INFORMATION TO USERS
This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “ Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted you will find a target note listing the pages in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again-beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.
4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department.
5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy.
University Micrdrilms International 300 N, ZEEB RD., ANN ARBOR, Ml 48106 Rodrigo, Arambawattage D.
THE HISTORY OF MEN’S INTERCOLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL IN THE UNITED STATES FROM 1895 TO PRESENT DAY
The Ohio State University
University Microfilms I n te r nS t i O n a I 300 N. Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. MI 48106
Copyright 1981 by Rodrigo, Arambawattage D. All Rights Reserved THE HISTORY OF MEN'S INTERCOLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL
IN THE UNITED STATES FROM 1895 TO PRESENT DAY
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate
School of The Ohio State University
By
Arambawattage D. Rodrigo, B.A., M.S., M.S.
*****
The Ohio State University
1981
Reading Committee: Approved By
Dr. Donald D. Harper
Dr. James M. Sweeney Advisef ' / Dr. Walter F. Ersing Department of Physical Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author wishes to express his very sincere thanks to his committee members, namely Dr. Donald D.
Harper (Chairman), Dr, James M, Sweeney and Dr. Walter F.
Ersing for their guidance and encouragement throughout this study.
A special word of thanks is extended to Dr. Bruce
L. Bennett, who guided the author in his writing.
Thanks are also extended to all past and present members of The United States Volleyball Association, who promptly extended their help in various ways. August 2, 1931...... Born - Kalutara, Sri. Lanka (Ceylon)
1958...... B.A., Social Science, Univer sity of Ceylon, Peradeniya
1958-1964...... High School Teacher, Educa tion Department, Sri. Lanka
1964-1965...... Diploma in Education, Univer sity of Ceylon, Peradeniya
1966-1977...... Director of Physical Educa tion, University of Ceylon (Vidyodaya Campus) Nugegoda, Sri. Lanka
1971...... M.S., Physical Education, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois
1979...... M.S., Health Education, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Physical Education
Studies in Health Education, Southern Illinois University
Studies in Education, University of Ceylon
Studies in Social Science, University of Ceylon TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... ü
VITA...... iii
LIST OF TABLES...... vii
LIST OF FIGURES...... viii
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION...... 1
Statement of the Problem...... 8
Sub-problems...... 8
Purpose of the Study...... 10 Delimitations...... 10 Method and Procedure of theStudy... 10
Collection and sources of the study...... 10
Presentation of the Materials...... 15
II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE...... 18
Summary...... 37
III. GROWTH IN VOLLEYBALL 1895-1949...... 39
Volleyball in the Colleges...... 43 Summary...... 50
IV. INTERCOLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL 1949-1970--- 51
V. INTERCOLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL 1970-71..... 78
Introduction...... 78 National Collegiate Men's Volleyball...... 78 Chapter Page
National Association of Inter collegiate Athletics (NAIA)...... 85 United States Volleyball Asso ciation (USVBA)...... 91
National collegiate volleyball... 91 USVBA intercollegiate volley ball championships...... 92
Summary...... 94
VI. CUREENT STATUS OF MEN'S INTER COLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL...... 95
Introduction...... 95 General Picture in the Country...... 96 NCAA Member Institutions That Sponsor Volleyball...... 98 NCAA Acceptance And .Its Present Day Role...... 105 Olympic Acceptance...... 114 Factors and Events That Affected the Development of Men's Inter collegiate Volleyball...... 118 Factors That Interfered With the Development of Men’s Inter collegiate Volleyball...... 119 Impact of Power Volleyball...... 123 Geographical Concentration of Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball...... 125 Rule Changes or Training Methods and Their Effect on College Volleyball...... 127 Persons and Institutions Who Contributed to the Development of Intercollegiate Volleyball...... 134
VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS...... 135
APPENDIXES A. QUESTIONNAIRE FOR INTERVIEWING THE PERSONS T-JHO ARE CONNECTED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF VOLLEYBALL IN THE UNITED STATES...... 151 APPENDIXES Page
B. QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE HISTORY OF MEN'S INTERCOLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL IN THE UNITED STATES...... 153
C. COVER LETTER...... 157
D. COLLEGES CLASSIFIED BY STATES WHICH SPONSOR VOLLEYBALL...... 159
E. NCAA DIVISION I, II, AND III MEMBER INSTITUTIONS WHICH SPONSOR INTER COLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL (1975)...... 178
F. NCAA DIVISION I, II AND III MEMBER INSTITUTIONS VIHICH SPONSOR INTER COLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL (1976)...... 182
G. NCAA DIVISION I, II, AND III MEMBER INSTITUTIONS m i C E SPONSOR INTER COLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL (1977)...... 186
H. NCAA DIVISION I, II, AND III MEMBER INSTITUTIONS WHICH SPONSOR INTER COLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL (1978)...... 190
I. NCAA DIVISION I, II, AND III MEMBER INSTITUTIONS WHICH SPONSOR INTER COLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL (1979)...... 195
J. NCAA DIVISION I, II, AND III MEMBER INSTITUTIONS IffllCH SPONSOR INTER COLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL (1980)...... 199
K. QUESTIONS ON PERSONS AND INSTITUTIONS IMPORTANT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF VOLLEY BALL AT THE INTERCOLLEGIATE LEVEL...... 203
BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 205 LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. States Showing No. of Colleges (C), No. of Colleges With Women's (W) Volleyball Programs, Men's (M) Volleyball Programs And Total Number in Each State (T)...... 97
2. NCAA Division 1 Member Institutions That Sponsor Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball 1981...... 99
3. NCAA Division 11 Member Institutions That Sponsor Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball 1981...... 100
4. NCAA Division 111 Member Institutions That Sponsor Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball 1981...... 101
5. NCAA Division 1 Member Institutions By States...... 101
6. NCAA Division II Member Institutions By States 1981...... ;...... 102
7. NCAA Division 111 Member Institutions By States 1981...... 102
8. States That Sponsored Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball In Division 1, 11, and 111, 1981 Along With the Colleges of Athletics and Volleyball in Each State...... 104
9. NCAA Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball Championships from 1975-1981...... Ill
10. NCAA Men's Intercollegiate Teams Representing Regions...... 112
11. Results of the Men's Volleyball ' Championships at Olympics Since 1964...... 116
vii LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. The volleyball court...... 3 Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
Volleyball is a very popular team game which has been accepted as a highly competitive as well as a recre ation sport throughout the world. It was first introduced
in 1895, by William G. Morgan, the director of the YMCA
at Holyoke, Massachusetts, as an indoor, lunch-time recre
ational game, an alternative to vigorous strenuous basket ball.^ Since its inconspicuous start, volleyball has undergone many changes and has now developed into a major world sport and a challenging team game of Olympic stature.
I'Jhat was once a simple game of "batting the ball across
the net," has now developed into a fast, invigorating team
game, which needs highly specialized individual skills, in both offensive and defensive play, making it very inter
esting to the spectator and challenging to the well skilled player.^ At its lowest level it is an enjoyable, less
^William G. Morgan, THE INVENTOR, "How Volleyball was Originated," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1916- 1917), p. 9.
^Janet Thigpen, Power Volleyball For Girls and Women (Dubuque, Iowa : William C . Brown Company Publishers, 1967), p. 1. 2
strenuous, easily set up informally played game enjoyed
by all, young and old. At its top level, it is a highly
competitive, fast moving, energetic team game demanding
skill, strength, agility, team work, and intelligent play from all its players.^
Highly competitive volleyball, involves twelve
individually skilled players, six players on each side,
played with an inflated ball (9 to 10 ounces) and 25 to
29 inches in circumference in a court, 60' long and 30' wide, divided by the net into two sides. The net is 3'.3" wide and 32' long. The top of the net is 8' above the
floor in international men's competition. A line 4" wide,
called the center line is drawn across the court, beneath
the net from side line to side line dividing the court
into two equal team areas. In each team area a line 2" wide is drawn between the side lines parallel to the cen
ter line, and 9'.10" from the center line, designating the
attack area. (Figure 1) Each team consists of six players, three in the
forward line near the net, and three who are positioned
near the baseline at the*back court. A team may also have
six substitutes, who may be sent into the game to replace
the starters at intervals when play is stopped.
^Peter Wardale. Volleyball (24 Russel Square Lon don : Faber and Faber Limited, l964), p. 15. senvir^Gt
Figure 1. The volleyball court. 4
The reference to the six players is made by their positions. (Figure 1) The three players at the net are front line players, and are designated as the right front
(RF), center front (CF) and the left front (LF) and occupy the positions 2, 3, and 4. The other three players com prise the back row and are identified as right back (RB), center back (CB) and left back (LB) and occupy the posi tions 1, 6, and 5. At the time the ball is served, the players of each team must be within their respective team areas, taking the above positions.
The ball is put into play by the right back player
(the server) who serves the ball from within the service area, over the net into the opponent's area. In serving, the server hits the ball with the hand (open or closed) or any part of the arm to send it over the net, into the op ponent's area. The ball shall be cleanly hit for the ser vice after being released or thrown from the hand or hands of the server. The service is considered good if the ball passes over the net between the antennas, without touching the net or other objects.
The team receiving the serve must return the ball
over the net within three touches, in order to prevent a point being scored by the opposition. The ball must be
clearly hit at all times and never visibly come to rest.
If the serving team succeeds in winning the rally, a point 5 is scored for their team. If the team receiving the serve wins the rally, it now becomes their turn to put the ball in play and attempt to score points.
The six players rotate their position on the court in a clockwise movement following each service change (side- out) . The person rotating from the RF position of the court to the RB position would be the server.
The game is won by the team which scores 15 points first. If the score is tied at 14-14, the winner must have a two point margin. Internationally, a match consists of the best of 3 out of 5 games. Thus, the object of the game is relatively simple. To win a rally, a team must cause the ball to strike in bounds in the opponent's court.
What occurs during a volleyball match featuring top caliber teams is a lightning-quick display of constantly shifting defense. Players receiving the serve pass the ball to teammates who attempt to find an opening in the opposition's defense and blast the ball back at top speed. With three players from both teams leaping like gazelles at the net while trying to smash or block shots, the game provides tremendous excitement.4
Modern competitive power volleyball is a fast, exciting, invigorating, team game with highly specialized individual skills. Each individually skilled player has
Women's Volleyball at the International Level (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, 1976), p. 87. As quoted from Organizing Committee of 1976 Olympic Games-COJO, 1976, p. 2. 6 a specific responsibility, maneuvering in definite, planned and strategic offensive and defensive patterns.^
Power volleyball therefore differs from recre ational volleyball in the amount of organization necessary for the highly refined application of team strategy and individual skills. Highly competitive power volleyball therefore needs quick, alert, ex tremely coordinated players with stamina to master the complex skills.°
Since its introduction, the game has spread to many parts of the world, and is played by many nations at an international competitive level, leading to world cham pionships for both men and women. The International
Volleyball Federation (FIVE) was formed in Paris in 1947.
Competitive volleyball has been recognized as an Olympic sport since 1957, and was added to the Olympic games for both men and women in the 1964 Olympic Games in Tokyo,
Japan, which tremendously increased the status of volley ball.^
However, volleyball was slow to develop in the
U.S. mainly because of the image given to it, as an in formal indoor game, used to supplement the gymnasium
Supplement (Hollywood, California, P.O. Box 2244: Creative Editorial Service, 1971), p. 1. 7 classes. For a time, it was almost exclusively an older man's game, business and professional men taking the sport
quite naturally.®
Credit goes to the YMCA for the growth and success
of volleyball at the beginning. The YMCA has played a major role in organizing and promoting the game. Volley
ball was used extensively as the major sport of the YMCA, which continued to be the chief agent in the use and
promotion of the game.^
"The United States Volleyball Association (USVBA) was formed in 1928, and the previously closed National
YMCA Championship became open to teams from other organ
izations."^^ After volleyball was played for many years
as an intramural and recreational game, the first National
Collegiate Tournament, conducted by the USVBA, was held in
1949 and was continued till 1976.
George J. Fisher, "Progress in Volleyball Admin istration." USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, (1929-30), p. 7.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. (1924-25), p. 7.
^^Allen E. Scates, Winning Volleyball' (Boston: Allyn andIB Bacon, ’Inc., 1972), p. 4
^^"College VolVolleyball," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, (1950), p. 39. However, very little competitive volleyball is played in the United States at the interscholastic and intercollegiate level. Volleyball neither spread as dramatically nor is as popular as basketball. But,
"the colleges and universities are also finding that com petitive volleyball deserves a place in their programs.
Power volleyball is growing among colleges, especially after the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) accepted volleyball as an official NCAA sanctioned sport and established the first NCAA volleyball championships in
1970. The NCAA action followed in the footsteps of the
National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA), which conducted its initial men's championship in 1969.
Statement of the Problem
To present the history of men's intercollegiate volleyball in the United States, since its introduction in 1895 to present day.
Sub-problems. To determine what were the major forces or events which were responsible for its development at the intercollegiate level and what significant progress was visible at various stages.
^^Wilbur H. Peck, "President's Message," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, (1978), p. 4. 9 To determine what were the major causes or events which hindered or prevented the development of intercolle giate volleyball.
To determine the role played by the NCAA regarding the development of men's intercollegiate volleyball.
To determine if the acceptance of volleyball as an official Olympic sport in 1957 had any significant effects on men's intercollegiate volleyball.
To determine if the recognition of the sytle of play termed "power volleyball" has had any impact on the sport as played in U.S. Colleges.
To determine if the geographical concentration of men's intercollegiate teams has had an effect on its national development.
To determine if there were any significant rule changes or training methods developed that changed the course of volleyball for men in colleges and universities in the United States.
To determine who are the particular individuals who made a worthy contribution to the progress of men's intercollegiate volleyball in the United States.
To determine what are the major institutions that played a significant role for the development of the men's intercollegiate volleyball in the United States. 10
To de.tennine if there is a significant increase
in the status of men's intercollegiate volleyball by the number of participants, the number of attending spectators,
and by the amount of financial support.
Purpose of the Study
The main purpose of the study is to collect and
analyze available and reliable information about the growth and development of men's intercollegiate volleyball since the day of volleyball's introduction as a sport in 1895 to present day.
Delimitations
The study deals with competitive volleyball and not with recreational or intramural volleyball.
The study deals with intercollegiate men's parti cipation.
The study is confined to the United States.
Method and Procedure of the Study
Collection and sources of data. To obtain data for the
study, four sources were used: 1. Primary Sources of Data - An excellent primary
resource of the data, to locate accurate volleyball resource material was the microfiche reproductions of the United
States Volleyball Association (USVBA) Archives, History 11
and Records Committee, headed by Harold T. Friermood. Much
information about the sport, its origin, growth, organiza
tion and development appeared in the published reference
guides and official rule books. Beginning with the jointly
issued guide, 1916-1917 YMCA-NCAA Edition and continuing
through 1975, and other historical materials are preserved
for permanent use on microfiche cards. There are some
9000 pages of informative historical records. These pre
serve the records of origin growth and development of the
U.S.A. originated sport of volleyball.
2. Personal Interviews - The personal interviews
are of two types. During the writer's involvement as a participant and as an observer in the Sports Imports In vitational, featuring the Senoh Cup Championship with Ohio
State, U.C.L.A., Stanford and the University of Southern
California (U.S.C.), the writer was able to conduct per
sonal interviews with nationally recognized coaches who
arrived from many regions of the country. This was on
April 3 and 4, 1981, St. John Arena, Ohio State Univer
sity. The writer was also able to conduct interviews with
several persons, who were responsible for the development
and organization of competitive volleyball in the Ohio
region, particularly at the Ohio State University and the
Columbus YMCA. 12
3. Questionnaire - A questionnaire with a cover letter was prepared by the writer. All questions were designed to elicit information relative to the growth and development of men's intercollegiate volleyball since its introduction in 1895. The writer felt that sufficient in formation could be gathered from the questionnaire for all the Sub-problems, that would help to understand the present status of intercollegiate volleyball. (See Appendix A).
A list of individuals considered as essential sources of information in investigating the history of men's inter collegiate volleyball was prepared by the writer.
The first category was the individuals from the
United States Volleyball Association who had influence on men's intercollegiate volleyball in the United States.
(1) Harold T. Friermood, past president and historian.
United States Volleyball Association Chairman, USVBA
Archives.
The second category was the individuals who were directly involved in the organization of the first NCAA
Championship in 1970.
(1) Edward S. Steitiz-Chairman of First NCAA Volleyball
Committee.
(2) Allan E. Scates - Committee Member, First NCAA Com
mittee, Coach of UCLA, Winter of First NCAA Tourney. 13
(3) Don Shondell - Committee Member, First NCAA Com
mittee, Second Committee Chairman, Current Chairman,
NCAA Representative to USVBA Board of Directors.
The third category were the individuals directly involved in the first National Association of Intercolle giate Athletics (NAIA) National Championship (1969).
(1) Jerre McManama, First Chairman and Organizer of First
NAIA Men's Volleyball Championship.
(2) Marvin Veronee - Member First NAIA National VB
Championship Tournament Committee, Former Volleyball
Coach, George Williams College.
The fourth category was the individuals directly involved in the first National Junior College Championship.
(1) Michael Haley - Coached at Kellogg Community College,
First NJCAA Champion.
The fifth category was the outstanding individuals in the development of the sport of volleyball.
(1) James Coleman - Coach, Wittenburg University
(2) E. B. DeGroot, Former Coach at Santa Monica City
College
(3) Don Shondell - Ball State University
(4) William T. Odeneal - Former Coach, Florida State
University.
(5) Jerre McManama - Ball State University. 14
The sixth category was the outstanding schools in
geographical areas of the United States in promoting men's
intercollegiate volleyball.
East :
(1) Springfield College, Mass, Tom Hay, Current Coach.
(2) Penn State University, Tom Tait, Current Volleyball
Coach.
(3) William T. Odeneal.
Midwest :
(1) Ball State University - Don Shondell.
(2) Ohio State University - Charles Mand Former Club
Team Coach.
(3) George Williams College - Marvin Veronee.
(4) Earlham College - Jackson Bailey.
(5) Graceland College - Rod Schall, Volleyball Coach,
Graceland College.
South :
(1) University of Tennessee - Arthur Fields Jr.
West :
(1) UCLA - Allan E. Scates.
(2) Santa Monica City College - E. B. DeGroot.
The questionnaire, with the cover letter, was
posted to the present Executive Director, the National
Commissioner/Vice President and Volleyball Commissioner too. 15 (1) Glen G. Davies, Executive Director United States
Collegiate Sports Council,
(2) Peter Dunn, Vice President Marketing and Communica
tions (USVBA).
(3) Joseph B. Sharpless, National Commissioner/Vice-Presi dent .
(4) Roll Engen, Volleyball Commissioner.
4. Research - Additional information pertaining
to the historical development of intercollegiate volleyball
was researched in books, journals, periodicals, disserta
tions, reports and handbooks.
Presentation of the Materials
The presentation of the materials for the study
will be based on the facts obtained mainly from the pri mary sources, the evidence gathered from the interviews,
the responses to the questionnaire, and the documents or
records preserved in the microfiche cards.
The data will be arranged by topic. The first
chapter is the introduction. It indicates the origin of
the game as a recreational activity, but stresses its modern aspect as a highly competitive sport. The features
essential for highly competitive volleyball are emphasized.
A general outline of the rules are given for the reader's 16 understanding of the game. The two organizations respons
ible for its developments at the beginning are the YMCA
and the United States Volleyball Association, followed by
the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and
the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics
(NAIA) - the two main organizations that are responsible
for the present organization of the intercollegiate volley ball .
The problem of the study, the purpose and the sub problems are given in the introduction.
Chapter two is a review of related literature,
the introduction of which indicates why there is a dearth
of literature of the subject of men's intercollegiate volleyball. This chapter presents the related research
from 1930. The first doctoral dissertation on volleyball was written in 1950. A few other related research works
of this kind followed in 1959, 1961, 1968, 1976 and 1978.
The rest of the chapter cites the literature mostly from
the reference guides from 1916-1981, and the journal
articles related to the subject.
Chapter three, "Growth in Volleyball 1895-1949"
covers the earlier period and the developments. The
fourth chapter is "Intercollegiate Volleyball 1949-1970."
The fifth chapter, "Intercollegiate Volleyball 1970-1981,"
deals with the most recent history of volleyball. The 17 sixth "Current Status of Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball,"
includes the presentation and analysis of the forces acting
on volleyball from the past to the present. The past is well analyzed for the reader to understand the present.
Appropriate tables and figures are included to point out
the developments and the past status. An attempt is made
to analyze some of the sub-problems listed. The seventh
chapter, the "Summary and Conclusions," gives the main procedures used in the historical investigation, and the principal events in the course of the development of men's
intercollegiate volleyball in the United States. An anal
ysis of the present status is given in outline. Some
recommendations for further research are also suggested. Chapter :îl
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A review of literature indicates there are several studies that have been done on volleyball, since it has become a major competitive sport in the country and recog nized as an official Olympic sport in 1957.
There is an abundance of literature on fundamental volleyball skills, techniques, and methods of techniques development, rules, and rule changes, and their applica tion, which are all designed for the player, the coach and the teacher. However, it is very clear that there is a dearth of literature on the subject of the history of men's intercollegiate volleyball in the United States.
This is due to several reasons.
Volleyball had its inception and greatest growth in the YMCA. Volleyball did not spread as dramatically as basketball, perhaps, but the game did catch on at YMCAs across the country. The United States armed forces have also been a strong force in popularizing volleyball. Upon returning home from World Wars I and II, many servicemen continued to play volleyball, and today, the Army, Navy, and Air Force consistently produce outstanding teams in
18 19 the USVBA National Championships. An important role is played by the United States Volleyball Association. Since its beginning, it has expanded the national tournaments in volving teams from the YMCA, armed forces, men's open, women's open, seniors (men over 35) and collegiate groups.
Historically, the colleges played volleyball of an infor mal type and promoted intramural competitions for several years. To gain real momentum as an interscholastic and intercollegiate competitive sport in the institutions took some years. As a result, volleyball has a short and recent intercollegiate competitive history.
The computer-based search service offered by the
Mechanical Information Center (MIC) of the Ohio State
University Libraries, indicated that the literature on the subject of men's intercollegiate volleyball was al most non-existent.
Pennington, in her study of the History of Certain
Sports as a part of General School Education in 1930 made reference to the origin and development of the game of volleyball. According to her, the greatest factor in the expansion of the use of the game was the agency of the
Y.M.C.A. of North America. In the colleges and univer sities this sport is used as an intramural sport.^
Julia Dietz Pennington, A History of Certain Sports as a Part of General School Education (Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Ohio State University, Columbus, 1930). 20
Lu, in her doctoral dissertation, the first of
its kind on volleyball, made An Analysis of Volleyball in
Various Regions of the World, and documents the history of
the game in many countries. She gave the status of volley
ball in each country, with the style of the game and rules
used,^
Lu, who quoted a personal letter, which she re
ceived from J. C. Greiner, YMCA Secretary in Latvia from
1924 to 1934, indicated to the reader an impending situa
tion in the United States in the status of competitive volleyball.
It is my own judgment that in countries outside the United States, particularly in Europe, the nationals of these countries have developed skills in playing of the game of volley ball more equal to the American standard of competition than in any other American sport developed in those countries. For instance, in basketball, most teams in Europe could not match in ability the American basketball teams. In volley ball however, the best teams of foreign countries o could match the better teams of the United States,
Rodick, referring to the forces affecting the development of the Sport of Volleyball in the United States, mentioned the YMCA's part in fostering the game and the
impetus given by the servicemen after World War I and II.
