Curious what exactly this means in this context…can you provide examples?
2 Likes
@NavigatingWP:
I see 5 from PAC Youth Blue 2025 and 5 from SPA Blue Youth that made NTSC.
5 CST CADET BLUE, 3 PAC Cadet Blue 2025 and 3 SPA Blue Cadet that made NTSC.
4 CST DEVELOPMENT BLUE, 1 PAC Dev Blue 2025 and SPA Blue DEV that made NTSC.
Doesn’t look like “almost no players get chosen from the Blue teams no matter what happens.”
1 Like
Fair enough, but CST weighted their teams equally, so the Blue/Red distinction is lessened. Also, SPA Blue Cadet had one field player, the other two were goalies. Either way, the vast majority of the NTSC group comes from Red teams. But everyone on the Blue teams thinks they have an equal shot, which statistically or anecdotally they probably don’t - which is fine. it is a great experience and the kids meet their peers from all over which makes Futures, Jos, etc. much more fun.
1 Like
NavigatingWP,
Why do you think that CST weighted their teams equally?
The Red and Blue teams consistently finished in very different places:
Youth Red finished 3rd, Youth Blue -11th.
Cadet Red finished 2nd, Cadet Blue- 8th.
Dev Red- 1st, Dev Blue 7th.
Looks like very clear cases of A an B teams, no?
As one of the ODP coaches explained the selection criteria for the teams:
Each team is allotted two spots, irrespective of their designation as red or blue. The distribution of additional spots is contingent upon the team’s performance; for instance, the first-place team is granted a greater number of spots than the second-place team, and so on.
Several factors are taken into account in this selection process:
-
Youth age group: In odd-numbered years, such as 2025, seniors—regardless of birth year—are not selected. This is because they are most likely committed to playing at the college level and will not have the time to participate in travel events in Europe during August. Next year, which is an even-numbered year, coincides with the World Tournament. Therefore, seniors born in 2008 or younger are eligible for selection, as the World Championships take place in June and July.
-
Cadet age group: The same principle applies to the selection for Cadet Worlds, thereby enhancing the chances of players born in even-numbered years.
-
Development age group: There are no such restrictions within the development category, as there is no corresponding World Championship for this age group.
Many times the Blue team might be considered the B team. Of course if that is the case, those players have a much tougher road to NTSC and beyond. They are on a B team. That makes sense
As to my politic statement, I believe there are agendas around the inclusion of some players (skill alone doesn’t justify some players being selected for teams) and certainly relationships matter.
All the comments, and there have been many, about ODP demonstrating greater transparency are fair game. Folks are not wrong to think it’s heavily dependent on the “eye test” and preconceptions based on school/club affiliation. The reality is that society places significant weight on shooters/scoring, regardless of sport, to the detriment of players that get overlooked despite demonstrating outstanding fundamentals (pool position, game awareness, superior passing/assists) and superlative defense.
3 Likes
This is a great example of the lack of transparency from USAWP on ODP.
We’ve been involved with ODP for many years. I’ve never heard any of these things before. Not placement-based NTSC slots, not even odd birth year preference. I’d heard about the guaranteed NTSC spot for B teams but I thought it was only 1 and not 2.
All this should be clearly spelled out on a (properly designed and maintained) ODP website.
2 Likes
I do not think that there are guaranteed NTSC spots for B teams. Of course, it often happens that very good players land on B teams, so there is no surprise that those players make NTSC.
It’s absolutely guaranteed, per team
It used to be true even for the Cal Combo teams, which were alternates from the larger California zones
Invites all kinds of gamesmanship where you’d rather be the best on a B than the worst on an A
It is not guaranteed. For example, this year, only one CEN Cadet player has been selected to NTSC. CEN zone fielded two teams.
P.S. Anyway, this preoccupation with NTSC invite is understandable but a bit overblown. If a kid plays for a decent hs/club in California, they will be seen by college coaches regardless.
1 Like
I’ve definitely heard “one per team” from multiple coaches, both zone and national. That might be only Dev.
This all makes my original point! Why the opacity?
