|
Post by dorothymantooth on Feb 3, 2015 10:25:39 GMT -5
I certainly think Hooker is a slam dunk starter for the US, they don't have a player that can do what she does, and believe you have to have that kind of player to win vs the best in the world, at their best. If play against Brazil and self destruct like we did last time it won't matter if we have Hooker or not. I'm hoping this group we have will steady out...and not blink in the big matches later in the Olympic tournament. That was the worst implosioN after dominating a first set I have ever seen. What I don't want to see is if she is not on the team for Rio we don't disrespect the rest of the team and say that just because she wasn't there it changed the outcome which would be short sighted and ridiculous for many reasons. This is a TEAM sport winning a medal and long term success depend on having a functional whole....everyone focused low error and being positive even during rough patches. That's what I want to see... Well I think it stands to reason that if the entire group implodes having one player won't change the outcome. I would also say that if she is not in Rio and they fall just short, suggesting she may have made a difference would be neither short sighted or ridiculous. Talent certainly isnt the only determining factor of outcomes, but to dismiss it, is in my opinion short sided and ridiculous. I would love to see a functional whole....everyone focused low error and being positive even during rough patches. What I am saying is Hooker can take a swing in a rough patch, in a way nobody else we have can.
|
|
|
Post by #skoskers on Feb 3, 2015 10:32:56 GMT -5
I certainly think Hooker is a slam dunk starter for the US, they don't have a player that can do what she does, and believe you have to have that kind of player to win vs the best in the world, at their best. If play against Brazil and self destruct like we did last time it won't matter if we have Hooker or not. I'm hoping this group we have will steady out...and not blink in the big matches later in the Olympic tournament. That was the worst implosioN after dominating a first set I have ever seen. What I don't want to see is if she is not on the team for Rio we don't disrespect the rest of the team and say that just because she wasn't there it changed the outcome which would be short sighted and ridiculous for many reasons. This is a TEAM sport winning a medal and long term success depend on having a functional whole....everyone focused low error and being positive even during rough patches. That's what I want to see... I'm still wondering how much of Berg's injury impacted the GM match. Until set 2, we had been dominating the entire tournament, as we were undefeated, and Hooker was our best scorer. If Team USA doesn't even medal in Rio, then there will be reasonable disappointment on the part of fans who will be wondering why Destinee wasn't included on the roster. We were 6-2 against Brazil from 2010-2012 (inclusive of the Olympic matches). Since Destinee's departure, we are 1-6 against the Brazilians from 2013 to date.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Feb 3, 2015 10:36:42 GMT -5
I don't see it working in a way that either Hooker or Tom return for Rio. I don't really understand the phrasing of the statement: "... love to see Tom on the team if she could help us."
I have to assume that the poster had something in mind other than Logan's superior passing, defense, experience, blocking, court awareness, volleyball IQ, and her not so shabby attacking and serving.