Hui-Ching Lu, An ^alysis of Volleyball in Various Regions of the World (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Teachers College-Columbia University, New York, 1950), p.339, ^Ibid,, p, 187, 21
He also mentioned the centralized leadership given by the
United States Volleyball Association after its formation in 1928.^
Flanagan made another historical contribution to volleyball in the United States, though it was not parti cularly of that of the colleges. The total picture that volleyball presents today according to him is the result of many social forces, agencies and individuals who have been instrumental in shaping the total picture. The YMCA, the recreation movement, the two world wars, women's atti tude toward the game, the industry, the depression period, the schools and colleges, along with the influence of the foreign countries are but a few of the movements that have caused changes in volleyball since its inception, which is very well reflected in various rule changes and styles of play through the years
Odeneal investigating The History and Contributions of the United States Volleyball Association, made reference to the men's intercollegiate volleyball in the United
States. He stressed that its growth at the beginning was
Miles I. Rodick, Forces Affecting the Development of the Sport of Volleyball in the United States (Unpublished M.S. Thesis, 1959). ^Lance, Flanagan, The History of Volleyball in the U.S. (Unpublished ED.D. Dissertation, Teachers College- Columbia University, New York, 1961). 22 slow, and a number of institutions played volleyball for several years as a recreational game and its development as an intercollegiate sport was hindered by the traditions surrounding the well established games of basketball, baseball, football, soccer, tennis, lacrosse and hockey.
The primary aim of his investigation was to trace the history and contributions of the United States Volley ball Association, but he made reference to the development of intercollegiate volleyball, as an important role played
National Collegiate Athletic Association. Repre- sentation from the National Collegiate Athletic Asso ciation (hereafter known as the NCAA) to the USVBA from 1928 had been in name only. From 1946 to 1952 representatives were college men who had previously been active in volleyball promotion and who had maintained interest in the game, but did not repre sent the USVBA at the annual NCAA meetings.
The USVBA Executive Committee felt the need to sponsor a national collegiate tournament because of the interest shown by several schools. In 1949, the USVBA sponsored the first national collegiate tourna ment in Los Angeles, California. Springfield College sponsored the first New England Intercollegiate Championship that same year. The University of Washington played volleyball on a minor sports basis. Also in 1948, Florida State University became the first school to make volleyball a major sport and the first to employ a full-time varsity coach for the sport. A Mid-West Intercollegiate Volleyball Confer ence was formed in 1961 with seven member schools.
William T. Odeneal, The History and Contributions of the United States Volleyball Association (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Springfield College, June, 1968). Two years later, Southern California Intercollegiate Volleyball Conference was formed with six schools.
The USVBA has sponsored the National Collegiate Championships each year, with the exception of 1964 when the Air Force Academy conducted the tournament.7
In a Comparative Study of Women's Volleyball at the International Level, Liskevyich also made reference to the origin of the game and the growth of the sport as a result of the International YMCA movement. The primary purpose of his research was to compare the interantional women's volleyball program in several countries. The study dealt with specific factors that have contributed to the success and/or failure of volleyball in the countries he investigated. He hoped that this information would further stimulate the sport of volleyball in the United
States, leading to the establishment of an ongoing program.
Personal interviews with personnel from several countries and a questionnaire sent to twenty eight countries were two of the important methods employed to collect data.
With the information gathered, the writer's intention was to further stimulate the promotion of volleyball programs in the United States.®
Liskevych, 1976. 24
Webb completed another related investigation on
the status of men's intercollegiate volleyball in the
United States. A questionnaire was mailed to 176 college volleyball coaches to determine the status of men's inter
collegiate power volleyball in the U.S. in 1976. It was revealed that men's intercollegiate volleyball was in
creasing in number of participants, in number of spectators and in the amount of financial support. The status of men's intercollegiate volleyball differed by the various
USVBA regions ; highest status was located in Southern
California, while the lowest status was found in the
Northeast and Southwest. Varsity teams had higher status than the club teams in all the areas measured.^
Many articles, although not extensively done, are plainly relevant and clearly reported on the history of men's intercollegiate volleyball, its origin, growth, organization and development appeared in the published reference guides and official rule books. Beginning with
the first jointly issued guide 1916-1917 YMCA-NCAA edition and continuing through 1975, all fifty-five copies were preserved on microfiche cards for permanent reference.
The investigator found that the reproduced guides were a
Jimme R. Webb, Status of Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball in the United States (Unpublished M.S. Thesis Western Illinois University, TTlinois, 1978). 25 rich primary source of material to use to trace the his
torical development of intercollegiate volleyball.
The first published article on college volleyball
appeared in the 1920 annual guide.
The game of volleyball is comparatively new in the colleges. It has been played several years as a recre ative game in a number of institutions where physical education is prescribed, but it has not been taken up as a competitive sport for intercollegiate competition.
The development of volleyball as an intercollegiate sport will be hindered by traditions surrounding the well established games - baseball, football, soccer, tennis, lacrosse, basketball and hockey. Another obstacle is the lack of grounds and floor space for volleyball courts outside of the spaces already as signed to other games. The game is played in most places like basketball courts or grounds laid out for other games, and volleyball has to compete against the older and more popular games.10
In 1922, Meylan reported that volleyball was growing steadily in the colleges. He indicated that al though volleyball was not figured in intercollegiate com petition, it holds an important place in the program of prescribed physical education courses.
Messer reported that volleyball has made slow, but
sure progress in recent years in colleges. It is more a
^^George L. Meylan, "Volleyball in the Colleges," USVBA Annual Guide (1920), p. 21.
^^Meylan, "Volleyball in Annual Guide (1922-1923), p. 25. 26 developed activity of the department of physical education rather than as an intercollegiate sport. It appears to be well suited for a definite place in the program of physical
education and as an intramural sport. Lack of standard
ized rules has been one of the greatest drawbacks until recent times.
Kearns indicated that the colleges are becoming
interested in volleyball. A few invitational matches have been played. In some of the Pacific Coast institutions
it is a strong intramural sport. Oregon Agricultural
College took its initial step by holding the first college invitational tournament in March 1925.
Walsh reported organized high school volleyball in Pittsburgh as a result of the impetus received through having the national championship team in Pittsburgh for
several years.
N. Messer, "Volleyball in the Colleges," USVBA Annual Guide (1924-1925), p. 11.
A. Keams, "Volleyball in the Pacific Coast," USVBA Annual Guide (1925-1926), p. 87.
^^C. L. Walsh, "Volleyball in the Pittsburgh High Schools," USVBA Annual Guide (1927-1928), p. 137. 27 Staley was responsible for promoting volleyball at the University of Illinois in 1922. Fundamental techniques were taught to freshmen classes and volleyball was organ ized as intramural competitions. He felt volleyball had a definite place in the intercollegiate program.
One of the most distinctive advances in the progress of volleyball in the country was the formation of the United
States Volleyball Association (USVBA) in 1928.
A rebirth of volleyball was noted at Springfield
College in 1949 under the direction of Walters who started teaching the classes and coaching a team. He was supported by the whole staff in this revitalization.^^
Danford noted that volleyball as an intercollegiate sport has made a very modest beginning within the recent years. The University of California, Temple University,
Springfield College, University of Nevada, University of
Washington, Hamline, Amherst and Florida State University sponsored teams during the past season. At Florida State
University, volleyball is recognized as any other sport with varsity status. Danford also noticed that coaches in
^^S. C. Staley, "Volleyball at the University of Illinois," USVBA Annual Guide (1927-1928), p. 149. L. Walters, "Springfield Volleyball," USVBA Annual Guide (1949), p. 57. 28 the universities have certain advantages over coaches of
YMCA and other non-college teams. They have the advantage
to choose from a wealth of material, when boys are generally
at the peak of their athletic ability, while non-college
coahces get players who are beyond their best playing ability. The coach of a college has better control over
the players, with frequent practice, to condition them better. University funds can be secured for longer trips, while non-college players have to bear their own expenses.
A grave disadvantage a college coach has is to lose the well trained and experienced players after their college years. A non-college coach does not experience this, as he can retain the players throughout their playing careers.
Very often as few universities play intercollegiate volley ball, a college coach has very few college opponents against which his team can play. Playing against strong
YMCA teams is very often a discouraging factor, as the
college teams are beaten so badly. Another major dis
advantage is due to the fact that the volleyball season
conflicts with both winter and spring sports schedules.
As a result the best athletes of a school do not go out
for volleyball. This condition should change as soon as 29 enough colleges sponsor volleyball to provide complete intercollegiate schedules,
Danford, the Director of Athletics at Florida
State University recognized many challenges confronting the progress of volleyball in the United States as early as 1955. Most of the people were not interested in volley ball at the time, neither as players nor spectators. In general, the public looked down on it as a game possessing little or no challenge to the good athlete. This was supported by the fact that very few people attended volley ball games as spectators. There were almost no adult male volleyball teams, except those of the YMCA and the military forces. Only six colleges entered the national tournament. Intercollegiate volleyball on a regular seasonal basis was non-existent. Not more than three or four states conducted state high school tournaments.
Volleyball was not supproted well by the news media and very little publicity was given by the newspapers. There was a growth of aristocracy in the sports of this country, dominated by football, then basketball, followed by other sports in a descending order. Volleyball occupied
Howard G. Danford, "Volleyball in the Univer sities," USVBA Annual Guide (1949), p. 54. 30 a very low status and was not taken very seriously by an athlete.
A survey made in 1969 on competitive volleyball and basketball at the interscholastic and intercollegiate level, revealed that volleyball lags far behind at every level. Eight hundred colleges in the United States sponsored basketball but only 13 supported volleyball.
The history of intercollegiate volleyball as revealed by USVBA Annual Guides, show that even as recent as 1975 or 1980, the number of colleges participating in annual intercollegiate volleyball competitions are very few in number.
More studies dealing with the history of inter collegiate volleyball appeared in the International
Volleyball Review. A survey conducted by a group of students at Springfield College showed that of all the
Northeastern area colleges in New England, New York,
New Jersey and Pennsylvania, as reported by Pead, there was only one college promoting a varsity team. The colleges providing a competitive volleyball program, mostly intramural, numbered forty six. Colleges providing
USVBA Annual Guide (1956), p. 112. ^^Donald S. Shondell, "Volleyball and Basketball- Are They Compatible," USVBA Annual Guide (1970), pp. 116- 117. 31 courses in volleyball numbered ninety, and sixteen colleges provided courses in advanced volleyball. Many colleges had volleyball as informal play. The survey indicated a demand for the sport but was played mostly at an intra mural or informal basis.Walters reported the first
Eastern Invitational Intercollegiate Volleyball Tourney, where six teams entered.Knabe reported the first intercollegiate tournament in the South, which was held at Tampa.
As reported by Wilson, the teams participating in the National Intercollegiate Championships were the
University of California (Berkeley), Whitter College,
The University of Southern California, College of Medical
Evangelists, Stanford University, Santa Barbara State and
Long Beach City College. The University of Southern
California became the first National Intercollegiate
The East?," International Volleyball Review (Vol. VII, No. 25 May 1948), p. l7.
^^M. L. Walters, "First Eastern Invitational Intercollegiate Volleyball Tourney," International Volley ball Review (Vol. VIII, No. 25 May 1949), p. 8.
^^Emest Knabe, "The Deep South," International Volleyball Review (Vol. VIII, No. 28 March-April, 1949),
^^Harry E. Wilson, ed., "Geographically We Expand," International Volleyball Review (Vol. VIII, No. 30 Nov. 1949), p. 4. 32
McClintick and McArthur also reported in 1950 on the progress of volleyball at the University of California at Berkeley, where the game was played on an intramural and intercollegiate basis. The University of California recognized volleyball as a minor sport with letters awarded three years ago. However, competition was limited as there were no other colleges in Northern California that recognized volleyball as an official sport. According to the report, the University of Connecticut, Rensselaer
Polytechnic Institute, Troy, N.Y., Cooper Union (N.Y.C.) in
the northeast, and Mercer University at Macon, Georgia,
Florida State University, Tallahassee in the deep south,
and Springfield College at Springfield, Massachusetts
all promoted good volleyball programs.
Data extracted from a national survey conducted by Edward B. DeGroot, Vice-President of USVBA, presented many facts about the intercollegiate volleyball.
Forty-one teams representing every section of the country and Mexico competed in four different divisions of the 1950 USVBA national championships.
More than forty colleges were represented by volleyball teams in intercollegiate or other 'outside' competition last year.
Robert E. McClintick and William R. McArthur, "Collegiate . . International Volleyball Review (Vol. VIII, No. 31 Jan. 1950), p. 22. 33
Volleyball was included in the men's intramural programs of 491 senior universities and colleges (approximately 70% of all senior colleges) in the country in 1949.25
Greenwood in the "Collegiate Department" of the
International Volley' Ball Review stated some conclusions resulting from its survey of college volleyball.
1. Volleyball is played as an intramural sport in most colleges.
2. Many colleges are unwilling at present to make it a varsity sport.
3. Most colleges are reluctant to pit their in experienced teams against tough opponents.
4. Most colleges are unwilling to add to their athletic budgets the expenses of an additional varsity sport.
5. Some college physical education men think that intramural athletics should be emphasized more than varsity sports.26
Further commenting on college voleyball, Greenwood stated many reasons why it was not well developed. A major reason was because more intense effort was devoted to football and basketball. At most colleges volleyball was a game played sloppily and half-heartedly by intramural teams for a few weeks a year. A few colleges that were trying to field a volleyball team for the entire season,
national Volley Ball Review (Vol. IX, No. 34 Nov-Dec 1950) p. 10. national Volleyball Review (Vol. XII, No. 47 Jan-Feb 1954), pp. 22-23. 34 not just for one tournament, were Springfield College in
Massachusetts, Cooper Union in New York City, Florida
State, George Williams College in Chicago, Earlham College in Indiana and Little Broom Tech in Binghamton, New York.
Greenwood felt that more colleges should get into this regular intercollegiate volleyball competition.^^
The International Volleyball Review reported the results of a college volleyball survey, which indicated that most colleges had some intramural volleyball but very few had intercollegiate teams. Questionnaires concerning their volleyball activities were submitted to several hun dred colleges, including at least one or two in each state.
Answers from a hundred and ten colleges showed that a hundred and two of them had some intramural volleyball and eight had none. Only five or six of these colleges had varsity volleyball teams. Of the colleges reported seventy-eight had intramural volleyball two months a year or less.^®
Greenwood, ed. "With the Colleges," Inter- _ national Volleyball Review (Vol. XIII No. 53 Mâÿ~T935), p. 62.
Greenwood, ed., "College Volleyball Survey," International Volleyball Review (Vol. XIV No. 54 Nov- Dec 1955), p. 6. 35 Heisler reported the results of a NCAA poll con ducted in January 1958, for the purpose of determining the interest in additional national championships. Volley ball was one of the sports included and seventy-five colleges expressed interest in a NCAA National Champion ship. The interest came from all parts of the country, both small and large institutions.^^
Jones commenting on intercollegiate volleyball in
1960, stressed that it was not progressing at all. Accord ing to him, the collegiate nationals in 1959, had only three schools participating. The financial support for off-campus volleyball was discouraging and very rarely was a new school converted to competitive volleyball. Intra mural volleyball in many colleges was not a reason for much hope, as the rules were so poorly understood, and ordinary intramural games had little resemblance to com petitive volleyball. "The question was not really why college volleyball was dying. It was instead a question whether intercollegiate volleyball ever existed in any real sense.
^^Ed Heisler, "Collegiate-Interscholastic," Inter national Volleyball Review (Vol. XVIII No. 70 Dec. 1959), p. S- ^^Keven Jones, "Why is Intercollegiate Volleyball Dying," International Volleyball Review (Vol. XVIII No. 72 April-May 1960), pp. 41-43. 36 Coleman reported that "getting volleyball accepted in the college is the greatest challenge in volleyball today." He also reported many excerpts from replies to this question of convincing the many physical educators and coaches to consider volleyball as a competitive sport.
Evans reporting in 1962 gave the results of a questionnaire from sixty-four selected colleges in the
United States, where forty-four questionnaires were re turned. Although by no means a complete picture of the whole country, this cross-section of schools gave some indication of those problems facing collegiate volleyball in the United States.
According to Evan's report, almost all schools that had volleyball played it on an intramural basis and taught it in physical education classes. Only six schools expressed a drive or interest in playing volleyball on an intercollegiate basis. The deciding factor was a lack of budget facilities to stand an intercollegiate sport.
Geddes reporting in 1963, observed that volleyball had enjoyed a dramatic progress in the past two years, and would continue to progress in the future, but would not
31Jim Coleman, "Footfaults," International Volley ball Review (Vol. XIX No. 74 Dec. I960), pp. 1Ü-19:
^^Gene Evans, "Volleyball Survey," Inteniational Volleyball Review (Vol. XXI No. 82 Nov-Dee 1962), p. 12. 37 however, emerge in a few short years as an international
power in volleyball. If volleyball was to achieve this
goal of international superiority, it needed to be well
established in institutions of higher learning.
In further reviewing the literature on the history
of intercollegiate volleyball in the U.S., the writer
found several journal articles related to the subject.
Friermood stated the origin of the game, the spread of
the game and the contributions of the various leaders, here and abroad. He referred to the advances made in the
schools and colleges, through the work of many able leaders and coaches. He presented the evidence of the growth of volleyball in the colleges.
Summary
Review of literature clearly indicated that the history of men's intercollegiate volleyball in the United
States is comparatively recent, its growth is slow, and
is not widespread. Although there was no direct scholarly work on the subject of the history of men's intercollegiate
David Geddes, "Open Letter to USVBA and College Officials," International Volleyball Review (Vol. XXVI No. 103 June-August), p. 60. ^^Harold T. Friermood, "Volleyball Reflections : The First 75 Years," (1895-1970), Journal of Physical Education 68: 35-6 (Nov. 1970), pp. 35-42. 38 volleyball, the literature in the Annual Guides, the Inter national Volleyball Review and the National Collegiate
Championship Handbook on Men's Volleyball carry a great
deal of historical evidence, which helps a researcher to
build its history. However, review of related literature
emphasized the need for more scholarly attempts to study volleyball. Chapter III
GROWTH IN VOLLEYBALL 1895-1949
The game of volleyball is comparatively new in
the colleges. Although it originated almost at the same
time as basketball, its growth was slow and did not
spread dramatically as did basketball.^
In its early days, volleyball had its greatest
growth in the YMCA. Not only was the game recognized as
a major sport of the YMCA, but the YMCA continued to be
its chief agent in the use and promotion of the game. The
YMCA played a leading role in bringing volleyball forward
as a competitive sport and in the development of the sta*-e
and national championships, and continued to be the chief
agent in the use and promotion of the game.^ The game had
a very rapid development in the YMCAs across the country,
and practically every state started its annual champion
ships . One of the major reasons for stimulating wide
spread interest in volleyball and the development of
^George L. Meylan, "Volleyball in the Colleges, USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1920), p. 21. ments," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1924-25), p. 7.
39 40 volleyball as a competitive sport was the national champion
ship tournaments started by the YMCA. The first national
YMCA tournament was held in Brooklyn, N.Y. in 1922 in which twenty seven teams were entered, and in the national
tournament of the subsequent year thirty two teams competed
in Chicago. This championships continued to be held
annually.^
A review of administrative changes too, shows the
developments that were taking place.
Until 1916, Young Men's Christian Association of
North America, revised the rules and published them in
the Athletic League Handbook^
In 1916, the rules were jointly issued by the two
bodies - YMCA and the National Collegiate Athletic Asso
ciation (NCAA).^ In 1922 YMCA and NCAA were joined by the Playground
Association and the Boys Scouts of America, to publish the
rules.®
George J. Fisher, ed. "Introduction," USVBA Offi cial Volleyball Guide (1923-24).
^Fisher, "Progress in Volleyball Administration," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1929-30), p. 7.
^Ibid.
^Ibid. 41
In 1922 and 1923, the National Amateur Athletic
Federation adopted them as their official rules.^
In 1925, the Army, the Navy and the Women's Divi
sion of the National Amateur Athletic Federation were added to the agencies participating in framing the rules.
The industrial organizations and high schools were repre
sented by a committee.®
From the period of 1922 to 1926, more changes were made in the rules than in any preceding or later period, as a result of national championships.^
While the public playgrounds, the backyards lots, the universities, the athletic clubs and the grammar and high schools have all done their share in bring ing the game up to its scientific level of today. Its meteoric rise, although not wholly, I believe, is largely due to the consistent sponsoring of the game by the Y.M.C.A. throughout the United States and foreign countries.10
"The game would never have made its rapid progress
in recent years if it had not been for the YMCA promotion.
'Ibid., P. 9.
®Ib'id.
^Ibid.
P. Thayer, "Volleyball as a Major Sport," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1928-29), p. 106.
^^Harry E. Wilson, ed., "An Eye to the Future, International Volleyball Review Vol. VII No. 23 (Jan. 1948), p. 5. 42 A significant event in 1928 was the formation of
the United States Volleyball Association (USVBA). The
USVBA continuing its affiliation with the National Amateur
Athletic Federation, announced that the YMCA national
championships would be made open. The interest in volley ball grew steadily and the game was advancing in two
directions, first as a sport informal in character for
all classes and both sexes, and second as a competitive
game recognizing highest skill and endurance.
The United States Volleyball Association (USVBA),
the governing body for volleyball in this country, strictly a voluntary organization, has grown tremendously in the past 30 years. It played a vital role in promoting volley ball in this country, by uniting all organizations which promote volleyball, by aiding the members in their efforts
to increase participation, by educating the players and the public, by adopting, formulating and publishing the rules
of the game, by promoting state, regional and national
tournaments and by representing the interest of volleyball
in relation to other national and international organiza
tions .
^^George J. Fisher, "Progress in Volleyball Admin istration," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1929-30), p. 9.
^^"United States Volleyball Association," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1933), p. 6. 43
In 1949, the USVBA sponsored the first National
Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball Tournament along with the
other national tournaments, conducted by the USVBA.
In 1970 the Men's Collegiate was discontinued be cause the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) colleges were sending teams to their own championship events. The USVBA Collegiate Committee reinstated the Men's Collegiate Division in 1971 pri marily for two-year colleges and unaffiliated four- year colleges. The USVBA holds clinics throughout the country and sends teams abroad to play in major international volleyball events.
Volleyball in the Colleges
The interest in volleyball grew steadily in the
colleges and occupied an important place in the program of prescribed physical education courses, but did not figure
in the intercollegiate competition. Meylan reported games and tournaments between classes or various departments.^^
Some had intercollegiate matches arranged exclusively for
staff members. The development of volleyball as an intra mural activity was prominent indicating its suitability in
the physical education program as an intramural sport.
^^Allen E. Scates, Winning Volleyball (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972), p. 13.
^^George L. Meylan, "Volleyball in the Colleges," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1922-23), p. 25. Many colleges in the West and East experienced this develop ment.^^ Some college activity in volleyball was becoming
important in the Pacific Coast Conference. Some of the
Pacific Coast institutions also used volleyball as an
intramural activity. The first college invitational tour nament was held by Oregon Agricultural College in March
1 9 2 5 . The University of Illinois started volleyball in
1922, first centering the effort to teach the techniques
to the members of the freshmen classes, in required physical education classes, and organizing an intramural volleyball league among the student organizations. By
the end of the fourth year, they had seventy-four student
teams, with a total membership of about five hundred.
one of the sports from the very beginning of the intra mural program at George Williams. Volleyball was taught
for many years in the regular physical education program.
Because of this there was a great deal of enthusiasm in
inter-fratemity, inter-class and all-campus leagues when
N. Messer, "Volleyball in the Colleges," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1924-25), p. 11.
^^W. A. Kearns, "Volleyball in the Pacific Coast," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1925-26), p. 87.
^®S. C. Staley, "Volleyball at the University of Illinois," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1927-28), p. 149. aspect of the game up to this time was its development on an informal basis, to be played by tens of thousands of people of all ages and of both sexes. Although the game showed a continual progress on an informal basis, it did not show progress as a competitive game, except the teams that participate at the USVBA nationals, consisting largely of YMCA players. The teams representing other agencies were still rare. Although college players have played volleyball at an informal level for some time, they have not yet realized its competitive aspect.
