|
Post by shesasetter on Dec 27, 2019 1:36:25 GMT -5
Intra-conference transfer restrictions seem counter-productive to me, in that they encourage transfering players to leave the conference. so you don't have any problem with a player from your team transferring to your team's arch rival? I don’t. Makes the game more interesting anyway. And feel more like a professional sport. Remember the hooplah over Tiffany Clark? I lived for it
|
|
|
Post by rjaege on Dec 27, 2019 8:10:16 GMT -5
Intra-conference transfer restrictions seem counter-productive to me, in that they encourage transfering players to leave the conference. so you don't have any problem with a player from your team transferring to your team's arch rival? Seems to be happening anyway. The only problem I see is with an athlete that needs more development wants to play for team A, signs with team B in the same conference so she can get exposure to A for later transfer. I think that would be a rare occurrence leading to a transfer.
|
|
|
Post by Volley Passionista on Dec 27, 2019 11:58:36 GMT -5
Wasn't aware of the downside for student-athletes that their current school can reduce or stop giving them athletics aid at the end of the term in which the request was made to enter the Transfer Portal. So, any SA who just entered could lose schollie for spring semester (and future years) if still in school until May (or later decides not to transfer). No soup for you! Makes sense, then, to enter in January after spring term has commenced and no looking back.
I think that with new transfer policies and the scholarships that will be taken away at the end of the term a SA enters the portal the recruiting will shift towards end of January but some players might want to train in spring with new team and are looking earlier. It is a risk and schools won't hold it against you waiting until January first day of spring semester, they are aware but also snatch early transfers up that are a match and there go some of the opportunities.
|
|
|
Post by Volley Passionista on Dec 27, 2019 12:03:47 GMT -5
As are a few of the Baylor players What's the current Big 12 conference undergraduate intra-conference transfer rule? Didn't Andi Malloy have to sit out one year, and lose one year of eligibility when she transferred from Iowa State to Baylor a few years ago? you gotta sit out a year, previously however SA could claim extraordinary circumstances, emotional distress or whatever really.. that is now a stricter guideline and spelled out / only with a few very rare exceptions and documentation they will waive . Don't think there would be a waiver granted until you can prove a serious need.
|
|
|
Post by MsRSV on Dec 27, 2019 13:16:39 GMT -5
As I just intimated, such waivers exist because the NCAA cares about making money off of it's athletes AND it cares about the illusion of fairness. The waivers allow the NCAA to indemnify itself against it's own rules regarding eligibility which might otherwise restrict a valuable player from earning money for the organization. Explain please... How does the NCAA make money on VB players being anywhere?
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Dec 27, 2019 13:51:50 GMT -5
As I just intimated, such waivers exist because the NCAA cares about making money off of it's athletes AND it cares about the illusion of fairness. The waivers allow the NCAA to indemnify itself against it's own rules regarding eligibility which might otherwise restrict a valuable player from earning money for the organization. Explain please... How does the NCAA make money on VB players being anywhere? It absolutely doesn’t. It’s just the cool thing nowadays to bash the NCAA and say they only care about money. Even when it doesn’t make sense to what’s actually being discussed.
|
|
|
Post by blastingsand on Dec 29, 2019 3:41:36 GMT -5
as a freshman Nunerviller was good. Brooke was and is one of the most talented Liberos in the nation. I've seen her play through every age group, both beach and indoors. I'm well aware of her ability. But Brooke Nuneviller is the exception, not the rule. And since you mentioned Brooke, she actually had a worse year this year from a passing perspective, partly due to the inconsistency of the freshman beside her (who, again, is a very talented player). So yeah, there's always freshman that CAN come in and play. But from a team perspective and an individual perspective, I think it's usually better to allow Liberos (especially converted ones) to play one year at DS. Brooke had to be the best of everything this year (probably could have even set better for the team at this point). I agree the DS one year helps transition new liberos into the role. Oregon's starting libero Georgia Murphy had an epic struggle this year and was outdug numbers wise by many of her teammates in a few matches. Rarely came up with digs in clutch situations, couldn't pick up a lot of tips and was not reliable on passing (was actually aced in set points more than once). Brooke at OH had far more digs than her at the end of the year. But she is at the same level, if not a notch above the senior walk on from a few couple of years ago. And has a great serve (already better than Amanda Bensons). If Oregon picks up a couple of big hitters I wouldn't be surprised to see Brooke move back to libero and Georgia be a DS, where she will shine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 10:53:27 GMT -5
