Post by gogophers on Oct 22, 2007 15:08:02 GMT -5
My 2 cents (for what it's worth, which is probably less than $.02):
1. I wasn't a member of Volleytalk in 2005 and so have never read the posts on Gentil being a problem. I hope they're backed by solid info. Otherwise, it would be a shame to see the most talented Gopher in the last five years denigrated like that. I saw a lot of matches in 2005. I don't think Gentil was fully recovered from her surgery. I never saw anything less than 100% effort from her.
2. I don't understand all this talk about chemistry. Yes, I read once an article in which Hebert said the 2005 team lacked it, but I thought that was just a polite way of saying, we just didn't have the players at a point in their development to be all that good. The 2005 team lost six seniors from the year before, including four starters; deployed a freshman setting; counted heavily on a transfer who didn't pan out and ended up transferring out of volleyball altogether after the season; and ran into a buzzsaw in the NCAA who both peaked at the right time and had the luxury of playing at home. Just those facts alone make the so-so showing no surprise.
3. I'm not a coach and I'm a million miles from being an expert. It's simply a mystery to me how this team went from sort of hot to stone cold in a matter of weeks. There was chemistry enough to beat SD and Michigan. It's a mystery too how this team went from consistently to holding other teams to under .200 hitting, usually well under .200, to making MSU look like PSU as regards hitting percentage.
Brook is Big Ten POW twice in the first month; then she disappears as an offensive force. Can only hit cross-court, so I read. Are we talking about the best broken playmaker/back court threat we've had for years, or at least that's what she looked like to me, that first month? That girl seems to be able to do anything. Her fall-off in offensive production doesn't make sense to me. Nor does the recent trend not to let you play all-around, as she seemed to be as good in the backcourt as anyone else.
Tan is big 10 defensive POW one week and then, well let's just say, she wasn't in the running.
The big difference between now and earlier in the season seems to be, Brook was on fire earlier, now she's in the background. Neither Katie nor Rachelle seem able to hit over even .200 consistently. So we now see that the Gophers had no depth on offense; they depended on Brook the way Michigan and Wisconsin do on having that one huge offensive force at OH and when that went away there was nothing to take its place. If memory serves, in the NW match, Gibbemeyer had more swings than any of the OH or RS players. She's great, but when something like that happens, you know the setter has no confidence in the other front line players.
4. Hartmann is criticized too much. The serve receive this year has been poor, especially against hard jump servers. The breakdown starts there. The team really misses Bowman and Peniata, more than I would have thought.
5. I agree with the poster who wondered why no one jump serves, not even when the Gophers are behind and not to take a chance in order to get 4-5 points on a service run. Cumpston was able to do that for them last year. Yeah, she'd hit a lot of errors; but she could also go on a run. Roysland is certainly able to hit jump serves. She'll miss a lot them, but sometimes you got to do something to shake up the other team (and impress you're own teammates). Listening to the NW game, all I heard on the Gophers' serve, was side out, side out, side out. Made me wish Cumpston was still playing.
6. I like what I've seen of Kelly Fallon, limited though it's been. I wonder why she doesn't get more of a chance. Yes I know; she doesn't, because the coaches, who know better, know better. Still, it surprises me that she's been totally eclipsed by two first-year players, both of whom look inexperienced to my untrained eye.
7. All this talk of resently upperclassmen: maybe they're resently; maybe they're not. I have no insider info. But Jones is playing well just the same, especially given her recently injury and Roehrig is better this year than last. If any of the others are resentful, we'll, they're either not playing (and weren't playing last year) or have never shown that they are good enough to make one think that their recent lack of performance has something to do with dissension in the ranks.
8. Gibbemeyer is definitely a bright spot this season. She is what she's been cracked up to be.
1. I wasn't a member of Volleytalk in 2005 and so have never read the posts on Gentil being a problem. I hope they're backed by solid info. Otherwise, it would be a shame to see the most talented Gopher in the last five years denigrated like that. I saw a lot of matches in 2005. I don't think Gentil was fully recovered from her surgery. I never saw anything less than 100% effort from her.
2. I don't understand all this talk about chemistry. Yes, I read once an article in which Hebert said the 2005 team lacked it, but I thought that was just a polite way of saying, we just didn't have the players at a point in their development to be all that good. The 2005 team lost six seniors from the year before, including four starters; deployed a freshman setting; counted heavily on a transfer who didn't pan out and ended up transferring out of volleyball altogether after the season; and ran into a buzzsaw in the NCAA who both peaked at the right time and had the luxury of playing at home. Just those facts alone make the so-so showing no surprise.
3. I'm not a coach and I'm a million miles from being an expert. It's simply a mystery to me how this team went from sort of hot to stone cold in a matter of weeks. There was chemistry enough to beat SD and Michigan. It's a mystery too how this team went from consistently to holding other teams to under .200 hitting, usually well under .200, to making MSU look like PSU as regards hitting percentage.
Brook is Big Ten POW twice in the first month; then she disappears as an offensive force. Can only hit cross-court, so I read. Are we talking about the best broken playmaker/back court threat we've had for years, or at least that's what she looked like to me, that first month? That girl seems to be able to do anything. Her fall-off in offensive production doesn't make sense to me. Nor does the recent trend not to let you play all-around, as she seemed to be as good in the backcourt as anyone else.
Tan is big 10 defensive POW one week and then, well let's just say, she wasn't in the running.
The big difference between now and earlier in the season seems to be, Brook was on fire earlier, now she's in the background. Neither Katie nor Rachelle seem able to hit over even .200 consistently. So we now see that the Gophers had no depth on offense; they depended on Brook the way Michigan and Wisconsin do on having that one huge offensive force at OH and when that went away there was nothing to take its place. If memory serves, in the NW match, Gibbemeyer had more swings than any of the OH or RS players. She's great, but when something like that happens, you know the setter has no confidence in the other front line players.
4. Hartmann is criticized too much. The serve receive this year has been poor, especially against hard jump servers. The breakdown starts there. The team really misses Bowman and Peniata, more than I would have thought.
5. I agree with the poster who wondered why no one jump serves, not even when the Gophers are behind and not to take a chance in order to get 4-5 points on a service run. Cumpston was able to do that for them last year. Yeah, she'd hit a lot of errors; but she could also go on a run. Roysland is certainly able to hit jump serves. She'll miss a lot them, but sometimes you got to do something to shake up the other team (and impress you're own teammates). Listening to the NW game, all I heard on the Gophers' serve, was side out, side out, side out. Made me wish Cumpston was still playing.
6. I like what I've seen of Kelly Fallon, limited though it's been. I wonder why she doesn't get more of a chance. Yes I know; she doesn't, because the coaches, who know better, know better. Still, it surprises me that she's been totally eclipsed by two first-year players, both of whom look inexperienced to my untrained eye.
7. All this talk of resently upperclassmen: maybe they're resently; maybe they're not. I have no insider info. But Jones is playing well just the same, especially given her recently injury and Roehrig is better this year than last. If any of the others are resentful, we'll, they're either not playing (and weren't playing last year) or have never shown that they are good enough to make one think that their recent lack of performance has something to do with dissension in the ranks.
8. Gibbemeyer is definitely a bright spot this season. She is what she's been cracked up to be.