|
Post by azvb on Aug 4, 2010 8:30:38 GMT -5
Didn't USC run a 6-2 not too many years ago with the setters subbing for the MB's? Maybe I dreamt that - sort of an "Inception" thing. Just FYI, in the mid-late 70's the ONLY team runnng a 5-1 was USC with Debbie Green doing a fairly decent job . I remember R2's calling her out of rotation a lot because they had never seen it before - their serve receive "disguised" whether she was front or back row. 14 year old teams are doing it now, but it was pretty advanced stuff in '77.
|
|
|
Post by postitagain2 on Aug 4, 2010 8:31:38 GMT -5
Dayton ran a 5-2 and a 6-2 all season last year. In the 5-2 the setters sub in for each other. One plays the front row and one plays the backrow and they sub in as the setter position rotates around. The Libero subs in for the MBs in this offense and there is one rightside. In the 5-2 you have the same amount of hitters as in a 5-1.
When they moved to the 6-2, the setters rotate in paired up with an MB so there are two players coming in at the same time. In this offense, the setter play only in the backrow. There are 2 rightsides in this offense and the Libero subs in for the rightsides. Nebraska is looking at this offense this year because they have two talented rightsides and two talented setters. In the 6-2, you have an extra hitter - the second rightside - because the setters are only in the backrow rotation. This offense put more attacking pressure on the opposition with the extra hitter. That's why coaches would "like" to run it, but the "problem" is finding two setters that put up a similar ball. That's hard.
People confuse the 5-2 by calling it a 6-2 a lot of the times. But I think the question here is really how many teams run 2 setter offenses versus 1. Most run with 1 because they can't find two similar setters.
FYI, there were 2 SETS (not matches) UD ran a 5-1 last year. Sheff was not pleased with something and gave each setter one set in a 5-1. Otherwise they ran with 2 setters. And it was injuries throughout the season that dictated either the 5-2 or the 6-2.
|
|
|
Post by sevb on Aug 4, 2010 9:36:55 GMT -5
Dayton ran a 5-2 and a 6-2 all season last year. In the 5-2 the setters sub in for each other. One plays the front row and one plays the backrow and they sub in as the setter position rotates around. The Libero subs in for the MBs in this offense and there is one rightside. In the 5-2 you have the same amount of hitters as in a 5-1. Wouldn't this just be a modified 5-1?? Both setters are setting out of the same position... just one in the front and one in the back...
|
|
|
Post by crawdaddy on Aug 4, 2010 9:44:54 GMT -5
Didn't USC run a 6-2 not too many years ago with the setters subbing for the MB's? Maybe I dreamt that - sort of an "Inception" thing. Just FYI, in the mid-late 70's the ONLY team runnng a 5-1 was USC with Debbie Green doing a fairly decent job . I remember R2's calling her out of rotation a lot because they had never seen it before - their serve receive "disguised" whether she was front or back row. 14 year old teams are doing it now, but it was pretty advanced stuff in '77. You are absolutely right. Throughout the seventies almost all teams (male and female) ran a 6-2 in the U.S. The change came because of changes in offense, not because people all of a sudden realized that having a single setter would be better. The primary benefit of a 6-2 is that you have three front row hitters at all times. Teams used to be scared of getting stuck in a rotation with only two hitters, where the blockers could load up and commit on either the middle hitter or the outside. Hence, they would go with a 6-2. Two changes occured. Teams started attacking from the back row (particularly men's team), effectively giving you more than two attackers when your setter was in the front row. On the women's side, the use of the slide attack also made it more difficult for other teams to load up on their blocking and easier for teams to side-out with two hitters in the front row. So in deciding to go with a 5-1 or 6-2, I think one has to not only look at your setting, but also your hitters. Do you have a dominant M-1 who can effectively run the slide? Do you have quality back-row attackers? And, of course, do you have either setters or RS who are good hitters?
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Aug 4, 2010 9:54:03 GMT -5
Dayton ran a 5-2 and a 6-2 all season last year. In the 5-2 the setters sub in for each other. One plays the front row and one plays the backrow and they sub in as the setter position rotates around. The Libero subs in for the MBs in this offense and there is one rightside. In the 5-2 you have the same amount of hitters as in a 5-1. Wouldn't this just be a modified 5-1?? Both setters are setting out of the same position... just one in the front and one in the back... Different names for the same thing. The term 5-2 originates from the more direct interpretation of the offensive system name structure '# of hitters - # of setters'
|
|
|
Post by crawdaddy on Aug 4, 2010 9:56:04 GMT -5
Good example to prove my point above. In the Manhattan Beach Six Man tournament (won this year on the women's side by a team with ex-Texas setter Carrie Busch Dodd and USC outside hitter Diane Cophenhagen) virtually all the good teams run a 6-2. Why, because on the beach you can't really effectively: (1) hit from behind the 10 ft. line or (2) run a slide. So you need three hitters in the front row.