It is unfortunate that colleges of the country have not participated in the game of volleyball more fully. The game is now forty years old and yet we have signally failed to realize its wonderful poten tiality, both as a form of recreation and as a mode of competition.21
It took many years for the colleges to gain varsity
status for volleyball. By 1947-1948, volleyball as an
intercollegiate sport made a very modest beginning. The universities that started sponsoring the teams at the be
ginning were:
sports at Williams College enjoy Volleyball for thrill of Competition," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1933), p. 74. ^^William J. Cromie, "Volleyball in College," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1935-1936), p. 41. The University of California
Temple University, Philadelphia, Pa.
Springfield College, Mass.
University of Washington
Hamline University, Minn.
Amherst College, Mass.
One of the first colleges to place volleyball on a varsity team basis was the Florida State University. Volley ball was made a major sport, on equal status as other major sports such as football.
The University of California, under the full time coach Lance Flanagan, had a strong varsity team from the ng.23
The University of Chicago and Purdue University had some matches. The Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas reported a great deal of interest in volleyball on a class, intramural and club basis. The University of
Washington had volleyball on a minor sports basis for about
12 years
sities," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1949), p. 54.
^^Ernest Knabe, "Flashes from the Deep South," International Volleyball Review, Vol. VII No. 24 (March 1948), p. 8.
^^Ibid., p. 6. ^^M. L. Walters, "A Report on Collegiate Volley ball," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1949), p. 55. 47
The Springfield College of Massachusetts had a re birth of volleyball. The game became a required sport and later included as an intercollegiate sport.
A survey of all the Northeastern area colleges in
New England, New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania by a
Springfield College Group under the direction of Charles
Pead, revealed the following facts about the interest in volleyball.
The research on college volleyball in February
1948, showed the following.
(1) Colleges promoting a Varsity volleyball team- 1, Temple University.
(2) Colleges providing a competitive volleyball program (mostly Intramural Competition) - 46 Namely: Amherst, the Association Colleges of New York, Bates, Bloomsburg STC, Bucknell, Buffalo, Carnegie Tech, The City College of New York, Clarion STC, Clark University, Colby, Colgate, Columbia, Univ. of Connecticut, Cortland STC, Dartmouth, East Stroudsburg STC, Fitchburg STC, Franklin and Marshall, Fredonia STC, Gettysburg, Grove City, Hamilton, Haver- ford, Hobart, Indiana (Pa.) STC, Lafayette, Lincoln Univ., Lock Haven STC, Univ. of Maine, M.I.T., Middlebury, Millersville STC, New Hampshire, New Jersey STC, Oneonta STC, Penn State, R.P.I., Rhode Island State, Univ. of Rochester, Susquehanna, Swarthmore, Syracuse, Temple Univ. of Vermont, Williams.
^^M. L. Walters, "Reports," International Volley ball Review, Vol. VII No. 23 (Jan. 1948), p. 22. 48 (3) Colleges presenting courses in volleyball in physical education program: (A) Teaching skills in volleyball-90 (B) Advanced coaching in volleyball-16
(4) Colleges permitting informal play-72.
(5) Colleges maintaining inter-club or fraternity competition-39.
(6) Colleges lacking volleyball of any sort-13. Namely: Brown, Holy Cross, Le Moyne College, New York Univ., Niagara Univ., Penn Military College, Rider, St. Peter's Siena, Tufts, Upsala, West Chester STC, Yale.
(7) Colleges having coed or women's group participation-12.2o
The first intercollegiate volleyball tournament
in history, the Northern California Intercollegiate Volley
ball, was won by the University of California who became
the first official Northern California Intercollegiate
Volleyball Champions on May 26th 1949.^^
the East," International Volleyball Review, Vol. VII N6.25 (May 1948), p. 17.
^^Tom Cotter, "University of California Wins Northern California Intercollegiate Volleyball Title I" International Volleyball Review, Vol. VII No. 22 (Nov. 1947), p. 24. 49
The first Eastern Intercollegiate volleyball tournament was held at Springfield College, Mass. on
April 23, 1949. The teams that participated were Spring field Collège, Mass., Rennselleer Polytechnic Institute of Troy, New York, Columbia University, New York, Darth- mouty, N.H., Cooper Union of New York, and the University of Connecticut. Springfield College won the championship by beating Rennselleer Poly. Tech.
The other colleges who reported volleyball in various stages of developments were the following:
The University of Arkansas had a course on volley ball for university students and also for high school classes. In the Pacific Northwest, Washington State
University and Western Washington College of Education has made progress not only in class work but in intramurals and teams participating in Northwest tournaments. The
University of Wyoming had strong intramural teams competing inl949. Students enrolled for volleyball classes in the
1948-49 academic year were about two hundred and ten.
Graceland College conducted a very ambitious volleyball program. Grinnel College of Iowa held the Amateur Athletic
Union Tournament, and placed 2nd in the State Class "C".
The University of Wichita, Kansas held the West Central Y
^^"College Volleyball," USVBA Official Volley ball Guide (1950), pp. 39-40. 50 Tournament. The University of Nebraska had 62 teams, with 765 players and conducted 475 matches. Bloomsburg,
Pa. State Teachers held many tournaments for high schools and held the State YMCA Tournament. Stanford University had volleyball at the club level and played other colleges.
The University of Chicago had a varsity team of an un official nature. The University of Washington was one of the first colleges to recognize volleyball as an inter collegiate sport in the west. They promoted a team from
1934.
The first National Collegiate Volleyball Champion ship conducted by the USVBA, along with the YMCA-Open
Tournament was held in 1949 and continued every year until the NCAA and NAIA colleges started their own champion ships in
Summary
Volleyball had a slow growth in the colleges at the beginning. The progress was more at an informal level rather than on competitive level. In its early days the greatest growth of volleyball was with the YMCA. Many
colleges had strong popular intramural participation. It
took many years for colleges to reach an intercollegiate
competitive level in volleyball.
^^"College Volleyball," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1950), pp. 39-46. Chapter IV
INTERCOLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL 1949-1970
After volleyball was played for many years as an intramural and recreational sport in colleges, it slowly evolved to become a highly competitive game. The first
National Collegiate Tournament, conducted by the United
States Volleyball Association (USVBA) was held in 1949.
Eight teams participated. Because of the travel cost, it was mainly an all California collegiate affair. The
University of Southern California won the first champion ship.
In the same year the Eastern Intercollegiate
Volleyball Tournament was held at Springfield College,
Massachussetts. The Rennselleer Polytechnic Institute of Troy, New York, Columbia University, New York, Dart mouth College, New Hampshire, Cooper Union of New York and the University of Connecticut were the colleges participating.
The other colleges that had fielded teams either intramural or giving instructions in volleyball, were the
University of Arkansas, Washington State University,
51 52
Western Washington College of Education, University of
Wyoming, Washington University of St. Louis, Graceland
College, Iowa, Grinnell College, Iowa, University of
Wichita, Kansas, University of Nebraska and Bloomsburg,
Pennsylvania State Teachers. All had some development in volleyball. Stanford University, although they had not yet recognized volleyball as a varsity intercollegiate
sport, had a club team which played with other colleges.
Volleyball was popular in the University of Florida.
The University of Miami, University of Tampa and Florida
Southern College all had strong intramural teams and had participated in the Florida State Tournaments and in itnercollegiate matches.
Florida State University, under their director
H. G. Danford,had a progressive team. The University of
Cincinnati had initiated an intramural league. The Univer sity of Chicago had great success with intramural volley ball and also had a varsity team of an unofficial nature.
Purdue University promoted a vigorous intramural program and held an invitation collegiate tournament. Texas A &
M University had a great deal of interest in volleyball on a class, intramural and club team basis. The Univer
sity of Minnesota had no intercollegiate volleyball but had intramural tournaments in the fall and winter. Williams
College in Williamstown (Mass.) had an intense inter-
fratemity volleyball league for many years. The University 53
of Washington was one of the first colleges in the West
to recognize volleyball as an intercollegiate sport and
maintained a team since 1934. Springfield College had
volleyball at the club level and did their best to pro mote the game.l
In 1949, volleyball was not played on a high
competitive level nationally.^
The University of Southern California (USC) de
fended their collegiate championship title in 1950. Seven
teams contested and the only section of the country not
represented was the northwest and the strong University
of Washington. The University of Mexico, the runner up proved that they had diversity of style, better training
and coaching, and was more advanced than the United
States teams. Southern California lost to Mexico, but
came from the loser's bracket to win the championship.
The other colleges and universities that participated were Springfield College from Massachusetts, College of
Medical Evangelists from California, Florida State Univer
sity, University of Tennessee and Earlham College of Rich mond, Indiana.3
^"College Volleyball," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1950), pp. 39-46.
2lbid., p. 103. 3"International Collegiate Tournament," USVBA Offi cial Volleyball Guide (1951), pp. 38-40. 54 The second annual Eastern College Tournament was held at Springfield Memorial Field House in April 29,
1950. The tournament was won by Springfield, with Columbia
second. University of Connecticut third and Amherst College
finishing fourth.4
The other colleges in the northwest that were
assuming recognition towards this goal for intercollegiate
volleyball were the College of Puget Sound, Reed College,
Portland University, Lewis & Clark, Multnomah College,
Washington State and the University of Idaho.^
Interest in intercollegiate volleyball in the
South grew, with Florida State University taking the lead.
F.S.U. was the only university in Florida to offer
volleyball as a varsity sport. The University of Florida
and Flordia Southern College fielded very formidable
volleyball teams. The other colleges that had progressive
teams but not yet at intercollegiate level were the
University of Tennessee, University of Alabama, Univer
sity of Georgia, Georgia Tech, Mercer and Howard C o l l e g e . 6
In the College Tournament of 1951, Universidad
de Mexico captured the college crown. Springfield College,
^Ibid., p. 49.
5lbid.
^Ibid., p. 51. 55 came second and Earlham College third. The other colleges that participated in the tournament were Florida State and Dartmouth College, New York.7
The third annual Eastern Collegiate Tournament was held at Springfield College on April 28, 1951. The teams that participated were Springfield "A" and "B", Cooper
Union, University of Massachusetts and University of
Connecticut. The strong Columbia University and Dartmouth teams had to withdraw at the last minute. The champions were Springfield "A” and "B".^
In the Midwest, on March 10, 1951 at Richmond,
Indiana, three college tournaments were held together:
Midwest Intercollegiate, Hoosier Conference and Indiana Collegiate.9
In the south, Florida State University, under
William T. Odeneal proved to field a top varsity team. It was the first college team ever to win an Open Regional
Tournament, the Mid-Southern Championship.^10
^Viggo Nelson, "International Collegiate Tourna ment," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1952), pp. 45-48.
Sibid., p. 81.
Ibid., p. 82.
10.'ibid., p. 83. 56
The University of Mexico won the Collegiate
Championship for the second straight year in 1952, The other teams that participated were Springfield College,
Mass., George Williams College, 111., Earlham College,
Ind., Florida State University and The Ohio State Univer sity. 11
On April 28, 1952 at the University of Pittsburgh, the first collegiate volleyball tournament was held with
Geneva, Carnegie Tech, Slippery Rock State Teachers,
California Teachers, Duquesne and the University of
Pittsburgh taking part. Carnegie Tech was the champion in this Tri-State Collegiate Tournament.
The first N.Y. State College Tournament was held at Binghampton with six college teams participating.
Springfield College "A" finished first, while N.Y. Tech
"A" came second and Cooper Union third.1^
The 1953 National Collegiate Championships were held in Omaha, Nebraska with seven teams in the College
Division. The University of California at Los Angeles
(UCLA), Earlham College, Waseda University, (Japan),
George Williams College of Chicago won their places in
^^"International Collegiate," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1953), pp. 48-49.
^^Ibid., p. 92.
l^Ibid., p. 93. 57 order. The other teams participating were Florida State,
Iowa State Gold and Iowa State.
The 1953 Eastern College Volleyball Tournament was held at New York State Tech, and Springfield College,
Carnegie Tech, State Tech, Cooper Union and Oswego S.T.C. won thier places in o r d e r . 15
"The Colleges of the northwest have been slow to take up volleyball as an intercollegiate s p o r t . "15
The Second Tri-State Intercollegiate Volleyball
Tournament was held at the University of Pittsburgh on
April 11, 1953. Seven teams competed. The University of
Pittsburgh was the winner with Carnegie Tech, the last year's winner, as runner up.17
In 1952, varsity status was awarded for volleyball at Cooper Union, N.Y.18
The most important volleyball event in Florida
Region in 1954 was the inaugeration of the first South eastern Intercollegiate Tournament.1^
^Gene Jensen, "1953 National Volleyball Cham-14& pionships," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1954), pp. 32-39:
l^lbid., pp. 148-149
^^Ibid., p. 152.
17lbid., p. 153.
ISlbid., p. 155.
l^"Region Six" USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1955), p. 61. 58
The Stan Bown Intercollegiage Volleyball Tournament was held on Saturday March 27 and Saturday April 3, 1954.
This was sponsored by Broome County Technical Institute,
Board of Governors of I.B.M. County Club and Binghampton
Junior Chamber of Commerce.
Results of Section A. Round Robin of 2 game matches. 1. George Williams College, Chicago, 111., 2. Carnegie Tech, Pittsburgh, Pa., 3. and 4. Cooper Union, New York, N.Y., and University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa., 5. and 6. Cortland State Teachers College, Cortland, N.Y., and Broome Tech, Binghampton, N.Y.
Results of Section B. Round Robin of 2 game matches. 1. Carnegie Tech J.V., 2. Cortland S.T.C,, 3. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, N.Y., 4. and 5. Oswego State Teachers College, Oswego, N.Y., and Broome Tech J.V.
Results of Section C. Double Elimination of 3 game matches. 1. R.P.I., 2. Cortland S.T.C., 3. Harpur (given second place trophy because Cortland won second place in Section B), 4. Phi Gamma Delta, Colgate University, Hamilton, N.Y. , 5. Kappa Delta Rho, Colgate, 6. Broome Tech Freshmen, 7. University of Scranton. Scranton, Pa., 8. Siena College Loudon- ville, N.Y. 20
Tucson, Arizona YMCA was the host to the 1954
National Volleyball Championships. This included five collegiate teams, four from California and one from the
University of Arizona, that battled for the collegiate title. The teams from California were the University of
California, Los Angeles, University of Southern California,
20Roy Greenwood, "Report of Stan Bown Inter collegiate Volleyball Tournament," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1955), p. 99. 59 College of Medical Evangelists Los Angeles and Loyola
University of Los Angeles. The University of California,
Los Angeles (UCLA) won the championship, with the Univer sity of Southern California (USC) being second. The
Tournament missed the past high ranking teams such as
Florida State, George Williams College, Earlham College and Springfield.
Oh February 27, the first Southeastern Inter collegiate Volleyball Tournament was conducted at David son College, Davidson, N.C., Florida State University,
University of North Carolina, University of South
Carolina, Davidson, Appalachian State and Jacksonville
State teams competed. Florida State University won the tournament without losing a g a m e . 22
Cooper Union College, in its second year at the varsity level, played in the Eastern Intercollegiate
Stan Bown Tournament held in Binghampton, N.Y. and placed third.
L. Walters, "Collegiate Division," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1955), pp. 134-135.
22r^Ibid., p. 102.
23Ibid., p. 103 60
In 1955, the National Volleyball Championships were
held in Oklahoma City, and in the College Division there were six well balanced teams. They were the College of
Medical Evangelists, Los Angeles, Florida State University,
Tallahassee, George Williams College, Downers Grove, 111.,
Central State College Group from Edmund, Oklahoma and the
University of Oklahoma. The Collegiate Division was won
by Florida State University, with the College of Medical
Evangelists (Los Angeles) placing second and George
Williams (Chicago) placing third.
In 1956, the National Volleyball Championship was
held at the Seattle Y.M.C.A. The Collegiate Division had
three teams from the West Coast Conference ; the Univer
sity of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), Stanford Univer
sity and the University of Washington. Seattle Pacific
College and the Florida State University were the only
teams not from the West Coast Conference. The Collegiate
Championship was won by UCLA, with Stanford placing second
and Florida State third. The University of Washington was
fourth and Seattle Pacific College was fifth.
Official Volleyball Guide (1956), pp. 133-135.
^^Chuck Shlosser, "1956 National Volleyball Championships," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1957), p. 124. 61
The 1957 National Volleyball Championships were hosted by the Memphis YMCA. The Collegiate National Cham pionship was contested by the University of Kansas, Law rence, George Williams College, 111., Union College, N.Y.,
Le Moyne College, N.Y., Florida State University, Florida,
Washington University, St. Louis, Earlham College, and the University of Tennessee. The Championship was won by
Florida State University. George Williams College placed second and the University of Kansas placed third.
The 1958 National Volleyball Championships were held in Scranton, Pennsylvania on May 7-10, 1958. The
Collegiate National Championship was won by Florida
State University, second place was won by the University of Kansas, and Washburn University was third. Other teams participating were the University of Pittsburgh, Cooper
Union Academy, University of Scranton, Broome Technical
College, Earlham College and George Williams College.
Volleyball at this time was progressing as an inter collegiate sport.
^^Phillip B. Salton, "The 1957 National Volleyball Championships, Collegiate Division," USVBA Official Volley ball Guide (1958), pp. 116-117.
^^Howard Stitzer and Headley Hagen, "1958 National Volleyball Championships," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1959), pp. 111-117. At present the Collegiate Division is one of the most popular divisions of the U.S. Volleyball Asso ciation National Championships.
Some of the live-wire places where modern volley ball 'is going to college' are: UCLA, Florida State, University of Kansas, University of Southern Califor nia, George Williams, Earlham, University of Pitts burgh, Penn State, University of Scranton, Ohio State, Cooper Union, Springfield Iowa State, Broome Tech, Washburn, University of Mexico, Cornell, Emory, University of Pennsylvania, University of Minnesota, Colgate, Carnegie Tech, U. U. Air Force Academy, West Point Military Academy, Lehigh, University of Califor nia at Berkeley, Stanford, Long Beach State, College of Medical Evangelists, College of Pacific, San Jose State, San Francisco State, California Institute of Technology, Occidental, Stockton Junior College, Modesto Junior College, Royal Canadian Military College, College Militare Royal de St. Jean, Toledo University, Western Reserve, Louisiana State, Drake, Colorado University, Denver University, Colorade A. & M., University of Minnesota, Washington and Lee, William and Mary, Virginia Polytech, University of Virginia, Hampden-Sydney, Richmond, Virginia Military Institute, Allegheny, Westchester State Teachers, Potsdam Teachers, Harpur College, Oneonta Teachers, Mitchell, Oswego Teachers, Union, Queens College of New York, Rensselaer Polytech, Colorado School of Mines, University of Tennessee, University of Washington at St. Louis, Le Moyne, Moravian, Delaware, Howard Junior College- Texas, University of Kentucky, University of Louisville, University of Washington, Dartmouth, Long Beach City College, Santa Barbara Teachers, Waseda University of Tokyo-Japan, City College of New York, New York University, Brooklyn College, Columbia, Whittier, Graceland, University of Massachusetts, University of Connecticut, Ball State Teachers, Fordham, Pomona- Claremont College, and University of Texas.28
Florida State University dropped volleyball as an intercollegiate sport in 1957. It was considered as an
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1959), pp. 141-142. 63 intercollegiate sport with full status for about ten years.
FSU had a team in 1957-1958 but the team was not on a varsity basis. It was dropped mainly because they could not play a collegiate schedule. FSU made many attempts to create interests in varsity competition among southern colleges, but was not very successful. Only one Southern
Intercollegiate tournament was conducted at Davidson
College in 1954 and was won by FSU. The first intercol legiate volleyball match ever held in Louisiana was played between FSU and LSU in 1955.
There was a tremendous rise of volleyball interest at Michigan State University in 1957-58, due to the inter est of the physical education department, intramural direc tor, students and the experience given by YMCA teams. The rapidly growing Volleyball Club at MSU was planning to par ticipate in the next 1958-59 Collegiate Division of the
National Championships.
The University of Kansas had a second place finish in the Collegiate Division of the 1958 National Champion ships.^^
^^Ibid., pp. 142-144.
^^Ibid., p. 146. 64
The University of Washington had a successful
varsity volleyball team in 1958, but its biggest drawback was the lack of college competition.^^
During the 1957-58 Collegiate season, the Cooper
Union participated in a long schedule by playing in the
National Championships and also in four intercollegiate
tournaments.
The 1959 National Volleyball Championships, along with the Collegiate Division, was held in Des Moines,
Iowa, on May 6-9, 1959. Burton stated "the Collegiate
Division showed some good play, but here was our weakest
tourney.It was won by George Williams College, with
the University of Kansas and Michigan State University placing second and third.
Dallas, Texas was the site of the 1960 National
Volleyball Championships along with the Collegiate Divi
sion. George Williams College, Chicago, 111. repeated its
championship. The Polytechnic Institute of Mexico City
gave strong competition. The only other U.S. team entered
^^Ibid., p. 147.
^^Ibid., p. 148. ^^Roger G. Burton, "1959 National Volleyball Cham pionships," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1960), p. 120.
^^Ibid., p. 127. 65 was Kansas University, the fourth being another Mexico
City team, the Teachers Institute. As last year, there were few colleges competing in this tournament.
The 1961 National Volleyball Championships along with the Collegiate Division was held at Duluth, Minnesota,
Eight teams participated, the largest in several years.
Santa Monica City College won the championship. George
Williams College of Chicago was second.
The intercollegiate Volleyball season in California in 1961 was one of the biggest seasons, with nineteen colleges competing. Southern California experienced three intercollegiate tournaments. Thé fourth Annual Valley
College Tournament had eight teams, the first Annual
San Fernando Valley State College Tournament had eight teams and the Santa Monica City College Invitational Tour nament had thirteen teams. The 1961 Far Western Champion ships held at Alameda NAS California was the climax of the season, with the six strongest college teams joining competition. The level of play was very high in California
^^Roger G. Burton, "1960 National Volleyball Championships," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1961), pp. 121-123. ^^Burton, "Report of the National Volleyball Tournament," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1962), pp..83-88. 66 in the 1961 season, which was well demonstrated by the
first four finishers, Santa Monica City College, San Diego
State College, San Jose State College and UCLA.
The formation of the Midwest Intercollegiate Volley ball Association by seven schools that met on February 4,
1961 was an important development towards more competitive volleyball at the intercollegiate level. Ball State
Teachers College, Detroit Institute of Tech, Earlham
College, George Williams College, Michigan State University,
Ohio State University and Wittenburg College were the colleges that formed the Midwest Intercollegiate Volleyball
Association.
Two Collegiate teams that had uninterrupted inter
collegiate competition in the Northwest were the Univer
sity of Washington and the University of British Coliraibia 40 teams.
Intercollegiate Volleyball in California saw fur
ther developments in 1962. Some twenty colleges fielded
E. B. DeGroot, "The 1961 Intercollegiate Volley ball Season in California," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1962), p. 100.
^^Ibid., p. 101.
^°Ibid., p. 104. 67 teams in four closed intercollegiate tournaments. There were more colleges than in 1961. The UCLA and University of California Berkeley were joined by teams from Univer sity of California at Santa Barbara and two teams from the
University of California at Riverside, to make four of the seven campuses of the University of California having teams in intercollegiate tournaments - a good lead by the
University of California. At this time volleyball had achieved varsity sport status at UCLA, San Jose State and
Santa Monica. The other improvement was in the general calibre of play, each university fielding stronger teams.
This was well shown by the many college teams that placed high in open tournament standing against YMCA, clubs and military teams and many colleges sponsoring open and college tournaments in 1962.^^
The Midwest Intercollegiate Volleyball Tournaments too showed good improvement. George Williams College successfully won the championship, by defeating Ball State
University. The Conference, which was divided into a
Northern Division and a Southern Division was represented by the following standing for 1961-62.
California," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1963), p. 84. 68 Northern Division S outhern Divi s ion
1. George Williams 1. Bail State College 2. Witternburg 2. Michigan State 3. Earlham 3. Lansing College 4. University of 4. Detroit Tech. Kentucky
5. Calvin College 5. Indiana Tech. College
Four teams from MIVA entered the College Division of the National Championships in 1962. Santa Monica Com munity College was the champion. George Williams was second, Ball State third, Wittenburg fourth and the
University of Kentucky tied for fifth.
In the 1962 season of play, the University of
Washington won the Far Western Canadian Tournament, hosted by the University of British Columbia.
The 1963 National Collegiate Championship was held on March 8-9 at San Antonio, Texas. There were seven
teams competing.
^^Ibid., p. 86. 69 1. Santa Monica 5. Mexico Polytechnic
2. UCLA 6. George Williams College
3. Whittenburg College 7, Valley College, Van Nuys
4. Texas University (California)
The championship was won by Santa Monica City
College, defeating UCLA.^^
The University of Washington Varsity Volleyball
Team continued their progress and Completed the season with a 17-2 record. They also competed in a University of British Columbia sponsored tournament and the Portland
Oregon YMCA Volleyball Fellowship Invitational Tournament.
The 1964 USVBA National Collegiate Volleyball
Championships were held at the U.S. Air Force Academy,
Colorado Springs, Colorado on May 22-23, 1964. The teams that participated numbered thriteen; a record. There were five from California, three from the Midwest, two from Mexico, two from Colorado and one from Utah. Santa
Monica City College won its fourth National Collegiate
Championship and UCLA was second, San Diego was third
P. Burroughs, "USVBA Volleyball Championships and Pan American Tryouts," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1964), pp. 81-87.
^^Ibid., p. 99. The formation of the Southern California Inter collegiate Volleyball Association in 1964 was another indication that interest in Collegiate Volleyball was improving, especially in the California region. In an invitational tournament conducted by the Southern Califor nia Intercollegiate Volleyball Association, the teams placed in the following order :
1. ÜCLA 1st place 4. Loyola University
2. SMCC 1st place 5. SMCC 2nd place
3. UCLA 2nd place 6. UC Riverside^^
In order to encourage wider participation of four year colleges and universities, a junior college volley ball association was formed in 1965.^®
In the Midwest Intercollegiate Volleyball Asso ciation (MIVA) Tournament, held on May 9 at Muncie, In diana, Ball State University ended George Williams
College's three year domination by dropping the defending champions two straight games in the finals. The 1965
Intercollegiate participants of the MIVA Tournament were the following:
46,E. B. DeGroot, "College Volleyball," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1965), pp. 95-97. 71 1. Ball State University
2. Earlham College
3. George Williams College
4. Ohio State University
5. Indiana Institute of Technology^^
The 17th National Collegiate Championship was held in 1965 at Omaha, Nebraska. The University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) with comparative ease defeated
Santa Monica City College (SMCC) to win the championship.
Many strong teams were from California, UCLA, Santa
Monica, San Diego and Loyola University. The University of California at Santa Barbara was a new comer ; as was the University of Kentucky. There were three teams from
Mexico-National Teachers of Mexico City, the University of Mexico and National Poly of Mexico. The other teams in the championship were George Williams, Ball State and Brigham Young University (Hawaii).
"Varsity Volleyball in Western Colleges, particu
larly in the California area, has become an important part of their athletic program.
^^Ibid. ^°Bob O'Neal, "UCLA Stops SMCC Skein at Four," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1966), pp. 85-86. 72
The Midwest Intercollegiate Volleyball Champion ship in 1965 had the participation of Ball State Univer sity, Ohio State University, George Williams College and
Earlham College, Ball State won the championship and
Ohio State placed second.
In 1966, the National Collegiate Championship was won by Santa Monica City College (California) defeating
UCLA. Brigham Young University (Hawaii) came third. The other teams that participated in the championship were
Ball State, Mexico Teachers, University of Southern
California and Ohio State University.
In the Midwest Intercollegiate Volleyball Champion ship in 1966, Ball State University defended their championship by defeating George Williams College. Ohio
State University was third. The others that participated were Earlham College and University of Toledo, Ohio.^^
Twelve teams participated in the National Collegiate
Championships in 1967, held at Detroit, Michigan. Again the championship went to the University of California at
^^Ibid., p. 93.
"National Coll Official Volleyball Guide (1967), pp. 94-95. 54t 73
Los Angeles (UCLA) and second was Santa Monica, another
California team. Other strong teams from the Midwest were Ohio State, Ball State and Earlham College.
The 1968 Collegiate Championship was won by San
Diego State College, which was its first national volley ball championship in the history of the collegiate divi sion. This ended a seven year domination of the event by Santa Monica (five titles) and UCLA (two titles).
Second place was won by Church College of Hawaii, with the University of Santa Barbara placing third.
Ball State University won the Midwest Inter collegiate Volleyball Championship in 1968, and this was its fifth straight win. George Williams, Ohio State,
Earlham, Valparaiso, Indiana Tech, Illinois, Kentucky,
Toledo, Indiana and Michigan State all participated.^^
More progress on Intercollegiate Volleyball was seen by the formation of the National Association of
Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) in 1967 for the promo tion of Intercollegiate Volleyball. NAIA established a
^^"National Collegiate Championship," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1968), p. 93.
^^Don Shondell, "1968 Collegiate Championship," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1969), p. 94.
^^Ibid., pp. 135-136. 74 "3-year Program," with a view to conduct an annual NAIA
Volleyball Championship by 1969-1970.
The 21st National Collegiate Championship in 1969 was won by the University of California at Santa Barbara
(UCSB). UCLA was second and Church College of Hawaii was third. Teams that participated were the following:
1. California State, Long Beach, Calif.
2. Ball State University, Muncie, Ind.
3. Brigham Young University, Hawaii
4. University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA)
5. Earlham College, Richmond, Ind.
6. Santa Monica City College, Calif.
7. University of Tennessee, Tenn.
8. Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
9. Kansas University, Kansas
10. San Diego State University, Calif.
11. West Point, United States Military Academy, N.Y.
12. Church College of Hawaii^^
George Williams College of Downers Grove, 111. hosted the first National Association of Intercollegiate
^^Rick Ervin, "1969 Collegiate Championships," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1970), pp. 114-115. 75 Athletics (NAIA) Volleyball Championship on May 2nd and
3rd, 1969. This was the first national intercollegiate
volleyball tournament ever sponsored by a national collegiate
governing body. Earlham College, Richmond, Indiana won
the championship, with Indiana Tech., Fort Wayne, Ind.
finishing second.
The field was composed of four Area champions, two Area runner-ups, and the host institution. The top seeded teams were Earlham College (Area IV) and the University of Califomia-San Diego (UCSD) (Area I) . Other seeded Area champions were West Georgia College (Area V) and Graceland College (Area II). Rounding out the field were Indiana Tech, Whittier College and host George Williams College.
The first National Collegiate Volleyball Champion
ship conducted by the National Collegiate Athletic Asso
ciation (NCAA) was hosted by the University of California,
Los Angeles (UCLA) on April 24-25, 1970.^^
The Midwest Intercollegiate Volleyball Association
league and play off crown in 1969 was won by Ohio State
University by defeating Ball State University. The teams
participating were: 76
1. Illinois (Chicago) 4. Ohio State University
2. George Williams, 5. Earlham College, Downers Grove Indiana
Ball State University 6. Indiana Tech, Indiana ' Fort Wayne, Ind. 62
The Southern California Intercollegiate Volleyball
Association (SCIVA) Title in 1969 was won by the Univer sity of California, Santa Barbara, At the beginning of the season it appeared that any team. University of Cali fornia at Santa Barbara (UCSB), San Diego State (SDS),
University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and Cali fornia State College Long Beach (CSCLB), was capable of winning the championship. But UCSB defeated UCLA to be come the champion,
The University of California, Los Angeles won the first NCAA Crown in volleyball in 1970,
The second annual NAIA Volleyball Championship on April 29 and 30, 1970 was won by the University of
ship,” USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1971), p,116. 77
The Midwest Intercollegiate Volleiyball Association
(MIVA) Title in 1970 was won by Ball State University arid
Michigan State University. Ball State won the league divi
sion and Michigan won the tournament division. Chapter V
INTERCOLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL 1970-1981
Introduction
There has been a phenomenal growth of inter collegiate sports in the United States in the past few decades. But one cannot say the same thing about the growth of men's intercollegiate volleyball. Not only is the game of volleyball comparatively new in the colleges, but it also has not shown a dramatic growth as has basket ball. For many years colleges played volleyball of an informal and recreative nature. It took some years for volleyball to gain real momentum as an intercollegiate sport. As a result, volleyball has a recent and short history at an intercollegiate level.
National Collegiate Men's Volleyball
The National Collegiate Athletic Association v(NCAA) decided to hold a national championship for volleyball for the 1969-70 academic year.^
^A1 Scates, "NCAA, NAIA and DGNS Volleyball," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1969), p. 132.
78 Determination of Participants Tournament Structure. The National Collegiate Men's Volleyball Championship provides for a single-elimination tournament, com prising four teams.
Selection of participants for the championship is by region, with the following NCAA districts making up the regional alignment : East Region-Districts 1, 2, and 3; Midwest Region-Districts 4, 5 and 6, and and West Region-Districts 7 and 8.
One team will be selected from each of the West, Midwest and East Regions ; and one team will be selected at large.^ (See Appendixes for a listing of institutions that sponsor men's intercollegiate volleyball.)
National Championships in Three Divisions. The NCAA conducts national championship competition in each of three divisions for its active institu tional membership. Each institution is afforded the opportunity to select its division through the process of self-determination except in the sport of football. Currently, members are Division I, Division II and Division III. Members that have designated Division II or Division III may elect to compete in Division I in any sport except football or basketball. In the sport of fencing, skiing, indoor track, rifle, volleyball and water polo, a single National Collegiate Championship is conducted, for which all NCAA member institutions are eligible. In any sport in which championship is not offered for Division III, those member institutions are eligible to compete in the Division II championships. In addition to the 19 National Collegiate Champion ships , 13 national championships are conducted in Division II and 11 in Division III for a total of 43 NCAA championships.3
^National Collegiate Championship Handbook, (Men's Volleyball) NCAÀ (Shawnee Mission, Kansas: April 1981), p. 10.
^National Collegiate Championship Handbook, 1980-81 Dates and Sites, NCÂÀ, (Shawnee Mission, Kansas: Sept. 1980). 80
The first National Collegiate Volleyball Champion- ship was conducted by the NCAA, on April 24-■25, 1970 with the University of California, Los Angeles as1 the host institution.
Teams Participating Results of Winners
Univ. of Calif, at UCLA 1 Los Angeles (UCLA)
Calif. State College UCLB 2 at Long Beach (UCLB)
Univ. of Calif, at UCSB 3 Santa Barbara (UCSB)
Ball State Univ. Ball State 4^ Muncie, Indiana
At the Second NCAA Volleyball Championship held at UCLA on April 23-24, 1971 the East, Midwest and West were represented.
Teams Participating Results of Winners
Univ. of Calif, at UCLA 1 Los Angeles (UCLA)
Univ. of Calif, at UCSB 2 Santa Barbara (UCSB)
Ball State Univ. Ball State 3 Muncie, Indiana
Springfield College Springfield 45 Massachusetts
^A1 Scates, "The First NCAA Volleyball Champion ships," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1971), pp. 115-116.
^John Sandbrook, "UCLA Captures NCAA Crown," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1972), pp. 101-102. 81
The Third NCAA Volleyball Championships were held on April 29, 1972, at Ball State University, Muncie, In diana.
Teams Participating Results of Winners
Univ. of Calif, at UCLA 1 Los Angeles (UCLA)
San Diego State San Diego 2 University State
Ball State Univ. Ball State 3 Muncie, Indiana
Univ. of Calif, at UCSB 46 Santa Barbara (USCB)
The Fourth NCAA Volleyball Championship was held at San Diego State University. UCLA was missing for the first time in the four years that the championship had been held.
Teams Participating Results of Winners
San Diego State San Diego 1 Univers ity State
Long Beach State Long Beach 2 University State
Ball State Univ. Ball State 3 Muncie, Indiana
Army (From the Army 47 Eastern Collegiate)
"Ron Lemasters, "1972 NCAA Volleyball Title to UCLA," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1973), pp. 127-128.
^"1973 NCAA Volleyball Title to San Diego State," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1974), pp. 133-134. 82 The Fifth NCAA Volleyball Championship, held on
May 11, 1974 was won by the University of California at
Los Angeles.
Teams Participating Results of Winners
Univ. of Calif, at UCLA 1 Los Angeles (UCLA)
Univ. of Calif, at UCSB 2 Santa Barbara (UCSB)
Ball State Univ. Ball State 3 Muncie Indiana
Springfield College Springfield 4^ Massachusetts
The Sixth NCAA Volleyball Championship held on
May 9-10, 1975 was won by the University of Southern
California.
Teams Participating Results of Winners
Univ. of Calif, at UCLA 1 Los Angeles (UCLA)
Univ. of Calif, at UCSB 2 Santa Barbara (UCSB)
Ohio State Univ. Ohio State 3 Columbus, Ohio
Yale University Yale 49 Connecticut
“"1974 NCAA Volleyball Title to UCLA," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1975), pp. 117-118.
9"1975 NCAA Volleyball Title to UCLA," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1976), p. 126. The Seventh NCAA Volleyball Championship was held at Ball State University on April 30-May 1 , 1976.
Teams Participating Results of Winners
Univ. of Calif, at UCLA 1 Los Angeles (UCLA)
Pepperdine Univ. Pepperdine 2 Malibu, Calif.
Ohio State Univ. Ohio State 3 Columbus, Ohio
Springfield College Springfield 4IO Massachusetts
The Eighth NCAA Volleyball Championship held on
May 6-7, 1977 was won by the University of Southern
California to become the second winner of an NCAA title other than UCLA.
Teams Participating Results of Winners
Univ. of Southern use California
Ohio State Univ. Ohio State Columbus, Ohio
Pepperdine Univ. Pepperdine Malibu, California
Rutgers-Newark, Rutgers-Newark New Jersey
10"1976 NCAA Title Again to UCLA," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1977), p. 133.
11"1977 NCAA Title to USC," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1978), p. 142. The Ninth NCAA Volleyball Championship held on
May 5-6, 1978 was won by Pepperdine University.
Teams Participating Results of Winners
Pepperdine Univ. Pepperdine 1 Malibu, California
Univ. of Calif, at UCLA Los Angeles
Ohio State Univ. Ohio State Columbus, Ohio
Rutgers-Newark, Rutgers-Newark 4^^ New Jersey
The Tenth NCAA Volleyball Championship held on
May 4-5, 1979 was won by UCLA, to come to the top spot for the first time since 1976.
Teams Participating Results of Winners
Univ. of Calif, at UCLA Los Angeles
Univ. of Southern USC California
Rutgers-Newark, Rutgers-Newark
Ball State Univ. Ball State a 13 Muncie, Indiana
The Eleventh NCAA Volleyball Championship held on
May 9-10, 1980 was won by the University of Southern
California (USC).
12"1978 NCAA Title to Pepperdine," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1979), p. 146. 13.11979 Title to UCLA," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1980), p. 106. Teams Participating Results of Winners
Univ. of Southern USC 1 California
Univ. of Calif, at UCLA 2 Los Angeles
Ohio State Univ. Ohio State 3 Columbus, Ohio
Rutgers-Newark, Rutgers- 414 New Jersey Newark
The Twelfth NCAA Volleyball Championship held on
May 8-9, 1981 was won by the University of California at
Los Angeles.
Teams Participating Results of Winners
Univ. of Calif, at UCLA 1 Los Angeles (UCLA)
Univ. of Southern USC 2 California (USC)
Pennsylvania State Penn State 3 University
Ohio State University Ohio State 4 Columbus, Ohio
National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA)
An important advancement for college volleyball was made by the National Association of Intercollegiate
Athletics (NAIA) at the International Relations Committee, by unanimously agreeing that volleyball be recognized
14m 1980 NCAA Championship Won by USC," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1981), p. 130. 86 and encouraged in NAIA colleges, and that a National
Tournament be organized to help in this p r o m o t i o n . 15
The first national intercollegiate volleyball
tournament ever sponsored by a national collegiate govern
ing body was the first NAIA volleyball championship sponsored by George Williams College, Illinois, on May
2-3, 1969. The tournament was composed of seven teams.
Four area champions - Earlham College, Richmond, Ind.
(Area IV), the University of California, San Diego (USCD)
(Area I), West Georgia College, (Area V) and Graceland
College, (Area II), two area runner-ups, Indiana Tech,
Whittier College, and host George Williams College.
"The seven team double elimination tournament was won by
Earlham College with Indiana Tech. finishing second.
The University of California San Diego in La
Jolla, California was the host institution for the second annual NAIA Volleyball Championship on April 29 and 30,
1970. Six teams competed. The tournament was won by
UCSD, La Jolla, California. The second was Indiana Tech.,
Fort Wayne, Indiana and George Williams, Downers Grove,
111. third. Teams that contested were:
Jerre i-McManama, "Collegiate Volleyball NAIA Recognizes Volleyball," Official Volleyball Guide (1966), pp. 90-91. ^^JerreMcManama, "Earlham College Wins National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) National Volleyball Championships," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1970), pp. 128-130. 87
Indiana Tech., Fort Wayne.(Area 6)
University of California, San Diego (USCD) (Area 1)
George Williams, Downers Grove, 111. (Area 6)
Graceland College, Lamoni, Iowa (Area 2)
Whittier College, Whittier, California (Area 1)
U. S. International University, San Diego, Calif. (Area 1)17
The Third Annual NAIA Volleyball Tournament held at Texas Weslyan University and the University of Dallas on April 23-24 was won by Church College of Hawaii by dethroning the University of California, San Diego. In diana Tech was second and George Williams College was third. The teams participating were:
Church College, Hawaii
University of California, San Diego, California
Indiana Tech, Fort Wayne, Indiana
George Williams College, Downers Grove, 111.
Graceland College, Lamoni, Iowa
University of Dallas, Texas
^^Dennis Keihn, "USCD Wins NAIA National Volleyball Championship," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1971), p. 117.
^®Glen Davies, "Church College Triumphs in NAIA Tourney," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1972), pp. 103-104. The Fourth Annual NAIA National Volleyball
Championship, held at Graceland College, Lamoni, Iowa, on April 29-30 was won by Church College, Hawaii. The five teams that contested were:
Graceland College, Lamoni, Iowa
Church College, Hawaii
Earlham College, Richmond, Indiana
Indiana Tech, Fort Wayne, Indiana
George Williams College, Downers Grove, 111.
Observers rated this the best tournament in NAIA's short volleyball history. An all tournament team was selected to represent the NAIA at the USVBA's National
Tournament and Olympic Volleyball trails, at Salt Lake
City on May 3-6, 1972. 19
The NAIA's Sixth National Volleyball Championship was played at George Williams College on May 3-4, 1974.
The teams participating and their winning positions were as follows :
George Williams College,Illinois 1st
Church College of Hawaii 2nd
Graceland College, Iowa 3rd
Gallaudet College, Washington D.C. 4th^^
19"church College Captures NAIA Crown," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1973), p. 130.
^^"George Williams College Captures NAIA Crown," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1975), p. 118. 89
The Seventh Annual NAIA National Volleyball
Championship played at Earlham College on May 8-9, 1975 was won by California State College at Dominguez Hills.
This was their first NAIA National Championship victory in their history. The teams participating and their winning positions were as follows:
California State College at Dominguez Hills 1st
Brigham Young University, Hawaii 2nd
George Williams College, Illinois 3rd
Graceland College, Iowa 4th
Earlham College, Indiana 5th^^
The Eighth Annual NAIA National Volleyball
Championship was held at Rock College in Kansas City on
April 29 - May 1, 1976. The teams participating and their winning positions were as follows:
Graceland College, Iowa 1st
Rutgers-Newark, New Jersey 2nd
Brigham Young University, Hawaii 3rd
Earlham College, Indiana 4th
California State College at D.H. 5th
^^"Cal. State at Dominguez Hills Wins NAIA Crown," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1976), pp. 126-127. 90 George Williams College, Illinois 6th
George Mason University, Va. 7th^^
The Ninth Annual NAIA Volleyball Championship held at Lamoni, Iowa was won by George Williams College of Downers Grove, Illinois, by beating the defending champion, Graceland College. The teams participating and their winning positions were as follows :
George Williams College, Downers Grove, II. 1st
Graceland College, Lamoni, Iowa 2nd
Brigham Young University, Hawaii 3rd
Nyack College, Nyack, N.Y. 4th
George Mason University, Fairfax, Va. 5th
Earlham College, Richmond, In. 6th^^
The Tenth Annual NAIA Volleyball Championship was held at George Mason University, Fairfax, Va. The teams that participated and their finishes were as follows :
George Williams College, DownersGrove, II. 1st
Graceland College, Lamoni, Iowa 2nd
Brigham Young University, Hawaii 3rd
22 "Gracelandtin College Wins 1976 NAIA," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1977), p. 134.
23"George Williams College Wins 1977 NAIA," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1978), p. 143. 91 California Lutheran College 4th
George Mason University, Fairfax, Va. 5th^4
The Eleventh Annual NAIA Volleyball Championship was held at Richmond, Indiana at Earlham College in April
1979. The teams that participated and their records were
as follows :
Graceland College, Lamoni, Iowa 1st
George Williams College, Downers Grove, 111. 2nd
Earlham College, Richmond, Ind. 3rd
George Mason University, Fairfax, Va. 4th^5
United States Volleyball Association (USVBA)
National dollegiate volleyball. In 1949, USVBA started its National Collegiate Volleyball Championship and con
tinued it yearly until they were discontinued in 1970, because the National Association of Intercollegiate
Athletics (NAIA) in 1969 followed by the National Collegi ate Athletic Association (NCAA) in 1970 had organized
collegiate championships for their members. However, the
USVBA Collegiate Committee reinstated the Men's Inter
collegiate Division in 1971. This was primarily for two
2^”George Williams College Wins 1978 NAIA," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1979), p. 147.
25"i979 NAIA Title To Graceland," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1980), p. 106. 92 year colleges and unaffiliated four-year c o l l e g e s .
USVBA intercollegiate volleyball championships.
Year Teams Entered Winners
1971 Santa Monica City College 1st Santa Monica
U.S. Military Academy, 2nd West Point West Point, N.Y.
Pennsylvania State Univ. 3rd Penn. S t a t e ^ 7
Harper College
1972 Santa Monica City College 1st Santa Monica
Stanford Univ., Calif. 2nd. Stanford
Long Beach Calif. College 3rd Long Beach
El Camino College, Calif.
Brigham Young Univ., Hawaii
U.S. Air Force Academy, Colo.
West Point Military Academy, N.Y,
Orange Coast (forfeit)^®
1973 (Information unavailable)
1974 University of Calif, at Santa Barbara, Calif. (UCSB) 1st UCSB
El Camino College, Calif. 2nd El Camino
^^Allen E. Scates, Winning Volleyball (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972), p. 13.
27"collegiate Division," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1972), pp. 94-95. 28"23rd USVBA National Collegiate Championships," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1973), pp. 116-117. Year Teams Entered Winners
1974 (Con't) U.S. Military Academy, 3rd U.S. Mili- N.Y. tary Academy^^ Western Illinois Univ., 111.
University of Tennessee, Tenn.
1975 California State Univ. Long Beach, Calif.
Calif. State University, Northbridge, Calif.
Graceland Coll., Lamoni, Iowa
Long Beach City Coll., Calif.
Pepperdine University, 1st Pepperdine Malibu, Calif.
Univ. of Calif, at Santa 2nd UCSB Barbara, Calif.
