|
2015 USC
Jun 14, 2015 13:33:50 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by vballfreak808 on Jun 14, 2015 13:33:50 GMT -5
In 2014 USC had a brutal schedule also, the toughest in the country. Their non-conference schedule is a little easier this year which should help. When is PAC schedule released? Can any of the freshman help with ball control? The PAC-12 schedule comes out tomorrow
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 14, 2015 14:09:54 GMT -5
#1 USC wasn't THAT bad last year. They were 22 in the Final Pablo. #2 If the incoming setter is merely competent, that will more than offset the loss of Ebony
|
|
|
Post by bigfanofbigfan on Jun 14, 2015 15:31:38 GMT -5
#1 USC wasn't THAT bad last year. They were 22 in the Final Pablo. #2 If the incoming setter is merely competent, that will more than offset the loss of Ebony Oh yes it was THAT bad..to the Southern Cal and Pac12 standards that is. They've never that many losses at the Galen center in one year.
|
|
|
Post by chatchu-off moksri on Jun 14, 2015 15:35:46 GMT -5
I still think that passing is going to make or break this team, no matter how fantastic the setting is. Bricio is going to have to carry a huge load this season as a senior. Someone, preferably Bricio, needs to step into that leadership role which I felt was lacking from the team last year. There was not really a leader that one could consistently look to in tight matches in my opinion.
Also I forgot if this was mentioned already, but are Anne Marie Schmidt and Taylor Wheatley transferring to other schools? Or are they just quitting volleyball altogether?
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,151
|
Post by trojansc on Jun 14, 2015 15:50:33 GMT -5
#1 USC wasn't THAT bad last year. They were 22 in the Final Pablo. #2 If the incoming setter is merely competent, that will more than offset the loss of Ebony Oh yes it was THAT bad..to the Southern Cal and Pac12 standards that is. They've never that many losses at the Galen center in one year. Not many teams make the NCAA Tournament when you go 4-8 at home and 8-12 in the conference. But USC's home record was terrible. USC has been so so good at Galen. Galen Center was a curse for Cal over the past 10 years, but all of a sudden Cal wins at USC last year. Not the same since that UW loss. I think USC comes out hungry for respect this season. Will be a very interesting look though. If everyone buys into the system, it just might work out well. I think there should be more concern in Westwood, with Lowe gone. Also, Strantzali gone.
|
|
|
Post by bigfanofbigfan on Jun 14, 2015 16:07:52 GMT -5
Oh yes it was THAT bad..to the Southern Cal and Pac12 standards that is. They've never that many losses at the Galen center in one year. Not many teams make the NCAA Tournament when you go 4-8 at home and 8-12 in the conference. But USC's home record was terrible. USC has been so so good at Galen. Galen Center was a curse for Cal over the past 10 years, but all of a sudden Cal wins at USC last year. Not the same since that UW loss. I think USC comes out hungry for respect this season. Will be a very interesting look though. If everyone buys into the system, it just might work out well. I think there should be more concern in Westwood, with Lowe gone. Also, Strantzali gone. They made the tournament because they are USC. If it's a smaller school, with the same resume, they would not have been picked. I am guessing they will be ranked #16- 20 in the country to start the season, and #7 in the pac 12. They will have to fight for respect for sure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2015 16:11:23 GMT -5
I still think that passing is going to make or break this team That could be said about 100% of teams.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 14, 2015 16:13:44 GMT -5
#1 USC wasn't THAT bad last year. They were 22 in the Final Pablo. #2 If the incoming setter is merely competent, that will more than offset the loss of Ebony Oh yes it was THAT bad..to the Southern Cal and Pac12 standards that is. They've never that many losses at the Galen center in one year. Yes, tons of losses. People talk about them like they barely made the tournament (or should have been out). Their Pablo holds up, but even if you discount Pablo, look at their record against the final poll rankings 0-7 against the Top 10 4-6 against 11-20 3-1 against 21-25 9-2 against unranked (both losses at deuce in the 5th) Not touching the Top 10, but very competitive otherwise. Clearly a Top 25 resume-just a team lots of people root against and some schadenfreude at coming in below expectations.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 14, 2015 16:15:58 GMT -5
Not many teams make the NCAA Tournament when you go 4-8 at home and 8-12 in the conference. But USC's home record was terrible. USC has been so so good at Galen. Galen Center was a curse for Cal over the past 10 years, but all of a sudden Cal wins at USC last year. Not the same since that UW loss. I think USC comes out hungry for respect this season. Will be a very interesting look though. If everyone buys into the system, it just might work out well. I think there should be more concern in Westwood, with Lowe gone. Also, Strantzali gone. They made the tournament because they are USC. If it's a smaller school, with the same resume, they would not have been picked. I am guessing they will be ranked #16- 20 in the country to start the season, and #7 in the pac 12. They will have to fight for respect for sure. They clearly would have made the tournament no matter what school they are with their resume. They had 7 wins against tourney teams (non-AQs), including 2 road wins over Top 16 seeds, plus a H2H road win over one of the first teams out (Pacific). Only 1 loss to a non-tourney team. That trounces every other bubble resume. They weren't even close to not being in once they went over .500. Freaking Lipscomb got in with a way worse resume. Was that based on their name?