Re NTSC focus - college coaches attend NTSC. Some college get 75%+ of their players from NTSC+ players. It’s a big deal.
1 Like
NLM,
It does not look that anybody from CEN Blue Dev team was invited to NTSC.
Maybe there is a ‘one per team’ guarantee, but I think those are more like guidelines. In Development, PAC Blue finished 7th and sent one to NTSC. SWZ finished 8th and sent five to NTSC.
The moral of the story is… save your money if you were born in Q4 and you are in development and did not have to shave your beard before the games… I’m sure there are 1 or 2 exceptions to this rule, but it’s a fairly accurate rule of thumb. The 0 for 22 stat on Q4 2011 birthdays is pretty staggering… many of those kids were the very best players on the best teams in 12u last year and not a single one was selected to a 75-person pool of players for Dev NTSC. Maybe this is ok(?). Some kids have an advantage in age group play (August 1 cutoff) and others have an advantage in ODP (January 1 cutoff). Such is life. But it seems unusual that there is a chunk of the country’s current top players who seems to be deliberately being left out simply because they are 9 months behind their peers in age, strength, puberty, etc. A more long-term developmental approach would bring these kids into the fold with a mindset that they may not be able to compete immediately, but they are worth investing in longterm.
It is absolutely certain that being born in an odd year is a disadvantage as the “up” years for youth/cadet world championships are 2008, 2010, 2012, etc. This is not a criticism; it is just a reality.
So unless you are a genetic freak born late in 2009, 2011, 2013… you might be better off saving your money and having your athlete focus on shining in age group play/high school and skipping ODP.
5 Likes
Could not agree with this more. I can name at least 6-7 2011 kids who carried their teams (all top 8) on their backs at JO’s last summer who were available to be selected and were not. All have late fall/winter 2011 birthdays. Not sure what the solution is, but a lot of talent slips through the cracks with the current approach. Maybe they get recaptured later on if they keep showing up…
5 Likes
This is interesting. I can’t figure out how to see the whole interview
This is true in all sports at all levels and really, all of life. Kids are advantaged by their genetics and being members of the “lucky sperm club.” It’s no one’s fault that the world championships are alternating years. Olympics are every four years and you might miss your peak window because of when your parents got busy so many years ago.
That said, there have been plenty of early developers who see the competition pass them at later ages and late bloomers who excel. We’ve all heard “that kid can’t be 12!” I think the coaches know that. Do they bet on potential that doesn’t materialize? Sure.
ODP is an experience. Take it or leave it.
3 Likes
There is so much USA Water Polo could do to make the ODP experience better!! The poor experience is creating a lot of cynicism in the water polo community and kids who see all the politics etc and have no interest to go back. In general, where is the “development” in oDp?
Right now the experience is completely dependent on the coach - some are a disorganized mess and others are awesome. How good an experience a player has is completely random. Some teams don’t even practice and have no social interaction outside the pool, other coaches encourage parents to set up chat groups and dinners etc. Some teams showed up at the pool for their 5 games and left right after games and really got no development or even bonding with team mates (given no practices).
USA Water Polo should implement some consistent guidelines for communication (for some coaches this is almost non-existent), practices, timelines, recommendations for parents etc.
And how about ODP “camps”? They are not camps but try outs… many view them just a money-maker taking advantage of kids’ dreams. So many kids come back completely dejected because they were deemed “non-contenders” from the start and put in some corner where no one even bothered to watch them, much less give them any feedback. I hear so much complaining from parents saying ODP camps turn their kids off the sport. Does USA Water Polo ask and actually listen to feedback?
1 Like
NCWP,
So 0 out of 22 kids with Q4 2011 birthdays were invited. OK. But then 6 out of 20 kids with Q1 2012 birthdays were invited. Are you really suggesting a deep conspiracy to discriminate against kids with Q4 birthdays? I am not sure that I can visualize National Dev coaches looking at a talented kid and saying, “Damn it. It is again a Q4 2011 kid. Let us take another Q1 2012 kid instead.”
But yes, 9–12 months is a big difference at this age group. This is probably one of the reasons why those late 2011 kids could do so well at the 12u JOs last summer.