El Camino College, Via 3rd El Camino Torrance, Calif.
Penn State University, Penn.
Rice University, Texas
Santa Monica City Coll., Calif.
SDEC, San Diego, Calif.
Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1975), pp. 114-115.
^®"26th USVBA National Collegiate Championship Pepperdine University," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1976), pp. 124-126. 94
Year Teams Entered Winners
1976 Penn. State, Pennsylvania 1st Penn State
Kellogg Community College 2nd Kellogg Mich.
Rice University, Texas 3rd Rice Univ.
Cornell University, N.Y.
Tulane University, La.31
Summary
The National Collegiate Athletic Association
(NCAA), and National Association of Intercollegiate
Athletics (NAIA), played a leading role in recent years
(1970-1981) in organizing intercollegiate volleyball.
NAIA National Tournaments in volleyball continued from
1969 to 1979. The 1976 National Collegiate championship was the last one to be sponsored by the USVBA. The NCAA continues from 1970, but selects one team to represent
West, Midwest and East regions and one team selected at large.
3^"27th USVBA National Collegiate Title to Penn State," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1977), pp. 131- 133. Chapter VI
CURRENT STATUS OF MEN'S INTERCOLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL
Introduction
Volleyball as a competitive sport at the inter
collegiate level has shown slow progress historically.
For many years it was played in the institutions as a
recreative sport. In 1949 the United States Volleyball
Association (USVBA) sponsored the first National Men's
Intercollegiate Volleyball Tournament, and continued until 1970. USVBA discontinued them because the NAIA in
1969, followed by the NCAA in 1970 had organized collegiate
championship for their members. However USVBA reinstated
them primarily for two year colleges and unaffiliated four
year colleges. The 1976 National Collegiate Championship was the last one to be sponsored by the USVBA. The
National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) held their championships from 1969 to 1979 only. The
National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) which
started their championships in 1970, still continues
them yearly.
95 96 General Picture in the Country
VIhile almost every college or university sponsors highly competitive sports, there are a few colleges or
universities that sponsor volleyball. Table 1 shows a
list of states along with the total number of colleges,
that sponsor college athletics and women's and men's volleyball programs in each and their total for each col
lege. (See Appendix D for a list of states in alphabeti
cal order, along with the institutions that sponsor volleyball.) Table 1 clearly shows that the colleges which sponsor volleyball are proportionately very few.
The state of California in the West, occupies the most
important place with 36 colleges sponsoring volleyball,
out of a total of 57 colleges that sponsor athletics.
The other states in the West are not even close to Cali
fornia. Out of 14 colleges in Washington, only 5 sponsor volleyball. Oregon with 17 colleges, only have 8 that
sponsor volleyball. The picture in the South too is not
satisfactory. Texas occupies an important place with 21
colleges that play volleyball, out of a total of 49 col
leges . Louisiana has 6 colleges that play volleyball out
of 17 colleges. In the state of Mississippi there are
only 2 colleges that play volleyball out of a total number
of 14 colleges. In the East, too, a dominant state cannot
be located. With a total of 83 colleges, in the state of Table 1
States Showing No. of Colleges (C), No. of Colleges With Women's (W) Volleyball Programs, Men's (M) Volleyball Programs And Total Number in Each State (T)
State (C) (W) (M) (T) State (C) (W) (My (T)
Alabama 21 3 2 5 Montana 9 1 2 3 Alaska 2 0 1 1 Nebraska 15 3 4 7 Arizona 5 0 1 1 Nevada 2 0 0 0 Arkansas 15 2 5 7 New Hampshire 10 0 2 2 California 57 4 32 36 New Jersey 22 1 7 8 Colorado 13 3 2 5 New Mexico 8 3 2 5 Connecticut 16 1 4 5 New York 83 9 16 25 Delaware 4 0 0 0 North Carolina 37 6 14 20 Dist. of Col. 9 2 4 6 North Dakota 7 2 1 3 Florida 24 2 5 7 Ohio 49 10 16 26 Georgia 26 1 5 6 Oklahoma 21 1 1 2 Hawaii 5 0 4 4 Oregon 17 1 7 8 Idaho 7 2 2 4 Pennsylvania 77 1 26 28 Illinois 51 3 16 ■ 19 Rhode Island 7 : 1 1 2 Indiana 37 4 10 14 South Carolina 20 : 4 7 11 25 4 7 11 South Dakota 14 : 1 6 7 Kansas 22 2 4 6 Tennessee 38 : 2 6 8 Kentucky 21 . 2 . 4 6 Texas 49 • 2 19 21 Louisiana 17 1 5 6 Utah 6 0 3 3 Maine 16 1 1 2 Vermont 9 1 2 3 Maryland 16 5 4 9 Virginia 32 2 8 10 Massachusetts 40 2 8 10 Washington 14 1 4 5 Michigan 39 4 9 13 West Virginia 17 0 6 6 Minnesota 25 2 6 8 Wisconsin 28 3 6 9 Mississippi 14 0 2 2 Wyoming 1 0 0 0 Missouri 33 5 8 13 98
New York, only 25 colleges play volleyball. In the state of New Jersey only 7 colleges out of a total of 23, sponsor volleyball. In North Carolina out of a total of 37 col leges, 20 sponsor volleyball and in South Carolina 11 colleges out of a total of 20 sponsor volleyball. In the
Northern states : Montana has 3 colleges out of 9, North
Dakota 3 colleges out of 7, Minnesota 8 colleges out of
25, Wisconsin 9 colleges out of 28 and Michigan 10 out of 39. The Central and Midwest states that sponsor volleyball are Illinois with 18 colleges out of 51,
Missouri with 13 colleges out of 33, Indiana with 6 colleges out of 37. The state of Ohio is dominant with
24 colleges sponsoring volleyball out of a total of 49 colleges.
NCAA Member Institutions That Sponsor Volleyball
This list of colleges that sponsor volleyball be comes still narrower when the National Collegiate Athletic
Association (NCAA) member institutions that sponsor volleyball are considered. Table 2 gives the NCAA Division I member insti tutions that sponsored men's intercollegiate volleyball in 1981. Table 3 gives the NCAA Division II member insti tutions that sponsored men's intercollegiate volleyball in 1981. 99
Table 2
NCAA Division I Member Institutions That Sponsor Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball 1981
District 6 Harvard University Arkansas State University Providence College Lamar University Louisiana Tech University District 2 Northeast Louisiana University Texas, University of Cornell University George Mason University District 7 Pennsylvania State University Pennsylvania, University of Hawaii, University of Pittsburgh, University of San Diego State University Princeton University Rutgers University, Newark District 8 California, University of District 3 (Los Angeles) E. Tennessee State University California, University of Tennessee, University of (Santa Barbara) W. Carolina University Long Beach, California State University District 4 Loyola Marymount University Pepperdine University Ball State University Santa Clara, University of Cincinnati, University of Southern California, Univer
Ohio State University sity of Toledo, University of Stanford University Table 3
NCAA Division II Member Institutions That Sponsor Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball 1981
District 1 District 3 Bridgeport, University of Coppin State College Bryant College Sacred Heart University District 8 Springfield College California, University of 9 (Riverside) uistrict z California Polytechnic State Dowling College University (San Luis Obispo) E. Stroudsburg State College Northridge, California State Maryland, Univ. of E. Shore University U.S. Merchant Marine Academy
Table 4 gives the NCAA Division III member insti tutions that sponsored men's intercollegiate volleyball in
1981. (See Appendix E for a list of colleges in all the
Divisions I, II, III, for the years 1975, 1976, 1977,
1978, 1979 and 1980.) Table 5 is a summary, showing the states that sponsored the men's intercollegiate volleyball in 1981, with the number of NCAA member colleges in each state.
Table 6 is a summary, showing the states that sponsored men's intercollegiate volleyball in 1981, with the number of NCAA member colleges in each state in Divi sion II. 101
NCAA Division III Member Institutions That Sponsor Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball 1981
Massachusetts, Univ. of Gallaudet College Boston North Carolina, Univ. of Westfield State College (Greensboro)
District 2 District 4 Allegheny College Heidelberg College Cortland, State Univ. College Illinois College Herbert H. Lehman College Indiana Univ.-Purdue Univ. InterAmerican University (Fort Wayne) New Jersey Institute of Tech. Mount Union College New Paltz State Univ. Coll. Puerto Rico, University of District 6 Queens College Ursinus College Bishop College
Calif., Univ. of San Diego Calif., Univ. of Santa Cruz
Table 5
NCAA Division I Member Institutions By States 1981
District 1 District 3 District 6 Massachusetts 1 Tennessee 2 Arkansas 1 Rhode Island 1 N. Carolina 1 Texas 2 Louisiana 2 District 2 District 4 District 7 New York 1 Indiana 1 Virginia 1 Ohio 3 Hawaii 1 Pennsylvania 3 California 1 New Jersey 2 District 5 None District 8 California 8 NCAA Division II Member Institutions By States 1981
District 1 District 2 District 3 Connecticut 2 New York 2 Maryland 1 Rhode Island 1 Pennsylvania 1 Massachusetts 1 Maryland 1 District 4,5,6 ,7 (None) District 8 California 8
Table 7 is a summary, showing the states that sponsored men''s intercollegiate volleyball in 1981, with the number of NCAA member colleges in each state in Divi- sion III.
Table 7
NCAA Division III Member Insitituions By States 1981
District 1 District 3 District 5 Massachusetts 2 Washington D.C. 1 (None) North Carolina 1 District 2 District 6 District 4 Pennsylvania 2 Texas 1 New York 4 Ohio 2 Oregon 1 Illinois 1 District 8 Puerto Rico 2 Indiana ^ California 2 103 Table 8 shows all the states that sponsored (NCAA)
men's intercollegiate volleyball in 1981, in Division I,
II, and III. It also shows the number of colleges having
athletics in each state, and also the number of colleges
that play volleyball as a sport.
There are very few states with colleges that
sponsor men's intercollegiate volleyball in the United
States. The state of New York has 83 colleges involved
in athletics, and of those 25 colleges where volleyball is
a sport, only one college sponsored volleyball in the
NCAA Division I, two colleges in Division II and three
colleges in Division III. The state of Massachusetts with
40 colleges involved in athletics and 10 playing volley
ball as a sport, has only one college sponsored NCAA men's volleyball in Division I. one college in Division II
and two colleges in Division III. Pennsylvania with 77
colleges involved in athletics and 23 colleges where
volleyball is a sport had 3 colleges in NCAA Division I,
one in Division II and 2 colleges in Division III. New
Jersey with 38 colleges having athletics and 8 colleges
playing volleyball as a sport sponsored NCAA men's
volleyball in 2 colleges only in Division I. The only
state well represented in all three divisions is the state
of California. Out of a total of 57 colleges of athletics,
there are 36 colleges that play volleyball as a sport. Table 8
States That Sponsored Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball In Division I, II, and III, 1981 Along With The Colleges Of Athletics And Volleyball In Each State
States 1981 No. of Coll. "No. of ______Having Coll. With Div Div Div Athletics Volleyball I II III
New York 83 19 Massachusetts 40 10 Rhode Island 7 2 Virginia 32 10 Pennsylvania 77 28 New Jersey 23 Tennessee 38 North Carolina 37 20 Indiana 37 14 Ohio 49 26 Arkansas 15 7 Texas 49 21 Hawaii 5 4 California 57 36 Louisiana 17 6 Connecticut 16 5 Maryland 16 Oregon 17 Washington D.C. 14 5
, Illinois 51 19 105 There are 9 colleges in the NCAA Division I, 3 in Divi sion II and 2 colleges in Division III. The states of
Ohio, Indiana and Illinois from the Midwest with many colleges playing volleyball as a sport are not very well represented as colleges sponsoring volleyball in the NCAA men's volleyball tournaments. The state of Ohio with 49 colleges having athletics and 26 colleges playing volleyball sponsored 3 colleges in Division I and 2 colleges in Division III. Indiana had 1 college in
Division I and 1 college in Division III. Illinois sponsored one team only in Division III.
District 5 had no sponsors in any Division in
1981. There was none in District 4, 6 , and 7 in Division
III.
Two states from the South, Texas and Louisiana too do not sponsor NCAA men's volleyball on a large scale.
Texas with 49 colleges of athletics and 21 colleges playing volleyball as a sport, had 2 colleges in Division I and one college in Division III. Louisiana had 2 colleges in Division I and had no representation in
Division II and III.
NCAA Acceptance And Its Present Day Role
Since 1970 the NCAA has conducted the men's intercollegiate volleyball championships. Many facts are revealed by the present structure and organization of the NCAA Annual Championships Tournaments.
The National Collegiate Men's Volleyball Champion ship provides for a single-elimination tournament, comprising four teams. Selection of participants for the championship is by region, with the following NCAA districts making up the regional alignment: East Region-Districts 1, 2 and 3; Midwest Region-Districts 4, 5 and 6 , and West Region-Districts 7 and 8. One team will be selected from each of the West, Midwest and East Regions ; and one team will be selected at large.^
The NCAA Volleyball Championships have been dom inated by the Western Region of the United States since itsorigin. The University of California, Los Angeles
(UCLA) won the championship in 1970, 1971, 1974, 1975,
1976, and 1981. UCLA did not compete in 1973 and the championship in that year was won by San Diego State
University. The winner in 1977 and 1980 was the Univer sity of Southern California (USC). The winner in 1978 was
Pepperdine University. Ball State University of Muncie,
Indiana appeared in all the five championships from
1970-1974, representing the Midwest Intercollegiate
Volleyball Champion. Ball State appeared again in the championship tournament in 1979.
^1981 National Collegiate Men's Volleyball ham^ionship Handbook (Shawnee Mission, Kansas: NCAA 1981), 107 Ohio State University appeared as a noteworthy
Midwest power in 1975, and continued its participation in
1976, 1977, 1978, 1980, and 1981. Ohio State was the only team to reach the finals as an outside team other than California. Springfield College of Massachusetts participated in the championship tournament in 1971, and
1974 and again in 197.6- The only recent newcomer to the tournament, from the East is the Rutgers University of
Newark, N.J., who participated in 1977, 1978, 1979 and
1980. The recent winner that appeared from the East as the
Eastern Collegiate Champion is Pennsylvania State Univer sity.
In all these years of existence from 1970 to 1981, the Intercollegiate Men's Volleyball Championship was won by the teams from the West - a team from the State of
California. For this single elimination tournament, comprising four teams, the selection of participation for the championship is by region. East Region - comprising of Districts 1, 2, and 3, was represented by Springfield
College in 1971, 1974 and in 1976. In 1975 the East was represented by Yale University, and from 1977 to 1980 by
Rutgers University. In 1981 the East was represented by Pennsylvania State University. Although sufficient competition is provided, the colleges in the East, do not experience the year round experience gained by the colleges 108 in California. Many colleges in the West made up of
District 7 and 8 , are made of very strong teams, as a result of the year round experience, and the play in the sea beaches.
One team that will be selected at large has always been from California, because of the strength of the teams.
The Midwest Region comprising Districts 4, 5, and 6 includes colleges in Indiana, Ohio, Arkansas, Texas and Louisiana. However, the representation for the last few years at the NCAA Championships had been either Ohio
State or Ball State.
In 1952 Howard Danford of Florida State University asked Walter Byer, the Executive Director of NCAA to have
NCAA sponsor a National Championship. William Odeneal told NCAA member schools to locate those schools who would sponsor a team. Fifty replies indicated intent but only
■six schools would definitely enter.^ In another survey conducted by the NCAA in 1968, 40 member schools were interested in or already fielding an intercollegiate volleyball team. There were thirteen schools who were willing to host the NCAA National Volleyball Championships.'
^William Odeneal, Response to Questionnaire, April 30, 1981. ^"NCAA Survey," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1968, p. 110. 109 The survey made by the NCAA indicated that there were
more schools to join in a NCAA Men's National Volleyball
Championship, than in 1952. NCAA selected UCLA to serve
as the host institution for the first National Collegiate
Volleyball Championship in 1970, and only 8 teams partici
pated.^
Sanction of volleyball as an intercollegiate
sport by the NCAA is a major reason for the development
of the sport at an intercollegiate level. The NCAA has
organized annual championships, and thereby given prestige
and status to the game. There was a significant develop ment since the NCAA sanctioned volleyball as a competitive
intercollegiate sport.^ In recent years this development
has levelled off. The main reason is the tightness of
the college budgets. In colleges more money is spent on major sports - football, baseball and basketball. Volley
ball is not a major sport.^
'^"NCAA to conduct first collegiate volleyball championship at UCLA," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1970), p. 130. ^A1 Scates, UCLA Coach, Personal Interview, Columbus, Ohio, April 4, 1981.
^Bill Neville, U.S. National Men's Coach, Personal Interview, Columbus, Ohio, April 4, 1981. 110 The NCAA has organized the annual championships since 1970, and thereby given prestige and status to the game, but has not done anything for the wider spread of the game nationally. The NCAA has not developed volleyball.
All it does is to host the annual championships.^ There is no significant development in men's volleyball at the intercollegiate level in recent times. The NCAA's accep tance has given due legitimacy, exposure, and publicity to the game, but has not given an impetus for many schools to adopt volleyball as major sport.^ The NCAA's accep tance of the sport is only one factor for the growth, but was not the deciding factor.^ Men's intercollegiate volleyball has not developed that much - still a pitiful number of colleges/universities play the game on a varsity level. The NAIA and the NJCAA have both cancelled their programs. The truth is there are not more than 15 to 18 colleges that field a university team. I don't think there has been any development at all.
^Taras Liskevych, Volleyball Coach UOP, Personal Interview, Columbus, Ohio, April 3, 1981.
^Dough Beal, National Coach, Personal Interview, Columbus, Ohio, Feb. 28, and April 4, 1981.
^Russ Rose, Volleyball Coach, Penn State Univer sity, Personal Interview, Columbus, Ohio, April 3, 1981.
^^Glen G. Davies, Executive Director, USVBA, Response to Questionnaire, April 30, 1981. Ill Table 9 shows the number of colleges that sponsored
NCAA volleyball from 1975 to 1981. Figures for 1975 to
1976 show an increase of colleges that participated in all the divisions.
Table 9
NCAA Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball Championships from 1975-1981
Year Division I Division II Division III
1975 27 (M) 13 (M) 27 (M) 1976 35 (M) 18 (M) 39 (M) 1977 16 (M) 31 (W) 6 (M) 42 (W) 11 (M) 54 (W) 1978 66 (M) 50 (M) 85 (M) 1979 33 (M) 16 (M) 38 (M) 1980 29 (M) 16 (M) 34 (M) 1981 31 (M) 12 (M) 20 (M)
In 1977, the men’s teams were considerably reduced because of the increase of women's programs that are shown in all divisions. The figures for 1978-1981 very clearly show the number of men's programs have decreased. Figures further indicate that the NCAA has not been able to give wider recognition to the game. The selection of the participants for the championship was by region in which
one team represents each region - West, Midwest, East and 112
one team selected at large. It is a single elimination
tournament comprised of four teams. It is a very narrow
selection. Table 10 shows the selection of teams.
Table 10
NCAA Men's Intercollegiate Teams Representing Regions
East Region 1 Team Districts 1 2 3
Midwest Region 1 Team Districts 4
6
West Region 1 Team Districts 7 8
One Team will be selected at large.
The championship has been dominated by the Western
Region since its origin. In the Midwest representation has been either Ohio or Ball State, while in the East it has been Springfield in 1971, 1974 and 1976. A recent newcomer from the East is Rutgers of Newark, who partici pated in 1977, 1978, 1979 and 1980, and a very recent
Eastern champion is the Pennsylvania State University.
The NCAA has given publicity and prestige to the
game. All the games from 1974 were televised by ABC
Television. Volleyball is given local and national 113 publicity in this national championship. Like other com petitive sports, NCAA Volleyball Championships are well organized under the control, direction, and supervision of a NCAA Volleyball Committee, The NCAA was not a factor in the game until 1970's and even now touches very little except for national events. It has a limited number of teams, mostly concentrated in California with a few small areas in the Midwest and on the East Coast, Volleyball still has a great deal to do to indicate that it is uni versal among the NCAA member institutions, It does not receive the attention of other major sports because it is not yet a revenue sport. When volleyball can enjoy that status then and only then will the NCAA be a moving force in volleyball,
The role played by the United States Volleyball
Association (USVBA) is an important force for the develop ment of intercollegiate volleyball. It was the USVBA which kept collegiate men's volleyball alive when the
NCAA and NAIA were not active in the field,
The first intercollegiate national volleyball championships for men were conducted by the United States
Response to Questionnaire, April 5, 1981,
^^Albert M, Monaco, Jr., Executive Director, USVBA, Response to the Questionnaire, May 26, 1981, 114
Volleyball Association in the early 1950's, having first been conceived in the late 1940's. Although college personnel were very active in this, the only national level outlet for volleyball was through the USVBA. It was mostly the small schools that played volleyball and they were not members of the NCAA.
The Collegiate Division established by the USVBA in 1949 continued for 27 years until 1976. During these years, many college teams participated from all parts of the country and developed many players for later open
Olympic Acceptance
The majority of the persons who were interviewed and also those who responded to the questionnaire agreed that acceptance of volleyball as an Olympic sport in 1957 was a significant factor for the development of volleyball a t the intercollegiate level. According to them, this acceptance had a positive effect, making volleyball more visible and attractive, with a definite goal for the young players to aim at. It aided to popularize volleyball as
^^Sharpless, Response to the Questionnaire.
^^Edward B . DeGroot, Jr., Former Coach Santa Monica City College, Response to the Questionnaire, June 22, 1981. 115 an acceptable competitive sport for men. This brought a tremendous advancement on the development of the sport.
It definitely enhanced the sport and upgraded its status.
Since 1946, continued effort has been made to in clude volleyball in the Olympic Games, by several leaders in this country who worked consistently for the inclusion of volleyball in the Olympic Games. There were leaders from the other countries too in the Olympic movement,
In 1957, volleyball was approved as an Official Olympic team sport by the International Olympic Committee at its meeting in Sophia, Bulgaria. It took eleven years of in tensive work on the part of the USVBA to achieve this status. Although accepted in 1957, volleyball was un veiled as a full-fledged Olympic sport only after the
International Olympic Committee (IOC) assigned it a place on the program of 1964 Tokyo Olympics.Table 11 shows the results of the men's volleyball championships at the
Olympics since 1964.
^^Tom Hay, DeGroot, Peter Dun, Don Shondell and Others, Response to the Questionnaire. Doug Beal, John Ketchman, Gary Colberg, Betty Baxter, Bill Neville, Russ Rose, A1 Scates, Don Shaw, Liskevych, Sue Gozansky, Karl Dunlap and Others, Personal Interviews.
Edmund Welch, "Volleyball Makes Olympics," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1959), p. 152.
^^Harold T. Friermood, "Olympic Volleyball," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1971), p. 133. Table 11
Results of the Men's Volleyball Championships At Olympics Since 1964*
Winner Place Year Gold Silver Bronze
Japan 1964 USSR Czechoslovakia Japan
Mexico City 1968 USSR Czechoslo vakia Munich Get. Demo. (W. Get.) 1972 Japan Rep. (GDR)
Montreal 1976 Poland USSR Cuba Moscow 1980 USSR Bulgaria__ Romania *Sources: Olympic Games 1980, Eds. Lord Killanin and Jonn Rodda. Volleyball Review, Vol. 8 No. 2, Sept. 1980
The first Volleyball Olympic Competition in Tokyo exhibited such great precision and strategic team play executed with all out effort that many did not recognize the well known playground pastime. The standard of play of most of the foreign countries far exceeded those of the United States, which won only a few matches. Men's competition results were: first Russia, second Czechoslovakia, third Japan, fourth Romania, fifth Bulgaria and sixth Hungary.
The United States had finished 9th in a 10 team
field in 1964 Olympics.
