exploitative), but I'll provide some history to help you understand where I'm coming from.
All of the players that I have coached as seniors in high school have had the opportunity to play in college. Moreover, until the 2009 season (this is the season in wich we "hosted" an 18's team instead of our traditional model, and is also the only year that I did not coach the 18's team) all SportVolleyball seniors played in college. All of the players that I personally coached at the higher levels went on to PLAY their freshman year (zero redshirts) at the college they chose.
But this isn't just because I only choose players who are already good. It's quite the contrary as I have a long list of players and teams that I have been able to turn around in a short time (not due to players growing, getting private lessons while under my supervision, or bringing in new talent to the team). This list would include such recent examples as the Sport 18 club team in 2008, who until my involvment had failed to advance in any tournament they had played (pool play and out). After two weeks with the team (same roster), we won the next scheduled tournament. In 2009 I took over the Sport 16 VR team who had failed to advance to the gold bracket for half of their season, and lost almost all bracket games (pool and out) with the exception of playing much younger teams. After taking over, we advanced to gold and won matches in all non-major tournaments, and won big games in the major tournments. This team became so good that after the season it's players were poached by coaches who (seeing these players earlier in the year) believed the kids were not "volleyball players". But I digress......
Of course there are caviats in all of these claims. I do not include any player who quit at any point in the season (although quitting is not by itself the mark of a loser, but that's a post for another day). I don't include players who made the decision not to play in college because they just didn't want to interfere with their academic careers (there are only a couple of these kids - and I FULLY support that decision). So who do I include? Everyone else.
I agree that success is habitual, and inherent to an organization. It is clearly inherent to this organization. Is it because I am that good of a coach? I would like to think so, but that's not the whole story. I think it's because we have the right system. Over the years, the biggest complaint lodged against me is that I am too inclusive. I always take players that are too short, too clumsy, or too slow to play volleyball. By the end of the season we produce impact varsity players and impact collegiate players, but at the start of the season they certainly don't look as good as the end of the season.
Remember, it's ownership, management, coaching, and players that make the team. And as far as I know, we're the only club to include all of those things. Each successful player has parent involvement, the full resources of the club, is engaged with the coach and staff, and - most of all - is supportive of the methodology. In each case when a player has failed to meet their goals, one or more of those items is missing.
So, the success is habitual. And it does come from a community of people making it happen. I'll provide one last example, which I think encapsulates this post. There was a player who I had the fortune to coach for 3 years. In high school, this is a long 3 years - freshman to senior. She excelled on each team. Her fourth year she played for the same club, but a different coach. The team she played for had a different system altogether. It lacked parent involvement, did not engage the players as a team, and had no off-court development. After thriving for 3 years, she was statistically unproductive and eventually quit the team her senior year. I recently spoke to her, as she is in her freshman year at a D1 University (I highly reccomended her to the school she currently plays for, knowing her and her family over the years and discounting that particular club season) and she is doing great. She is succeeding in the classroom and on the court, and is seeing limited playing time as a true freshman (I love that statistic).
So, why the change? Did she get bad at volleyball for a year and then really good again? Of course not. The easy answer is coaching (me!), but this isn't complete since I'm not there at the University. It's complex. She's in the right environment with the right people doing the right jobs.
That is where this consistent success comes from. That's where our success comes from. Any warm body with good players on the team can win. But what sets my record apart is the involvement of the right people. Which is also why bragging about my accomplishments seems a bit exploitative - they're not really all mine.
Of course, the "team" is made up of ownership, management, coaches and players. It takes a lot of people to make something work, or not work. If you have like minded people then you will have consistency - good or bad.
So this gets me to thinking about the success that I've been fortunate enough to experience with volleyball. I don't put a list of my former players' accomplishments on our website (it seems a bit exploitative), but I'll provide some history to help you understand where I'm coming from.
All of the players that I have coached as seniors in high school have had the opportunity to play in college. Moreover, until the 2009 season (this is the season in wich we "hosted" an 18's team instead of our traditional model, and is also the only year that I did not coach the 18's team) all SportVolleyball seniors played in college. All of the players that I personally coached at the higher levels went on to PLAY their freshman year (zero redshirts) at the college they chose.
But this isn't just because I only choose players who are already good. It's quite the contrary as I have a long list of players and teams that I have been able to turn around in a short time (not due to players growing, getting private lessons while under my supervision, or bringing in new talent to the team). This list would include such recent examples as the Sport 18 club team in 2008, who until my involvment had failed to advance in any tournament they had played (pool play and out). After two weeks with the team (same roster), we won the next scheduled tournament. In 2009 I took over the Sport 16 VR team who had failed to advance to the gold bracket for half of their season, and lost almost all bracket games (pool and out) with the exception of playing much younger teams. After taking over, we advanced to gold and won matches in all non-major tournaments, and won big games in the major tournments. This team became so good that after the season it's players were poached by coaches who (seeing these players earlier in the year) believed the kids were not "volleyball players". But I digress......
Of course there are caviats in all of these claims. I do not include any player who quit at any point in the season (although quitting is not by itself the mark of a loser, but that's a post for another day). I don't include players who made the decision not to play in college because they just didn't want to interfere with their academic careers (there are only a couple of these kids - and I FULLY support that decision). So who do I include? Everyone else.
I agree that success is habitual, and inherent to an organization. It is clearly inherent to this organization. Is it because I am that good of a coach? I would like to think so, but that's not the whole story. I think it's because we have the right system. Over the years, the biggest complaint lodged against me is that I am too inclusive. I always take players that are too short, too clumsy, or too slow to play volleyball. By the end of the season we produce impact varsity players and impact collegiate players, but at the start of the season they certainly don't look as good as the end of the season.
Remember, it's ownership, management, coaching, and players that make the team. And as far as I know, we're the only club to include all of those things. Each successful player has parent involvement, the full resources of the club, is engaged with the coach and staff, and - most of all - is supportive of the methodology. In each case when a player has failed to meet their goals, one or more of those items is missing.
So, the success is habitual. And it does come from a community of people making it happen. I'll provide one last example, which I think encapsulates this post. There was a player who I had the fortune to coach for 3 years. In high school, this is a long 3 years - freshman to senior. She excelled on each team. Her fourth year she played for the same club, but a different coach. The team she played for had a different system altogether. It lacked parent involvement, did not engage the players as a team, and had no off-court development. After thriving for 3 years, she was statistically unproductive and eventually quit the team her senior year. I recently spoke to her, as she is in her freshman year at a D1 University (I highly reccomended her to the school she currently plays for, knowing her and her family over the years and discounting that particular club season) and she is doing great. She is succeeding in the classroom and on the court, and is seeing limited playing time as a true freshman (I love that statistic).
So, why the change? Did she get bad at volleyball for a year and then really good again? Of course not. The easy answer is coaching (me!), but this isn't complete since I'm not there at the University. It's complex. She's in the right environment with the right people doing the right jobs.
That is where this consistent success comes from. That's where our success comes from. Any warm body with good players on the team can win. But what sets my record apart is the involvement of the right people. Which is also why bragging about my accomplishments seems a bit exploitative - they're not really all mine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
