Actually, the seeding guidelines state just what Lancer said above. the point system is a starting point, and adjustments can/should be made if warranted based on other factors, such as head-to-head, significant injuries (either earlier or at Bid tourney time), etc. Some years, like this one, it may not have mattered in terms of who made it to the finals, but even if it is just a matter of giving a team it's proper due going in, it should be done right. Besides, looking down through the list of what local tourneys get which rating (a 5, a 4, a 3, etc), some of it needs adjustment. You can have a tourney of 40+ teams in an age group and receive high points for finishing 3rd out of 40 teams, and the truth of the matter is, that 40-team tourney was truly a 5-8 team tourney at best in terms of quality. Another tourney may have half that # of teams and still have 8-10 competitive teams: it starts with a lower "strength rating" and even if you finish 2nd, the points you accumulate are fewer based on the fewer # of teams participating. That factor needs elimination. I'd rather finish 3rd out of 5 teams in a high quality pool of teams, than 1st out of 80 weak teams. But you can accumulate big numbers doing the latter, especially if the tourney is rated too high in the WEVA listings in terms of strength.

but no matter. That's for future discussion. On to preparing for Nationals for some, finishing up their respective seasons for others.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by vbref</i>

Looking at Weva past results, there were a number of scenarios in which head to head appears to have been ignored. Or maybe they are not in the formula for determining seeds. That's seems dumb, though. 18's especially was messed up if head-to-head counts.

A couple of notes:

It is really enjoyable to see so many former players coming back to support the present players. It added nicely to the atmosphere. I recognized some parents of former players too.

Also great to see that many younger players who played on Saturday came back on Sunday to support the older girls. Looked like entire teams came back.

Again, what a great facility. The place was buzzing with excitement all day. Great to have the entire tourney under one roof in a place specifically designed for vb.

and for my only negative (but mostly humorous) observation, I guess the powers that be decided to ignore guidelines about # number of coaches on one bench. I counted 7+ repeatedly on one team's bench. Reminds me the old joke, "How many idiots does it take to screw in a light bulb?..." I mean, come on! Maybe it's for an attempt at intimidation or to show unity, but it's just kinda silly, never mind distracting. Thank God they stuck with the 6 players on the court at one time rule.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">


I would like to clear up your humble yet humorous observation... Even though it was a little over board with the amount of coaches on the benches i was able to take a step back and smile! I am proud to be apart of an organization, club and program that the coaches believe and support ALL players, coaches and teams on and off the court. We celebrate each others wins and we feel each others defeats. I would like to thank the players and coaches who came to support my team and the other teams last weekend.

Good luck to all the teams 12-18 who will be supporting our region this year in Atlanta! I will try and see all of you regardless to what team or club you play for... From the coaches, we are proud of all of you

Matt Glover

A couple thoughts...

Could care less how many coaches or players or what have you are on the bench. I know that when you raise kids in a club, you can create a family atmosphere. Stating that, I've known coaches who thought it was beneath them to sit with other squads in their program. I've also known coaches who will sit with any of their teams or even opposing teams, regardless of success, just because they care and support one another.
Used to always enjoy having kids & staff on same club, coming to support one another. Always loved that. Loved it most, when the support was there for the 15-5 as much as the 1. Very cool.

But tourney size, I hope is judged by the event. For example: play at NEQ (3 divisions). Open 36, National 96, American 96.
Finish 17th in open, do you finish 17th out of 228 or 17th out of a weighted or unweighted 36?

Very, very difficult to judge, because there are so many standards of what is strong and what isn't. Hereabouts, well, for our young ladies, a strong field is rare. Some NF teams played much stronger schedules than other squads in same age brackets. As evident by their finishes.

Now our thoughts turn to Nationals.
It doesn't really matter to us that the JVA teams (thought to be the best in the Nation) won't be there, but rather will be at the earlier AAU's). What should matter to us, is how we do in the National division, or that we don't have a representative in the Open or American division.

Over the years, we've had a few teams qualify for the "Open." Go back enough years, before the Open, National and American division divisions and all our teams accomplished that.

But it is a bit vexing that our region isn't considered strong enough to have any of our 2nd place finishing squads get an American bid. I guess we don't earn them, & in the past, when we got them, didn't do so well.

To get that respect and considerations, I guess we'll have to do better in the future.

Good luck to all our representatives this year!

vb 101:

I wish getting an American bid for our region had anything to do with the organization's view of our region's strength. If that were the case, we'd have received some now and then.

Unfortunately, only SIZE of region matters. And as one of the smallest, if not THE smallest, regions (in terms of membership), we will only be allotted ONE national bid. In order to gain another bid, I believe we have to increase our total USAV membership something like 1,100-1,400 more members--something around there. Not an easy task.

