What? A Division III post? I know, with February winding down it's about time!
Although I don't participate as much anymore, I still view volleytalk's forum daily to get the latest gossip/rumors on the season. Recently, a thread started talking about the potential 2010 D-III All-Americans. And I still haven't quite figured out how to respond, because some of the posts have been brain-numbing. There are so many different perspectives on who should get it and who shouldn't that you aren't always going to please everyone.
One of the gripes I always heard in numerous D-III circles about is Endicott always getting All-Americans, largely skewed by the fact that coach Tim Byram is on the committee. Before all the trolls come about and tell me how the process REALLY works and how it's unfair to say that, let me finish: I am not faulting Byram for simply doing what he can to promote his players in a positive manner. He's one of seven coaches on that board. So if Dan Coleman (A good libero but played for a team that never made it past the 2nd round of NECVA's) can be a three-time All-American, the system if flawed. Statistics are important, but it needs to go much deeper than that, as they can be skewed.
No worries though, because I have a fix. I present to you "Volleyballer4life's rules to a successful All-American selection process"!
THE "BIG THREE" RULE.
Juniata, UC-Santa Cruz, and Springfield automatically each get three All-Americans, with the 1 seed heading into Molten's getting a 4th. After each season, the teams are reviewed and the committee can veto this rule for the upcoming season with 5 votes against it.
If you look at the previous years, this is not that much of a stretch. Last year, these 3 teams combined for 6 of the 20 spots. Not a bad representation. However, who here watched the replay of the National Championship? Did anyone else see Anthony Damiano from Juniata? Are you going to tell me that he really pales in comparison to Leserman/Coleman? This was the biggest snub last season. All three of these teams year in and year out have players that would start at any other Division III school they were at and make an immediate impact. I don't like the lack of parity, but I can't deny it. So until these juggernauts show any signs of slowing down, they get half of the accolades.
THE NECVA RULES
NECVA champion gets a minimum of two players. Simple enough.
Down to 8 spots or less! Here's where it gets fun.
NECVA teams must make it to the second round of the tournament to have players considered.
Let's look at the teams that would have been eliminated from last year's voting from this:
Hunter, Medaille, SUNY NP, Elms, Newbury, Emmanuel, Eastern Mennonite, MIT.
If you look at the All-Americans from last year, this rule techincally worked out anyways. The year before, there would be four violations: Witofsky/Coleman from Endicott, Pamidimukkala from MIT, and Brubaker from PBU.
I'm not saying that these players aren't all very strong - nor am I saying there weren't players from last year that weren't deserving of the thought at least - Elms and Newbury had some standout players. However, when I think of All-Americans, we can review box scores all we want, but there are intangibles to be considered.
Take Newbury's loss to Philly Bible last year. We were the higher seed, probably were deeper talent-wise, and fell apart. People were yelling at each other on the court, no one was able to take the game over, and we lost in four, although it could have easily have been a sweep. If you can't will your team to win in the first round of a 16-team tournament that doesn't include the big 3, then all-conference is about as high as you should get. Poise is something that you can't necessarily chart on paper, but it should be one of the highest priorities when choosing someone as an AA.
Sometimes, the fact that you will your team to the playoffs is even a feat though. Hence:
THE BRUBAKER CLAUSE
With the unanimous vote by the AVCA committee, ONE player from a team that does not meet the prior rules may be voted as an All-American.
There are some players that thrive on mid-level teams where you aren't sure if they'd have the same success on a top team. Brubaker is an example of a guy that would be successful in just about any program. That being said, the committee can vote someone in that meets these standards.
And finally, my favorite rule:
THE "LETS HELP EVERYONE STOP CRYING ABOUT SNUBS" ALL-AMERICAN HONNORABLE MENTION AWARD.
Although a third-team would be unnecessary, certainly it'd be nice to know who just misses the cut. There are always 5-10 guys that a lot of people bring up that should have been on the list, and most of them really are only missing one or two pieces to the puzzle. Therefore, let the committee pick 10 players that just fell short. No criteria regarding their team. This gives credit to players that had a great season individually, and perhaps it helps push them to get to the next level the following year. It also gives a little credit to their schools, and perhaps that'll help bring in a recruit that wants to help build a program from being middle-tier into a contender.
These rules really only make the committee pick 5-6 players, as well as the Honorable Mention team. Although I'd like to say Division III has enough parity to say this wouldn't work... it doesn't. Juniata and Springfield are the only two teams that have won D-III titles that haven't moved up or dropped their program. The gap is getting closer, but still has a long way to go.
Perhaps Baruch will alter that this year. Time will tell.
No comments:
Post a Comment