|
Post by hornshouse23 on Apr 14, 2024 21:18:12 GMT -5
Nebraska ... I’m not a fan, We hold out hope for you. ew, please don’t.
|
|
|
Post by knapplc on Apr 14, 2024 21:24:56 GMT -5
Cool and I can accept someone thinking Nebraska will be repeat champions. They’re going to be studs, but my reasonings shouldn’t be dismissed: this is a team of all-stars, and some of them will have their stars diminished. How the players will accept that and how the coaches will manage that will be very important to their success. Surely you are not making the argument that star players riding the pine will be a detriment to Nebraska while simultaneously making the argument that Wisconsin's stars riding the pine will result in a kumbaya moment for the Badgers.
|
|
|
Post by knapplc on Apr 14, 2024 21:26:27 GMT -5
We hold out hope for you. ew, please don’t.
|
|
|
Post by hanmertime on Apr 14, 2024 21:47:44 GMT -5
I somewhat agree with this prediction. Minn is way too high. So is USC. Move Oregon and Ohio state up. Move Washington a little back. Northwestern has talent so don’t know if they finish last. Agree Iowa starting from scratch with mostly new players is actually a bonus. They could leap some schools. Why move Washington back? I think they will struggle with the travel, level of competition and coaching that is still learning to be a head coach.
|
|
|
Post by hornshouse23 on Apr 14, 2024 21:48:13 GMT -5
To quote Naomi Campbell ‘I have my career*. You guys don’t. You want what I have. And for me, it’s a waste of my time.’ *back-to-back titles
|
|
|
Post by badgerbyproxy on Apr 14, 2024 22:04:58 GMT -5
Cool and I can accept someone thinking Nebraska will be repeat champions. They’re going to be studs, but my reasonings shouldn’t be dismissed: this is a team of all-stars, and some of them will have their stars diminished. How the players will accept that and how the coaches will manage that will be very important to their success. Surely you are not making the argument that star players riding the pine will be a detriment to Nebraska while simultaneously making the argument that Wisconsin's stars riding the pine will result in a kumbaya moment for the Badgers. To be fair, I have questioned this of Wisconsin the past two years. I wasn’t on VolleyTalk two years ago, but I did have concerns with how bringing in Frank and Crawford would impact our outside and middle situations given that we had Demps/Orzol and Hart/Robinson. I also had questions about how bringing in TTA and Booth would impact chemistry last year, but was more confident with how things turned out the year before. I was also skeptical of having Landfair at Wisconsin when there were rumblings/musings of that after she entered the portal. In Wisconsin’s case, things worked out the last two years (one conference title and one final four run), so I’m not as concerned with the roster management issue at middle - they’ve proven they can figure it out (and you can see my proposed Wisconsin lineup earlier in this thread if you’re curious). The reason I’m more skeptical of Nebraska in this case is because I haven’t been as impressed with their roster management these past two years. Not every new piece is going to fit into the puzzle.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbyproxy on Apr 14, 2024 22:12:44 GMT -5
*my expertly chosen 1-18 😜 * I somewhat agree with this prediction. Minn is way too high. So is USC. Move Oregon and Ohio state up. Move Washington a little back. Northwestern has talent so don’t know if they finish last. Agree Iowa starting from scratch with mostly new players is actually a bonus. They could leap some schools. Was busy fighting Nebraska folks and couldn’t respond properly 😂 I’ll concede I have USC too high. I don’t know the program well and am just going on last year’s performance and a rumored transfer. I’m curious where you’d put Minnesota in the order. Their off-season has been pretty strong so far.
|
|
|
Post by hornshouse23 on Apr 14, 2024 22:18:40 GMT -5
I somewhat agree with this prediction. Minn is way too high. So is USC. Move Oregon and Ohio state up. Move Washington a little back. Northwestern has talent so don’t know if they finish last. Agree Iowa starting from scratch with mostly new players is actually a bonus. They could leap some schools. Was busy fighting Nebraska folks and couldn’t respond properly 😂 I’ll concede I have USC too high. I don’t know the program well and am just going on last year’s performance and a rumored transfer. I’m curious where you’d put Minnesota in the order. Their off-season has been pretty strong so far. If Devin K ends up at USC their stock increases a bit.
|
|
|
Post by HOLIDAY on Apr 14, 2024 22:29:05 GMT -5
Thanks for the set up to trigger the Nebraska fans! Admittedly, it’s not that hard (if you don’t say “they’re perfect, they’re beautiful, they look like Linda Evangelista” they go haywire), but appreciate being given the chance to ruffle their feathers for my weekend amusement 😂 Linda Evangelista??? Are you 80 years old?
|
|
|
Post by badgerbyproxy on Apr 14, 2024 22:31:11 GMT -5
Thanks for the set up to trigger the Nebraska fans! Admittedly, it’s not that hard (if you don’t say “they’re perfect, they’re beautiful, they look like Linda Evangelista” they go haywire), but appreciate being given the chance to ruffle their feathers for my weekend amusement 😂 Linda Evangelista??? Are you 80 years old? Learn your herstory.
