2004 Adult Survey Results

We would like to thank the people who took the time to respond to our survey. We appreciated your comments and suggestions and hope that you see that many of your concerns and suggestions have been addressed and implemented for the coming 2004/2005 season and that we are working on some of the other issues (that take a little longer to solve) for future seasons.

We had 43 team reps respond, with responses balanced between the women and men and among the divisions (21 women - Gold 6, Silver 10, Bronze 5 and 22 men - Gold 5, silver 12, Bronze 5).

The first several questions dealt with tournament locations and dates:

• The preference is to hold all the divisions on Saturday in the same location. Second choice was to hold all the divisions on Saturday even if they are in different locations. Region response: Looking for enough courts to hold all divisions on Saturday.
• If the tournament has to be split over two days, the preference was to put as many divisions as possible on Saturday and the rest on Sunday with nearly equal preference for the split being along divisions (gold playing the same day, etc) as compared to being split along gender. Region response: will split some along gender and some along division.
• The Regional Championships should be after the Hi-Neighbor and be held in early April (1st choice) or late March (2nd choice). Region response: the Regional Championships are April 2nd - 3rd weekend.
• There is interest in another two day tournament, with a preference for a February time frame. However, there is also concern about losing a tournament weekend for the teams that do not wish to play a two day format. Region response: for this reason, if a two day tournament is held, it will be an additional date that does not conflict with an adult or junior weekend (they need all the courts they can get on their weekends).

The next question dealt with movement of teams between divisions:
There was no clear cut direction for team movement (22 said stay with current system of division reps making the determination and 21 said automatically move the top two teams up and move the two teams with the lowest average points down). Region response: stay with current system.

The next group of questions dealt with player movement:

• A nearly unanimous response (40 for 3 against) to allow players who want to play but do not have a team or are not able to commit to playing several tournaments to register as unaffiliated. Teams would be able to pick up players off this list when they do not have enough to play. Once a player on the list plays a third time they would be locked to that team's roster. Teams who pick up a player off the list would be eligible to advance to the playoffs (41 for 1 against). Region response: approved for use this season.
• A majority response (28 for 15 against) to allow a team that shows up at the tournament without enough players to "borrow" a player from another team (that is not part of their registered club) for the tournament. Teams who "borrow" a player for the day would be eligible to advance to the playoffs (41 for 1 against). Region response: if the team shows up with five players they could "borrow" a player from another team for the tournament. (This would not apply if a team has six to start the tournament but drops to five during the tournament). A team is allowed to do this once during the season. If a sixth player shows up, then the "borrowed" player would go back to their original team and the team will have used their one-time permission to "borrow" a player. In the instance of "borrowing" a player, there will be flexibility with the uniform rules handling number conflicts the best way possible.

The next group of questions dealt with officiating:

• The concept of trying to get paid up officials for all tournaments (understanding that the fee would have to increase to cover the additional cost) was turned down by a majority vote (17 for 25 against). Region response: we will not have paid referees at regular region tournaments this season. We will still have paid first referees at the Regional Championships.
• The concept of using certified junior age officials to help referee the regular season tournaments was also turned down (18 for 25 against). Concern was expressed that they did not want to expose the juniors to the behavior of some of the adult players. Region response: not using paid referees at regular season tournaments so it becomes moot point.
• The re-certification clinics were not well attended, should the region continue to offer them (33 for 10 against)? The best day for clinics is Saturday - 10, Tuesday evening - 9, Sunday - 7 and Monday evening - 5. The other days received 1 vote each. Region response: offering a recertification clinic from 9-12 on Saturday and Sunday clinics (the full clinic will be from 1-6 PM). Also offering a Monday and Tuesday evening re-certification clinic from 6-9 PM.
• Last season, several people took the test online but did not send in their corrections. Respondents want the online testing to again be offered (38 for 5 against) but to also offer testing at the clinic (37 for 5 against) and for the clinicians to emphasize taking the test at the site and inform attendees of the policy if they do not follow through. Region response: offering both online testing and on site testing. Clinicians will promote on site testing and inform the attendees of the policy regarding failure to complete online testing.
• Regarding whether teams should have to have certified officials (attend clinic, take test and correct to 100, and have a full rating) or trained officials (attend clinic, take test and correct to 100, and have a cursory rating), the response was certified - 13 and trained - 29. Region response: officials that want to work juniors or college reciprocity must be certified officials. We will offer a trained official status for adult teams playing in the region. The trained official will need to attend a clinic, take the test and correct to 100 (unless they score a 70 on their first test) and be rated. The rating will not be a full rating, but will be more thorough than the "drive by" ratings of the past few seasons.

The question on whether the region should subsidize some of the cost of teams going to nationals (even if this means raising fees) had 18 for and 21 against subsidy. If there was subsidy, they were in favor of it going to the regional champions (12) instead of being divided among all teams going (9). If it was going to be divided among all teams going, the regional champions should get a larger share (24) rather than be divided evenly (7). Region response: continue current policy of not subsidizing some of the cost of teams going to nationals.

On the question of what are the deterrents to people playing USA Volleyball (both finding new players and retaining current players), some comments were: having the men and women play on different days, having to play on Sundays, players refereeing, having trouble picking up players at the last minute, people do not know what teams are looking for players, not enough opportunities to play indoors in their area, money/cost, rules and regulations, paperwork, older players aging out and not replacing them with younger players, player movement rules, not accepting credit card/debit card payments. Region response: several of these concerns have been addressed in other questions. Opportunities/places to play continue to be a problem. The region does have a facility grant program where facilities can apply for money to assist in putting volleyball into a gym that is not set up for it, putting a second court in a gym that has one main court by setting up two cross courts, etc. We will be accepting PayPal this season allowing teams/individuals to pay with a credit card. We are part of a beta test group for USA Volleyball for online registration which will be operational later this year for testing and functional next season.

On the question of offering incentives to attract new members, there were varied responses from offering reduced entry fee to first tournament or lower membership fee to don't do any more than the region does now, to I have been playing for 10 years I ought to get a discount. Region response: continue current incentives for new players and teams (special tournament fee that includes entry fee and one-event membership for the players on the team).

Regarding whether child care was an issue, we again received varied responses: it is always an issue, for women definitely, only if the men and women play on the same day, if child care is an issue it is an area the region should stay away from. Region response: while the region does not feel it can get into the child care business, we will check with facilities to see if they could offer child care or possibly provide a list of people (maybe junior players in the area) who would be available to baby sit.

The next group of questions dealt with age group and coed play: