| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| vb101 |
Posted - 02/07/2003 : 3:57:41 PM
Who are or were this 2002-2003 season best passers? Any candidates?
|
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| vball5 |
Posted - 02/17/2003 : 11:21:16 PM
i felt that victor's servers were very tough and made very good passers look bad this year. hannah and bethany played well together and were consistent throughout the year. i also thought that courtney wright from wayne was a good passer for the most part, but when they played good competition she broke down, for example when they played victor.
|
| raider1 |
Posted - 02/15/2003 : 11:51:27 AM
Hey-I got to see Wayne play at the Sweet Home tourney this past fall. Nice young team. I rarely get to see any Rochester teams and none in the winter, but the two I saw were Wayne and Victor. I remember that they had a shorter girl (rt. or lft. side, not sure) that moved pretty efficiently on the court. The real difference between them and Victor was maturity and Wayne's lack of a real go-to hammer. Both teams were athletic, though. Last year, we wanted to get Wayne to our tournament, but we had to cancel it for the first time in about 20 years. However, we will again have it on Columbus Day weekend if Wayne, Victor, and Bloomfield would be interested. I realize that athletic budgets will be dealing in pennies next year, but if those teams are interested, we'll probably run a 12 to 16-team tournament (at Eden). I will be sending out invitations soon. We are bringing up at least one PA team and Horseheads, Pine Bush, and Warwick have come from other sections in NY in the past. Maybe we can get Burnt Hills this year. Lots of play and lots of fun. (I know Bloomfield is a microscopic sized school, but it would give you the always fun opportunity to raise some cane on a number of MUCH bigger schools.)
Barre's being nice in his comments about our passing, but I have to say that most of our ideas on the subject are at best borrowed and at worst outright stolen from a good many brighter minds.
|
| otter6297 |
Posted - 02/15/2003 : 11:15:34 AM
The matches I saw them play were at a tournament, so they shuffled their line-up quite a bit. Their ball control was pretty consistent through the whole day, but it was the shorter one coaches were trying to serve away from.
|
| Barre |
Posted - 02/14/2003 : 2:05:28 PM
Well, in response to vb101's question's about how to successfully teach kids to pass, I'd have to say to pay attention to what's going with some of the consistently top passing teams around. Take, for example, the Eden girl's team. Even Sally Kus (whose kids were queens of the pass) admired the year-to-year ball control that the Eden teams seem to have. And having worked with a number of their kids in club from time to time, I can say that some of the top serve receivers in the area have come out of their program. Liz Feldman (all-conference DS at UNC), Amie Wall (libero at UB), Diana Wierzba (Siena and former NYS Player of the Year), Emily Engle (now at St. John Fisher), and now Ashley DoEpp. These kids were/are all superb at swallowing up the ball--quick shuffle steps nearly always moving parallel to the net, wide base stance, arms out away from their body, and ABSOLUTELY no stiffness or straightness in the back and shoulders. They've got their head down "in the bowl," shoulders and chest concavely curved around the ball. (The BIG mistake a lot of kids make in passing is to put their hands together close to their body-knees, thighs, etc.-and then try to swing their arms at the ball. Disaster.
I remember watching some of Eden playoff run in 2000 when they had perhaps their best team (Tim now at NYU was there, too): in the Sectional finals against a good city Honors team, I'm pretty sure they didn't send over a single free ball the entire 1st two games. And then they pretty much repeated the feat in the Far West Regionals against...hmmmm...well, I can't remember. Anyway, their setter (4th in the nation in assists at Edinboro now) just stood in her spot and tossed the ball around. In the Rochester area, I like Cottingim, Sharp, and that other Victor outside. Wayne's got some good young passers, as did Batavia--good ball control for such a small school. One of the more athletic teams I saw this year. And although they didn't have the team they've had in the past, Bloomfield always demonstrates solid ball control. They just didn't have the big horses to close the door this year. COACHES--KEEP DRILLING YOUR KIDS ON THE PASS. YOU CAN'T TEACH HEIGHT OR ATHLETICISM, BUT YOU CAN TEACH A KID TO PASS NAILS.
