[ Vinny, Johnny, and Angela deleted ]
>There is always a hint of truth in any piece of humor.
Not in the Vinny, Johnny, and Angela post.
>comment which lead to this "east" v "west" sub-thread was that some
>announcers emit a "west is best" attitude. I don't agree with the
>opinion, but I do see the attitude on a regular basis. I suggest
>that this could be good for the sport. UCLA was on a mission last
>year at the NCAA's, now other programs might want to prove that 1994
>wasn't a fluke. Healthy rivalry can produce better competition. What is
>needed to produce a broad-based competitive sport like NCAA basketball?
Most volleyball on TV these days is the AVP. Their announcers are
part of a plan to market a lifestyle, not a sport. And the
centerpiece of that lifestyle is the sybaritic California beach culture.
Your comments about healthy rivalry are well taken, however, I thought
your original post focussed on why things are rather than where they
ought to be.
>>> I think all of the above. These areas have strong juniors programs.
>>> California has a large concentration of the middle to upper-middle
>>> class families that have the wherewithal to send their kids to clubs
>>> and such.
>I don't buy the "VB is a upper-middle class sport" answer. VB is
>similar to basketball. Basketball is perceived as an "urban sport".
>How many NBA stars had mummy and daddy supporting their BB education?
>I think urban areas could be the growth regions for volleyball.
>What is the catalyst to make this happen?
Let us think present and future separately. I strongly believe that
volleyball has thus far been a sport for the country club set. It
takes money to buy the equipment, pay for the coaching and travel, and
so forth. Does it have to stay this way? Hell no. And thus the need
to continue messianic efforts to take the game to kids who ordinarily
would not be exposed to it and to find ways to pay for those costs.
I would not volunteer any time for this effort, but, I'd contribute to
a good program that did.
I think there is nothing wrong with trying to switch the marketing
emphasis away from youth and beauty to something "longer term." It is
usually the case that youth and beauty marries rich and powerful. At
which point it surrenders the Lite Beer, boogie board, and volleyball
for vintage wines, Mercedes, and golf.
>>> I think serious volleyball fans in California do respect Nebraska,
>>> Florida, Penn State, and other first-rate non-California programs.
>>> Who cares what region they happened to be placed in?
>Of course they respect these few programs, mainly women's programs, but not the
>leagues or HS/Juniors? I like what has happened in the last few years
>to Women's VB. Cable TV, Title IX, the basball strike, etc etc has been
>a big boost to women's and girl's programs. I envision more competitive
>"eastern" women's programs in the years to come. I expect winners in the
>mid-western states, Florida and Texas. These areas are nearing critical mass.
>What about the rest of the country? What about men's programs? People have
>justly questioned the talent pool for the new NVL. Without a variety of quality
>jr's and college teams, VB may be destined to pander weak beer on
>the beaches of So. CA.
Well, what about them? This raises again the separate issue about how to grow
the game. I'd suggest that NCAA Div. I football be spun off as an
adjunct to a University's academic mission and be tied in with revenue
producing programs such as Graduate and Professional Schools. Since
that will never happen, I think volleyball must be grown by continuing
to expand the player base and by having rabid fans bring in their
friends/lovers to matches, turning them on to good sport. The
rivalries ought to develop naturally.
As far as NCAA men's programs, I am worried. Very worried.
Plan 9 from Outer Space