|
|
|
Post by bigfanofbigfan on Jun 14, 2015 16:25:46 GMT -5
Oh yes it was THAT bad..to the Southern Cal and Pac12 standards that is. They've never that many losses at the Galen center in one year. Yes, tons of losses. People talk about them like they barely made the tournament (or should have been out). Their Pablo holds up, but even if you discount Pablo, look at their record against the final poll rankings 0-7 against the Top 10 4-6 against 11-20 3-1 against 21-25 9-2 against unranked (both losses at deuce in the 5th) Not touching the Top 10, but very competitive otherwise. Clearly a Top 25 resume-just a team lots of people root against and some schadenfreude at coming in below expectations. Yes, those are good stats/ numbers, for most other schools. However, USC is one of the top volleyball programs in the country in the last 15 years. Their were bad, record and stat- wise. They were especially bad if u watched them in person.
|
|
|
Post by bigfanofbigfan on Jun 14, 2015 16:27:20 GMT -5
They made the tournament because they are USC. If it's a smaller school, with the same resume, they would not have been picked. I am guessing they will be ranked #16- 20 in the country to start the season, and #7 in the pac 12. They will have to fight for respect for sure. They clearly would have made the tournament no matter what school they are with their resume. They had 7 wins against tourney teams (non-AQs), including 2 road wins over Top 16 seeds, plus a H2H road win over one of the first teams out (Pacific). Only 1 loss to a non-tourney team. That trounces every other bubble resume. They weren't even close to not being in once they went over .500. Freaking Lipscomb got in with a way worse resume. Was that based on their name? people love two things: big names and underdogs.
|
|
|
Post by socalsurf on Jun 14, 2015 16:59:05 GMT -5
It gets said a lot, but USC was lacking a big emotional leader like Natalie Hagglund last year to look up to and really mourned the loss of a player like her. I get that there'll never be a player like Hagglund since she herself was incredibly special and very rarely do you find game changers like her, but not having a real, true team captain and leader like that to rely on was probably the root of their problems, IMO. Instead of being able to look to someone on the court as both your calming presence and team energizer, the WOT had to be coached directly from the sideline by Mick since their setters were struggling. They just lost confidence eventually and I don't think they really trusted each other all that much.
Truthfully, no one on the team really has that loud, energetic personality that Hagglund brought on every point of every match, and when you lose a leader like that, you need others to step up. But if anyone has watched the team for the past few seasons, you'd know that primary players like Bricio, Ruddins, Ogoms, Whittingham, Abercrombie, and Schmidt were all just very quiet personalities, somewhat emotionless players that never got too excited after big points. That's just how they are and how they play. Not everyone can be a spark plug, but you need someone to keep the spirits high both on and off the court, and they just didn't have anyone like that.
If anything, the two closest things to "leaders" they had on the court were Pizzasegola/Nwanebu, who occasionally would scream/smile after kills and such. But even then, they brought about maybe 40% of energy compared to what Hagglund brought to that team herself, and you could see the team's confidence fading away as the matches went on. The fact that the team itself was relatively young and made up of frosh/sophs didn't help either, so it just seemed like no one really wanted to step up into that leadership position. Either Bricio needs to step up vocally in her final season, the role players need to collectively step up, or they need to find someone else to do it and do it fast. Perhaps one of the future recruits within the next few years can step up from the start and really take the reigns like Hagglund did when she came in as a frosh.
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Jun 14, 2015 17:01:56 GMT -5
They clearly would have made the tournament no matter what school they are with their resume. They had 7 wins against tourney teams (non-AQs), including 2 road wins over Top 16 seeds, plus a H2H road win over one of the first teams out (Pacific). Only 1 loss to a non-tourney team. That trounces every other bubble resume. They weren't even close to not being in once they went over .500. Freaking Lipscomb got in with a way worse resume. Was that based on their name? people love two things: big names and underdogs. The NCAA committee loves criteria. USC was in with not based on their name. Besides the quality wins mentioned, they were #1 in strength of schedule. I think Mick schedules too tough out of conference, but then again who am I to criticize.
|
|
|
Post by socalsurf on Jun 14, 2015 17:08:40 GMT -5
Also, I think the depth chart will be as follows:
OH1: Bricio (Sr.) OH2: Ruddins (Jr.) MB1: Ogoms (Sr.) MB2: Dunn (So.) OPP: Abercrombie (So.) S1: Pizzasegola (Jr.) S2: Johnson (Fr.) L: Whittingham (Jr.)
Subs: OH: Ford (Fr.), Livingston (So.), Withers (So.) MB: Reed (Fr.) DS: Ford (Fr.), Garrick (Fr.)
Does anyone think Mick will run another type of hybrid 6-2 with Johnson as a S/OPP, kinda like Emily Young did last year? She has pretty good size and hits a heavy ball, and I don't think Mick will sit his Italian import Pizzasegola for the next two years. I'm also really hoping that Ruddins has a breakout year, the former #2 recruit is long overdue and I think she has it in her. The injuries set her back, so if she can at least be a solid pin hitter that'd be a big upgrade. Same for Abercrombie, she needs to gain a little more muscle but she showed flashes of potential early on last year, and a lefty hitting on the right is big. They'll both get some significant playing time I think, so hopefully this will be a breakout year for the both of them!
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Jun 14, 2015 17:15:45 GMT -5
Ford is not a DS. At all. Pretty sure Mick just wants a clean slate setting. 5-1 with Johnson would be the most beneficial for that and hopefully getting some continuity there.
|
|