Osage

The TPV Paragon team really earned it in the semis... Carolina Rogue is an up and coming club on the National scene, and their 18 team is / was pretty good. Congrats to that group... you guys are right, it's an experience I am sure those kids and parents will never forget. Are all the Alliance 1's teams getting killed in Open? I'll have time later to take a look at results.

Wish I had a popcorn GIF... I am not an Alliance insider, but I know some who are. I'll see what I can find out. Personally (for reasons I have stated earlier in this thread), I would be surprised if either TPV or Alliance instituted any major changes after this season. I have to think that both clubs met the targets they were aiming at this year.

Time to kick the dust off this thread... TT, I looked for an AAU schedule for you guys, couldn't find it. Am I missing it, or not out yet? Also, are the Alliance / TPV 18's teams done?

I hadn't looked at that field in a long time. As good as it is, seems a bit diluted from when I saw it last time. Wasn't A5 supposed to be there? Also, looks like some of the higher ranked 18's teams pulled out. Alliance 18's are not in the field, either. Anyway, good luck to everyone!

Had no idea. In which case, props to them for their improvement!

Been thinking about this competitiveness question. That is, do you go to big events (Bluegrass, Qualifiers, Nationals, AAU Championships) in order to potentially win the event? Or compete against matched competition, knowing you are probably going to win as many as you lose? The easy cases are on the extreme ends of the spectrum. As clifford and TT point out, nobody is getting any better losing (or winning) by blowout margins. If your team's point ratio for a given event is in the .6 range or lower (meaning, you consistently scored 15 points or less in your games), you were probably in over your head. On the other extreme, if you are one of the top 20 or 50 teams in the country, you need to be entering these tournaments with the goal to win the most competitive division. But what about the large space between those endpoints? After thinking about this a couple of days, I've decided the bar for me is: CAN you finish top half in a given field? If yes, you're playing in the right division. Let's take a case in point: should the Alliance 15-1 team have played Open at Big South? 15O was a tough, tough field: 9 teams entered the event with a bid already in hand, and 3 more teams left with Open bids. Alliance finished 26th out of 32, so on first glance, you'd say they shouldn't played that field. But they were seeded 28th, and their fate was sealed on the first day when they lost 15-12 in the third to a team that ended up finishing 10th overall (and had previously qualified at the 15 USA level). They were ThatClose to locking in a top half finish. So in retrospect... yes, playing Open was appropriate for them.

I missed that crossover result for the 13s. Re JVA / AAU / USA... I agree that it's all the same to most parents, they just want to know what the EOY event is going to be. And families can count and plan around Orlando, for better or worse. But the 10% that do know the difference... those are the families I would want in my club. Give them a choice. I think Alliance or MidTN would do itself good by foregoing the JVA / AAU route, ceding that circuit to Ethos and TPV. Having the chance to compete Nationally in either USA or JVA / AAU would be good for middle TN volleyball in general. As things stand now, that choice isn't really available. The SRVA / USAV / Qualifier route isn't without its faults. I just don't think a club can consistently field top 50 level teams across age divisions, year after year, by just competing in JVA events. I'm going to think about your point on competitiveness a bit. I still don't know where I fall on the question.

Check Sportwrench. Which means, among other things, that these results are worthless from an AES rankings perspective.

Wow, you're not kidding. Alliance sent 16 teams, MidTN 6, and Clarksville 2. Of those 24, only 7 finished top half in their divisions (Alliance 13-2, 14-2, 14-3, 15-3 and 16-3, MidTN 14s and 16s). Since we were talking about them earlier, I did notice that the MidTN 13s beat the Alliance 13s pretty easily. On the other hand, some of those fields were DEEP. Take a look at the 15, 16, and 17 Open fields... half of those teams are qualified. I'll say it again... we all know why TPV can't play qualifiers, but they're going to have to find a way around that at some point if they want to be truly relevant at the National level. This is where the top teams are competing. Or maybe not. If all the major clubs in middle TN are JVA clubs, that doesn't provide families with much choice, does it. Might be better for Alliance to align itself tightly with USA / SRVA, in order to more clearly differentiate itself from TPV and Ethos. If they did that, maybe they could get some better seeds at Big South. Debate question: should clubs enter their teams to COMPETE at these events, or do you send teams to Qualifiers in order to QUALIFY? Just focusing on the Open teams, Alliance clearly isn't going to be qualifying an Open team at Big South.

