Exhibition: Minnesota vs Iowa State - Aug 24, 3:00pm CT
Aug 26, 2024 0:10:11 GMT -5
JT, B1Gminnesotafan, and 3 more like this
Post by mcmike on Aug 26, 2024 0:10:11 GMT -5
Overall impression:
MN in set 1 was similar to Faribault with ISU looking out of sorts
ISU stepped up their floor defense in set 2. I had a stat snapshot at 22-21 MN
At that point MN was hitting over .300 28 9 63. But in crunch time
ISU hit .500 4 0 8 to win 26 24
MN hit .125 2 1 8. I posted something after that run for ISU re. floor leadership.
I thought MN was the better team in set 3. They held ISU to .140. But then I saw
MN’s attack line: 10 8 47. MN had 3 HEs and were blocked 5x.
Crafty Lefty noted 19-14. Then ISU’s libero had a long deflating service run.
As posters noted, we just didn’t have the ability to terminate.
Then there was Wookie.
Posters have extolled her performance, but it was
A Tale in 3 parts
10 1 14 .643 at 22-21 in set 2 then
0 4 13 new blocking scheme?
10 5 27 to the end of set 3, then
8 1 10 in set 4 (new front row personnel for ISU? MN hit .485 in set 4)
18 6 37 .324
Her serve is going to be a weapon as its precision is honed
As previously mentioned, her floor defense and digging, in particular, is markedly more efficient
AlexA was efficient at the net and often in the serve reception configuration
I noticed very few pipes, biqs, & D sets
Very noticeable: evenly spread offense TAs
OH1: 37
OH2: 37
RS: 39
MB: 29 Getting good passes for middle quicks and back slides should give MN a higher H% this year.
Set: 8 I had the sense that Shaff could have been more offensive, but chose set over dump/attack
Grote was
1 1 9 near the end of the 2nd set, then
6 2 17 after the third
7 3 26 for the 2 sets she played.
Passing in ro1 seemed ragged with Grote on the left
Spectator attendance was strong
Stat sheet said 3,000. Who was counting with no ticket sales?
Next week's matches vs Stanford and Texas will allow for video analysis
and less 'seat of the pants' impressions
MN in set 1 was similar to Faribault with ISU looking out of sorts
ISU stepped up their floor defense in set 2. I had a stat snapshot at 22-21 MN
At that point MN was hitting over .300 28 9 63. But in crunch time
ISU hit .500 4 0 8 to win 26 24
MN hit .125 2 1 8. I posted something after that run for ISU re. floor leadership.
I thought MN was the better team in set 3. They held ISU to .140. But then I saw
MN’s attack line: 10 8 47. MN had 3 HEs and were blocked 5x.
Crafty Lefty noted 19-14. Then ISU’s libero had a long deflating service run.
As posters noted, we just didn’t have the ability to terminate.
Then there was Wookie.
Posters have extolled her performance, but it was
A Tale in 3 parts
10 1 14 .643 at 22-21 in set 2 then
0 4 13 new blocking scheme?
10 5 27 to the end of set 3, then
8 1 10 in set 4 (new front row personnel for ISU? MN hit .485 in set 4)
18 6 37 .324
Her serve is going to be a weapon as its precision is honed
As previously mentioned, her floor defense and digging, in particular, is markedly more efficient
AlexA was efficient at the net and often in the serve reception configuration
I noticed very few pipes, biqs, & D sets
Very noticeable: evenly spread offense TAs
OH1: 37
OH2: 37
RS: 39
MB: 29 Getting good passes for middle quicks and back slides should give MN a higher H% this year.
Set: 8 I had the sense that Shaff could have been more offensive, but chose set over dump/attack
Grote was
1 1 9 near the end of the 2nd set, then
6 2 17 after the third
7 3 26 for the 2 sets she played.
Passing in ro1 seemed ragged with Grote on the left
Spectator attendance was strong
Stat sheet said 3,000. Who was counting with no ticket sales?
Next week's matches vs Stanford and Texas will allow for video analysis
and less 'seat of the pants' impressions