Not sure what there is to understand about? Where Hooker is right now as a player, and where she is in her career, it's an absolute certainty that she could help the NT in a big way. I made that statement about Tom because given where she is in her career, and that she has all but said she isnt interested in returning to the NT, that it isnt a certainty that she could help the NT in Rio in a significant way. I dont believe I am the only one that shares that sentiment, although you certainly believe that I am. It would seem that me calling Tom a "legend" "the greatest womens player in US history" isnt enough to convince you I am not anti-Tom. Hooker would be a slam dunk starter, and I don't believe in another year and a half Tom would be, thus "if she could help us" Again, not sure how hard it is to understand that statement. You may disagree, which I respect, but the statement isn't very difficult to understand. It was not clear to me in your original post that you were talking about her playing level a year and a half from now, which is what I said plainly and directly: I don't really understand the phrasing. No need to get them all tied up in a knot.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Feb 3, 2015 13:15:03 GMT -5
Not sure what there is to understand about? Where Hooker is right now as a player, and where she is in her career, it's an absolute certainty that she could help the NT in a big way. I made that statement about Tom because given where she is in her career, and that she has all but said she isnt interested in returning to the NT, that it isnt a certainty that she could help the NT in Rio in a significant way. I dont believe I am the only one that shares that sentiment, although you certainly believe that I am. It would seem that me calling Tom a "legend" "the greatest womens player in US history" isnt enough to convince you I am not anti-Tom. Hooker would be a slam dunk starter, and I don't believe in another year and a half Tom would be, thus "if she could help us" Again, not sure how hard it is to understand that statement. You may disagree, which I respect, but the statement isn't very difficult to understand. It was not clear to me in your original post that you were talking about her playing level a year and a half from now, which is what I said plainly and directly: I don't really understand the phrasing. No need to get them all tied up in a knot. Yes, I wasn't clear that I was specifically talking about Rio. I think at her age, where she is now, and where she may be in a year and a half is significant. I still think her greatest opportunity and contribution could be at libero. I have no doubt she could be the best passer/defender we have in a year and a half. I just have a good sense that ship has sailed for both parties, which seems silly, if she is good enough, wanted to play, and was on-board with what their vision is at this point. She has done everything except the elusive Olympic gold.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2015 15:34:15 GMT -5
If play against Brazil and self destruct like we did last time it won't matter if we have Hooker or not. I'm hoping this group we have will steady out...and not blink in the big matches later in the Olympic tournament. That was the worst implosioN after dominating a first set I have ever seen. What I don't want to see is if she is not on the team for Rio we don't disrespect the rest of the team and say that just because she wasn't there it changed the outcome which would be short sighted and ridiculous for many reasons. This is a TEAM sport winning a medal and long term success depend on having a functional whole....everyone focused low error and being positive even during rough patches. That's what I want to see... I'm still wondering how much of Berg's injury impacted the GM match. Until set 2, we had been dominating the entire tournament, as we were undefeated, and Hooker was our best scorer. If Team USA doesn't even medal in Rio, then there will be reasonable disappointment on the part of fans who will be wondering why Destinee wasn't included on the roster. We were 5-2 against Brazil from 2010-2012 (inclusive of the Olympic matches). Since Destinee's departure, we are 1-6 against the Brazilians from 2013 to date. It's worth pointing out a couple of things about those records: 1. Two of those losses came in the 2013 WGP, where the only two Olympic starters were Harmotto and Davis (lol). 2. One of those losses came in the 2013 Grand Champions Cup, where the only Olympic-caliber starter was Larson. Hill, Murphy and Glass all started as well, but Hill and Murphy were nowhere near as effective then as they are now. 3. The final three are in 2014, two at the Grand Champions Cup and one at the World Cup. Not denying these were losses in any way, but that's the first year our (what will hopefully be) "Rio" team started playing together consistently. Harmotto, who has proven to be huge to our offense, also wasn't there. 4. I understand leaving out the USA Volleyball Cup matches, but I also don't buy they're completely nill. Brazil used their most competitive roster (with the exemption of Gabi occasionally) and I don't think they were "whatever" about the matches. They're athletes, they're competitive. Homecourt advantage does tilt the games in our favor though. Nonetheless, we played really well in those games and I don't think you can completely discount them. **Not putting words in your mouth, just anticipating arguments. Hooker might've helped us win the games in 2014, she might not have.