Bravo is the first team. Paragon is the second. You can guess the hierarchy in a number of ways. For example, Bravo played Open at Bluegrass, while Paragon played Premiere. I'm pretty sure there are at least two other 18's teams.

I was making a comparison between the top 2 TPV 18's teams. My expectations were not that high for the Bravo team. Even so, the season seems to have been a bigger struggle for them than I expected. With end of year school events and college pending (for some), it's hard to hold an 18's team together that is limping to end of the schedule.

Been saying that team was the real #1 18's team. My concern about the other group was that it was constituted to look good in warm-ups and on paper, but once the whistle sounded, I thought they would have first contact challenges. Having said that, I am surprised that they've struggled as much as they have. Took a quick look at AES just now, and I can't find a single result to be proud of.

the other thread was specific to TN Club volleyball 2019. That's where, for example, Apostle was keeping up with AES rankings, and we were commenting on those. This thread lost a page or 2 as well, making me wonder what all was deleted, and why. Anyhow, congrats (again) to TT's team on another outstanding weekend. The win vs. the 18's team was especially impressive.

Agree with Apostle here. Let's be honest... among the upper level older players (high school age, anyway) what's left at Alliance that TPV would want? Probably one kid of the 16's, at least one, maybe 2 off the 15's. Beyond those, when you talk about kids who are potential candidates to play for Top 40 D1 schools, Alliance does't really have them anymore. Which creates an interesting situation for both clubs. TPV first. As they become the standard-bearer, the expectations for TPV will be to improve upon the results Alliance had posted with unfettered access to the area's top talent. @ Apostle, I'm not sure I agree that Alliance regularly missed the boat... maybe my expectations are lower than yours, but most years, they'd placed at least one team in Gold at AAU, right? This being Tennessee, that should be good enough. I'd think TPV would certainly take that kind of result this year, and likely in the years going forward. TPV is going to have have to find a way to compete in USAV events if they want to be truly relevant nationally (there's a limit to how much you can improve just playing yourselves and Southern Performance week after week). If that never happens, then Triple Crown. Alliance will then be the home for underdogs (at least with its top teams). Those teams will be comprised of players who are just glad to be on a 1's team (like it or not, that matters more than it ought), along with those who know they belong at that level, but have something to prove. In theory, Alliance top teams should not be able to compete toe-to-toe with TPV peers, who will have the top players and "better" training model.