he Eden girl's team. Even Sally Kus (whose kids were queens of the pass) admired the year-to-year ball control that the Eden teams seem to have. And having worked with a number of their kids in club from time to time, I can say that some of the top serve receivers in the area have come out of their program. Liz Feldman (all-conference DS at UNC), Amie Wall (libero at UB), Diana Wierzba (Siena and former NYS Player of the Year), Emily Engle (now at St. John Fisher), and now Ashley DoEpp. These kids were/are all superb at swallowing up the ball--quick shuffle steps nearly always moving parallel to the net, wide base stance, arms out away from their body, and ABSOLUTELY no stiffness or straightness in the back and shoulders. They've got their head down "in the bowl," shoulders and chest concavely curved around the ball. (The BIG mistake a lot of kids make in passing is to put their hands together close to their body-knees, thighs, etc.-and then try to swing their arms at the ball. Disaster.
I remember watching some of Eden playoff run in 2000 when they had perhaps their best team (Tim now at NYU was there, too): in the Sectional finals against a good city Honors team, I'm pretty sure they didn't send over a single free ball the entire 1st two games. And then they pretty much repeated the feat in the Far West Regionals against...hmmmm...well, I can't remember. Anyway, their setter (4th in the nation in assists at Edinboro now) just stood in her spot and tossed the ball around. In the Rochester area, I like Cottingim, Sharp, and that other Victor outside. Wayne's got some good young passers, as did Batavia--good ball control for such a small school. One of the more athletic teams I saw this year. And although they didn't have the team they've had in the past, Bloomfield always demonstrates solid |
| otter6297 |
Posted - 02/13/2003 : 6:07:38 PM
Fall ball only.
Hannah was strong, the shorter OH from Wayne, Heather DeLong at Waterloo, Jenn Werder at Honeoye, Meghan Lamb at HFL, and both of Batavia Notre Dame's outsides were the most impressive I saw.
Did not see much winter ball, and did not see all the fall teams.
|
| OH13 |
Posted - 02/13/2003 : 5:31:31 PM
hannah and bethany are both coming back next year. victors only key losses are jessie condon in the middle, and kelli thon who was one half of the 6-2 setting combo. other than that they should be sharp.
|
| vball5 |
Posted - 02/13/2003 : 4:51:45 PM
so, otter with all of this said, can you pick out who you thought the best passers were this season?
|
| otter6297 |
Posted - 02/13/2003 : 3:07:10 PM
In teaching a "standard", I meant both in positioning and in form. Most forms will look alike. Outside foot slightly forward, hips and shoulders hopefully squared to target, etc. However, every passer has different strengths and weaknesses, and through analyzing each player individually, you may have to tweak one's form independently.
Positioning also has to take into account level of comfort from those players. Especially in light of hand passing, the let serve, and the fact that the server can move along the baseline to serve from different areas.
It is the concept of the pass, and the philosophy of offense and defense that have to be in-grained in the players and coaching staff. Then you will make physical adjustments to achieve the goals of the philosophy.
And will philosophies change with personnel ?? Probably. At least a little. That is the challenge in playing and coaching this sport. It's forever dynamic.
|
| vb101 |
Posted - 02/13/2003 : 2:43:45 PM
Agreed. Agreed. Agreed. Mike Hebert's book, "Insights & Strategies..." is one of the most amusing & wise reads a vbcoach or player or fan can wander into. In it he talks of his attempts to conform to one system of reception for season after season & basically he found that he couldn't. There is no one "best" methodology, even if the 3 straight with a line caller is what is currently being advocated by America's top coaches. Personnel, the ability of the serving squads you meet, & the comfort level of his athletes dictate different possibilities.
