|
Post by Keystonekid on Nov 28, 2006 22:13:01 GMT -5
Hodge, may not be the best "player" she was however the most dominant player in the league, therefore had the most impact on matches. That is my definition of POY. I think Barboza is the best player in the nation, I think there are a few other players impacting matches at a higher level. Another example is Larson is the best player at Nebraska, Pavan is the player that creates the toughest challenges for opponents, forces them to address her specifically, and therfore impacts the match at a higher level.
|
|
|
Post by rudepa on Nov 28, 2006 23:27:07 GMT -5
Perhaps if Hodge could pass a ball decently, Fawcett could have been a candidate for POY.....but why expect good all around play from the POY?? Yes, that's sarcasm
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2006 23:32:39 GMT -5
If someone else had been better this year -- including on PSU -- that person would have won. Fact is, there were no spectacular standouts in the Big10 this year.
And Hodge's backrow play isn't _that_ bad. You all are making her out to be Gorf or something. Didn't she do pretty darned well for a frosh?
But I want to know: Did PSU make some promises to her to get her there? Did Nebraska with Pavan? Does that sort of thing happen at elite programs?
I'm guessing not, but maybe I'm naive.
|
|
|
Post by bucky415 on Nov 29, 2006 0:53:28 GMT -5
I think that Walbridge also might have been a victim of the setting decisions Glass made. I don't think they set her enough, even when the pass was there. She was effective when she got more sets late in the year.
|
|
|
Post by parent on Nov 29, 2006 2:40:11 GMT -5
I think you're crazy to think that Nelson should have been POY.
|
|
|
Post by cbrown1709 on Nov 29, 2006 3:04:18 GMT -5
Agree. Hodge is a great talent, but has a lot of weaknesses to her game.....esp. her passing. That is why when teams keyed their serving on her, they won. That is why PSU won't make it to the Final Four.
|
|
|
Post by Keystonekid on Nov 29, 2006 10:15:36 GMT -5
You better believe coaches make promises to that affect. I am not sure that happened in the two cases mentioned, but it does. In Pavan's case, her backrow play was sub par as a frosh, but you have to leave a kid who can attack like that in the back row in the match. As for, hodge, essentially one OH had to stay in the match, Salyer is a reformed middle, Fawcett is not very strong either. With both middles coming out, the RS and the O2 as well, you only have so many subs.
|
|
|
Post by spikerthemovie on Nov 29, 2006 10:16:23 GMT -5
I would be all for a Gopher as POY -- although, with the stats spread out over so many people, it'd be tough to figure out who (I think a case could be made for Cumpston, who didn't even make the all-Big Ten team HMs) -- but I find myself weirdly OK with the Hodge choice, based on seeing her in one of her team's toughest matches, at MN. Yeah, she was a huge liability in the back row and yeah, her passing was often horrid. But PSU won that match because she took them on her back. She almost single-handedly won that match for them and she DID single-handedly win the fourth game. I'm interested to see how she responds in the tournament, where she can expect to receive every serve.
|
|
|
Post by D. B. Cooper on Nov 29, 2006 10:25:21 GMT -5
But I want to know: Did PSU make some promises to her to get her there? Did Nebraska with Pavan? Does that sort of thing happen at elite programs? I'm guessing not, but maybe I'm naive. IMO, yes that's clearly the case. It doesn't have to do with elite programs, it has to do with elite players. When you're a program changer that has her pick of schools (i.e. Hodge, Pavan, et al), you can set your own terms, to an extent. They want to play...all the time. I would too. Besides, PSU will certainly reap the benefits of Hodge playing backrow now in the years to come. Scary.
|
|