|
|
|
Post by #skoskers on Feb 4, 2015 17:18:05 GMT -5
I'm still wondering how much of Berg's injury impacted the GM match. Until set 2, we had been dominating the entire tournament, as we were undefeated, and Hooker was our best scorer. If Team USA doesn't even medal in Rio, then there will be reasonable disappointment on the part of fans who will be wondering why Destinee wasn't included on the roster. We were 5-2 against Brazil from 2010-2012 (inclusive of the Olympic matches). Since Destinee's departure, we are 1-6 against the Brazilians from 2013 to date. It's worth pointing out a couple of things about those records: 1. Two of those losses came in the 2013 WGP, where the only two Olympic starters were Harmotto and Davis (lol). 2. One of those losses came in the 2013 Grand Champions Cup, where the only Olympic-caliber starter was Larson. Hill, Murphy and Glass all started as well, but Hill and Murphy were nowhere near as effective then as they are now. 3. The final three are in 2014, two at the Grand Champions Cup and one at the World Cup. Not denying these were losses in any way, but that's the first year our (what will hopefully be) "Rio" team started playing together consistently. Harmotto, who has proven to be huge to our offense, also wasn't there. 4. I understand leaving out the USA Volleyball Cup matches, but I also don't buy they're completely nill. Brazil used their most competitive roster (with the exemption of Gabi occasionally) and I don't think they were "whatever" about the matches. They're athletes, they're competitive. Homecourt advantage does tilt the games in our favor though. Nonetheless, we played really well in those games and I don't think you can completely discount them. **Not putting words in your mouth, just anticipating arguments. Hooker might've helped us win the games in 2014, she might not have. First, we were actually 6-2 against the Brazilians once Hooker joined the squad. I'll revise my initial post. 1. Brazil's B-team swept our B-team (with Thompson, Fawcett, Hildebrand and Davis) in last year's World Championship with none of their Olympic starters. Their B-team still gets it done against Team USA. 2 & 3. 2010 was also a transformative year for a young USA roster that started playing together consistently, and we still spanked the Brazilians in the years to come. It seems the USA squads today should have the scouting advantage for preparing for the Brazilians, whose roster and system have barely changed since 2010 (with the exception of Fabi retiring). I mean, USA should know their tendencies in 2015, but we've done worse against them since the Olympics after the departures of Destinee and Logan. 4. The consensus on here at the time (and even watching the replays now) was that the Brazilian A-team wasn't playing to its full potential in the friendly matches. The players from their A-team didn't relentlessly pursue balls, hit at full strength, and Ze wasn't his animated self in timeouts, probably because everyone knew that nothing was on the line. We'll see if people reflect on the 2014 friendly matches in Rio, when the tables are completely turned: A gold medal will be on the line, the Brazilians will have HC advantage, and the game’s biggest audience will be watching from around the world. If Karch polishes his three gold medals and thinks about how terrific USA is for its wins against Brazil in the friendly matches, then the USA is likely to continue to get thumped by the Brazilians in the big tourneys. That is, I don't think he even gives much weight to those matches. In sum... From 2010-2012, we were 6-2 against the Brazilians with Destinee and Logan. From 2013 to today, we are 1-6 against our South American amigos without Destinee and Logan.
|
|
|
Post by kro2488 on Feb 5, 2015 12:52:36 GMT -5
It's worth pointing out a couple of things about those records: 1. Two of those losses came in the 2013 WGP, where the only two Olympic starters were Harmotto and Davis (lol). 2. One of those losses came in the 2013 Grand Champions Cup, where the only Olympic-caliber starter was Larson. Hill, Murphy and Glass all started as well, but Hill and Murphy were nowhere near as effective then as they are now. 3. The final three are in 2014, two at the Grand Champions Cup and one at the World Cup. Not denying these were losses in any way, but that's the first year our (what will hopefully be) "Rio" team started playing together consistently. Harmotto, who has proven to be huge to our offense, also wasn't there. 4. I understand leaving out the USA Volleyball Cup matches, but I also don't buy they're completely nill. Brazil used their most competitive roster (with the exemption of Gabi occasionally) and I don't think they were "whatever" about the matches. They're athletes, they're competitive. Homecourt advantage does tilt the games in our favor though. Nonetheless, we played really well in those games and I don't think you can completely discount them. **Not putting words in your mouth, just anticipating arguments. Hooker might've helped us win the games in 2014, she might not have. First, we were actually 6-2 against the Brazilians once Hooker joined the squad. I'll revise my initial post. 1. Brazil's B-team swept our B-team (with Thompson, Fawcett, Hildebrand and Davis) in last year's World Championship with none of their Olympic starters. Their B-team still gets it done against Team USA. 2 & 3. 2010 was also a transformative year for a young USA roster that started playing together consistently, and we still spanked the Brazilians in the years to come. It seems the USA squads today should have the scouting advantage for preparing for the Brazilians, whose roster and system have barely changed since 2010 (with the exception of Fabi retiring). I mean, USA should know their tendencies in 2015, but we've done worse against them since the Olympics after the departures of Destinee and Logan. 