|
Post by clubparent on May 17, 2012 13:03:39 GMT -5
What are the advantages? Disadvantages? What kind of personnel is needed for it to be effective?
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on May 17, 2012 13:12:30 GMT -5
You need 3 middles, and a creative setter. As with any system, it helps to have a couple of OH's who can pass nails.
|
|
|
Post by volleyhead on May 17, 2012 13:25:08 GMT -5
Advantages: 1) 2 quick attackers in the front row which if you pass well is harder to defend.
2) Bigger RS block. (Most middles are tall which can help blocking RS)
Disadvantages:
1) Requires you to pass more perfectly without an opposite that is a passer (Most middles aren't passers)
2) Vulnerable to short serves that clog up approach patterns
3) Transition offense is a little more predictable in medium dig situations unless the opposite can hit off 2 feet.
I don't think any team running a 3 middle offense has won a national title. UCLA last year, no...Penn State with Blair Brown at opposite, no...Nebraska when they had Pavan, no...Washington when they had Tomasevic, no. Not sure what that means but it's just interesting.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on May 17, 2012 13:33:06 GMT -5
Advantages: 1) 2 quick attackers in the front row which if you pass well is harder to defend. 2) Bigger RS block. (Most middles are tall which can help blocking RS) Disadvantages: 1) Requires you to pass more perfectly without an opposite that is a passer (Most middles aren't passers) 2) Vulnerable to short serves that clog up approach patterns 3) Transition offense is a little more predictable in medium dig situations unless the opposite can hit off 2 feet. I don't think any team running a 3 middle offense has won a national title. UCLA last year, no...Penn State with Blair Brown at opposite, no...Nebraska when they had Pavan, no...Washington when they had Tomasevic, no. Not sure what that means but it's just interesting. You're talking about using a middle as your RS hitter, like Cal has done with Johnson. I thought the "3-middle" system had none of the middles opposite one another and was more fluid with multiple changes betwen MBs playing left and center.
|
|
|
Post by roy on May 17, 2012 13:57:42 GMT -5
It was most evident by the 2001 UCLA men's team when Adam Naeve returned from training with the national team for the Olympics. UCLA had 3 huge middles so instead of converting one of them to another position, they put all 3 of them in the line up. Their middles ranged from 6'7-6'10 and posed a lot of problems for some of the outside hitters on other teams.
|
|
|
Post by vbkid111 on May 17, 2012 14:37:12 GMT -5
You're talking about using a middle as your RS hitter, like Cal has done with Johnson. I thought the "3-middle" system had none of the middles opposite one another and was more fluid with multiple changes betwen MBs playing left and center. A 3-middle offense is more than just inserting a true MB as your RS. In this system, you have 3 middles, all positioned 2 rotations away from each other (maybe starting in the 4-spot, the 2, and 6). Your M1 (starting in the 4) would play middle for the 1st 2 rotations and then RS when the M2 (starting in 6) rotates to the front. The setter has to be placed between 2 of the MB's to prevent a difficult "setter in the back left" serve receive...and so on... A big advantage is that this system can create some VERY difficult match-up problems for your opponent and you can move blockers around in just about every rotation to get the best match-up. A big disadvantage is that these players need to be very flexible and multi-skilled, probably moreso than most MB's tend to be (no offense to those of that specie). You also have to be a little clever with your libero entries since the MB's are not opposite. At some point, one of the giants will have to do some backrow work.
|
|
|
Post by lonewolf on May 17, 2012 15:11:53 GMT -5
You're talking about using a middle as your RS hitter, like Cal has done with Johnson. I thought the "3-middle" system had none of the middles opposite one another and was more fluid with multiple changes betwen MBs playing left and center. A 3-middle offense is more than just inserting a true MB as your RS. In this system, you have 3 middles, all positioned 2 rotations away from each other (maybe starting in the 4-spot, the 2, and 6). Your M1 (starting in the 4) would play middle for the 1st 2 rotations and then RS when the M2 (starting in 6) rotates to the front. The setter has to be placed between 2 of the MB's to prevent a difficult "setter in the back left" serve receive...and so on... A big advantage is that this system can create some VERY difficult match-up problems for your opponent and you can move blockers around in just about every rotation to get the best match-up. A big disadvantage is that these players need to be very flexible and multi-skilled, probably moreso than most MB's tend to be (no offense to those of that specie). You also have to be a little clever with your libero entries since the MB's are not opposite. At some point, one of the giants will have to do some backrow work. That's a pretty good summation vbkid, though outside of switches you can have a varied number of how often each 'middle' plays middle. (e.g. M1-3rot, M2-1rot, M3-2rot) I would add to the advantages. Can give lots of different looks, and make it very hard to scout. Can be fun and fresh to the players. A big note for this offense is that you use it when you look at your personnel and see they fit the system, or you can recruit the personnel to fit it. Trying to force players into a system they don't fit into just ends badly. As far as personnel. Flexible hitters that are comfortable playing different positions and at least 3 that are competent at Middle (e.g. don't put a 3rd player that can play middle on the court if they don't give you an advantage, and/or it puts a better hitter on the bench). As far as their passing/defensive skills...that depends on your DS situation and sub rules.
|
|
|
Post by fogballer on May 17, 2012 15:15:03 GMT -5
The three middle offense is lame. If you want to impress me, run the five setter offense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2012 15:37:34 GMT -5
Hi, not new to the forum here but don't normally comment.