In personal experience, I've played and coached most systems except for the 2 tiered slide thing that reminds me too much of the center of the W & the innovation of the Japanese where the 3 passers move up 15 feet from the end line & take everything with their hands. I even had the interesting experience of playing on a 6 man team with 2 passers, where my partner couldn't pass & so I attempted to pass 5/6ths of the court (usually he could pass, but everyone has a bad day & the team's comfort level was with the 2 person thing, so we stuck it out - we learned a lot from that experience). The only reason it worked was that the opposition kept the ball away from me and served to the sideline where my partner was hiding. One guy finally got the idea and served away from me, but in my zone, & their team almost rallied, but it was too little, too late. How Acosta did it against Olympic competition is beyond me. That guy's skills were incredible.
The only passing system, I truly frown upon, is this "v" thing. Even the old "w" would work with a lot of repetition and training the entire squad to serve receive, but the concept of putting the center passer on the end line, & the wings @ the 20' line, leaving the center of the court open just creates a black hole in the center of the court where it is easiest to serve hard. Perhaps, when the teams have the 2 wings centralize and pass a la a 2 person scheme, it is logical, but I've seen programs where the bail out (central passer on the end line) is the best passer, because they've rotated to that spot. Perhaps in trying to conform to this system, having seen a successful program make it work, people have forgotten what Barre wisely alludes to, putting good passers out to create the best options to side out.
One other neglected point has perhaps been the development of good passers. How are they created? What passing system, beyond telling them to go to the beach and play 2 person ball, is going to create the touches and opportunities to develop the skill? Any thoughts?
And oh yeah, sometimes I can just kick myself. "tell me that it's evolution, well you know. We all want to change..." and so on. I recall one season, that I'm also sure scmiddle recalls, where a team I was coaching didn't really have a great candidate for setter. Most of the squad could set, all about equal. Most of the squad could pass, one was stronger than the others. So, in one crazy pre-season practice, trying to stretch the kids abilities we played a 6 on 6 king of the court thingee where the right back always set & we unspecialized. Our kids were all talented, had experience & knew how to play all the positions. It was a great day! We had so much fun, played so well, & so hard, that on the following day when we had a scrimmage, we innovated to a 6-4. It worked. The kids loved it. We went to the season opening tourney & with the 6-4 won the tourney (without one of our more potent players). All along, I was thinking, "hey this is a good thing. we're creating a ton of depth. & once the season gets interesting we'll evolve to a 5-1, after discovering who the best setter is." All well & good, but then the wheels fell off, the person we sided off the best, didn't want to set, our next 2 candidates weren't tall enough, & evolution wasn't going to happen. So we compromised on a 6-2, sometimes a 6-3, & had our moments, but ultimately came up a bit short.
Why do I want to kick myself? Well, I fudged around with something that was working, even if it was unconventional (Totally bizarre - there were times when even I couldn't figure out if we were out of rotation - so many kids playing so many different roles, but they were having FUN, playing hard, and winning). I changed it because I saw all the potential problems & didn't realize that evolution wasn't necessary. Ever since, I've wondered, maybe with a little refinement, the 6-4 might have been a better path for that squad.
So, oh yeah, I know that each season leads to different things and different paths. The following season we would play with one middle and 2 opposites (we wanted our best players on the floor & this made it possible), & since all our setters had graduated, we would have to make one. This would work too (sometimes with amazing results - we'd shut down the best teams in the league). Trying new things & learning from them is worth a risk. Sometimes you hit that jackpot, "You never know."
one crazy pre-season practice, trying to stretch the kids abilities we played a 6 on 6 king of the court thingee where the right back always set & we unspecialized. Our kids were all talented, had experience & knew how to play all the positions. It was a great day! We had so much fun, played so well, & so hard, that on the following day when we had a scrimmage, we innovated to a 6-4. It worked. The kids loved it. We went to the season opening tourney & with the 6-4 won the tourney (without one of our more potent players). All along, I was thinking, "hey this is a good thing. we're creating a ton of depth. & once the season gets interesting we'll evolve to a 5-1, after discovering who the best setter is." All well & good, but then the wheels fell off, the person we sided off the best, didn't want to set, our next 2 candidates weren't tall enough, & evolution wasn't going to happen. So we compromised on a 6-2, sometimes a 6-3, & had our moments, but ultimately came up a bit short.
