2004 Junior 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 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 62 people respond, with responses balanced among the divisions (Open = 38, Power = 15 and Club = 9) as well as the age groups (18 = 16, 17 = 7, 16 = 13, 15 = 14, 14 = 8, 13 = 2 and boys = 2). Of the respondents 47 were coaches, 7 were club/team administrators and 6 = parents.

The first several questions dealt with tournament locations and dates:

• The Regional Championship should be held in late April (1st choice), early April (2nd choice) or late March (3rd choice). Region response: the Regional Championships for the Bronze and Copper divisions are March 19th (15s, 14s, 13s, & 12s) and April 9th (18s, 17, &16s). For the Gold and Silver divisions they are April 16th for all age groups.
• The majority (45 for and 15 against) felt that the season should end with the Regional Championships (excluding the Jr. Hi-Neighbor and Quest For Excellence tournaments). Region response: Regional Championships are the last region tournament of the season (excluding the Jr. Hi-neighbor and Quest For Excellence tournaments).

The next question dealt with movement of teams between divisions. The majority (38) was in favor of automatically moving the top two finishers of the tournament up and moving the bottom two finishers down (as well as any other teams that might need moving for competitive or numbers reasons) as compared with the current system of division representatives making the determination (23). Region response: automatically move the top two finishers of the tournament up and the bottom two finishers down after the first three tournaments of the season.

The next group of questions dealt with officiating:

• The concept of having paid up officials on the stand all day (understanding that the fee might have to increase to cover the additional cost and that we might not have enough officials to staff all pools) was turned down by a majority vote (22 for 39 against). Region response: paid referees will still work with the player referees during pool play and officiate any tie-breakers and all play-off games. At the first 3 tournaments we will have the adult officials work the first game of each match in the 14 and younger divisions. We will still have paid first referees on the stand all day at the Regional Championships.
• The concept of using the older certified junior age officials to help referee the younger division's regular season tournaments was approved (49 for 11 against). Region response: older junior players who are certified and wish to work the younger age division tournaments will be considered.

The question on whether the region should subsidize some of the cost of teams going to nationals (even if this means raising fees) had 41 for and 19 against subsidy. If there was subsidy, there was no clear opinion of whether it should go to the regional champions (21) instead of being divided among all teams going (23). If it was going to be divided among all teams going, the regional champions should get a larger share (28) rather than be divided evenly (17). Region response: continue current policy of not subsidizing some of the cost of teams going to nationals as did not want to raise fees.

On the question of what are the deterrents to younger players and boys playing USA Volleyball, there were varied responses from: finding qualified coaches who can teach fundamentals, access to gym time, too many other activities for them to do that also only are available on Saturdays, no high school opportunities for boys, younger players and boys families are not aware of the opportunity to play. Region response: 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 are working with YMCA's, Parks and Recreation and other facilities in offering youth volleyball leagues for 8-12 year olds.

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. Region response: continue current incentives for younger players and boys (discount on the membership fee).

There were 20 people interested in starting a program for 8-12 year olds in their area. Region response: following up with them to provide information on how to start a youth volleyball program in their area.

The next group of questions dealt with play format:

• The divisions are getting large. The opinions were mixed on whether to take the top teams out of open (35) or add a fourth division (22). Region response: adding a fourth division (Gold = top open teams, Silver = rest of open and top Power teams, Bronze = power teams and top club teams and Copper = club teams) which does both. Combined with the automatic movement (see above) this will even out the division levels.
• The majority (52-9) is in favor of playing matches (2/3), starting at 0-0 and having 4 team pools in the open (now Gold) division. Region response: in Gold division we are playing 2/3, starting at 0-0 and will have 4 team pools when feasible, otherwise will use the modified 5 team pool.
• The majority (38-23) is in favor of starting games at 0-0. Region response: in Silver, Bronze and Copper divisions we are playing 2/3, starting at 0-0 and will have a modified 5 team pool (everyone plays 3 matches except team 3 plays 4).

The next group of questions dealt with the High Performance program:

• The majority of the respondents (32 to 26) have not participated in the Region's High Performance program. Of those who have not 11 were not interested, 6 did not know about it, 6 thought that they were not good enough and 2 said it was too expensive. Region response: make more people aware of the program and take the clinics to new areas of the region to make it easier for players to attend.
• As the talent increases the vast majority (55-5) felt that the region should add a second competition team in each age group. Region response: we will evaluate the talent level and where and when feasible add a second competition team in an age group.
• There was sentiment that the region should expand the High Performance program to include a beach component (37-21). Region response: plans are underway to begin a beach component next summer.

The next few questions dealt with coaching certification and clinics:

• Most of the responses (55-3) indicated that they would attend coaching clinics geared toward more experienced coaches. Region response: working to offer some advanced coaching clinics next fall (time frame referred by respondents). Suggested topics include the High Performance techniques, conditioning and training concepts, motivation and psychology and sports medicine. Also including an advanced section covering high performance techniques to the IMPACT gym clinic.
• The region holds a CAP Level I and Level II clinic every 2-3 years. The preferred time to hold these clinics is before the season starts (32) followed by during the summer (18). Region response: working with USA Volleyball to bring a CAP Level I and Level II clinic next fall.

Are there things that the region could do to support or enhance the outdoor play in the region? Responses were: yes we should do it and I think it is extremely valuable, to we already hold some outdoor tournaments, the players complained about the heat in the gym - I would hate to hear what they have to say about being outside, and concerned about players needing a break. Region response: looking to work with local clubs to offer a limited schedule for juniors next summer.

The final group of questions asked about Member Service and Support:

• The majority of the people use the web site (yes - 59, no - 1).
• The web site was rated Good to Excellent in overall usefulness, intuitiveness and ease of use.
• The schedules, pool postings, results and officials sections were the most frequently used sections of the web site.
• Suggestions to improve the web site included: update directions to facilities (including physical address), update how region teams do in qualifiers/nationals and other out of region tournaments, add search function for the site itself, keep it updated, online registration, spice it up with graphics, no pink characters, add "button style" links, more pictures, online tournament entry, links to other websites that help players find places to play in their area.
• The respondents were nearly unanimous (56-1) in supporting the development of online registration an online tournament entry.
• They were also nearly unanimous (52-5) in supporting credit/debit card payments.
• The regular e-mail updates were received by the majority (yes - 46, no - 13). Of the 13 who do not receive the updates, 9 did not know about them.

Region response: we are currently part of a beta testing group for USA Volleyball's online registration system. This system will also eventually incorporate tournament entry. We will be able to accept credit/debit card payments through PayPal this season. We are looking at the web site design and how to make it more user friendly.