4. The consensus on here at the time (and even watching the replays now) was that the Brazilian A-team wasn't playing to its full potential in the friendly matches. The players from their A-team didn't relentlessly pursue balls, hit at full strength, and Ze wasn't his animated self in timeouts, probably because everyone knew that nothing was on the line. We'll see if people reflect on the 2014 friendly matches in Rio, when the tables are completely turned: A gold medal will be on the line, the Brazilians will have HC advantage, and the game’s biggest audience will be watching from around the world. If Karch polishes his three gold medals and thinks about how terrific USA is for its wins against Brazil in the friendly matches, then the USA is likely to continue to get thumped by the Brazilians in the big tourneys. That is, I don't think he even gives much weight to those matches. In sum... From 2010-2012, we were 6-2 against the Brazilians with Destinee and Logan. From 2013 to today, we are 1-6 against our South American amigos without Destinee and Logan. one cannot deny Brazil is the best team in the world at making adjustments and figuring things out. Just have to look at the Gold Medal match from London. Set 1 they were a completely different team and the other sets outplayed us in about every aspect of the game. It takes something more than mere talent and high volleyball iq to win a gold though if that's all everyone is concerned about. The question we will see answered is does this current group have that underlying something to achieve what no other group has been able to do? or will Brazil and take it or Cinderella? While the games are different look at Misty and Kerri. They were not dominant at all in the last quad yet they turned it on and stormed through the Olympics....unto gold.
|
|
|
Post by VolleyTX on Feb 5, 2015 13:27:33 GMT -5
First, we were actually 6-2 against the Brazilians once Hooker joined the squad. I'll revise my initial post. 1. Brazil's B-team swept our B-team (with Thompson, Fawcett, Hildebrand and Davis) in last year's World Championship with none of their Olympic starters. Their B-team still gets it done against Team USA. 2 & 3. 2010 was also a transformative year for a young USA roster that started playing together consistently, and we still spanked the Brazilians in the years to come. It seems the USA squads today should have the scouting advantage for preparing for the Brazilians, whose roster and system have barely changed since 2010 (with the exception of Fabi retiring). I mean, USA should know their tendencies in 2015, but we've done worse against them since the Olympics after the departures of Destinee and Logan. 4. The consensus on here at the time (and even watching the replays now) was that the Brazilian A-team wasn't playing to its full potential in the friendly matches. The players from their A-team didn't relentlessly pursue balls, hit at full strength, and Ze wasn't his animated self in timeouts, probably because everyone knew that nothing was on the line. We'll see if people reflect on the 2014 friendly matches in Rio, when the tables are completely turned: A gold medal will be on the line, the Brazilians will have HC advantage, and the game’s biggest audience will be watching from around the world. If Karch polishes his three gold medals and thinks about how terrific USA is for its wins against Brazil in the friendly matches, then the USA is likely to continue to get thumped by the Brazilians in the big tourneys. That is, I don't think he even gives much weight to those matches. In sum... From 2010-2012, we were 6-2 against the Brazilians with Destinee and Logan. From 2013 to today, we are 1-6 against our South American amigos without Destinee and Logan. one cannot deny Brazil is the best team in the world at making adjustments and figuring things out. Just have to look at the Gold Medal match from London. Set 1 they were a completely different team and the other sets outplayed us in about every aspect of the game. It takes something more than mere talent and high volleyball iq to win a gold though if that's all everyone is concerned about. The question we will see answered is does this current group have that underlying something to achieve what no other group has been able to do? or will Brazil and take it or Cinderella? While the games are different look at Misty and Kerri. They were not dominant at all in the last quad yet they turned it on and stormed through the Olympics....unto gold. I've heard time and time again the Brazil is excellent at adjusting. Many times it is in reference to the 2012 Gold Medal match. I would love to hear from someone who thinks the story of the match was the fact that Brazil turned it around because of adjustments they made. What adjustments did they make that turned the match around? Granted, it had been a long time since I've seen the match (it is painful to watch!), but here is what I saw: USA came out playing their A game..... Brazil playing dazed and confused. Everything flipped in set two. The only "adjustments" that were obvious to me were mental. I didn't see many technical changes. Yes... maybe brazil started setting the left side a little "inside". I didn't see them doing anything different that they hadn't tried in previous matches against USA. A good example is Jacque..... she really isn't an effective attacker against a good blocking team. Time and time again in that match, she just got lucky. I don't think she did anything different than she usually does. In my mind, it was the block and defense that lost their way.