Why do I want to kick myself? Well, I fudged around with something |
| Barre |
Posted - 02/13/2003 : 1:01:27 PM
quote:
Passing cannot be taught or played in any one "standard" form.
I had matches against teams that could not serve effectively, and used only two passers. I have also had less-skilled passers, and have had to use as many as four people to pass effectively (maintain the flow and rhythm of the offense, while giving the setter multiple options), and I have had a couple teams that served strongly enough to exploit what the other "static" coach ws using.
The ability to adapt to situations is the ultimate key to all our success. Adapt in every rotation, from every position, against every team. Passing is only one piece of that big old volleyball pie. That is why EVERY player on a team has to learn form and technique, even if a select few will be passing the majority of the serves over the course of a season.
"That's all I've got to say about that."
An illustration of what I was just saying. Let's add Otter to that list of effective/successful coaches. However, not sure what you meant by "passing can not be taught or played in any one "standard" form. Did you mean the technique or the positioning/system on the court? Or both?
|
| otter6297 |
Posted - 02/13/2003 : 12:16:16 PM
Passing cannot be taught or played in any one "standard" form.
I had matches against teams that could not serve effectively, and used only two passers. I have also had less-skilled passers, and have had to use as many as four people to pass effectively (maintain the flow and rhythm of the offense, while giving the setter multiple options), and I have had a couple teams that served strongly enough to exploit what the other "static" coach ws using.
The ability to adapt to situations is the ultimate key to all our success. Adapt in every rotation, from every position, against every team. Passing is only one piece of that big old volleyball pie. That is why EVERY player on a team has to learn form and technique, even if a select few will be passing the majority of the serves over the course of a season.
"That's all I've got to say about that."
|
| Barre |
Posted - 02/13/2003 : 12:03:29 PM
Much of what vb101 says (and the implied conclusions drawn) reveal that vball is catching up to that long-standing, much-evolved sport: football (American, that is). The best coaches know the various systems, know their personnel, and then decide what system best fits their personnel. However, on occasion, a visionary looks at his unique group of athletes (or the presence of one special athlete) and creates a new system. Buddy Ryan's 46 Defense is an example. If these systems work, everyone emulates them: some with success, others with utter failure. If, however, the system proves almost universally successful--to varying degrees--then, to be sure, it will meet its demise soon enough. How? One, the opposition will pour all its brain power into creating ways to reveal & exploit its weaknesses (every system has them) OR rules will be devised to dilute its success. BASICALLY, THE EVOLUTION WE'VE BEEN SEEING IN MANY PHASES OF THE GAME OF VBALL HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS IN FOOTBALL. The cliche, "Necessity is the mother of invention," proves true in sports.
Early, the Japanese astounded opponents with quickness, feints, and exact timing. The Russians answered it with never-before-seen size across the net AND wingspans that could match the quick, pin-to-pin offense.
The Ruskies then dominated with overpowering size at the net, so the Yanks countered with impeccable ball control (2-person receive) and the swing offense, which created a before unseen arsenal of 5 hitters on every play.
The Americans dominated two Olympics with their system, so the Brazilians (and others) eventually sought to disrupt it with the jump serve. They succeeded.
Although all of Neville's ploys and systems don't reach the desired result, he is the most valuable kind of asset to the sport because he is a visionary, constantly looking to stretch the boundaries of what humans can do in a 30 X 30 space.