The 3-middle offense you are referring to is sometimes called a "triangle offense" in the sense that (as you mentioned) your lineup has 3 players that end up playing in the middle. You generally will have one player play all 3 rotations as a middle, the other player plays 2 rotations as a middle and 1 as an outside, and the third player plays 1 rotation as a middle and 2 as an outside. Don't recall ever seeing this at the women's collegiate level.
In terms of personnel, I played on a team that employed this type of offense because there was only 1 "true" middle available. The other 2 players were an outside and an opposite that ended up having to play middle because they were tall and athletic enough to get away with it. It was less ideal and more out of necessity.
If you are planning on using 3 middles in this offense, I think volleyhead covered the major advantages/disadvantages. Personally, I tend to reject the idea of using trained middles in place of a pure opposite because the focus shifts more to blocking than on attacking. In system, you'd set these players at a tempo familiar to them as middles - quick. It's in transition and out of system that you start to lose the ability to utilize these players effectively and can run the risk of becoming one-dimensional (high outside).
|
|
|
Post by internationalball on May 17, 2012 17:03:24 GMT -5
You're talking about using a middle as your RS hitter, like Cal has done with Johnson. I thought the "3-middle" system had none of the middles opposite one another and was more fluid with multiple changes betwen MBs playing left and center. A 3-middle offense is more than just inserting a true MB as your RS. In this system, you have 3 middles, all positioned 2 rotations away from each other (maybe starting in the 4-spot, the 2, and 6). Your M1 (starting in the 4) would play middle for the 1st 2 rotations and then RS when the M2 (starting in 6) rotates to the front. The setter has to be placed between 2 of the MB's to prevent a difficult "setter in the back left" serve receive...and so on... A big advantage is that this system can create some VERY difficult match-up problems for your opponent and you can move blockers around in just about every rotation to get the best match-up. A big disadvantage is that these players need to be very flexible and multi-skilled, probably moreso than most MB's tend to be (no offense to those of that specie). You also have to be a little clever with your libero entries since the MB's are not opposite. At some point, one of the giants will have to do some backrow work. Sure, just give me an Angelica Ljungquist, Lauren Cacciamani, and Dani Scott and it will be a piece of cake!!!
|
|
|
Post by jgrout on May 17, 2012 18:11:13 GMT -5
Don't forget Bev Oden. She was the first middle blocker (and the first player) to be a four-time first-team AVCA A-A. Perhaps one of the Penn State middles has done it since (Foluke was second-team her freshman season).
Bev was a six rotation middle, an excellent blocker in the front row and an excellent attacker in all six rotations. I'm told there weren't many back-row attackers in NCAA WVB in those days... let alone back-row attacking middles. In today's game, where the libero can be the backup setter, she could also play right side without having to be the classic "opposite hitter" (ala Stanford's Walsh and, in the seasons she wasn't setting full time, UT's Engle).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2012 18:30:30 GMT -5
Don't forget Bev Oden. She was the first middle blocker (and the first player) to be a four-time first-team AVCA A-A. Perhaps one of the Penn State middles has done it since (Foluke was second-team her freshman season). No Penn State middle was ever a four-time First-Team All-American.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2012 18:34:16 GMT -5
Advantages: 1) 2 quick attackers in the front row which if you pass well is harder to defend. 2) Bigger RS block. (Most middles are tall which can help blocking RS) Disadvantages: 1) Requires you to pass more perfectly without an opposite that is a passer (Most middles aren't passers) 2) Vulnerable to short serves that clog up approach patterns 3) Transition offense is a little more predictable in medium dig situations unless the opposite can hit off 2 feet. I don't think any team running a 3 middle offense has won a national title. UCLA last year, no...Penn State with Blair Brown at opposite, no...Nebraska when they had Pavan, no...Washington when they had Tomasevic, no. Not sure what that means but it's just interesting. You could argue that Blair Brown was a "third middle" I think. Alisha used her on quick attacks all across the net, slides, high balls, etc. The combinations that Blair ran with Arielle for two rotations was a big reason why Megan and Nic Fawcett could be so effective. Having Blair able to hit any ball anywhere effectively was a huge strength for Penn State and was a huge reason their offense was so successful.
|
|
|
Post by sonofdogman on May 17, 2012 20:09:20 GMT -5
Triangle offense with 3 MB's and 3 OH/S's is good for training younger kids. Only 2 positions to learn rather than 5. MB's play left and middle, hit right out of one serve-receive, hit slides b/c there is always a front-row setter. OH/S's play left or right and set when they are MF and RF. Developmental theory here, rather than any high-level play as referenced above.
|
|
|
Post by baywatcher on May 17, 2012 21:52:21 GMT -5
Blair Brown wouldn't have been a "3rd MB" in this set up because she line up next to another MB. The idea is to space the 3 MB apart with either an OH or S in between.
The Ohio State Coach, Carlston? can never remember the correct spelling, has a video out on the 3 MB offense, done at his Ohio University days. I remember he brought that formation out to Stanford for the Regional with Santa Clara and Arizona and Ohio gave Arizona fits in the 3rd round. Least I think he used it. Since you'd have two of your returners in the front row for at least one rotation the part about serve receive would be helpful. Getting a little crowded back there.
|
|