In contrast, there are more registered girls clubs in the Ohio Valley region alone than there are boys clubs in the entire nation--that's how big that region is. Not only do they get 1 national bid, but they then receive a few American bids on top of it. Moreover, any bids not claimed at the qualifiers (for example, when a team that already has one wins the American or National divisions), it is ALWAYS reallocated to one of these huge regions. That means that for a small region club, you have to WIN the qualifier or you get nothing. Finishing 2nd over 118 teams gets you a pat on the back while some team from Texas, California, Ohio, Great Lakes, etc that may have not even competed that weekend may up getting that bid through reallocation. That's fair. Thus, the rich get richer,....

Of course, not even mentioning the economic struggles of a region like Buffalo, we'd also like a region like so many of these monstrous metropolitan areas where there are literally millions of residents, but also where thousands of former professional, amateur (Olympic), and D-I athletes settle to raise their kids. Only being able to reach to the East and South to grab athletes sucks, too. (Lakes to the West and North...and Canada-apparently off-limits). Those are limitations. But we're doing the best we can right now. Now, if you really want me to go off, get me started on USAV and the lazy job put forth by the whole USA vball "Development/Grassroots" crew. Talk about sitting back and taking a paycheck. In regards to helpful ideas and methods of development, the JVA crew has lapped them and then some in just a few years of existence.

Below is a cut and pasted Bid Listing for the Florida Bid Tourney. Hopefully, it comes out legibly, but it shows that for most age groups, Florida gets both a Nat and an Amer bid (& in one age group 2 Amer Bids). Also, they rank 2nd in nation in terms of lining up for any reallocated bids from other regions. (For instance, our neighber IREVA has a long history on giving up their regional bids.)

2011 BID INFORMATION FOR JUNIOR VOLLEYBALL TEAMS (in the Florida Regions)

BIDS AVAILABLE AT THE 2011 GIRL'S JR. REGIONAL BID CHAMPIONSHIPS: GIRLS

AGE DIVISION NAT AMER Reallocated Bids* *RE-ALLOCATION RANK (in the nation)

12U 1 0 TBD 2nd
13U 1 2 TBD 31st
14U 1 1 TBD 2nd
15U 1 1 TBD 2nd
16U 1 1 TBD 2nd
17U 1 1 TBD 2nd
18U 1 1 TBD 2nd

Note: The re-allocation rank is the position that the age division falls for re-allocated bids that are not used by other Regions. The lower the number the better the chance that re-allocated bids will be available for Florida Region teams.



*2011 Reallocated Bids Awarded:

TBA

One more item (for those who've never seen it):

The link below lists the '09-'10 & '10-'11 membership numbers fro ages 14-18. We are not quite the smallest at 1422 members (up 51 from '09), BUT we would need to get to 3250 member (again in ages 14-18) to acquire a 2nd bid (in American Div). That's an increase of 1828 and is quite a task.

On another note, apparently we rank 27th for reallocated bids. Oddly, New England ranks 1st and GEVA 2nd, so clearly, it has nothing to do with USAV's recognition of a region's strength. They may have changed their format for reallocation, but it used to be determined by the percentage of your membership increase (or decrease) from the previous year. Doesn't seem like that's still the case by just glancing at the numbers, but maybe somebody has better info on that. At any rate, if you look at our numbers compared to the totals of a number of regions that we either compare favorably or at least hang with competitively, we are holding our own. For instance, OVR is nearly 10Xs our size, and yet many of our teams finished in teh top half to top 3rd of the Power Leagues there. Keystone, Chesapeake, Carolina, Garden Empire--all considerably bigger regions. Just food for thought.

https://www.gpvb.org/TOURNAMENTS/2011%20 ... 14-18s.pdf

Here's a clearer explanation of how both National and American bids are reallocated:
what is the definitition of a JN Reallocation Bid and how are they handed out...from prepvolleyball.com:

"This is all detailed in the USAV Junior Girls Qualifier Manual and probably a lot clearer than I can explain it, but here you go:

There are teams within regions that for whatver reason elect not to use the bid they qualified for. The region has their own "trickle down" procedure for giving out these bids within their regions and in the larger regions this is how they are taken. For smaller regions they at times end up with no teams that want to take that bid. Those regions give the bid bad to USAV and it goes into the Reallocation Pool. Also, bids can only trickle down so many places at Qualifiers. If they dont give those out they to into the Reallocation Pool. Also, qualifier tournaments that dont have the required number of teams to give out as many bids, have those extra bids go to the Reallocation Pool.

The Reallocated NATIONAL bids are given to the regions based on the number of athletes in their regions. The region with the most athletes is offered the first reallocation bid, and so on (the largest regions get the bids).

The Reallocated AMERICAN bids are offered based on how close a region is to what they refer to as a "Bench". The "Bench" is a total number of athletes that is used to base how many AMERICAN bids a region gets. The closer you are to the next "Bench" the higher on the list you are for a Reallocated AMERICAN bid."