Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2005 0:01:15 GMT -5
Nebraska has the advantage in backrow attack for the same reason they are at a disadvantage defensively: more options. Somehow I doubt Candace Lee will be taking backrow swings.
Outside attack is not advantage Washington. They are lucky if it is a draw.
I actually give the advantage to UW in the middle, assuming they use them--although Elmer is the best of the bunch, by far.
I don't know about experience. Both teams have demons to battle. It's not like either has had much success (until THU night) in the finals.
Big advantage to NU in blocking, mainly because of Courtney. But big advantage to UW in setting, mainly because of Courtney.
I think this will come down to serving and serve receive. If NU can pass, they will win. If they can't, it will be very difficult for them to win (but not impossible).
Key players that you might not expect to be key: Hagerty for UW and the Nebraska setters.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Dec 17, 2005 0:34:30 GMT -5
A healthy PSU and Stanford would have made for one of the all time best FF's. Ah the injury excuse..... always the first one out of the deck.
|
|
|
Post by lilred on Dec 17, 2005 0:45:41 GMT -5
A healthy PSU and Stanford would have made for one of the all time best FF's. Ah the injury excuse..... always the first one out of the deck. Especially from the Wahine. Do you we really need to drag out all the posts on why Hawaii had 6 losses before the tourney. Something tells me there will be several references to Hittle and Mason.
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Dec 17, 2005 0:50:48 GMT -5
Ah the injury excuse..... always the first one out of the deck. Especially from the Wahine. Do you we really need to drag out all the posts on why Hawaii had 6 losses before the tourney. Something tells me there will be several references to Hittle and Mason. Sure, drag those posts out. Go ahead, and if you can't then I'll simply dismiss your post the way I did (R)uffda!'s
|
|
|
Post by lilred on Dec 17, 2005 1:12:16 GMT -5
Especially from the Wahine. Do you we really need to drag out all the posts on why Hawaii had 6 losses before the tourney. Something tells me there will be several references to Hittle and Mason. Sure, drag those posts out. Go ahead, and if you can't then I'll simply dismiss your post the way I did (R)uffda!'s I would agree with your thoughts on the NACWAA but for different reasons. Hawai'i was without Tara Hittle, a major component to Hawaii's offensive/defensive strategy so while Nebraska was playing without stalls and in the infancy of their 6-2, Hawai'i was not without problems of their own. « Last Edit: 9/18/05 at 21:59 by BiK » Logged Hawai'i was playing without Tara Hittle. Hittle's absence changed the dynamics of this Wahine team. It's like Nebraska playing wihout the services of Jen Saleamua. If you are going to make excuses for Nebraska (playing with freshman etc) you should be as objective when looking at Hawai'i. Futhermore, Hawai'i had more aces and less service errors than did the Huskers.Not bad for a team that "had no serving". « Last Edit: 10/25/05 at 0:47 by BiK » you are ovelooking something critical in Hawaii's lost to LMU. Hawaii didn't have Mason and Hittle playing in that game. They both had sprained ankles. Also, Houston, Hawaii's gifted freshman was still green. The Hawaii team that manhandled texas has a different starting lineup from the one that lost the 6 matches at the beginning of the season. I am not saying Hawaii will beat nebraska. Hawaii still has to go through the regional. But I am saying this is not the same team Nebraska beat. OK? « Last Edit: 12/4/05 at 17:27 by pineapple
|
|
|
Post by roofed! on Dec 17, 2005 1:39:09 GMT -5
I think Washington will try to attack Nebraska's passing, so that the setters will have to set away from Elmer and Stalls. Pavan will be Pavan, and I don't think you can shut her down. For Washington to win, they have to shut down Nebraska's MB and force Jenn S (and possibly Larson too) to have a "bad" night. Also, Washington needs to get a good matchup at the net for Thompson (preferably defending Jenn S) -- you don't want to have Houghtelling hitting over Thompson all day long.
For Nebraska, I think they need to shut down both Hagerty and Morrison (Hagerty can be inconsistent), and take care of areas that I think they are still vulnerable: passing and backrow defense.
I will be rooting for fellow Pac-10 team, but both teams are equally matched up. It would be great if the match goes all the way to game 5, and both teams standing toe-to-toe past the 15 points.
|
|
|
Post by holidayhusker on Dec 17, 2005 2:50:09 GMT -5
Beachwear........ you make me laugh......... as often my pet labrador does.......! Don't know whether to pat you and laugh at your stupidity or slap you and rub your nose in it when you pee on the floor.
|
|
|
Post by cvbc14 on Dec 17, 2005 3:15:39 GMT -5
holiday husker...
i say huskers in 4. i know you will agree with that as well. i'll be home over x-mas weekend. maybe we'll put up a net in the south gym.
|
|
|
Post by FlyingL on Dec 17, 2005 8:30:39 GMT -5
Though this was the worst Final Four Semis I have ever watched, the Championship has the potentiontial to be one of the best ever.