Thank you, Apostle, for taking the time to refresh the conversation. At this point, it seems like the thread has devolved into taking side and reading minds (I'm guilty, I admit, I'll try to be better), which may not be the best use of time. Maybe it’s not the worst thing if this conversation between the 4 of us has run its course. I am sorry, though, to hear you think I have vague or unclear on how I feel about these teams. If that is the case, it's only because I'm a terrible writer, so let me try again. And unlike Clifford, I do have some time to kill, so bear with me. I am from Chicago. My old club (Lions) is now part of 1st Alliance (not to be confused with Alliance). It's hard for me to be objective about TPV because I know 2 of Butler's 3 publicly named victims, plus a handful of the others that have not been publicly named (yes, those exist too). I have very strong feelings on this. If anything, I’ve held back on this forum, because I don't think any of you were there, so none of you can understand what it was like. Worse, it seems like some of you don’t even believe that anything happened, or if it did, it doesn’t matter. There I go mind-reading again. The Chicago volleyball world is tight and very well connected. We all knew each other, everybody knew what was going on. If another national org, say, A5, Munciana, Northern Lights, Orlando, or pick a Texas or West Coast club, had set up a satellite in Tennessee, there'd be nothing to object to. But every dollar spent with TPV eventually sends some % to one of Rick Butler's accounts. Hence my bias, which I feel like I have been clear about. I'm also clear that none of this persuades anyone, our minds are already made up on this subject. Also note that none of this has anything to do with Alliance. So now that my biases are clear (I hope)... let’s flip the script. TPV is a business. Business isn't (or shouldn't be) personal. As a business, TPV has to make money. Apostle quoted me laying out the roadmap for how they should do that. Like TT, I don't regret or take back anything I wrote, and I didn't even mean to be provocative. This isn't rocket science. It shouldn't surprise anyone that it played out the way it did. But to review… TPV's goal is to be the top club around, correct? TPV (just like SPRI) doesn't sell "Join us and win!" Their message is "Join us and train!" But TPV training is supposed to be special, better than anyone else's. To a point, I buy this. For example, I think SPRI does a good job developing setters. But you must post results: wins, losses, championships. TPV was in real danger last year when its teams weren't getting it done, particularly in head-to-head match-ups against peer teams at Alliance, K2, even Ethos and MidTN. Losing, by itself, isn't a problem, especially for a new club, but TPV set itself up to be a special case. But the competitive differences between TPV and peer teams last year weren't incremental... with the possible exception of that 13's group, last year's TPV teams outclassed by their peers, particularly vs. K2 and Alliance. (Apostle, correct me if I have any of this wrong.) If the end result of all that "better" training is that the kids can't compete, then what's the advantage to your training? The message fails, and eventually so does the business. TPV management couldn’t risk waiting 3, 4 or 5 years, while the coaches develop, couldn’t wait for the training to eventually differentiate. Volleyball parents tend not to see the Big Picture, and they don’t have that kind of attention span. Solution: get better kids, however way you can. I don't see how TPV could have done anything different than they did. Business is not personal, you do what needs doing, within the bounds of the law and your own organizational standards. (Violate those, there's a problem.) I don't agree with Clifford's earlier statement about feeling sorry that it went down the way it did. I have no feelings either way about it, it just "was". What feelings I do have are these: I hope that those who left their clubs are getting what they want, and I hope those who stayed are likewise pleased. I also hope that anyone is dissatisfied, either way, is honest with themselves about their expectations and their situation. However, I will continue to push back on dishonesty. Things like "No, this isn’t happening, everybody is playing under the same rules" when everyone knows otherwise... or where the messaging changes over time, like "No, that never happened" even though we all agreed at the time that it had. That feels like SPRI, and it needs to be called out. What next? Seems clear… In the other thread, (Apostle, back to you), you’ve made the compelling case that TPV has surpassed Alliance in terms of National competitiveness, which makes TPV the preeminent club in middle Tennessee. They have the numbers (tons of teams, tons of kids), their bills are paid (right?), they have a couple of flagship teams (14’s, 16’s 18’s) to hang their hats on, to point out how the training pays dividends… "Look how much we've improved in just one year!" There's nowhere to go but up. Limiting factor on growth will be # and quality of coaches, and that's a real thing that would keep me up at night if I were Dan. Meanwhile, I expect Alliance to contract. Fewer teams, fewer coaches, but probably a net increase in competitiveness by seeing attrition at the lowest competitive levels, and those kids will continue to flow into TPV's gym. On the other hand, I agree with TT: I no longer expect Alliance to field Open-level competitive teams (IE, legitimate threats to make Gold in Qualifiers, large national events, top half at JO’s and AAU’s) every year, at every age division. There just aren’t enough Open-level players in the region. And in the end, I expect (hope) that, so long as expectations are clear, agreed upon, and met, most folks (families, players, management, ownership at TPV, Alliance, MidTN, Ethos, other clubs) will be pleased with this. If people are happy with where they are at, the sport will grow. By the way, I don't live near any lakes, but the Cumberland river is not far.

Teeter, I think you are playing with words here, being careful not to answer the question. This speaks more clearly than if you had been direct. Perhaps you feel like you need to do that to protect yourself / your player. I trust the people I talked to back in September / October, which includes families on either side of the transaction: those that left, plus those that remained with their home clubs. They were approached, they did not initiate any conversations, but were glad to pursue and eventually accept the offers made to them. Then gladder still to spread the word to other high value kids. This wasn't a clandestine thing. Had TPV not done that... had they tried to compete with the kids that were already in the program, plus those who would organically have made the move without being pursued... TPV would not be seeing the success in the older ages so far this season that they have. And it worked. TPV can now roll into the next club season with this message: "Look how much improvement we've seen in our teams! Our training really is different, and it produces results."

Really? TPV management did not initiate any conversations? I thought it was pretty clear here in this thread (amongst the 4 or 5 of us) that they had? They may not have initiated contact with you / your player, but it was clear at the time that they were going after targeted Alliance kids, incentivizing them, with the hopes that others would follow. And it worked.