^John V. Grombach, The Official 1980 Ol^pic Guide (New York: N.Y., Times Books, 1980), p. Lb2 Sol H. Marshall, USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1967), p. 123. 117 Exposure of the game by television was another reason that made the game of volleyball popular among players and among the public. In 1965, Japanese women's volleyball team toured here. It was a big factor as only a few thousands were exposed to actual exhibition matches between the Japanese and our teams. Drawing attention to the calibre of play by women took away some of the general feelings of volleyball as a pitty-pat game.
Certainly men's volleyball in general became more "re spected."^® Tokyo Olympics, Montreal and other Pan Ameri can games all had exciting volleyball and received good media attention in the United States, which understandably was a reason why the game became popular and drew the attention of the young athletes as a competitive sport.
A significant development of men's volleyball at the intercollegiate level was seen by some as a result of higher quality athletes participating and better coaching of the sport at the college level. More good athletes play volleyball at an earlier age as one of their primary sports.
A1 Scates, Personal Interview.
^^Roger L. MMartin, Coach, Response to the Question- naire. May 25, 1981. 118
Factors and Events That Affected the Development of Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball
The persons who were interviewed and those who responded to the questionnaire agreed that several factors and events affected the development of men's intercollegiate volleyball in the United States. Among the positive fac tors they mentioned the following are important.
1. Recognition of volleyball as a NCAA sport for for men's championships in 1970.
2. Acceptance of volleyball as a Olympic sport.
3. Exposure through television.
4. Establishment of a collegiate division in USVBA National Championships in 1949.
5. Pressure of success of other countries.
6 . Better coaching at college level.
7. More good athletes playing volleyball at an earlier age.
8 . Efforts of a few dedicated people to promote volleyball.
9. Participation of Southern California univer sities .
10. Organization of the Midwest Intercollegiate Volleyball Association (MIVA).
11. Efforts of the YMCA is popularizing competitive volleyball.
12. Players who became coaches, stimulating the interest in volleyball among the college players. Factors That Interfered With the Development Of Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball
A majority of the persons who were interviewed and
also those who responded to the questionnaire agreed that
there were major reasons that hindered the development of men's intercollegiate volleyball. The poor image given
to volleyball is a major reason for hindering its develop ment. The attitude that prevailed in the past that
volleyball was a recreational sport for old men, played
basically at picnics with little skill required, was the
image given to the sport. This made it unappealing to the
young athletes. Volleyball from the very beginning was not recognized as a highly competitive nor highly skilled
sport.It was designed as a game that would appeal to men who were unable to play basketball. "The need was
for a game that was competitive without being antagonistic,
that would relax the average business man and yet give him
men, but there was a need of something for the older one
not quite so rough and severe."It was one of the
simpler games which could be used by the mass of students
^^Scates, Response to the interview.
Official Volleyball Guide (1916-1917), p. 7.
24^Ibid.,?. p. 120 in intramural sport.Volleyball at the beginning increased in popularity, especially among the business men as a social game which afforded both physical and mental relaxation.
It took many years for volleyball to change its original image and become a competitive sport at the inter collegiate level. "In recent years volleyball like most games has been taken up as a competitive sport among young men, who play it with greatest skill.
The fact that three team sports, football, basket ball and baseball dominated the scholastic and collegiate sports season throughout the year in the U.S. is another factor that has hindered the development of intercollegiate volleyball in this country. The new sports have little chance for adoption as varsity sports, because of this aristocracy that places emphasis on these three major varsity sports. A very few colleges have accepted it as an intercollegiate sport, and therefore we do not see enough growth in this sport as an intercollegiate sport.
Volleyball Guide (1917-1918), p. 6 .
^^Ibid., p. 69.
^^Fisher, "Forward and Resume," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1927-28), p. 7.
^^DeGroot, Response to the Questionnaire.
^^Shondell, Response to the Questionnaire. 121
The lack of recognition of volleyball as a highly competitive highly skilled sport on the part of athletic directors, physical educators, coaches arid teachers was another factor that interfered with its dçveloperant.
More and more young talented athletes start football, basketball or baseball where they see a lucrative pro fessional market. Top male athletes are not playing volleyball when they are young because it is not so attractive as other games. In other countries top athletes play volleyball, starting when they are young.
Volleyball is not, nor has it ever been, what we refer to as one of the glory sports. It does not play before crowds, there are no major scholarship programs, there is not a lucrative pro-market and to the contrary, it usually is played at major expense to the individual player. Until recently, few, if any, colleges funded volleyball and until it is recognized by a college as a "varsity" sport, with full funding for travel, competitions and uniforms, it tends to disuade ultimate participation. This is still the case in many institutions. In addition, the competition
^^DeGroot, Jr., Odeneal, Response to the Question- 122 for practice and play facilities within a given college is very keen.^^ Lack of facility (space and time) in schools and colleges is another reason why low priority is given for volleyball. A very high priority is given for other well established sports.
Lack of adequate, competent, qualified coaches to coach volleyball in the schools and colleges was another reason that interfered with the development of volleyball at the beginning.
Lack of sufficient funds, to add new programs was another reason that interfered with the development of volleyball in the colleges. This was made worse by the economic recession of the late 20’s.
Explosion of women's sports in the United States, especially the effects of Title IX, where more money is allocated for women's sports, is one of the major reasons why men's volleyball is not developing in recent times at the college level.
^^Sharpless, Response to the Questionnaire.
^^Hay, Davies and DeGroot, Response to the Ques tionnaire. ^^Odeneal, Hay, and Davies, Response to the Questionnaire.
^^Dunn, Shondell and DeGroot, Response to the Questionnaire. ^^Shondell, Engen and others, Response to the Questionnaire. 123 Lack of interest among the public to view volley
ball as a highly competitive sport where specialized
talent and skill is involved, lack of media support to make volleyball a popular sport, and lack of exposure
to young people in secondary and high schools were the other factors cited by some who responded to the question naire and to the interview.
Impact of Power Volleyball
To a certain extent, the term "power volleyball" differentiates competitive college volleyball from the volleyball played casually for recreation. When it was introduced in the late nineteenth century, it was strictly a recreational game, demanding very little physical skill and athletic prowess. The term "power volleyball" is a misnomer, however it helped to change the image of volleyball, as held by the public and many coaches and physical education teachers who felt that volleyball was a recreational sport for old men, played with little skill.
The term "power volleyball" is a public relations effort to develop a recognition for the sport apart from the recreational game. It made the uninformed person a little more aware of a newer competitive type game in which the rules and interpretations were drastically changed from the recreational game. For over forty years there has been "power" in volleyball when played by more skilled 124
Power volleyball has reached an all-time high in the United States. Player interest and spectator appeal is unexcelled in the history of the game. At last sportsmen are beginning to realize that there is something very wonderful about the sport. Most people appreciate this when they see a match that has unusual interest and color surrounding the affair. This is especially true at the National championships where everyone can enjoy great volleyball.
Today players on college, Armed Forces, and YMCA teams are better than ever. Power volleyball has developed into a fast game of color and deception and is a highly competitive sport everywhere.
The involvement of U.S. teams in international con tests such as the Olympics, Pan American and World Games and the television coverage of volleyball as displayed by both men's and women's teams of other countries, clearly gave recognition to volleyball as a hard, fast sport, which requires a great deal of strength, coordination, endurance and conditioning. The talented players began to adopt that style and improve highly competitive volleyball, and wanted to distinguish it from the informal recreational volleyball, where no skills and techniques were involved. "Power volleyball" made the sport more
38,Shondell, Monaco, Jr. and others. Response to the Questionnaire. ^^Curtis R. Emery, "Power volleyball reaches peak in Colleges, YMCA's and Armed Forces," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1958), pp. 135-138. 125 attractive for the talented player, who wanted to take the game more seriously. It also made the game more attractive to the spectator.
Geographical Concentration of Men's Intercollegiate Volleyball
It is obvious that the West Coast, particularly
Southern California has dominated collegiate volleyball since the beginning. In all its years of existence from
1970-1981 Intercollegiate Men's Volleyball Championship was won by a team from the West, and in addition a team from the state of California. The concentration of power volleyball in the Southern California region is due to several factors. Traditionally volleyball is considered a prestigious sport, a status symbol, and is widely spread and accepted in that area of the country. The conducive climate has led to year round paly, promoting all round development in skills and techniques. Quality instruction, available facilities and above all exposure to the game when they are young by the public school system has encouraged the quality players at high school and college level. Well organized beach tournaments for all age levels is another strong factor for producing quality players. The beach play - two against two - has 126 produced all-round talented players. It is a top specta
tor sport in the spring in California. All these factors
have made it possible to produce champion teams in Cali-
These conditions are not found anywhere else in
the country. VJhile volleyball play is seasonal in the
rest of the country, most of the players are exposed to
the game only at the college level. They do not belong
to the extremely self-motivated, physically gifted quality players of California.
This geographical concentration has been a positive
effect as the California Schools have been the leaders in
the style and quality of play. There may have been some negative effects on the development of the game in the
collèges in the other regions as a result of this regional
strength. The domination of the collegiate championships primarily by teams from California, with local area domin
ation by a few teams in the Midwest and the East, has pro bably held back collegiate development in other parts of
the country. The training and subsequent employment at
the collegiate and high school level of graduates from
these centers of collegiate volleyball has no doubt been
a positive factor in aiding of the development of volley-
DeGroot, Jr., Response to the Questionnaire. Rule Changes or Training Methods and Their Effect on College Volleyball
Rules of volleyball have undergone many changes since volleyball was first introduced in 1895. The first rules were designed by the originator for the pur pose of providing some sort of recreation and relaxation for businessmen. The first rules,written by îir. Morgan, contained the following basic features:
• Net, 6 ft. 6 in. high
• Court, 25 ft. by 50 ft.
• Any number of participants allowed
• Length of game, nine innings ; each team allowed three outs per inning
• Continuous air dribbling of ball permitted up to a restraining line 4 ft. from the net
• Unlimited number of hits allowed on each side of court
• A served ball can be assisted across the net
• A second serve allowed if first serve results in a fault
In 1916, changes in rules were designed to be standardized and to clarify existing rules.
• Official game, 15 points
• Two out of three games determine a match
• The net height was increased to 8 ft.
• Each player rotated in order and served in turn
• Any serve that hits the net or any outside object was out of bounds # The ball could not come to rest in a player's hand
# The ball could not play a second time unless it had been played by another player
In 1920 the court size was changed to 30 ft. by
60 ft. The ball could be played by any part of the body above the waist, and could be played three times by each
from a recreational sport to a highly competitive sport many rules were designed and changed. The rules that highly competitive volleyball follow today are different from the basic rules of 1895. Recreational volleyball still does not require great skill and techniques.
The persons who were interviewed and those who responded to the questionnaire, agreed that rule changes and new training techniques have given rise to a better game, but not so much for the growth of the game. Few teams that are playing competitive volleyball now play a better game.
Years of Rules," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1970), pp. 149-154. ^^Liskevych, Response to the Interview. 129
As more competitive volleyball developed it was essential to design new rules especially in the net area.
In 1928 a one-inch vertical marker of soft material was placed the entire width of the net, parallel with the side lines. A ball striking the net outside of this line was considered a "dead ball. This vertical marker was changed into 2 inches in 1939-40.As a guidance to the officials, one antenna at each sideline extending verti cally from the bottom of the net, was positioned at a distance of 8% inches from the 2 inch tape on the net above the sideline, in 1972-73.^^ There was a widespread use of international rules in 1967 and an attempt was made in 1968 to draw USVBA rules and international rules together.The U.S.
Volleyball Association (USVBA) finally adopted the princi pal features of the rules of the International Volleyball
Federation (FIVB). Still existing minor differences were brought to an end by FIVB adopting several features of
USVBA rules, with the USVBA making the most concessions.
Rules," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1928-29), p. 13. ^^Brown, "Rules 1939-40 Revisions," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1940, p. 12.
^^Official Rules, (1972-73), USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1973), p. 181.
47,Odeneal, Op. Cit., p. 154. 130 Not only did the U.S. accept the principal FIVE rules but also incorporated the interpretations of these rules by leading foreign referees. These interpretations had effects on the American game as much as the change of the rules had. A good example is the Rule 8 adopted in 1950.
Rule 8 - PLAYING THE BALL Catching or Holding the ball
When the ball visibly comes to rest in any part or parts of the body of a player, he shall be considered as catching or holding the ball. The ball MUST BE CLEARLY BATTED. Lifting or shoving shall be'considered illegal.
The interpretation of the above rule by the referees was different at different periods. While over
80 percent of the overhand serve reception was allowed in 1960, there was very much restriction on this method of serve reception in later periods. The "dink" spike which is practiced today, was not allowed by the referees in the 1960s as a form of "throw". Referees required players to hit them in a cleaner fashion.
Some major rule changes have influenced the style of play. In 1935 it became a foul to deliberately screen an opponent player from the server. In 1954 screening the serve was allowed. In 1959 players screening the serve
48,Official Volleyball Rules, USVBA Official Volley ball Guide (1951), p. 125. 49J. Edmund Welch, "Volleyball-1960 and 1970," USVBA Official Volleyball Guide (1970), p. 155. 131 were allowed to wave their hands and move during the serve. In 1965 screening was made illegal, and this rule still continues. This gives the opposing side a better view of the oncoming serve, and the opportunity to make a successful pass. Moreover, the serve reception is made easier, as the server is allowed to the right one- third of the area behind the end line. Players who receive the serve can position better, as they know that serve can come to them from certain angles only.
In recent times, the dominant method of receiving the serve is by the double forearm or the bump pass. The overhand or the chest pass which was dominant in the
1960s is not used now.
The "soft" or the dink spike, which gives the m o d e m day spiker a chance to outwit the blockers, and defensive players of the backcourt, would have been called a thrown ball ten years ago. In modern day play the bump pass on serve reception and the soft spike with the fingers, has made the sport more attractive to the spectator.
One of the most significant rule changes during the past ten years is the condition where spikers and blockers reach over the net. In 1922 reaching over the net in any manner was prohibited. "In 1966 the blocker's fingers were permitted to stray across the net inadvert antly as long as they did not contact the ball or affect 132 the play." In 1968, the blockers were allowed to reach across the net as long as they did not contact the ball until after it had been contacted by the attacker.
Under certain conditions, both spikers and blockers are allowed to reach over the net today. Because of this allowance a spiker can successfully spike those sets close to the net. Usually a spiker's follow-through may pass over the net. Blockers now can have their hands over the net at any time as long as they do not touch the ball before the opponent spiker touches it. This rule change therefore has led to very aggressive play near the net.
Blocking has become a major way to turn the ball back to the opponent's court to win points or to cause a side- out.
Another rule change that has changed the style of play is the change brought on the number of players who can block at the net. Today the front line players only may take part.in a block; whereas in 1960 any number of players could block. This rule change has therefore prevented the back row players coming to assist in block ing, and four-man blocks are no longer a part of the game.
^°Ibid., p. 154.
^^Ibid., p. 156. 133 This change also has prevented a short player switching to the back row to play defense all the time.
Today the three-man blocks are rare. The only time it is used effectively is when the offense spikes from the center-front position. Two-man blocks are the standard technique used today at the right and left front positions. In modern day play setter plays a vital role.
He sets the ball at various heights and angles to make use of the spikers effectively by making the block ineffective.
Even the one-man block has become very effective because a single blocker is allowed to hit the ball twice. "Any player participating in a block shall have the right to make the next contact with the ball, such contact counting as the first of the three contacts allowed the team." The one-man block is essential today to stop the quick, low set especially from the center front position.
Defensive play in the back court and in the middle of the court has improved. The introduction of diving and rolling methods have become a part of the modern day play and is more spectacular. The new techniques also have led to changes in training methods, placing more emphasis in greater physical conditioning, leading to greater strength, agility and flexibility. The European
52i,^Ibid.
33.Ibid., p. 157. and Japanese dominance of the sport has effected all our training methods.
Persons and Institutions Who Contributed To the Development Of Intercollegiate Volleyball
All persons who were interviewed and those who responded to the questionnaire named a few individuals who contributed for the development of intercollegiate volleyball (See Appendix K) and also a few institutions which played a vital role in promoting intercollegiate volleyball. (See Appendix K)
As a response to the interview and to the question naire they also said that volleyball as a competitive sport is growing in popularity in the colleges and be coming more popular among the spectators. A majority of them also said that there is no adequate financial support for the growth arid development of the sport.
^^Shondell and Angen, Response to the Question- Chapter VII
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The main purpose of the study was to present the
history of men's intercollegiate volleyball in the United
States, since its introduction in 1895 to the present day.
An attempt was also made to find answers to several sub-
problems related to the historical development.
Microfiche reproductions of the United States
Volleyball Association (USVBA) was the basic primary
resource to obtain information about the sport regarding
its origin, growth and development from 1916 to 1975.
The data from 1975 to 1981 came from the published Annual
Official Volleyball Guides of the USVBA. The information
from the nationally recognized coaches from many regions
of the country was very convenient, as many of them met
at St. John Arena, Ohio State University, on April 3 and
4, 1981. In addition to the interviews, a questionnaire was posted to several others. The first category was the
individuals from the USVBA, who had influence in men's
intercollegiate volleyball in the United States. The
second category dealt with the individuals who were
directly involved in the organization of the first NCAA
135 136
Championship in 1970. The third category was the indivi duals directly involved in the first National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) National Championship
(1969). The fourth category was the individuals directly involved in the first National Junior College Championship.
The fifth category was the outstanding individuals in the development of the sport of volleyball. The sixth category was the individuals from the outstanding schools in the
West, East, Midwest and South who promoted intercollegiate volleyball. The questionnaire was also posted to the present Executive Director, National Commissioner/Vice
President and Volleyball Commissioner. Response to the questionnaire was satisfactory, with 55 percent responding, especially from the present and past members of the United
States Volleyball Association.
Additional information on the historical develop ment of intercollegiate volleyball came as a result of the search in books, journals, periodicals, dissertations, and handbooks.
Volleyball was first introduced in 1895, as a lunch time recreational game, and later developed into a major sport of Olympic stature. The growth and success of volleyball at the be ginning was due to the Young Mens Christian Association
(YMCA) which continued to be its chief user and promoter. 137 In its-highly competitive aspect it was extensively promoted by the YMCA, by stimulating the interest in
state and national championships. The game had a very rapid development in the YMCAs across the country, and practically every state had its championships. The first national YMCA tournament was held in 1922, and continued
to be held annually. Not only the national tournaments
stimulated widespread interest, but also brought many
administrative changes and rule changes. The period 1922 to 1926 brought more changes in rules than in any pre ceding or later period.
A significant event for the progress of volleyball in the United States was the formation of the United
States Volleyball Association (USVBA) in 1928. It played a vital role in promoting volleyball in this country. The
USVBA made the previously closed National YMCA Champion
ships open to teams from other organizations. In 1949, the
USVBA sponsored the first National Men's Intercollegiate
Tournament, along with the other national tournaments conducted by the USVBA. This was definitely a turning point for college volleyball, as it was only an intramural recreational game for many years in the colleges. In the
same year the Eastern Intercollegiate Volleyball Tourna ment was held at Springfield College. Florida State
University took the lead in the south, and the University 138 of Washington in the west. In the midwest Earlham
College and George Williams College took the lead. A rapid progress of competitive volleyball occurred in Cal ifornia. There came a slow but steady growth of inter collegiate volleyball in the U.S., and the Collegiate
Division became one of the most popular divisions of the
USVBA. Many intercollegiate championship tournaments were played in many regions of the country, before the USVBA conducted the National Championships. The growth was very prominent in California, with many colleges achieving varsity status, and experiencing many intercollegiate competitions at a high level of competition.
The formation of the Midwest Intercollegiate
Volleyball Association in 1961 was another important development towards intercollegiate volleyball. Seven colleges in the Midwest joined the Association to promote competitive volleyball.
The formation of the Southern California Inter collegiate Volleyball Association in 1964 was another indication that Collegiate Volleyball was improving, es pecially in the state of California.
More progress in intercollegiate volleyball was seen by the formation of the National Association of
Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) in 1967. 139 The National Collegiate Athletic Association
(NCAA) decided to hold a national championship for volley ball for the 1969-70 academic year, NCAA Men's Volleyball
Championship provides a single-elimination tournament comprising of four teams, representing west, midwest, east and one team to be selected at large. The National Asso ciation of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) also organized a National Tournament to help the promotion of college volleyball, and continued the championships from 1969 to 1979,
USVBA continued their National Collegiate Champion ships yearly until they were discontinued in 1970, because the NAIA in 1969, followed by the NCAA in 1970 had organ ized college championships for their colleges. However
USVBA reinstated a Men's Intercollegiate Division in 1971, and continued till 1976, primarily for two year colleges and unaffiliated four year colleges.
Since 1970 NCAA has conducted the Men's Inter collegiate Championships and still continues them yearly.
Generally there are relatively very few colleges in the country that sponsor volleyball. Among the states, the state of California has the most colleges that sponsor volleyball. There are still very few states with colleges as NCAA member institutions that sponsor Men's Inter collegiate Volleyball, Here, too, the state of California takes the lead. 140 Sanction of volleyball as an intercollegiate sport by the NCAA is a major reason for the development of the sport at the collegiate level. It has given prestige and status to the game, but has not done anything for the wider spread of the game nationally. The selection of the par ticipants for the championships is by the region, one team to represent each region - West, Midwest, East and one team selected at large. It is a single elimination tournament comprising of four teams. It is a very narrow selection and touches very little national talent.
The NCAA Volleyball Championships have been domi nated by the West, a team from the state of California since its origin. One team that is selected at large has always been from California. Ohio State was the only team to reach the finals as an outside team other than
California.
This dominance and concentration of strong teams in
California is a positive factor for more and more develop ment of the sport in that region, while it may have been a negative factor for the development of the sport in the
colleges of the other regions.
The representation from the Midwest at the NCAA
Championships for the last few years (1970 to 1981) has been either Ohio State or Ball State. Other colleges that belong to the Midwest Region, Indiana, Arkansas, Texas and 141 Louisiana had never appeared at the championship tourna
ments. The only recent newcomers to the tournament from
the East is the Rutgers University of Newark, N.J., who
participated in 1977, 1978, 1979 and 1980 and the most
recent winner of the Eastern Collegiate Championship, the
Pennsylvania State University.
Although there was an increase in the number of
colleges that sponsor NCAA Men's Volleyball at the be
ginning, the recent figures show that the number of
colleges have decreased. It indicates that the NCAA has not been able to give wider recognition to the game. It
still has a great deal to do to indicate that the sport
is universal among the NCAA member institutions. On the
other hand the Collegiate Division established by the USVBA
in 1949 continued for 27 years until 1976. During these years many colleges participated from all parts of the
country, and the game was progressing well nationally, as
an intercollegiate sport.
Acceptance of volleyball as an Olympic sport in
1957 was a significant factor for the development of volleyball at the intercollegiate level. Exposure of the
game by television was another reason that made volleyball popular among the players and the public. Participation
of higher quality athletes and better coaching at the
college level are other reasons that brought a development
of the sport at the college level. 142 The poor image given to volleyball as a recre ational sport for old men was the major reason that hin dered the development of volleyball from the beginning.
Competitive volleyball was more a monopoly of the YMCA at the beginning, without school children being exposed to the game. It took a long time for volleyball to be recognized as a competitive sport at the college level.
The growth came late, and the growth was slow as well.
In recent times the development has been slow due to emphasis on women's volleyball programs and the lack of sufficient funds to add new programs to the already existing athletic programs.
Volleyball has developed into a rapid and skilled sport, which requires a great deal of conditioning and techniques, at a highly competitive level. The term
"power volleyball" differentiates competitive volleyball from the recreational game.
It is obvious that Southern California dominates
Collegiate Volleyball. This is due to many geographical conditions and the acceptance of the sport as a status symbol in that region. While this domination accounts for positive effects locally, it may have had a negative effect on the rest of the country. Volleyball as a com petitive sport has shown tremendous development in Cali fornia, but not in the rest of the nation. 143 Rules of volleyball have undergone many changes.