I actually agree with Beachman's assessment of Nebraska's Middles. Elmer is National Team caliber. Tracy Stalls is no better than either of Washington's Middles.
I think this match will be determined by passing. Pavan will be served relentlessly. Front and backrow. All of Santa Clara's runs were a result of Pavan's less than accurate passing. Don't expect Washington to have the same problem. I take Washington in 4.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2005 9:26:00 GMT -5
OK---I'm still baffled on the "much faster offense" comments by some of you. Much more efficient setter----yes. More deceptive setter----perhaps. Much faster offense. NO. UW does not run multiple hitters at you at different tempos, they don't run low fast sets to the outside. In fact their outside set are sometimes set inside---advantage block---.
I'll give you that CT is a better setter, more consistent. UW better passers hands down, ummmmm let's wait on that.
5pm needs to be here. NOW.
|
|
|
Post by ohiostatetad on Dec 17, 2005 10:37:29 GMT -5
Well, this is the match most of us thought we would see. Clearly the two best teams in the country. I am also certain that the next two best teams were not in San Antonio. Tennessee and Santa Clara have alot to be proud of, they made great runs, but they were way out of place out there. The scores were lopsided and the matches weren't as lopsided as the score indicate, they were worse. Then why have a tournament? I read more gripes from volleyball fans about seedings than I do from basketball fans---and there's not a single volleyball office pool in the 40-story building where I work. Maybe college football DOES have the right answer.
|
|
|
Post by 808 on Dec 17, 2005 10:44:04 GMT -5
OK---I'm still baffled on the "much faster offense" comments by some of you. Much more efficient setter----yes. More deceptive setter----perhaps. Much faster offense. NO. UW does not run multiple hitters at you at different tempos, they don't run low fast sets to the outside. In fact their outside set are sometimes set inside---advantage block---. I'll give you that CT is a better setter, more consistent. UW better passers hands down, ummmmm let's wait on that. 5pm needs to be here. NOW. Mention of a "much faster offense" might be due to memories of Washington's offense in previous years. They did run a faster offense the past few years, but in the matches I saw this year, I didn't think it was as fast as before.
|
|
|
Post by lilred on Dec 17, 2005 10:47:51 GMT -5
I guess the only thing I have the "fast offense" theory to compare to is Georgia Tech's in 2003. They not only set the middles 6 inches off the net, but most of the sets to the OH's were more horizontal than vertical. I am assuming this is a fast offense? Sometimes I wondered if the ball even left the setters hand before it was hit. I don't really see this from Washington.
|
|
|
Post by JHAM on Dec 17, 2005 11:19:51 GMT -5
Well you can only run an offense so fast and UDub is rather hampered with having Sonja back since she is like ancient....LOL! Just kidding! Can't wait for the match so that all the "I told you so's can start" I predicted that both TN and SC would be swept respectively (who didn't?) but I'll go out on a limb and say that this may be the matchup we've all wanted from the start of the season but that it will not live up to all the hype!
NEBRASKA SWEEPS!
|
|
|
Post by Barefoot In Kailua on Dec 17, 2005 12:14:18 GMT -5
Sure, drag those posts out. Go ahead, and if you can't then I'll simply dismiss your post the way I did (R)uffda!'s I would agree with your thoughts on the NACWAA but for different reasons. Hawai'i was without Tara Hittle, a major component to Hawaii's offensive/defensive strategy so while Nebraska was playing without stalls and in the infancy of their 6-2, Hawai'i was not without problems of their own. « Last Edit: 9/18/05 at 21:59 by BiK » Logged Hawai'i was playing without Tara Hittle. Hittle's absence changed the dynamics of this Wahine team. It's like Nebraska playing wihout the services of Jen Saleamua. If you are going to make excuses for Nebraska (playing with freshman etc) you should be as objective when looking at Hawai'i. Futhermore, Hawai'i had more aces and less service errors than did the Huskers.Not bad for a team that "had no serving". « Last Edit: 10/25/05 at 0:47 by BiK » you are ovelooking something critical in Hawaii's lost to LMU. Hawaii didn't have Mason and Hittle playing in that game. They both had sprained ankles. Also, Houston, Hawaii's gifted freshman was still green. The Hawaii team that manhandled texas has a different starting lineup from the one that lost the 6 matches at the beginning of the season. I am not saying Hawaii will beat nebraska. Hawaii still has to go through the regional. But I am saying this is not the same team Nebraska beat. OK? « Last Edit: 12/4/05 at 17:27 by pineapple That's it? Btw, my response was in response to excuses by a Husker fan.
|
|