|
|
|
Post by #skoskers on Feb 5, 2015 13:39:55 GMT -5
First, we were actually 6-2 against the Brazilians once Hooker joined the squad. I'll revise my initial post. 1. Brazil's B-team swept our B-team (with Thompson, Fawcett, Hildebrand and Davis) in last year's World Championship with none of their Olympic starters. Their B-team still gets it done against Team USA. 2 & 3. 2010 was also a transformative year for a young USA roster that started playing together consistently, and we still spanked the Brazilians in the years to come. It seems the USA squads today should have the scouting advantage for preparing for the Brazilians, whose roster and system have barely changed since 2010 (with the exception of Fabi retiring). I mean, USA should know their tendencies in 2015, but we've done worse against them since the Olympics after the departures of Destinee and Logan. 4. The consensus on here at the time (and even watching the replays now) was that the Brazilian A-team wasn't playing to its full potential in the friendly matches. The players from their A-team didn't relentlessly pursue balls, hit at full strength, and Ze wasn't his animated self in timeouts, probably because everyone knew that nothing was on the line. We'll see if people reflect on the 2014 friendly matches in Rio, when the tables are completely turned: A gold medal will be on the line, the Brazilians will have HC advantage, and the game’s biggest audience will be watching from around the world. If Karch polishes his three gold medals and thinks about how terrific USA is for its wins against Brazil in the friendly matches, then the USA is likely to continue to get thumped by the Brazilians in the big tourneys. That is, I don't think he even gives much weight to those matches. In sum... From 2010-2012, we were 6-2 against the Brazilians with Destinee and Logan. From 2013 to today, we are 1-6 against our South American amigos without Destinee and Logan. one cannot deny Brazil is the best team in the world at making adjustments and figuring things out. Just have to look at the Gold Medal match from London. Set 1 they were a completely different team and the other sets outplayed us in about every aspect of the game. It takes something more than mere talent and high volleyball iq to win a gold though if that's all everyone is concerned about. The question we will see answered is does this current group have that underlying something to achieve what no other group has been able to do? or will Brazil and take it or Cinderella? While the games are different look at Misty and Kerri. They were not dominant at all in the last quad yet they turned it on and stormed through the Olympics....unto gold. In the first set, Brazil gifted the US with lots of points via attack and service errors. In the last three sets, their passing became pinpoint accurate, which allowed Brazil to spread and speed up their offense really well. Like you said, they started setting the left a bit more inside, especially in the rotations with a recovering Berg blocking and Hooker digging line. And I couldn't agree more about Jacque, who I think just got really lucky against us.