Brooke was and is one of the most talented Liberos in the nation. I've seen her play through every age group, both beach and indoors. I'm well aware of her ability. But Brooke Nuneviller is the exception, not the rule. And since you mentioned Brooke, she actually had a worse year this year from a passing perspective, partly due to the inconsistency of the freshman beside her (who, again, is a very talented player). So yeah, there's always freshman that CAN come in and play. But from a team perspective and an individual perspective, I think it's usually better to allow Liberos (especially converted ones) to play one year at DS. Brooke had to be the best of everything this year (probably could have even set better for the team at this point). I agree the DS one year helps transition new liberos into the role. Oregon's starting libero Georgia Murphy had an epic struggle this year and was outdug numbers wise by many of her teammates in a few matches. Brooke at OH had far more digs than her at the end of the year. Rarely came up with digs in clutch situations, couldn't pick up a lot of tips and was not reliable on passing (was actually aced in set points more than once). But she is at the same level, if not a notch above the senior walk on from a few couple of years ago. And has a great serve (already better than Amanda Bensons). If Oregon picks up a couple of big hitters I wouldn't be surprised to see Brooke move back to libero and Georgia be a DS, where she will shine. Fun fact, Oregon actually tied Stanford as the top passing team in the pac-12. I already dug the numbers out at the request of the father of one of the Oregon players on this board. Brooke wants to stay at OH in college. I doubt you'll see her back at L.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Dec 29, 2019 10:56:59 GMT -5
Brooke had to be the best of everything this year (probably could have even set better for the team at this point). I agree the DS one year helps transition new liberos into the role. Oregon's starting libero Georgia Murphy had an epic struggle this year and was outdug numbers wise by many of her teammates in a few matches. Brooke at OH had far more digs than her at the end of the year. Rarely came up with digs in clutch situations, couldn't pick up a lot of tips and was not reliable on passing (was actually aced in set points more than once). But she is at the same level, if not a notch above the senior walk on from a few couple of years ago. And has a great serve (already better than Amanda Bensons). If Oregon picks up a couple of big hitters I wouldn't be surprised to see Brooke move back to libero and Georgia be a DS, where she will shine. Fun fact, Oregon actually tied Stanford as the top passing team in the pac-12. I already dug the numbers out at the request of the father of one of the Oregon players on this board. Brooke wants to stay at OH in college. I doubt you'll see her back at L. ...and this while the libero he wants to trash spent a good chunk of the season in a 2-person passing formation. She had freshmen moments butimproved steadily as the season went on.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Dec 29, 2019 11:02:25 GMT -5
Brooke had to be the best of everything this year (probably could have even set better for the team at this point). I agree the DS one year helps transition new liberos into the role. Oregon's starting libero Georgia Murphy had an epic struggle this year and was outdug numbers wise by many of her teammates in a few matches. Brooke at OH had far more digs than her at the end of the year. Rarely came up with digs in clutch situations, couldn't pick up a lot of tips and was not reliable on passing (was actually aced in set points more than once). But she is at the same level, if not a notch above the senior walk on from a few couple of years ago. And has a great serve (already better than Amanda Bensons). If Oregon picks up a couple of big hitters I wouldn't be surprised to see Brooke move back to libero and Georgia be a DS, where she will shine. Fun fact, Oregon actually tied Stanford as the top passing team in the pac-12. I already dug the numbers out at the request of the father of one of the Oregon players on this board. Brooke wants to stay at OH in college. I doubt you'll see her back at L. Yikes. If their passing was that good, it’s a further indictment on Oregon’s setting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 11:09:03 GMT -5
Fun fact, Oregon actually tied Stanford as the top passing team in the pac-12. I already dug the numbers out at the request of the father of one of the Oregon players on this board. Brooke wants to stay at OH in college. I doubt you'll see her back at L. ...and this while the libero he wants to trash spent a good chunk of the season in a 2-person passing formation. She had freshmen moments butimproved steadily as the season went on. Well whether he "wants" to trash or her not, I don't know. But what I do know is that total digs is a poor metric to use when attempting to analyse a defensive performance. I thought everyone here knew this but teams will funnel balls to different areas of the floor depending on the tendencies of the hitters they are facing. You typically try to take away their favorite shot. If they are still hitting it (some can) sometimes you 'force' them to hit it, but at your best defender. For such reasons total digs tell you more about the coaching staff than the players. A FAR better statistical measurement is dig efficiency; how many balls that a player got their hands on were successfully dug? And dig accuracy; how many of those digs kept the offense in system and led to a full attack. I can pull those numbers for the key Ducks defenders if you guys want them, but total digs isn't the one.
