|
Post by photos1 on Apr 24, 2024 13:50:01 GMT -5
How does the ACC fit in that equation? They only got the one powerhouse, but it’s the biggest powerhouse of them all. I’m uncertain exactly what kind of team they’ll field this year, but I assume they’re going to be really good. The ACC does get the biggest powerhouse in Stanford, but picking up Cal and SMU as well doesn’t carry the same kind of weight as Washington, Oregon and the LA schools do. Stanford also seems to be looking at a bit of a down year with Kipp, Baird, and Vicini all graduating. They’ll still be great, but I don’t know if they’ve been near powerhouse level since Plummer and co graduated. That’s funny. How is Stanford the “biggest powerhouse” when the two time defending champion went to the SEC? 🏐
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Apr 24, 2024 13:56:52 GMT -5
It’ll likely work out better for the Big 10 tbh. Compared with what the Big 12 lost/took in, the prospects seem to be pretty good comparatively. It won't work out well for the B1G in terms of what the commitee will do. It will rely on RPI, which SEC/Big 12 will have structural advantages on (as well as Sun Belt, Big East, etc.) Did the ACC announce their conference schedule in terms of number of matches? I love that the SEC went with only 16 conference matches. Jerritt Elliott was talking about only having 12! in a press conference. That would have been crazy. But 16 is good for RPI purposes.
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Apr 24, 2024 14:00:26 GMT -5
The ACC does get the biggest powerhouse in Stanford, but picking up Cal and SMU as well doesn’t carry the same kind of weight as Washington, Oregon and the LA schools do. Stanford also seems to be looking at a bit of a down year with Kipp, Baird, and Vicini all graduating. They’ll still be great, but I don’t know if they’ve been near powerhouse level since Plummer and co graduated. That’s funny. How is Stanford the “biggest powerhouse” when the two time defending champion went to the SEC? 🏐 Well, I was referring to Pac 12 schools. And I'd still consider Stanford the biggest powerhouse volleyball program simply based on national titles. They have some systemic issues because of where college athletics has gone and they have institutional barriers to adjusting to that. But if we're talking about the prestige of the LA schools in volleyball being added to the Big 10 - which I think can be a relevant factor in the long term depending on what they do - then certainly talking about Stanford as a powerhouse is accurate.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbyproxy on Apr 24, 2024 14:03:52 GMT -5
It’ll likely work out better for the Big 10 tbh. Compared with what the Big 12 lost/took in, the prospects seem to be pretty good comparatively. It won't work out well for the B1G in terms of what the commitee will do. It will rely on RPI, which SEC/Big 12 will have structural advantages on (as well as Sun Belt, Big East, etc.) The SEC definitely has an advantage, but I think the Big 12 is going to be hurt by losing Texas, which is always a top RPI team and definitely boosted their RPI strength. They don’t add in as strong of new members as the other power conferences also, so I don’t see the Big 12 getting much of a bump out of the realignment.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Apr 24, 2024 14:07:42 GMT -5
It won't work out well for the B1G in terms of what the commitee will do. It will rely on RPI, which SEC/Big 12 will have structural advantages on (as well as Sun Belt, Big East, etc.) The SEC definitely has an advantage, but I think the Big 12 is going to be hurt by losing Texas, which is always a top RPI team and definitely boosted their RPI strength. They don’t add in as strong of new members as the other power conferences also, so I don’t see the Big 12 getting much of a bump out of the realignment. That's not how RPI works.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Apr 24, 2024 14:08:23 GMT -5
It won't work out well for the B1G in terms of what the commitee will do. It will rely on RPI, which SEC/Big 12 will have structural advantages on (as well as Sun Belt, Big East, etc.) Did the ACC announce their conference schedule in terms of number of matches? I love that the SEC went with only 16 conference matches. Jerritt Elliott was talking about only having 12! in a press conference. That would have been crazy. But 16 is good for RPI purposes. ACC is going up to 20, I think. They still have some of the best geography though (esp. cuz their weakest teams have access to the very weak NE competition) but at least the schedule itself won't game the RPI as much.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbyproxy on Apr 24, 2024 14:17:20 GMT -5
The SEC definitely has an advantage, but I think the Big 12 is going to be hurt by losing Texas, which is always a top RPI team and definitely boosted their RPI strength. They don’t add in as strong of new members as the other power conferences also, so I don’t see the Big 12 getting much of a bump out of the realignment. That's not how RPI works. Not directly, but 50% of the RPI formula is your opponent’s winning percentage. Texas is a team that always scheduled tough and took very few losses in non-conference. Playing them in conference was a good boost for the RPI for the other Big 12 schools. Not having Texas will have a bit of a negative impact just because you lose their W-L record for every team. The Big 12 will still schedule very well and they’ve shown they can game the RPI, but Texas leaving will very likely have a negative impact.
|
|
|
Post by netninja on Apr 24, 2024 15:05:43 GMT -5
Returning to the conversation about our starting setter for the upcoming season, I remember reading/hearing that Kelly informed Carlini upon her arrival that she would need to earn her starting position. Carlini's response was a confident "bring it on" or something to that effect. I mention this for two reasons:
1. Kelly's approach to competition and everyone needing to earn playing time. He is not afraid to do this.
2. Carlini's response exemplifies the attitude I hope to see from Charlie as well. It shouldn't be about relying on family connections. I sincerely doubt Charlie's father would endorse such a mindset, either.