|
|
|
Post by kro2488 on Feb 5, 2015 15:44:54 GMT -5
one cannot deny Brazil is the best team in the world at making adjustments and figuring things out. Just have to look at the Gold Medal match from London. Set 1 they were a completely different team and the other sets outplayed us in about every aspect of the game. It takes something more than mere talent and high volleyball iq to win a gold though if that's all everyone is concerned about. The question we will see answered is does this current group have that underlying something to achieve what no other group has been able to do? or will Brazil and take it or Cinderella? While the games are different look at Misty and Kerri. They were not dominant at all in the last quad yet they turned it on and stormed through the Olympics....unto gold. In the first set, Brazil gifted the US with lots of points via attack and service errors. In the last three sets, their passing became pinpoint accurate, which allowed Brazil to spread and speed up their offense really well. Like you said, they started setting the left a bit more inside, especially in the rotations with a recovering Berg blocking and Hooker digging line. And I couldn't agree more about Jacque, who I think just got really lucky against us. Not much luck there. You either take away tendencies with the block and dig the rest or you don't. More like she outplayed the United States defensive scheme. Always give credit where it is due, they were the better team that match and deserved it. I'm re-watching this now and Brasil served and overall played so much better starting in set two, getting good block touches at the net and digging everything. Beautiful defense and transition offense. My favorite play of the match Davis is playing left back releases early and moves in on sheila thinking she is going to tip short... and she does beach style shot over her in into the back left corner. Priceless. Never ever move for the off speed early, hold and explode, hold and explode.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Feb 5, 2015 16:55:53 GMT -5
Brazil men and women have always been pretty unbeatable once they get some momentum going. Brazil was also playing as the underdog, whereas I think the US was expected to win. When the momentum shifts the underdog gets looser, the favorite gets tighter. U.S. couldnt slow the tide when it switched. I think the issue was at least as much emotional as it was any technical area of the game.
|
|
|
Post by kro2488 on Feb 5, 2015 17:04:30 GMT -5
Brazil men and women have always been pretty unbeatable once they get some momentum going. Brazil was also playing as the underdog, whereas I think the US was expected to win. When the momentum shifts the underdog gets looser, the favorite gets tighter. U.S. couldnt slow the tide when it switched. I think the issue was at least as much emotional as it was any technical area of the game. The only time i've really ever seen a Brasilian crowd completely and utterly silenced was when Misty and Kerri annihilated Juliana and Larissa in the Foreteleza gold medal match, i think it might have been 2007. I don't see that happening indoors in Rio for Olympics, its going to be insanely loud in there.
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Feb 5, 2015 17:12:45 GMT -5
Brazil men and women have always been pretty unbeatable once they get some momentum going. Brazil was also playing as the underdog, whereas I think the US was expected to win. When the momentum shifts the underdog gets looser, the favorite gets tighter. U.S. couldnt slow the tide when it switched. I think the issue was at least as much emotional as it was any technical area of the game. The only time i've really ever seen a Brasilian crowd completely and utterly silenced was when Misty and Kerri annihilated Juliana and Larissa in the Foreteleza gold medal match, i think it might have been 2007. I don't see that happening indoors in Rio for Olympics, its going to be insanely loud in there. when you play and depend on a lot of emotion that can work both ways. They will be under a ton of pressure in Rio. Look how the soccer team did in World Cup!!!
|
|
|
Post by #skoskers on Feb 5, 2015 17:53:46 GMT -5
In the first set, Brazil gifted the US with lots of points via attack and service errors. In the last three sets, their passing became pinpoint accurate, which allowed Brazil to spread and speed up their offense really well. Like you said, they started setting the left a bit more inside, especially in the rotations with a recovering Berg blocking and Hooker digging line. And I couldn't agree more about Jacque, who I think just got really lucky against us. Not much luck there. You either take away tendencies with the block and dig the rest or you don't. More like she outplayed the United States defensive scheme. Always give credit where it is due, they were the better team that match and deserved it. I'm re-watching this now and Brasil served and overall played so much better starting in set two, getting good block touches at the net and digging everything. Beautiful defense and transition offense. My favorite play of the match Davis is playing left back releases early and moves in on sheila thinking she is going to tip short... and she does beach style shot over her in into the back left corner. Priceless. Never ever move for the off speed early, hold and explode, hold and explode. Jacque has consistently performed poorly against the US, but she did have a good game against us in the GM match. I'd call that type of success lucky since it was an anomaly.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Feb 5, 2015 18:00:16 GMT -5
Brazil men and women have always been pretty unbeatable once they get some momentum going. London Men's Final? Athens Women - 24-19? I'm not sure that really holds up.
|
|