Ok. I still think that if anyone is so dispirited at this point in the season, it's a matter of expectations not being met. How? Somebody (coach, club leadership, teammates, other parents) isn't upholding their end Expectations were unreasonable in the first place Expectations were unspoken or not even really known or understood by those who held them My point earlier stands... seems to me the first half of the season, on paper, has played out in line with reasonable expectations. People who aren't happy right now may struggle to find what they think they are looking for. And that would be unfortunate. At the end of the day, it will be best for the sport, and best for the sport's continued growth in the region, for everyone to be where they want to be. As Apostle is subtly pointing out in the other thread, it's arguable we've taken a step back so far this season, relative to national competition. That's a matter of how the top (Open / Premiere) level teams have fared these first few months. But there is an army of kids playing at younger ages and lower competitive levels, probably more than ever before. Those kids are the future of middle TN volleyball. That's where the clubs need to step up: they need to assign quality coaches to the younger teams. If I ran a club (I don't, which is probably clear), the top coach would always coach the top 14's team. Coaches with lots of experience, who think a lot of themselves and their abilities... they shouldn't be spending all their time with the older kids who are already mostly who and what they are going to be as players. That's easy, and it's lazy. They'll make a bigger impact doing the hard work with younger kids.

Agree with Clifford... watching from a distance, seems like most teams are performing in line with expectations, and I am surprised to hear people disappointed at the halfway mark of the season. The macro view, though, I guess could hide concerns specific families might have regarding playing time, role, etc. @TT: do I assume correctly that these are Alliance families who will be playing for TPV next year? What do they think will be different when they make the move?

You had more time to spend on the question than I did. I agree that the younger Alliance teams should probably be disappointed in their central zone finishes. And though it's hard to get excited about finishing 24th in a 27 team field, results suggest that 16's team competed well and lost close games to good teams. I also stand behind my comment about the depth of that tournament, especially at the Open divisions. Any event where the top teams from Legacy, KIVA, Circle City, Milwaukee Sting, Mintonette and AVC Cleveland are playing is a really deep event, regardless of age division. Then throw in a few other one-offs from Lions, A5, Michigan Elite, Tri-State and others bringing strength at various age levels. Good early season test with a lot of teams that will be in the National Championship conversation in June. Congrats to the TPV 18 2 team for another strong weekend, and for the 18 1 team for sweeping their weekend. Results say the TPV 16's lost to the KIVA 15-2s, and Munciana 15-1s, no shame there, those are good teams.

Central Zone is a deep tournament. The Open Divisions in particular had multiple teams at pretty much every age division who have a chance to compete for National Championships. I'm surprised TPV wasn't there... it's not a USA Volleyball event, so they could have gone. With a couple of exceptions, Alliance teams finished within shouting distance of their original seeds. I wouldn't have expected them to do much different than they did. Turning to Power League... only 3 TPV teams entered. Why so few? I think this will be a good weekend for that 16's team. Their opening pool isn't very strong, and though I'd expect the Sunday match-ups to be more competitive, I still don't see either team from the other pool beating them.

I did. "Average" is a relative term... they'll be among the top teams in the state of Tennessee, top 5 probably. There are some really good players on that team, future D1 kids. But it's probably unrealistic to expect that group to reach the levels of success they've enjoyed previously. What stands out about that team is size... size matters as you move up to 16's and beyond. With a couple of exceptions, this is a short team, by 16 Open standards. Short teams win (MAVS won 16 Open last year with a 5'8" middle), but they do so with a combination of outstanding ball control and athleticism, and / or on the back of a terminal / dominant player. I don't see that with this bunch. If they are going to be successful, they'll have to be one of those feisty ball control teams that doesn't make many mistakes, is difficult to side out against, and makes you beat yourself. Like a KIVA team.

Caught a little of the 16's on Saturday... I think the Blackman kid is a big a get for that 16 Alpha team as any of the Alliance kids. That group has a chance to be nationally competitive. I think TPV has done a disservice to the 18's kids, though. The Paragon team is a complete team, all the pieces are there. The Bravo team has some injury issues, I realize... but I'm not sure when they get to full strength that they can be much better than they are. First contact issues (service receive and floor defense) over the course of the season might keep them from being as competitive as the second team. I know TPV likes to move kids around, so maybe they will make some adjustments.

In fact, IB was established by folks in the Business Community who hated having to restart their kids in new curricula every time they moved from (say) Singapore to Geneva to Sydney to... etc. It is rigorous, and every bit as prestigious as AP-level work. But to compare it to Honors programs at elite private schools (elite within the elite) isn't really fair. Every IB kid in the world is working on the same material, and takes the sames exams at the end of the year. The goal is to prepare these kids for leadership positions in the real world, with an eye towards a global perspective on these questions. McCallie, Harpeth Hall, etc. are aiming at a very different goal. And there are a surprising number of athletes in IB programs, although none are probably game-changers AFAIK.

Does that TPV 16's team have any "legacy" TPV kids? Or is it all Alliance?