I watch many hs and club coaches in the Western New York area and am alwys impressed with how the most successful adapt on the fly--from season to season and game to game. The most successful seem to know this: you can never put a weak serve receiver in a position to be exploited at any time AGAINST A GOOD TEAM and expect to win. (Of course, a good passer may go through difficult moments, but then the coach must quickly evaluate that player's ability to refocus against the game's score). Secondly, those coaches always create the best scenario for their most effective side-out producer to most easily get the ball. This is SO important and coaches with very limited vball knowledge, but who know these two tenets, have been HUGELY successful.
Despite the almost obscene use of the hands in serve receive these days, serve receiving, along with setting, is one of the more highly technical aspects of the game, an aspect in which lack of proper technique cannot be overcome by sheer athleticism (to an extent, this is not true in the areas of hitting, blocking, and floor defense). Therefore, if you want a look at the best coaches, look and see which teams, year after year, have the best serve receive/ball control.
nents with quickness, feints, and exact timing. The Russians answered it with never-before-seen size across the net AND wingspans that could match the quick, pin-to-pin offense.
The Ruskies then dominated with overpowering size at the net, so the Yanks countered with impeccable ball control (2-person receive) and the swing offense, which created a before unseen arsenal of 5 hitters on every play.
The Americans dominated two Olympics with their system, so the Brazilians (and others) eventually sought to disrupt it with the jump serve. They succeeded.
Although all of Neville's ploys and systems don't reach the desired result, he is the most valuable kind of asset to the sport because he is a visionary, constantly looking to stretch the boundaries of what humans can do in a 30 X 30 space.
I watch many hs and club coaches in the Western New York area and am alwys impressed with how the most successful adapt o |
| vb101 |
Posted - 02/12/2003 : 9:15:32 PM
I was impressed with Victor's passing as well. I didn't think, however, it was limited to just their 2 passers. The majority of kids on that squad passed well. I don't know if I'm right, but I attribute that to teaching and coaching.
Interestingly enough, I was talking with Q and Tut the other day, and mentioned the current use of the 2 person pass system. Both knowledgeable coaches immediately talked about how Beal (men's olympic coach), one of the popularizers of the 2 person pass, has now discounted the effectiveness of this methodology. Initially, this technique was devised for men, on the men's height net prior to the development of the jump serve. Dealing with top spin serves, floaters, & short serve, 2 passers could pretty efficiently cover the whole court. It was ideally suited to a man named Kiraly (a 2 person beach champion while in high school), who, while a player @ UCLA, in the 5 person W, would hawk any ball in his vicinity (sometimes by violating the perfect construction of that W - a "no no" at that time), & risk offending then volleyball purists by delivering sweet pass after sweet pass.
Selinger, the women's coach @ the time, charted the speed of an athletes movement versus the time it would take the athlete to move to various areas of the court & realized that on the lower women's net, the 2 person technique, would not allow the athletes to get to all balls. Physically impossible, you'd need to be bit by an irradiated spider to do it. He even noted that the efficient use of what @ that time was considered a faddish skill, jump serving, could make the 2 person pass obsolete.
At Buffalo, a decade or perhaps a little more ago, Max was able to effectively receive with 2. His team passed most impressively, however, when a remarkable quick lady named Dionne covered more than half that court. Very good serving teams, however, stressed that team. Buffalo adapted.
Now, with the advent of the jump serve and the legal let serve, most men's teams do not even attempt to pass with 2, unless facing a squad using the standing serve. Even on the beach, where 2 man ball prevails, they've shrunk the size of the court, to make passing more probable (too many aces were resulting). The serve can move too fast for the movement ability of the passers. What was stressed at the recent AVCA convention is the creation of a new position, the primary passer. Again, going back in time, I believe it was Neville who experimented with the single person passing system, where a fellow named Acosta stood @ the 20' deep by 15' spot and received all the passes. Amazingly enough, the National Team won a few matches this way, but as I heard, we were too dependent on that one person's performance, and so that idea was shelved. Now, to a certain extent, it is in the process of being revived.
