Annual Convention: December 18, 2008


< back


Division I Head Coaches Committee Meeting

December 18, 2008

AVCA Convention - Omaha, NE

Meeting called to order by Mark Rosen

Roll called by Ross Brown

Absent - Southwest Athletic Conference, Horizon League, Independent, Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference


Mark welcomed everyone and encouraged everyone to visit the exhibitors and reminder them the conference would not be possible without the sponsors.


Recruiting Task Force Update -

  • Last years process went through the AVCA Legislative Code
  • The matriculation time limit was explained, this essentially starts a players "clock" when they graduate high school and allows them 5 years from time of high school graduation.
  • Only 220 out of 338 coaches voted which means 1/3 of the coaches did not vote either yes, no or abstain. Chose not to move forward due to lack of votes. We are working to obtain the remainder of the votes to move this forward.   
  • Legislation regarding a ban on camps/clinics during quiet period was not on the calendar as NCAA said they talked to someone at AVCA. However, they did not as no one at AVCA or on RTF spoke with the NCAA. This is an important issue as it impacts coaches' opportunities to make money which is a sticky issue with the NCAA as it could lead to antitrust issues.  This is an important issue as it would stop defacto recruiting during the quiet period. This piece of legislation was not sponsored. Currently - 74% in favor, 26% against, 95 have not voted
  • College coaches coaching club counting towards days - 80% in favor, 20% against, and 95 have not voted
  • 1 time transfer rule - 63% for, 37% against
  • Explanation of process - Surveys serve as the basis to enter legislation into applicable NCAA Cabinet. Allows us to gauge our membership's opinions.
  • We did have a piece of legislation applicable to volleyball that the AVCA was not involved with. The West Coast Conference sponsored legislation regarding starting practice early.
  • We are considering starting an educational newsletter that would address issues that would be applicable to college/club/high school coaches regarding recruiting. We cannot make interpretations but can send out information to educate coaches.


Rules Changes: Open discussion on rules changes, likes and dislikes -

  • WAC representative- did not like the change as reps team is a grind it out team, games are a little off, get a rotation and a half as opposed to a full rotation, getting beat by odd scores like 25-12, not balanced, the fans like it, now the game makes more sense since it is similar to the high school/club rules they know
  • West Coast representative - Coaches hated it, Spectators liked it, kids don't really like it as records are hard to hit,
  • CUSA representative - As a fan it is exciting, as a coach I did not like it. If it goes 4 or 5 games you could actually have more volleyball, officials seemed to be in favor
  • Discussion regarding Ball handling - confusion with fans and referees, need to define athletic, its hard to judge the intangibles, is really a judgment call - what is athletic?
  • Mark  - Some officials seem to be on their own page, some are traditional call it tighter, it is a challenge for officials as well and takes them time to transition, the term "athletic" also changes from official to official based on their athletic abilities, would like to see officials be consistent within a match,
  • Mark - regarding change in scoring John Speraw on the men's side is against it as they are developing players to play in International Competitions and it could take them down over a four year period by one-third of a season,
  • Colonial Representative - was on rules committee when it went to Rally scoring and the committee wanted to make the transition easy, took a lot of feedback on it and knew we needed a change, committee wanted to make sure it did not take away anything but thought 25 points made it more competitive
  • Discussions on Substitutions - Seems to be a lot of talk about subs not being enough what are the committees thoughts on this?
    • Eliminates 6-2, wanted to make more subs but couldn't, the way to beat some teams was to get them to 25 so that they ran out of subs,
    • Question is do we want to be a participatory sport or teach the game?
    • Becomes a parody issue with mid-majors
    • NAIA has no limit on subs
    • The question is will more subs make the game better?
    • The officials in NAIA like it as it is easy to call
    • Can't take the risk with subs and may not play girls on end of the bench - they are on the end of the bench for a reason
    • From a AD perspective how can you ask for more scholarships when you take away points/subs?
    • Just because you practice does not mean you deserve to play,  like DI because of the win - lose attitude, its not participatory, as a coach you have to work hard to make it and to win, DI has to be a competitive environment that is strategy driven,


Action Item - Following meeting we need to find out pulse and get feedback from our constituency regarding substitutions.


Discussion regarding Sand Volleyball -

  • When it came out it was exciting, its in the spring, girls can learn the game and be more well rounded, as it starts moving we need to start thinking of cons as well. Look at baseball/softball and the northern/southern split, is that an issue? What about the length of the season? Look at CC/Track coaches - do we want that life? Kids like beach in the spring but will they like it when they are playing after classes end?
  • Economically hard to justify, does sand really help our players?
  • It's our job to bug AD's to get the sport into the limelight. Building sand courts is easy and inexpensive.
  • What will happen to out of season competitions?
  • This may allow us to develop the kids and the sport. Girls need to play more volleyball, young women need to see that opportunity, it makes players better, there is an enormous transition,
  • Would actually like indoor volleyball to be a spring sport. We would then be competing for TV time vs. baseball/softball as opposed to football/basketball.
  • Will coastal teams have a recruiting advantage?
  • Initially we will have a lot of crossover in players but down the road more separation will occur between outdoor girls and indoor girls.  
  • The only thing currently on the table is should sand volleyball be on the emerging sport list?
    • Issues/Questions on should it be on the list are first priority. If sand is added as an emerging sport next year will focus on rules, legislation, scholarships, coaching staff,
  • Sand will provide more opportunities and exposure to coaches and players. We need to look at the popularity of Olympics. We must explore this. This would allow volleyball more exposure and engage fans year round, could increase sponsors.
  • Wisconsin built an indoor sand court in an old warehouse and practices hard court one day - sand the next, can also share sand facility with other teams.  
  • Talk to Physical Department about sand courts. Most schools have them for general use and intramurals and those that don't may want to put them next to dorms for general use.
  • Currently have 400,00 HS kids playing volleyball and 150,000 club players, will this lead to 500,000 or 550,000 girls playing volleyball?
  • DII Softball coach commented she was scared of this because it may entice spring sport athletes to play sand. She said if it came down to sand v. softball, sand will probably win.
  • Will we have 2 sport players or have to deal with indoor/outdoor players? We may have to recruit at sand events now.
  • Would this create more jobs for coaches and players after college? What about club jobs?
  • If it is added to emerging sport list we will have 10 years to get to championship level (40 teams).
  • Administrators are looking to add sports for women and don't know what to add, this just makes sense


Please discuss issues with your league coaches for discussion on Friday.

Meeting closed by Mark Rosen.


< back