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on Dec 29, 2019 13:05:07 GMT -5
...and this while the libero he wants to trash spent a good chunk of the season in a 2-person passing formation. She had freshmen moments butimproved steadily as the season went on. A FAR better statistical measurement is dig efficiency; how many balls that a player got their hands on were successfully dug? And dig accuracy; how many of those digs kept the offense in system and led to a full attack. I can pull those numbers for the key Ducks defenders if you guys want them, but total digs isn't the one. I have a problem with that efficiency %. Let's say you have a Libero who is so quick and also fast, who can, b/c of that quickness and speed, cover a 5' radius on the floor. An average Libero say can cover 3.5'. Now suppose you have ten chances in a game where the quick Libero can get two arms on a ball hit 4.5' from her. The quick one fails to properly pass 5 of those 10, and properly passes the other 5, because of full out extension just to touch it. Now, the average libero doesn't even touch any of the the 10. What do the dig efficiency numbers do with that? The same problem exists with baseball outfielders... a slow one won't even touch certain outfield hits, while the really fast one will touch the same hits with the end of their glove, incurring an error.
|
|
|
Post by justahick on Dec 29, 2019 13:08:39 GMT -5
A FAR better statistical measurement is dig efficiency; how many balls that a player got their hands on were successfully dug? And dig accuracy; how many of those digs kept the offense in system and led to a full attack. I can pull those numbers for the key Ducks defenders if you guys want them, but total digs isn't the one. I have a problem with that efficiency %. Let's say you have a Libero who is so quick and also fast, who can, b/c of that quickness and speed, cover a 5' radius on the floor. An average Libero say can cover 3.5'. Now you have six or so chances in a game where the quick Libero can get two arms on a ball hit 4.5' from the Libero. The quick one fails to properly pass half of those 6, because of full out extension. the slow libero doesn't even touch the ball. What do the dig efficiency numbers do with that? The same problem exists with baseball outfielders... a slow one won't even tough certain outfield hits, while the really fast one will touch it with the end of their glove, incurring an error. Agree - same can be said for passing. Had troubles with our Lib and our OH1 this year. OH1 was only interested in passing the tiniest sliver of court and Lib would routinely defer as much space as she could to the other passers. Sure, both of them passed very well, but this absolutely wrecked the passing numbers of the other who now had to pass too much court.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2019 13:33:39 GMT -5
I have a problem with that efficiency %. Let's say you have a Libero who is so quick and also fast, who can, b/c of that quickness and speed, cover a 5' radius on the floor. An average Libero say can cover 3.5'. Now you have six or so chances in a game where the quick Libero can get two arms on a ball hit 4.5' from the Libero. The quick one fails to properly pass half of those 6, because of full out extension. the slow libero doesn't even touch the ball. What do the dig efficiency numbers do with that? The same problem exists with baseball outfielders... a slow one won't even tough certain outfield hits, while the really fast one will touch it with the end of their glove, incurring an error. Agree - same can be said for passing. Had troubles with our Lib and our OH1 this year. OH1 was only interested in passing the tiniest sliver of court and Lib would routinely defer as much space as she could to the other passers. Sure, both of them passed very well, but this absolutely wrecked the passing numbers of the other who now had to pass too much court. Don't disagree. Range would be a complicated element to measure since much of it is schematic and, as I've already said, often comes down to responsibilities. That's where the human element of evaluation is important. But dig efficiency combined with dig accuracy gives a far better picture than total digs or digs per set. Regarding passing; it's unlikely the OH1 wasn't 'interested' in passing a larger section of the court. Again, it was probably a coaching decision designed to limited her balls. I know that's probably what you meant, since I know you're a knowledgeable poster, but without knowing your team, I'm unable to comment any more than to say that players themselves usually don't get to decide how much of the floor they cover. If the other passers did in fact struggle (and I'm sure you're right) it would seem like that's a mistake by their coaching staff though.
|
|
|
Post by justahick on Dec 29, 2019 13:56:10 GMT -5
Agree - same can be said for passing. Had troubles with our Lib and our OH1 this year. OH1 was only interested in passing the tiniest sliver of court and Lib would routinely defer as much space as she could to the other passers. Sure, both of them passed very well, but this absolutely wrecked the passing numbers of the other who now had to pass too much court. Don't disagree. Range would be a complicated element to measure since much of it is schematic and, as I've already said, often comes down to responsibilities. That's where the human element of evaluation is important. But dig efficiency combined with dig accuracy gives a far better picture than total digs or digs per set. Regarding passing; it's unlikely the OH1 wasn't 'interested' in passing a larger section of the court. Again, it was probably a coaching decision designed to limited her balls. I know that's probably what you meant, since I know you're a knowledgeable poster, but without knowing your team, I'm unable to comment any more than to say that players themselves usually don't get to decide how much of the floor they cover. If the other passers did in fact struggle (and I'm sure you're right) it would seem like that's a mistake by their coaching staff though. Considering I was the coach, I can 100% tell you it wasn't a coaching decision - you can tell someone to pass, you can sit them, you can pull them out of the back row, but you can't force them to pass more court. Was it a coaching failure - yes - anytime players aren't doing what they should be doing I consider it a coaching failure.
|
|