Rule changes and new training techniques have given rise
to a better game, with more appeal to the serious,
talented player and more attraction to the spectator.
Vital roles have been played by a few individuals and institutions for the development in intercollegiate volleyball, but the development has been confined to the
West, Midwest and the East. South has shown interest and development only for a brief period. The growth of volley ball at the intercollegiate level is not as dramatic as that of basketball.
In international competitions too, the U.S. has not shown much success. Since 1964, a U.S. men's volley ball team has not participated in the Olympics. Men's volleyball in the Olympics has been dominated by the
Eastern European countries. Japan and Cuba have also had good success.
International competition is organized by the
International Volleyball Federation (FIVE). It was or
ganized in 1947 and since then over one hundred and
thirty countries have become members. The United States
Volleyball Association (USVBA) the Governing Body for volleyball in this country, as recognized by the United
States Olympic Committee (USOC) and the (FIVE), is
essentially a voluntary organization. As a voluntary 144 organization, USVBA has done an excellent job to promote volleyball in this country and make it popular among the athletes and the public.
Very little effort has been taken in the past to promote volleyball at the elementary, secondary and high school levels.
The geographical concentration and the domination of the sport in Southern California will continue in the future, too, if the present structure of the NCAA Tourna ments continues.
The NCAA as the single organization now promoting volleyball at the intercollegiate level has not given the same attention to volleyball, as it has given to other competitive sports, because volleyball is not yet a revenue sport. NCAA will perhaps be a moving force only when volleyball achieves that end.
Although volleyball had slow progress at the be ginning the gradual evolution of volleyball as a highly competitive sport of exceptional skill and beauty is highly encouraging to all. The recent developments are an indication that it is an emerging sport taken seriously by the talented athlete. It is also growing in popularity among the spectators. It has become highly desirable to promote more and more competitive volleyball at the inter collegiate level. Future growth arid development of 145 intercollegiate volleyball in the United States depends on the following factors:
1 . number and calibre of participating athletes in volleyball;
2 . availability of college programs of volleyball;
3. financing of intercollegiate volleyball;
4. promotion of intercollegiate volleyball;
5. public support for the sport; and
6 . research for further development.
The success of the European countries and the
Asian countries in international competitions and our own success in Southern California has clearly shown that better intercollegiate champions or national champions can emerge only if volleyball is promoted in the elemen tary and secondary schools on an intensive or competitive basis. When young people are exposed to the game at an earlier age as in basketball or baseball highly developed talent will be available at intercollegiate and national levels. The future of volleyball lies in the schools.
There are tremendous possibilities to bring this develop ment at the school level in the future. Some organization should deliberately, intelligently and aggressively set out in a nationwide program to achieve this end.
The United States Volleyball Association (USVBA) is a logical organization to accept this challenge or it may 146
be by any other organization. An organized effort should
be launched for the development of our volleyball in our
public schools, on a nationwide scale. This effort should
be supported by the professional physical educators and
organizations such as the American Alliance of Health,
Physical Education and Recreation (AAHPER).
Endurance, energy, fitness, self control and
alertness, the characteristics of all other games are more the prerogatives of this game. If well played it
is a fast, vigorous and scientific game. It is a non-
contact sport and can be continued as a life-long recre
ational activity.
Very little volleyball has been taught in our
public schools in the past. We have not been very success
ful in promoting the game in organized form among the
elementary, secondary and high school levels. The result was the lack of exposure of young players to good volley
ball which resulted in a dearth of skilled players at
intercollegiate level.
A revival of the game is needed among the school
age players. Experienced coaches in all sports say that
an early start is a great advantage in developing skillful
and able players. This is equally true to volleyball.
Lack of exposure of young players to the game in the 147 proper form by competent teachers has been a major reason
for not having talented young athletes at college level in
the past. This is one of the major reasons for the stag
nation of the game at the intercollegiate level in the
recent past. This is not true in California, where young
school athletes are exposed to the game at all age levels
by proper instruction and well organized competition,
developing highly motivated talented players who reach
their peak at the intercollegiate level.
Volleyball should be promoted as an organized
sport in the elementary, secondary and high schools in a nationwide program. This promotion and development should
start at the local level followed by district, state and
then by the region. The country should be divided into
several geographical regions for the purpose of promotion
of volleyball. The regional concept developed by the USVBA proves to be a sound one for the purpose of promoting volleyball at the school level, too.
In addition to the promotion of school volleyball
each region should have a training center for the purpose
of training the college players of the region. This should
have a director as its head with several head coaches. The
players for the training center should be selected after
conducting the intercollegiate competition among the
colleges in the region. After a period of training under 148 the head coaches in the regional training center these players can represent the region in national competitions.
A national tournament conducted this way would meet all the best players of a region who make a strong regional
Growth and development of volleyball at the college level also depends on the availability of college volley ball programs on the future. With organized development of school volleyball there will be more participants at the college level. This will induce the athletic directors to have more programs at the college level. Playing good volleyball at the school level on a national basis would make volleyball a major sport at college level with many skilled players seeking participation at the college level.
Like basketball or baseball volleyball, too, would occupy a place as a major sport at college level.
Financing of intercollegiate volleyball is another factor which effects the future development of inter collegiate volleyball. With proper development of volley ball as a major sport in the country, with more and more college athletes participating in volleyball as a major sport, the athletic directors in the colleges would be compelled to allocate a reasonable budget for volleyball.
The regional concept with emphasis on local, district, state and regional competition is one of the ways to 149 reduce expenses on intercollegiate volleyball.
Promotion of intercollegiate volleyball is another important factor for its future growth. This is es pecially true for volleyball as its development was over shadowed by previously established "Big Time" sports.
Promotion of volleyball also should start at all levels as a part of a national program. The country needs a national program with a national promotion officer.
The public support for the intercollegiate volley ball is growing as witnessed by the large numbers who attend well played college volleyball games. This is especially true in California. If volleyball is played at all levels as a fast, vigorous scientific game, specta tor interest will grow along with the growth of the game.
More scientific research is necessary in several areas o f the sport. No research has been done on the promotion and the development of the game at school and college levels. There is need for more research in the area of school volleyball, especially in elementary school volleyball. What age level is best to present this game, and what should be their growth level to practice the basic fundamentals effectively? Should the game be modi fied to present it to young players and if so what are the changes that should be done? What are the skills they should master to enjoy the game best and at what age 150 level? How can the coaches teach them more effectively and efficiently? Answers to these questions and to many more as we go on should come from reasearch.
If an effective, efficient, well planned program of volleyball is carried out on a nationwide scale, by a government organization at federal level or by a private organization, and effectively avoid all factors that hindered its development as a major sport at college level in the past, and promote volleyball as a competitive sport in the elementary school and follow its development at other school levels, more competitive volleyball will be the result in our colleges, and stronger will be our college teams nationally and internationally. APPENDIX A
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR INTERVIEWING THE PERSONS m O
ARE CONNECTED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF
VOLLEYBALL IN THE UNITED STATES 152 1. Do you see a significant devleopment of men's volley ball at intercollegiate level in recent times? If so what do you consider the reasons for such a develop ment?
2 . I-Jhat would you consider as major reasons which pre vented the development of intercollegiate volleyball?
3. Do you have any significant feeling or information about the role of the NCAA regarding the development of men's intercollegiate volleyball?
4. Volleyball became an Olympic sport in 1957. Do you consider that this has any significant effect on men's volleyball?
5. What can you say about the growth of men's power volley ball in recent times?
6. Volleyball is popular and played more in Western coastal regions than in the other regions. How can you account for this difference? Has this concentra tion had an effect on its national development?
7. Do you think the change of rules from time to time and the new training techniques have any effect on men's intercollegiate volleyball?
8. According to you who are the individuals who made a contribution for the development of volleyball in the • United States? Is there anybody in particular who has done his best for intercollegiate volleyball?
9. Can you name a few institutions that played an impor tant role for the development of volleyball at inter collegiate level?
10. Do you consider volleyball as a sport growing in popularity among the colleges? Do you think it is becoming a popular sport among the spectators? Do you think there is adequate financial support for this sport? APPENDIX B
QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE HISTORY OF MEN'S
INTERCOLLEGIATE VOLLEYBALL IN
THE UNITED STATES Do you feel there were any significant turning points or events in the development of men's intercollegiate volleyball in the United States? Yes No.... (If yes please note them if you would)
Do you feel there were any significant factors that interfered with its development? Yes No.... (If yes please note)
3. Do you have any significant feeling or information about the role of the NCAA regarding the development of men's intercollegiate volleyball? Yes No.... (If yes please note)
4. Do you have any feeling or information regarding the 1957 acceptance of volleyball as an Olympic Sport on its development in U.S. Colleges? Yes No.... (If yes please note)
Did the recognition of the style of play termed "power volleyball" have any impact on the sport as played in U.S. Colleges? Yes No.... (If yes please note) 155 . Has the geographical concentration of men's inter collegiate teams had an effect on its national develop ment? Yes No.... (If yes please note)
7. Were there any significant rule changes or training methods developed that changed the course of volley ball for men in U.S. Colleges? Yes No....
8 . Could you list a few of the people and their contri butions who you feel were important in the development of volleyball at intercollegiate level?
1 . 2 . 3. 4. 5.
9. Could you do the same for institutions?
1 . 2 . 3. 4. 5. 10. Do you see a significant increase in the status of men's intercollegiate volleyball by the number of participants? Yes No by the number of attending spectators? Yes No by the amount of financial support? Yes No.... 156
Your address: Please return in the enclosed self-addressed ...... stamped envelope to: A. D. Rodrigo ...... 580 Ashtabula Ct. Columbus, Ohio 43210 157
COVER LETTER 158
April 30, 1981
Dear Sir;
I am a doctoral candidate in physical education at The Ohio State University, and am presently writing a doctoral dissertation on the history of men's inter collegiate volleyball in the United States from 1895 to the present. It would be greatly appreciated if you would be kind enough to complete the following questions relative to sub-problems of the study and also provide any addi tional comments which would be relevant to my investiga tion. In addition to responding to the questionnaire, any additional information about volleyball at inter collegiate level would be most valuable. I would greatly appreicate your cooperation in my attempt to produce a worthy history of intercollegiate volleyball in the United States. A self-addressed stamped envelope is enclosed for your convenience.
Sincerely,
A. D. Rodrigo The Ohio State University
Enclosure - 2 COLLEGES CLASSIFIED BY STATES WHICH
SPONSOR VOLLEYBALL No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Name of College
Alabama University Jacksonville State University Livingston University Troy State College Tuskegee Institute
2 Alaska University
Arizona 5 Northern Arizona University
Arkansas 15 Arkansas College Arkansas State University Arkansas Tech. Arkansas University Henderson State College John Brown University S. Arkansas University
California Azuza Pacific College Biola College California Baptist College California Institute of Tech. California Maritime Academy California Polytechnic State Univ. California State College'Stanislaus California State University (Northbridge) m California State University S (Sonoma) No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Women Name of College
California (Con't) California University of L.A. California University of Riverside Calffomia University of San Diego California University of Santa Barbara California University (Santa Cruz) Chapman College Claremont-Mudd College Fresno Pacific College Fresno State University Humboldt State University La Verne College Loma Linda University Los Angeles Baptist College Loyola Marymount University Occidental College Pacific, University of the San Diego State University San Diego University San Francisco State University Santa Clara University Southern California College Southern California University Stanford University University States International University (Cal. Western Campus) Westmont College No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Women Name of College
Colorado 13 Fort Lewis College Northern Colorado University Regis College Southern Colorado University Western State College
Connecticut 16 Central Conn. State College Eastern Conn. State College New Haven University Sacred Heart University Southern Conn. State College
Delaware 3 0
Dist. of Col. 9 6 American University, The Catholic Univ. of America District of Columbia Univ. Galludet College Georgetown University Howard University
Eckerd College Flagler College Florida S. College Jacksonville University Miami University of Coral Gables Palm Beach Atlantic College Stetson University No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Women Name of College
Georgia Berry College Coltmibus College Georgia State University North Georgia College Valdosta State College West Georgia College
Brigham Young University Church College of Hawaii Hawaii Pacific College University of Hawaii
Boise State University University of Idaho Lewis-Clark State College Northwest Nazarene College
Blackburn College Chicago State College Chicago State University Chicago, University of Elmhurst College George Williams College Illinois College Illinois University of Chicago Circle Illinois University of Urbana Lake Forest College No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Women Name of College
.Illinois (Continued) Lewis University Lincoln Christian College Loyola University of Chicago MacMurray College North Central College North Park College Northeastern Illinois University Northwestern University Triton College Anderson College Ball State University Bethel College DePauw University Evansville, University of Earlham College Fort Wayne Bible College Indiana Institute of Technology Indiana Central University Oakland City College Purdue University Saint Francis College Saint Joseph's College
10 Cornell College Dubuque, University of Graceland College Iowa State University Iowa Wesleyan College No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Name of College
Iowa (Continued) Morningside College Northern Iowa University Saint Ambrose College Wartburg College William Penn College
Bethel College Friends University Kansas Newman College Kansas State University Marymount College Tabor College
Kentucky 21 Bellarmine College Georgetown College Kentucky State College Louisville, University of Morehead State University Northern Kentucky University
Louisiana 17 Dillard University New Orleans University Nicholls State College Southeastern Louisiana College Southern University Tulane University No. of No. of Colleges State Colleges With V.B. Men Women Name of College
Maine 16 Bates College Unity College
Maryland 16 Bowie State College Loyola College Maryland University, Baltimore Maryland University, Prin. Anne Saint Mary's College Salisbury State College United States Naval Academy Washington College Western Maryland College
Massachusetts 40 American International College Assumption College Lowell University Massachusetts Institute of Tech. Massachusetts, Univ. of Amherst Salem State College Springfield College Wentworth Institute Westfield State College Worcester State College Michigan Aquinas College Calvin College Eastern Michigan University Ferris State College No. of No. of Colleges State Colleges With V.B. Men Women Name of College
Michigan (Continued) Grand Rapids Baptist College Grand Valley State College Lake Superior State College Hope College Northern Michigan University Oakland University Olivet College Spring Arbor College Wayne State University
25 Bethel College Hamline College Minnesota Bible College Pillsbury Baptist Bible College Saint Mary's College Saint Scholastica College of Duluth Saint Thomas College of St. Paul S. West Minnesota State Univ.
Mississippi 14 2 Mississippi Industrial College Mississippi,University of
Missouri 33 13 Central Bible College Central Missouri State Univ. Drury College Harris Stowe College i-- Lindewood College ^ Missouri Southern State College No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Women Name of College
Missouri (Continued) Missouri, University of Columbia Missouri Western College Northeast Missouri State Univ. Northwest Missouri State Univ. Ozark, The School of Rockhurst College Southwest Baptist College
Eastern Montana College Montana College of M.S. & T Northern Montana College
Nebraska 15 Creighton University Doana College Hastings College Midland Lutheran College Nebraska Univ. of Omaha Nebraska State College Peru State College
Nevada 2
New Hampshire 10 New Hampshire College New Hampshire Univ. of Durham
New Jersey 22 Farleigh Dickinson Univ.'/Madison Farleigh Dickinson Univ./Teaneck Monmouth College New Jersey Institute of Tech. No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Women Names of Colleges
New Jersey (Continued) Princeton University Rutgers University, New Brunswick Rutgers University of Newark Trenton State College
Eastern New Mexico Univ. New Mexico Inst, of Mining & Tech New Mexico State University New Mexico, University of Western New Mexico University
New York 83 25 Baruch College Brooklyn College City College of New York Clarkson College Colgate University Concordia College Eisenhower College LeMoyne College Medgar Evers College New York Institute of Tech. New York State Univ/Binghamton New York State Univ/Geneseo New York State Univ/Coll. of New Albany ^ New York State Univ. at New c Paltz New York State Univ/Plattsburgh New York State Univ/Potsdam No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Women Names of Colleges
New York (Continued) Niagara University Nyack Missionary College Pace University Roberts Wesleyan College St. Bonaventure Univ. Saint Frances College Southampton College U.S. Marine Academy U.S. Military Academy
North Carolina 37 Atlantic Christian College Belmont Abbey College Duke University East Carolina University Elizabeth City State Univ. Elon College Gardner Webb College Lenoir Ryyne College Mars Hill College Methodist College North Carolina A & T State Univ. North Carolina Central Univ. North Carolina Univ at Asheville North Carolina Univ. at Chapel Hill North Carolina Univ. at Charlotte North Carolina Univ. at Greensboro No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Names of Colleges
North Carolina (Continued) North Carolina Univ. at Wilmington North Carolina Wesleyan College
North Dakota Dickinson State College Jamestown College North Dakota University
49 26 Ashland College Baldwin Wallace College Bowling Green State Univ. Capital University Case Western Reserve Univ. Cedarville College Central State Univ. Cincinnati Bible College Cincinnati, University of Defiance College, The Dyke College Heidelberg College Hiram College Kenyon College Malone College Mount Union College Oberlin College Ohio Dominican College Ohio State University Ohio Wesleyan University No. of No. of Colleges State Colleges With V.B. Men Women Names of Colleges
Ohio (Continued) Toledo, University of Urbana College Wilmington College Wittenberg University Xavier University
Oklahoma 21 Oral Roberts University Tulsa, The University of
Oregon 17 George Fox College Lewis and Clark College Linfield College Multnomah School of the Bible Oregon College of Education Oregon Institute of Technology Southern Oregon State College Williamette University
Pennsylvania 77 28 26 Albright College Allegheny College Baptist Bible College Cabrini College Carnegie-Melon University E. Stroudsburg State College Gettysburg College Lafayette College LaSalle College Lincoln University Messiah College No. of No. of Colleges State Colleges With V.B. Men Women Names of Colleges
Pennsylvania (Continued), Moravian College Muhlenburg College Pennsylvania, University of Pennsylvania State University Philadelphia College of Bible Philadelphia Col. of Phar. & Science Pittsburg University Pittsburgh, University of Scranton, University of Slippery Rock State College Susquehanna University Thiel College United Wesleyan College Valley Forge Christian College Washington & Jefferson College Waynesburg College York College
Rhode Island Providence College Rhode Island College
South Carolina 20 Baptist College at Charleston Charleston, College of Coastal Carolina College Coker College Erskine College Francis Marion College Newberry College No. of No. of Colleges State Colleges With V.B. Men Women Names of Colleges
South Carolina (Continued) Presbyterian College South Carolina University of Columbia Vorhees College Wofford College
South Dakota 14 7 Dakota State College Mount Mary College National College of Business Sioux Falls College South Dakota State University (Brookings) South Dakota State University (Springfield) Yankton College
Tennessee 38 8 Bethel College Bryan College South, The University of the Southwestern College Tennessee University at Martin Tennessee Temple College Tusculum College University of Tennessee at Chattanooga No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Women Names of Colleges
49 21 2 Abilene Christian University Angelo State University Austin College Dallas Baptist College Lamar University LeToumeau College McMurry College Midwestern University North Texas State University Paul Quinn College Saint Edward's University Saint Mary's University Sam Houston State University Southwest Texas State University Southwestern University Sul Ross State University Tarleton State University Texas Lutheran College Texas, The University of at Arlington Texas Wesleyan College Wayland Baptist College