|
|
|
Post by itsallrelative on Aug 4, 2010 9:56:46 GMT -5
Didn't USC run a 6-2 not too many years ago with the setters subbing for the MB's? Maybe I dreamt that - sort of an "Inception" thing. Just FYI, in the mid-late 70's the ONLY team runnng a 5-1 was USC with Debbie Green doing a fairly decent job . I remember R2's calling her out of rotation a lot because they had never seen it before - their serve receive "disguised" whether she was front or back row. 14 year old teams are doing it now, but it was pretty advanced stuff in '77. You are absolutely right. Throughout the seventies almost all teams (male and female) ran a 6-2 in the U.S. The change came because of changes in offense, not because people all of a sudden realized that having a single setter would be better. The primary benefit of a 6-2 is that you have three front row hitters at all times. Teams used to be scared of getting stuck in a rotation with only two hitters, where the blockers could load up and commit on either the middle hitter or the outside. Hence, they would go with a 6-2. Two changes occured. Teams started attacking from the back row (particularly men's team), effectively giving you more than two attackers when your setter was in the front row. On the women's side, the use of the slide attack also made it more difficult for other teams to load up on their blocking and easier for teams to side-out with two hitters in the front row. So in deciding to go with a 5-1 or 6-2, I think one has to not only look at your setting, but also your hitters. Do you have a dominant M-1 who can effectively run the slide? Do you have quality back-row attackers? And, of course, do you have either setters or RS who are good hitters? On a related note, when did the 6-1 sub rule come into effect, internationall?
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Aug 4, 2010 9:59:14 GMT -5
It depends on the personnel, with coaches changing the situation as personnel change, as well as the occasional mid-season or even mid-game switch. I remember Santa Clara starting out with a 6-2 in 2004, which they abandoned by the end of the season. Stanford has tried variations on the 6-2 in recent years. I would have to add that I haven't heard of anyone in DI/II/III purposely recruiting players to run a 6-2 (outside of the better setter that can play front row getting injured at the last minute, so now looking for a 3rd setter to go along with the 2nd setter who is a non-block, and would have to be subbed out). More that they had decided to run it based on the players they had gotten, injuries, tactics, etc.
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on Aug 4, 2010 10:12:08 GMT -5
Dayton ran a 5-2 and a 6-2 all season last year. In the 5-2 the setters sub in for each other. One plays the front row and one plays the backrow and they sub in as the setter position rotates around. The Libero subs in for the MBs in this offense and there is one rightside. In the 5-2 you have the same amount of hitters as in a 5-1. Wouldn't this just be a modified 5-1?? Both setters are setting out of the same position... just one in the front and one in the back... Yep - just a 5-1. Substitutions really don't change whether it's a 5-1 or a 6-2. It's what's done with the rotational position. Stanford did that too circa 2002 and 2003. They had Anna Robinson and Dunning liked her in the front row to block and set.
|
|
|
Post by NotKingOfAnything on Aug 4, 2010 10:35:47 GMT -5
very interesting input everyone, thank you and keep it up please!
|
|
|
Post by pogoball on Aug 4, 2010 10:38:27 GMT -5
If I ever get a college job, I'm running the middle-school 6-0 offense or the Reverse-Coed 3-3 offense. Just because. Why not the 6-6? I would imagine the 6-0 would be really hard with experienced players. Teaching them to pass the first ball over the net would take up most of your preseason. Edit: I actually meant the 4-6. 6-6 would be much harder. Teaching the big girls to set out of the back row would be way too much work.
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Aug 4, 2010 10:48:50 GMT -5
Lonewolf, Florida recruited Rogers and now Brown with the idea of putting them in a 6-2. Not sure they actually will, but Florida's always seemed like they wanted to put Murphy in a system where she can both set and hit.
|
|
|
Post by vbfamily on Aug 4, 2010 10:56:42 GMT -5
USF (in Florida) ran a 6-2 with their really good setters subbing out for 2 strong RS attackers. They substituted so fast that it seemed like it didn't even effect momentum or anything.
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on Aug 4, 2010 11:37:42 GMT -5
Lonewolf, Florida recruited Rogers and now Brown with the idea of putting them in a 6-2. Not sure they actually will, but Florida's always seemed like they wanted to put Murphy in a system where she can both set and hit. Ahh..thanks for the info.
|
|
|
Post by sevb on Aug 4, 2010 11:50:42 GMT -5
USF (in Florida) ran a 6-2 with their really good setters subbing out for 2 strong RS attackers. They substituted so fast that it seemed like it didn't even effect momentum or anything. I think they did it more for a blocking system than an offense... Mari Thon is a good enough setter to run a 5-1 and IMO was far better than the other setter they used, however at her size she would have been a blocking liability! And their offense never really changed... set the big OH and let her swing... Gurgel will be a loss for them!!
|
|