Most players know that the ball is served to the center of the court more than anywhere else (beach players choke the middle and move outward), so the current idea, is to put the best passer, by manipulating the rules of overlap, in the center of a 3 person pass scheme, where that person covers both central seams & ball hawks the center of the court.
Using the serve as a weapon is becoming more and more of a focus throughout the nation. The passer is becoming more and more important as squads learn to serve hard to seams, alleys, & areas, in order to pick apart their opponents. I believe it was Dunphy who once told a seminar I attended something along the lines of this. "We are looking for big people to dominate the net, but if a player can pass nails & serve a squad off the court, there's room for that player on any team." He was referring to Eric Sato, an Olympian Dunphy coached at the 88 olympics, a serving, passing, digging specialist, who was one of the inspirations of the development of the libero position, along with his sister Liane & probably a host of others.
So, long story short. Skilled passers are valuable. They make the difference between winning and losing. & if we have some kids who can pass well in a 2 person scheme, more power to them, that's awesome and to be very, very worthy of praise.
hrunk the size of the court, to make passing more probable (too many aces were resulting). The serve can move too fast for the movement ability of the passers. What was stressed at the recent AVCA convention is the creation of a new position, the primary passer. Again, going back in time, I believe it was Neville who experimented with the single person passing system, where a fellow named Acosta stood @ the 20' deep by 15' spot and received all the passes. Amazingly enough, the National Team won a few matches this way, but as I heard, we were too dependent on that one person's performance, and so that idea was shelved. Now, to a certain extent, it is in the process of being revived.
Most players know that the ball is served to the center of the court more than anywhere else (beach players choke the middle and move outward), so the current idea, is to put the best passer, by manipulating the rules of overlap, in the center of a 3 person pass scheme, where that person covers both central seams & ball hawks the center of the court.
Using the serve as a weapon is becoming more and more of a focus throughout the nation. The passer is becoming more and more important as squads learn to serve hard to seams, alleys, & areas, in order to pick apart their opponents. I believe it was Dunphy who once told a seminar I attended something along the lines of this. "We are looking for big people to dominate the net, but if a player can pass nails & serve a squad off the court, there's room for that player on any team." He was referring to Eric Sato, an Olympian Dunphy coached at the 88 olympics, a serving, passing, digging specialist, who was one of the inspirations of the development of the libero position, along with his sister Liane & probably a host of others.
So, long story short. Skilled passers are valuable. They make the difference between winning and losing. & if we have some kids who can pass |
| statechamp8 |
Posted - 02/12/2003 : 8:54:22 PM
I would deff have to choose Fairports,Hilary and ashley that whole team was based on there passing. Hanna is a close second and has another year to amaze us.
|
| vball5 |
Posted - 02/12/2003 : 6:46:42 PM
yeah, i agree. hannah and bethany passed really well together. are both of them coming back next yr? i havent seen such a good 2-man serve receive in a long time
|
| OH13 |
Posted - 02/07/2003 : 11:12:30 PM
yeah definitely hannah but she played in the fall...watch out for her next year
|
| Q |
Posted - 02/07/2003 : 7:05:58 PM
Sorry ...I didnt mean to forget hilary....she was ommitted because it is assumed she will be in the list.....Ommission be admission if you will.....
|
| vbchick1 |
Posted - 02/07/2003 : 5:55:24 PM
Fairport passes 2 person serve receive as well
|
| cruiser |
Posted - 02/07/2003 : 5:23:36 PM
If you want to name some outstanding passers you should also mention 2 girls from Victor, Bethany Bowe and Hannah Sharp. Both girls demonstrated exceptional ball control along with the added responsibility of playing in a 2 man serve receive format.
|
| Q |
Posted - 02/07/2003 : 4:02:53 PM
I vote for ashley(fairport) and Jessica(pittsford)
|
|
|
Login 