If Charlie can't beat out Anderson, and leaves the program because of it (not my speculation, BTW and not something I think will happen), then so be it.
I think Charlie will bring us a natty.
|
|
|
Post by robtearle on Apr 24, 2024 15:44:39 GMT -5
Returning to the conversation about our starting setter for the upcoming season, I remember reading/hearing that Kelly informed Carlini upon her arrival that she would need to earn her starting position. Carlini's response was a confident "bring it on" or something to that effect. Dennis Punzel's book. Roughly pages 84-87
|
|
|
Post by photos1 on Apr 24, 2024 15:55:53 GMT -5
That’s funny. How is Stanford the “biggest powerhouse” when the two time defending champion went to the SEC? 🏐 Well, I was referring to Pac 12 schools. And I'd still consider Stanford the biggest powerhouse volleyball program simply based on national titles. They have some systemic issues because of where college athletics has gone and they have institutional barriers to adjusting to that. But if we're talking about the prestige of the LA schools in volleyball being added to the Big 10 - which I think can be a relevant factor in the long term depending on what they do - then certainly talking about Stanford as a powerhouse is accurate. Then you consider UCLA the biggest powerhouse in men’s basketball? Come on…
|
|
|
Post by 25or624 on Apr 24, 2024 16:35:41 GMT -5
Tis' the season for speculation, e.g., "Charlie will ...", Charlie won't ...". It's a way to pass the time but ultimately futile IMO. NIL and the considerable loosening, voluntary or not, of The NCAA Transfer Rules have radically altered the recruiting / retention landscape. We have no idea if any player in question is, like Sarah Franklin, "indifferent" to the money end of things, or a mercenary. Only time will tell. There is something that we as Badger Fans do know and have probably seen in action. Jim Polzin, The Badger Men's Basketball beat writer wrote about it today: "So just because Wisconsin compares favorably to others in terms of (sports) revenue, that doesn’t mean that Wisconsin is one of the “haves” when it comes to NIL. It’s not one of the “have nots,” either, but Wisconsin certainly is a tier below the programs that are better funded from an NIL standpoint ..."
" ... Wisconsin doesn’t have the big donor, or donors, who is willing to throw around hundreds of thousands of dollars just to chase championships ..."My assumption is that this applies to volleyball as well; see, e.g., Taylor Landfair.
In spite of it all, we have Charlie on the way and a promising freshman class more generally. The future looks bright based on what we know. Go Badgers.
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Apr 24, 2024 17:42:04 GMT -5
Well, I was referring to Pac 12 schools. And I'd still consider Stanford the biggest powerhouse volleyball program simply based on national titles. They have some systemic issues because of where college athletics has gone and they have institutional barriers to adjusting to that. But if we're talking about the prestige of the LA schools in volleyball being added to the Big 10 - which I think can be a relevant factor in the long term depending on what they do - then certainly talking about Stanford as a powerhouse is accurate. Then you consider UCLA the biggest powerhouse in men’s basketball? Come on… I don’t think that’s an apples to apples comparison. I don’t even think of UConn as the biggest powerhouse, but if they keep winning national championships every single time they make the Final Four, and they make a few more, that could change. I do think the national titles keep UCLA in the conversation when it comes to basketball powerhouses. I’ll say that much.
|
|
|
Post by dbro1970 on Apr 24, 2024 18:14:22 GMT -5
I find this setter discussion all so amusing. Have any of you watched any Montana matches? This was a losing team all the time Anderson was there. Have you watched any of last night’s tape? This is comparing gold to lead. Sorry I am a Nebraska fan… I (and every coach in the B1G) urge Wisconsin to operate their offense using a 6-2. . . Or better yet, just play Anderson and let Fuerbringer watch this year. All kidding aside, Fuerbringer is an elite talent-and has been for four years… Fuerbringer will be the clear starter in a 5-1 within ten minutes of her first Wisconsin practice… Should be good…. 🏐 I think it might take a week.....
|
|
|
Post by dbro1970 on Apr 24, 2024 18:25:01 GMT -5
Why would Sheffield promise Charlie a 5-1, she still has a lot to prove. I say they start with a 6-2. I doubt this. I think they start by giving each setter a set or two in their opening matches. Charlie wins the job by the time they get to Fiserv to face Texas.
|
|
|
Post by photos1 on Apr 24, 2024 18:48:02 GMT -5
Then you consider UCLA the biggest powerhouse in men’s basketball? Come on… I don’t think that’s an apples to apples comparison. I don’t even think of UConn as the biggest powerhouse, but if they keep winning national championships every single time they make the Final Four, and they make a few more, that could change. I do think the national titles keep UCLA in the conversation when it comes to basketball powerhouses. I’ll say that much. Sorry, makes no sense. Stanford has been on an incremental slide since 2018. They won the championship in 2019 but lost more matches and Dunning’s recruits were gone. Haven’t recruited quite as good…haven’t been quite as good in OOC… the Covid year was a kill shot, and now they are really without a player who scares you going into a match. Their roster in 2024 is just not as good as 5, 6, 7 teams-not sure that could be said from 2005 to 2018. Their conference just pulled the rug from beneath them (they had to find a new conference) and they are 2000+ miles away from most of the schools in their new conference. Who is gonna want to be recruited to that? Anyway, I don’t think they have the credentials any longer to be a powerhouse, let alone THE powerhouse, and their recruiting and conference no long give them a foundation to be a powerhouse. I see the slide continuing… they are certainly no longer elite. we’ll see 🏐
|
|