|
|
|
Post by knapplc on Apr 14, 2024 22:34:52 GMT -5
Surely you are not making the argument that star players riding the pine will be a detriment to Nebraska while simultaneously making the argument that Wisconsin's stars riding the pine will result in a kumbaya moment for the Badgers. To be fair, I have questioned this of Wisconsin the past two years. I wasn’t on VolleyTalk two years ago, but I did have concerns with how bringing in Frank and Crawford would impact our outside and middle situations given that we had Demps/Orzol and Hart/Robinson. I also had questions about how bringing in TTA and Booth would impact chemistry last year, but was more confident with how things turned out the year before. I was also skeptical of having Landfair at Wisconsin when there were rumblings/musings of that after she entered the portal. In Wisconsin’s case, things worked out the last two years (one conference title and one final four run), so I’m not as concerned with the roster management issue at middle - they’ve proven they can figure it out (and you can see my proposed Wisconsin lineup earlier in this thread if you’re curious). The reason I’m more skeptical of Nebraska in this case is because I haven’t been as impressed with their roster management these past two years. Not every new piece is going to fit into the puzzle. Nebraska has a better resume than Wisconsin WRT conference titles and FF appearances in the time frame you're taking about. I don't disagree with you that the Badgers could/should be favorited for the 2024 conference title. I think it's a coin flip. I think the arguments you're putting forth amount to little more than your personal preference between the two.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Apr 14, 2024 22:36:09 GMT -5
I’ll concede I have USC too high. I don’t know the program well and am just going on last year’s performance and a rumored transfer. But you do know that USC doesn't have Fields anymore, right? Even with a 6 point, .300% outlet OH, USC was 19-13 last year. If that doesn't tell you how pedestrian the rest of the team was last year, I dunno what will. That's not to say that USC doesn't have the on paper talent to finish high in the Big 10. I'd proffer that they do, but I'd say the same about BOTH LA schools for the better part of the last decade. But for whatever reason, the collective LA achievements (or rather lack there of) when it comes to national volleyball over the last 10 years or so, has been an embarrassment to the Pac-12. Is next year the year they turn it around? perhaps, but until there is evidence to support that USC is going to live up to the programs historic reputation, I'm in wait an see mode.
|
|
|
Post by VBallLife on Apr 14, 2024 23:02:41 GMT -5
Was busy fighting Nebraska folks and couldn’t respond properly 😂 I’ll concede I have USC too high. I don’t know the program well and am just going on last year’s performance and a rumored transfer. I’m curious where you’d put Minnesota in the order. Their off-season has been pretty strong so far. If Devin K ends up at USC their stock increases a bit. How and why?
|
|
|
Post by badgerbyproxy on Apr 14, 2024 23:14:25 GMT -5
To be fair, I have questioned this of Wisconsin the past two years. I wasn’t on VolleyTalk two years ago, but I did have concerns with how bringing in Frank and Crawford would impact our outside and middle situations given that we had Demps/Orzol and Hart/Robinson. I also had questions about how bringing in TTA and Booth would impact chemistry last year, but was more confident with how things turned out the year before. I was also skeptical of having Landfair at Wisconsin when there were rumblings/musings of that after she entered the portal. In Wisconsin’s case, things worked out the last two years (one conference title and one final four run), so I’m not as concerned with the roster management issue at middle - they’ve proven they can figure it out (and you can see my proposed Wisconsin lineup earlier in this thread if you’re curious). The reason I’m more skeptical of Nebraska in this case is because I haven’t been as impressed with their roster management these past two years. Not every new piece is going to fit into the puzzle. Nebraska has a better resume than Wisconsin WRT conference titles and FF appearances in the time frame you're taking about. I don't disagree with you that the Badgers could/should be favorited for the 2024 conference title. I think it's a coin flip. I think the arguments you're putting forth amount to little more than your personal preference between the two. And in that timeframe, Wisconsin has a 3-1 record against Nebraska with the loss coming in a close 5-setter in Lincoln. Nebraska had a great year last year, but Wisconsin’s had the edge in the head to head. If you think it’s just personal preference, that’s your prerogative. Chemistry matters in volleyball. If you want stats though, here ya go: Wisconsin’s returning the NPOY and three other all-Americans. They return two of the top 3 hitters in in-conference play and 3 of the top 5 blockers. They were also the highest hitting percentage and highest blocking team by a huge margin, and were also first in aces per set. They’re losing only one of their hitters from last year’s roster, and the returners are all senior enough to adjust to a freshman setter. They also had this stellar hitting with subpar passing and non-elite setting. Defensively, their passing wasn’t elite, but they were also top 3 across the “opponent” defensive stats including opponent service aces per set (https://bigten.org/stats.aspx?path=wvball&year=2023&conf=true). While the records last year were 19-1 and 17-3, Nebraska lost 15 total sets (dropping sets to much lower caliber teams and were swept by Wisconsin in their second matchup) whereas Wisconsin only lost 10 sets (none to teams outside of the top four in the conference). It’s a coin flip like you said, but the stats plus the chemistry concerns put Wisconsin over the edge for me.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbyproxy on Apr 14, 2024 23:22:44 GMT -5
I’ll concede I have USC too high. I don’t know the program well and am just going on last year’s performance and a rumored transfer. But you do know that USC doesn't have Fields anymore, right? Even with a 6 point, .300% outlet OH, USC was 19-13 last year. If that doesn't tell you how pedestrian the rest of the team was last year, I dunno what will. That's not to say that USC doesn't have the on paper talent to finish high in the Big 10. I'd proffer that they do, but I'd say the same about BOTH LA schools for the better part of the last decade. But for whatever reason, the collective LA achievements (or rather lack there of) when it comes to national volleyball over the last 10 years or so, has been an embarrassment to the Pac-12. Is next year the year they turn it around? perhaps, but until there is evidence to support that USC is going to live up to the programs historic reputation, I'm in wait an see mode. Yeah I know. Kinda hard to miss that. They definitely do have talent on paper and old transfer stock (if the Kahahawai rumor pans out) which is why I had them higher compared to the more familiar Big 10 teams where I better know their strengths and shortcomings. All of the former PAC 12 schools are in a wait and see mode for me at this point. The travel’s gonna be pretty rough on them.
|
|