0 Brigham Young University Southern Utah State College Weber State College !
1 Goddard College St. Joseph's College Saint Michael's College No. of No. of Colleges State Colleges With V.B. Men Women Names of Colleges
Virginia 32 10 Bluefield College Eastern Mennonite College Emory and Henry College George Mason College Hampton Institute Liberty Baptist College Roanoke College Virginia Commonwealth Univ. Virginia Polytechnic Ins. and State University Westhampton College
Washington 14 5 Northwest College Puget Sound, Univ. of Washington State University University of Washington Whitman College
West Virginia 17 6 Bethany College Glenville State College Marshall University Shepherd College West Liberty State College West Virginia Inst, of Tech. No. of No. of Colleges Colleges With V.B. Men Names of Colleges
Lakeland College Mount Senario College Northland College Ripon College Saint Norbert College Wisconsin, University of Lacrosse Wisconsin, University of Milwaukee Wisconsin, University of Stevens Point Wisconsin, University of Superior
Wyoming APPENDIX E
NCAA DIVISION I, II, AND III IlEIffiER INSTITUTIONS WHICH SPONSOR INTERCOLLEGIATE
VOLLEYBALL (1975) Yale University Creighton University St. Louis University District 2
Canisius College Howard University McNeese State University Pittsburgh, University of District 7 District 3
Appalachian State University Morehead State University District Murray State University North Carolina, Univ. of California University of Charlotte Los Angeles South Carolina, Univ. of California University of Tampa, University of Santa Barbara Virginia Commonwealth Univ California State University Long Beach District 4 Hawaii, University of Loyola Marymount University Ball State University Pepperdine University Dayton, University of San Diego State University Marshall University Santa Clara, University of Ohio State University Southern California Univ. of DIVISION II
District 5
Central Connecticut State Missouri, University of, College St. Louis Springfield College District 6
None C, W. Post College East Stroudsburg State Coll, District 7
District 3 None
Columbus College District 8 Federal City College George Mason University California University of St. Augustine's College Riverside Tuskegee Institute California State Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo District 4 Chapman College DIVISION III
District 1 District 4
Bates College DePauw University Boston State College Hope College Curry College John Carroll University Westfield State College Kenyon College Ohio Northern University District 2 District 5 Brockport, State University College None Brooklyn College District of Columbia District 6 Teachers College Franklin & Marshall College None Geneseo, State University College District 7 InterAmerican University Kutztown State College None New Jersey Institute of Technology District 8 New Paltz, State University College California, University of New York, City College of San Diego Puerto Rico A & M College California State University Queens College Chico Rochester, University of Washington & Jefferson College
District 3
Gallaudet College Southwestern College APPENDIX F
NCAA DIVISION I, II AND III MEMBER INSTITUTIONS
WHICH SPONSOR INTERCOLLEGIATE
VOLLEYBALL (1976) DIVISION I
District 5
Holy Cross College Bradley University Yale University Creighton University Louisville, University of District 2 St. Louis University West Texas University Canisius College Georgetown University District 6 Howard University Maryland, University of Rice University Eastern Shore Texas, University of U.S. Military Academy District 7 District 3 Idaho, University of Georgia State University Jacksonville University District 8 North Carolina, University Virginia Commonwealth Univ. California, University of (Los Angeles) District 4 California, University of (Santa Barbara) Ball State University Long Beach, California Illinois, Univ. of. State University Champaign Loyola Marymount University Marshall University Pepperdine University Ohio State University Saint Mary's College Purdue University San Deigo State University San Jose State University Seattle University Southern California, University of Stanford University DIVISION II
District 1 District 5
Assumption College None Springfield College District 6 District 2 None C. W. Post College East Stroudsburg State Coll. District 7
District 3
Alabama State University District 8 Federal City College George Mason University California, Univ. of Riverside Jacksonville State Univ. California Polytechnic State Rollins College University, San Luis Obipo Tampa, University of Chapman College Tuskegee Institute Hayward, California State Univ. San Diego, University District 4
Michigan Technological Univ. Wayne State University DIVISION III
District 1 District 4
Bates College Case Western Reserve Univ. Boston State College John Carroll University Connecticut College Kenyon College Curry College Lake Superior State College Framingham State College Mount Union College Gordon College Olivet College Western New England College Westfield State College District 5
District 2 Cornell College Midland Lutheran College Brooklyn College Washington University Dist. of Columbia Teachers College District 6 Franklin and Marshall Coll. InterAmerican University None Kutztown State College Mansfield State College District 7 Monmouth College New Jersey Inst, of Tech. None New York, City College of Puerto Rico, University of District 8 Rutgers University, Newark Sarah Lawrence College California, University of Shepherd College San Diego Thiel College Redlands, University of Washington & Jefferson Coll. Yeshiva University
District 3
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Institute Gallaudet College South, University of the Southwestern College APPENDIX G
NCAA DIVISION I, II, AND III MEMBER INSTITUTIONS
WHICH SPONSOR INTERCOLLEGIATE
VOLLEYBALL (1977) 187
District 5
(M,W) Yale University (W) Creighton Univ. (W) Wichita State Univ. District 2 District 6 (W) Canisius College (MX) Fordham University (M,W) Arkansas State Univ. (WO) New York University (W) Hardin-Simmons Univ. (M) Pennsylvania State +(W) Southwestern (M) U.S. Military Academy (W) Louisiana, Univ. of (W) Texas, Univ. of Arlington (W) Appalachian State (W) Duke University (W) Florida, "University of (W) Northern Colorado, (W) Jacksonville Univ. University of (W) Louisville, Univ. of (W) Madison College (W) Middle Tenn. State (W) N. Carolina A & T State (M) Calif., Univ. of (W) N. Carolina State Univ. Berkeley (W) South Alabama, Univ. of (M) Calif. Univ. of (W) Stetson University Los Angeles (W) Tennessee Tech. Univ. (M) Calif. Univ. of (W) Tulane University Santa Barbara (M) Fullerton, Calif. State University (M) Long Beach, Calif. (M) Ball State Univ. State University (W) Dayton, Univ. of (M) Loyola Marymount (W) DePaul University University (W) Indiana State Univ. (W) Pacific, Univ. of (M) Ohio State Univ. (M,W) Pepperdine Univ. (W) Ohio University (M) San Diego State Univ. (W) Western Michigan Univ. (W) San Francisco, Univ. of (W) Wisconsin, Univ. of (M) Southern Calif. Madison Univ. of (W) Xavier University (M) Stanford University
Key to type of varisty intercollegiate volleyball program sponsored:
(M) : Men's Program Only (M,W) = Men's and Women's (W) • Women's Program Only Programs (Separate) (MX) = Mixed (men's and women's programs combined) DIVISION II
District 1 District 4
(K) Hartford, Univ. of (W) Akron, University of (W) St. Anselm's Univ. (W) Central State Univ. (M) Springfield College (W) Eastern 111. Univ. (W) Evansville, Univ. of District 2 (W) Grand Valley State College (M) East Stroudsburg (W) Hillsdale College State College (W) Illinois, Univ. of (W) Edinboro State College Chicago Circle (M) George Mason Univ. (W) Oakland University (W) LeMoyne College (W) Youngstown State Univ. (W) Loyola College (M) Maryland Univ. of District 5 Eastern Shore (W) New York Inst. of Tech, (W) Augustana College (W) Philadelphia College (W) Lincoln University of Textiles & Science (W) Missouri, Univ. of (W) Pittsburgh, Univ. of (W) Morningside College Johnstown (W) N. Dakota, Univ. of
District 3 District 6
(W) Augusta College (W) Arkansas, Univ. of (W) Bellarmine College Little Rock (W) Belmont Abbey College (W) Arkansas, Univ. of (W) Eckerd College Pine Bluff (W) Elizabeth City State (W) Southern Univeristy College (W) Federal City College District 7 (W) Jacksonville State (W) N. Carolina Central (W) Fort Lewis College (W) N. Kentucky Univ. (W) Pembroke State Univ. District 8 (W) St. Augustine's Coll. (W) Southeastern La. Univ. (M) Calif., Univ. of (W) Tuskegee Institute Riverside (W) West Georgia College (M) Calif. Polytechnic State Univ (W) Los Angeles, Calif. State Univ. (W) Puget Sound, Univ. ( DIVISION III
(W) Babson College (M) Embry-Riddle Aero (M,W) Barrington College nautical Inst. (W) Boston State Coll. (W) Emory & Henry Coll. (W) Gordon College (M) Gallaudet College (W) Maine, Univ. of (W) Greenboro College Farmington (W) Maryville College (W) Maine, Univ. of Southwestern Coll. Presque Isle S Washington Coll. (W) Southeastern Mass. (W) Western Maryland Coll. Univ. (W) Western New England College (M,W) Westfield State Coll. (W) Aquinas College (W) Ashland College District 2 (W) Beloit College (W) Capital University (W) Albright College (W) Case Western Reserve (W) Alfred University (W) Denison Univ. (M) Brooklyn College (W) Heidelberg College (M,W) Dist. of Col. (W) Illinois Benedictine Teachers Coll. Coll. (W) Fairleigh Dickinson (W) John Carroll Univ. Univ.-Madison (W) Knox College (M) InterAmerican Univ. (W) North Park Coll. (W) Kutztown State Coll. (W) Otterbein College (W) Mercy College (W) Ripon College (W) Monmouth College (W) St. Norbert College (MX) New Jersey Inst. of Tech. (W) New York, City Coll. of (W) Pace University (W) Jamestown College (M,W) Puerto Rico, Univ. of (W) Nebraska Wesleyan Univ. (M) Rutgers Univ. Newark (W) Upper Iowa University (W) Thiel College (W) Washington University (M) Turabo College (W) William Penn College (MX) U.S. Merchant Marine Academy District 6 (W) Upsala College (W) Washington & Jefferson (W) Bishop College College (W) Wilkes College District 7 (W) York College (Pa) (W) Colorado College
(M) Calif. Univ. of San Diego (W) Stanislaus, Ca. State (W) Whittier College APPENDIX H
NCAA DIVISION I, II, AND III MEMBER INSTITUTIONS
WHICH SPONSOR INTERCOLLEGIATE
VOLLEYBALL (1978) District 4 (Con't)
Rhode Island, Univ. of Michigan Univ. of Providence College Northern 111. Univ. Yale University Ohio State Univ. Purdue Univ. District 2 District 5 Duquesne University Fordham University Kansas State Univ. Niagara University Oklahoma Univ of Pennsylvania State Univ. Tulsa, Univ. of Princeton University Rider College District 6 St. Francis College (N.Y.) St. Francis College (PA) Arkansas State Univ. Temple University Jackson State Univ. U.S. Military Academy Pan American Univ. U.S. Naval Academy Southern Univ., Baton Rouge Southwestern Louisiana, District 3 Univ. of
Auburn University District 7 Austin Peay State University Campbell College Arizona State Univ. Clemson University Gonzaga University Duke University Montana University of E. Carolina University Montana State University E. Tennessee State Univ. Weber State College Mississippi, Univ. of N. Carolina, Univ. of District 8 Charlotte N. Carolina, Univ. of Calif. Univ. of Berkeley Wilmington Calif. Univ. of Irvine South Alabama, Univ. of Calif. Univ. of Los Angeles Stetson University Calif. Univ. of Santa Barbara Tulane University Fresno State University Virginia Polytechnic Inst. Hawaii, Univ. of William & Mary, College of Long Beach Calif. State Univ. Loyola Marymount Univ. District 4 Pepperdine University San Diego State Univ. Ball State University San Francisco, Univ. of Dayton, Univ. of Santa Clara, Univ. of Eastern Mich. Univ. Southern Calif, Univ. of Kent State Univ. Stanford University Loyola Univ. Washington, University of 192
DIVISION II
District 1 District 4
Bryant College Akron, University of Hartford, University of Eastern Illinois University Lowell, University of Ferris State College Springfield College Hillsdale College Indiana Central University District 2 Illinois Univ. of Chicago Circle Clarion State College St. Cloud State University East Stroudsburg State Coll. St. Joseph's College (Ind) Cannon College Wright State University George Mason University Hampton Institùte District 5 Indiana University (PA) LeMoyne College Ceiîtral Missouri State Univ. Maryland, University of Lincoln University (MO) Eastern Shore Missouri Univ. of Kans. City N. York Institute of Tech. Northeast Missouri State Univ. Pittsburg, Univ. of Johnstown District 7
District 3 Ft. Lewis College Regis College Belmont Abbey College Western State College Columbus College Eckerd College District 8 Elizabeth City State Coll. Florida A & M Univ. Calif. Univ. of Riverside Florida Intl. Univ. Calif. Polytechnic State Univ. Northern Kentucky Univ. San Luis Obispo Pembroke State Univ. Los Angeles, Calif. State Roanoke College University St. Augustine's College Northridge, Calif. State Troy State University University Tuskegee Institute Calif. State Polytechnic Winston-Salem State Univ. University, Pomona Puget Sound, University of San Diego, University of 193
DIVISION III
District 1 District 3
Babson College Bowie State College Bridgewater State Coll. Bridgewater College Framingham State Coll. Christopher Newport College Gordon College Eastern Mennonite College Hawthorne College Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Keene State College Institute Maine Univ. of Farmington Fisk University North Adams State Coll. Galludet College Rhode Island College Greensboro College Salem State College Knoxville College Western Connecticut Lynchburg College State College Miles College Westfield State College Southwestern College Windham College South, University of the Washington College District 2 District 4 Albany, State Univ. of NY Elmira College Adrian College Fairleigh Dickinson Univ., Albion College Madison Alma College InterAmerican University Beloit College Ithca College Calvin College Juniata College Case Western Reserve Univ. Kean College Chicago, University of King's College Denison University Kutztown State College Indiana Univ - Purdue Univ Lincoln University (PA) Fort Wayne Medgar Evers College Knox College New Jersey Inst, of Tech. Macalester College Oneonta, State Univ. Coll. Monmouth College (ILL) Pace University Muskingum College Pratt Institute North Central College Puerto Rico, Univ. of North Park College Queens College Otterbein College Rochester Institute of Principia College Technology Ripon College Rutgers University, Newark St. Thomas, College of Salisbury State College Wheaton College Stockton State College Wooster, College of Thiel College Turabo, Univ. of U.S. Merchant Marine Acad. Washington & Jefferson College Wilkes College 194
DIVISION III (Cont'd)
District 5 District 8
Coe College California, Univ. of San Diego Dubuque University of Claremont-Mudd-Scripps Coll. Jamestown College Pomona Pitzer Colleges Nebraska Wesleyan Univ. Stanislaus, Calif. State Univ.
District 6
Austin College Bishop College APPENDIX I
NCAA DIVISION I, II, AND III MEMBER INSTITUTIONS
WHICH SPONSOR INTERCOLLEGIATE
VOLLEYBALL (1979) 196
Boston University Ball State University Providence College Cincinnati, Univ. of Yale University Ohio State University
District 2 District 7
Fordham University San Diego State University George Mason University Pennsylvania State Univ. District 8 Pittsburgh, Univ. of Princeton University Calif. Univ. of Berkeley Robert Morris College Calif. Univ. of Los Angeles St. Bonaventure Univ. Calif. Univ. of Santa Barbara St. Francis College (NY) Hawaii, University of U.S. Military Academy Long Beach, Calif. State Univ. U.S. Naval Academy Loyola Marymount University Pepperdine University District 3 St. Mary's College Santa Clara, University of Maryland, Univ. of Southern California, Univ. of College Park Stanford University Mississippi, Univ. of Tennessee Tech. Univ. Virginia Commonwealth Univ. Wake Forest University DIVISION II
District 1 District 5
Springfield College Central Missouri State Univ. South Dakota, Univ. of District 2 District 7 G, W. Post College East Stroudsburg State Regis College College Hampton Institute District 8 Maryland, Univ. of Eastern Shore Calif. Univ. of Riverside U.S. Merchant Marine Calif. Polytech. State Univ. Academy San Luis Obispo Calif. State Polytechnic District 3 Univ., Pomona Northridge, California Elizabeth City State Univ. State University Northern Kentucky Univ.
District 4
Wright State University DIVISION III District 1 Turabo University of Ursinus College Babson College Wilkes College Franklin Pierce College Yeshiva University Hawthorne College^ Keene State College District 3 North Adams State College Western New England College Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Westfield State College Inst. Gallaudet College District 2 North Carolina, Univ. of Greensboro Albany, State Univ. of NY Carnegie-Mellon Univ. District 4 Herbert H. Lehman College InterAmerican University^ Indiana Univ. - Purdue Univ, Juniata College Fort Wayne Kutztown State College Mount Union College Lincoln University (PA) Muskingum College New Jersey Institute of Tech. Otterbein College New Paltz, State Univ. Coll. New York, City College of District 5 Pace University , Puerto Rico, University of Washington University Queens College William Penn College Rutgers University, Newark Thiel College District 8
California, Univ. of San Diego Occidental College Whittier College
Ineligible for postseason competition. APPENDIX J
NCAA DIVISION I, II, AND III MEMBER INSTITUTIONS
X'THICH SPONSOR INTERCOLLEGIATE
VOLLEYBALL (1980) Boston University Oklahoma University of Providence College West Texas State University Yale University District 7 District 2 San Deigo State University Catholic University Fairleigh Dickinson Univ. District 8 Teaneck Fordham University California Univ. of Los George Mason University Angeles Pennsylvania State Univ. California Univ. of Santa Pittsburgh, Univ. of Barbara Princeton University Fresno State University Rutgers University, Newark Hawaii, Univ. of St. Francis College (NY) Long Beach, California State Univ. District 3 Loyola Marymount University Pepperdine University Tennessee Tech. University Santa Clara, University of Southern California Univ. of District 4 Stanford University
Ball State University Cincinnati, Univ. of Ohio State University DIVISION II
District 5
Springfield College Central Missouri State Univ, South Dakota University District 2 District 7 East Stroudsburg State Coll. Edinboro State College Regis College Hampton Institute U.S.' Merchant Marine Acad. District 8
District 3 California, Univ. of Riverside California Polytechnic State Elizabeth City State Univ. University, San Luis Obispo Roanoke College Northridge, Calif. State Univ. Southeastern Louisiana Univ, Puget Sound, University of Virginia State University DIVISION III
District 1 District 3
Hawthorne College^’^’^ Gallaudet College Maine, University of Longwood College Salem State College N. Carolina, Univ. of Westfield State College Greensboro
District 2 District 4
Albany, State Univ. of NY Heidelberg College Allegheny College Indiana Univ. - Purdue Univ. Bernard M. Baruch College Fort Wayne Carnegie-Mellon Univ. Clarkson College of Tech. Dickinson College Gettysburg College « Bishop College InterAmerican University King’s College District 8 Kutztown State College Medgar Evers College California, Univ. of San Muhlenberg College Diego New Jersey Inst, of Tech. Occidental College New Paltz, State Univ. Coll. Pomona-Pitzer Colleges New York City, College of Puerto Rico, University of Queens College Susquehanna University Ursinus College Wilkes College Yeshiva University
Chose not to participate in NCAA postseason competition.
^Ineligible for NCAA postseason competition per Bylaw 4-6-(d)
^Ineligible for NCAA postseason competition for delinquent dues. APPENDIX K
QUESTIONS ON PERSONS AND INSTITUTIONS IMPORTANT
IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF VOLLEYBALL AT
THE INTERCOLLEGIATE LEVEL Q.8 Could you list a few of the people and their con tributions who you^feel were important in the develop ment of volleyball at intercollegiate level?
Number of persons interviewed 12 Number who responded to Q.8 12
Responses
Donald S. Shondell 8 Allen A. Scates 8 Coleman 5 Veronee 4 Burt De Groot 3 Jack Bailey _ 2 Doug Beal ‘ 2 Harry Wilson Rod Scholl John Lowell Dick Larkins John Ketchman Ken Dunlap Richard H. Perry Bill Odeneal
Q.9 Could you do the same for institutions?
Number of persons interviewed 12 Number who responded to Q.9 12
Ball State University Ohio State University George Williams College Earlham College UCLA Springfield College Rutgers of New Jersey UCSB u s e Penn State Pepperdine University Kellogg Community College BIBLIOGRAPHY
Egstrom, Glen H,, Frances Schaafsma. Volleyball. Dubuque, Iowa: Ito. C, Brown, 1972,
Emery, Curtis Ray, Modern Volleyball, New York: The Mac Millan & Company, 1953,
Grombach, John V, The Official'1980 Olympic Guide, New York: Times Books, 1980,
Keller, Val, Point, Game and Match! Coaching Supplement, Hollywood, California, P,0, Box 2244: Creative Editorial Service, 1971,
Killanin, Lord, and Rodda, John, Eds, The Olympic Games 1980, MacMillan Publishing Company, Inc,: New York, 1979,
Montgomery, Katherine W. Modern Volleyball For Women, New York: A,S, Barnes and Company, 1928,
Peck, Wilbur, Volleyball, New York: Collier, 1970,
Scates, Allen E, Winning Volleyball, 470 Atlantic Avenue, Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc,, 1972,
Thigpen, Janet, Power Volleyball, Dubuque, Iowa : Wm, C, Brown Co,, Inc,, 1957,
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1916-1917,
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1917-1918,
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1920,
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1922-1923,
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1923-1924,
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1924-1925, 206
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1925- 1926.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1926- 1927.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1927- 1928.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1928- 1929.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1929- 1930.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1933- 1934.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1935,
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1935- 1936.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1936- 1937.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1937- 1938.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1938- 1939.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1940.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1941.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1942.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1943.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1944.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1945.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1946.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1947.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1948.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1949.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1950.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1951.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1952.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1953, USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1954.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1955.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1956.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1957.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1958.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1959.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1960.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1961.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1962.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1963.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1964.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1965.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1966.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1967.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1968.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1969.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1970.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1971,
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide, 1972.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1973.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1974.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1975.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1976.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1977.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1978. USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1979.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1980.
USVBA Official Volleyball Guide. 1981.
Wardale, Peter. Volleyball. 24 Russel Square London: Faber and Faber Limited, 1964.
Welch, J. Edmund. (Ed.) How to Play and Teach Volleyball. New York: Association Press, 1969.
Bell, John. "Volleyball Exhibition for 12,000," Inter national Volleyball Review. VII, No. 24 (March, 1948), p. .15.
Boyden, Doug. "Where Are The Volleyball Spectators," International Volleyball Review, VIII, No. 29 (May, 1949), p. 12.
Cotter, Tom. "University of California Wins Northern California Intercollegiate Volleyball Title," International Volleyball Review, VII, No. 22 (Nov., 1947), p. 24.
Evans, Gene. "Volleyball Survey," International Volleyball Review, XXI, No. 82 (Nov-Dee. 1962), p. 12.
Friermood, Harold T. "Volleyball Reflections: The First 75 Years (1895-1970)," Journal of Physical Education, 68: 35-6, November, 1970.
Friermood, Harold T. "Highlights in the History of Volleyball," International Volleyball Review, XX, No. 80 (March-April, 1962), p. 45.
Greenwood, Roy. "College Volleyball," International Volleyball Review, XXI, No. 46 (Nov.-Dec, 1953), P. l2. Greenwood, Roy. "College Volleyball," International Volleyball Review, XII, No. 47 (Jan.-Feb., 1954), p. 22.
Greenwood, Roy. "With the Colleges," International Volleyball Review, XIII, No. 52 (March-April, 1955) ---- Heisler, Ed. "Collegiate-Interscholastic," International Volleyball Review. XVIII, No. 70 (Dec., 1959), p. 8.
Jones, Kevin. "Nhy is Intercollegiate Volleyball Dying," International Volleyball Review. XVIII, No. 72 (April-May, 1960), p. 41.
Pead, Charles. "TVhere is College Volleyball in the East," International Volleyball Review. VII, No. 25 (May, 1948), p. 17.
Shondell, Don. "Volleyball in the Colleges and Schools," International Volleyball Review. XXV. No. 99 'CAug.','1967), p. 67.
Walters, M. L. "First Eastern Invitational Intercollegiate Volleyball Tourney,” International Volleyball Review. VIII, No. 30 "(Nov. , 1949), p. 8. ----
Wilson, Harry E. "More Milestones," International Volleyball Review. VII, No. 22 (Nov., 1947), p. 4.
Monographs, Manuals, Programs, Reports. Special Publications
National Collegiate Athletic Association. Men's Volleyball Championship Handbook. Shawnee Mission. Kansas: 1974.
National Collegiate Athletic Association. Men's Volleyball Championship Handbook. Shawnee Mission. Kansas. T9731
National Collegiate Athletic Association. Men's Volleyball vm:Championship Handbook. Shawnee Mission. Kansas: National Collegiate Athletic Association. Men's Volleyball Championship Handbook. Shawnee Mission, Kansas :
National Collegiate Athletic Association. Men's Volleyball Championship Handbook. Shawnee Mission. Kansas :
National Collegiate Athletic Association. Men's Volleyball Championship Handbook. Shawnee Mission, Kansas: V579. National Collegiate Athletic Association. Men's Volleyball Championship Handbook. Shawnee Mission, Kansas: 19ÔÔ.
National Collegiate Athletic Association. Men's Volleyball Championship Handbook. Shawnee Mission. Kansas: TWT.
Encyclopedias
Hickok, Ralph. New Encyclopedia of Sports. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. 1977.
Menke, Frank G. The Encyclopedia of Sports. 5th Rev. ed., New Jersey: A. S. Barnes and Co., Inc. 1975.
Pratt, John Lowell and Jim Benagh, The Official Encyclopedia of Sports. 575 Lexington Avenue, New York: Franklin Watts, Inc. 1964.
Webster's Sports Dictionary. Springfield, Massachusetts: G.C. Merriam Company Publishers. 1976.
Personal Interviews
Baxter, Betty. Coach, Canadian Volleyball Association, April 4, 1981. St. John Arena, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Beal, Dough. National Coach, February 28, 1981 and April 4, 1981. St. John Arena, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Colberg, Gary. USVBA, 501 Reed Drive, Davis, California. April 4, 1981. St. John Arena, Ohio State Univer sity, Columbus.
Dunlap, Ken. Former Ohio State Volleyball Coach, June 8, 1981. "Sports Imports," Columbus.
Gozansky, Sue. Volleyball Coach, University of California, Riverside, California. April 4, 1981. St. John Arena, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Kechman, John. Former Coach and Player, YMCA Columbus, June 18, 1981. Columbus. 211
Liskevych, Taras. Volleyball Coach, University of Pacific, April 3, 1981. St. John Arena, Ohio State Univer sity, Columbus.
McPeak, Clifford T. Volleyball Coach, Colorado Springs, Colorado. April 4, 1981. St. John Arean, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Mand, Charles. Former Ohio State (Club) Volleyball Coach, March 30, 1981. Larkins Hall, Ohio State Univer sity, Columbus.
Neville, Bill. Coach, USA Men's National Team, April 3, 1981. St. John Arena, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Peterson, James C. Volleyball Coach, Grand Rapids, Michigan. April 3, 1981. St. John Arena, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Rose, Russ. Volleyball Coach, Penn State University, April 3, 1981. St. John Arena, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Scates, Allen E. Volleyball Coach, University of California, April 4, 1981. St. John Arena, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Shaw, Don. Volleyball Coach, Stanford University, April 3, 1981. St. John Arena, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Tegtmeir, Doug. Former Ohio State University Team Player and Coach, Columbus.
Yoder, Robert. Former Ohio State University Coach, April 6 , 1981.
Dissertations and Unpublished Manuscripts
Liskevych, Taras Nestor. A Comparative Study of Women's Volleyball at the~International Level. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, 1976.
Lu, Hui-Ching. An ^alysis of Volleyball in Various Regions of the World. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Teacher's College Columbia University, 1950. Odeneal, William T. The History and Contributions of the United States Volleyball Association. Ünpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Springfield College, 1968.
Pennington, Julia Dietz. A Study of the History of Certain Sports as a Part of Genieral School Educatio^ Unpublished M.À. Thesis, Ohio State University, Columbus, 1930.
Rodick, Miles I. Forces Affecting the Development of the Sport of Volleyball in the United States. Unpub lished M.A. Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, 1959.
Rodick, Miles I. Abstract. Completed Research in Health, Physical Education and Recreation 2:31; No. 53, 1960.
Webb, Jimme R. Status of Men’s Intercollegiate Volleyball in the United States. Unpublished M.S. Thesis, Western Illinois University, Illinois, 1973.
Webb, Jimme R. Abstract. Completed Research in Health, Physical Education Recreation 21;311; No. 683, 1979,