|
|
Post by volleyguy on Oct 10, 2017 13:17:57 GMT -5
Nebraska in three, unless Wisconsin changes its lineup. Wisconsin just hasn't shown anything to indicate that it has the ability to play at a consistent high level for the duration of an entire match. If you look at five of the last six sets they've played, they look like they're regressing vs. progressing. Still think that Gillis, Duello, and MacDonald need to find spots on the bench. I agree. All things point towards Bucky getting bucked in 3:  |
|
|
|
Post by eov4nu on Oct 10, 2017 13:39:45 GMT -5
With a few days of preparation for only Wisconsin and Nebraska's current state of team chemistry I like their chances to play well on the road a lot! Madison is not an easy place to play for sure but have faith in the Big Red!
|
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Oct 10, 2017 13:41:46 GMT -5
Nebraska in three, unless Wisconsin changes its lineup. Wisconsin just hasn't shown anything to indicate that it has the ability to play at a consistent high level for the duration of an entire match. If you look at five of the last six sets they've played, they look like they're regressing vs. progressing. Still think that Gillis, Duello, and MacDonald need to find spots on the bench. What is your proposed lineup? You can't use Hart. MacDonald is the bad spot? She's not playing more than a rotation or two right now, so any perceived "damage" in my view, is limited. If anything, she should be serving more. If Gillis and Duello are both benched, then we have Whalen (who appears to be hurt), Shanahan, and Loberg available. Would you have Loberg play 6 rotations, since you are benching a small (these are real questions, not snarky). Would Bell play 3 rotations in the back row, or get on a regular SS rotation? Ok, here's a scenario: Bates/Loberg, Shanahan/Williams, Rettke, Hilley, Clark. |
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Oct 10, 2017 13:45:33 GMT -5
With a few days of preparation for only Wisconsin and Nebraska's current state of team chemistry I like their chances to play well on the road a lot! Madison is not an easy place to play for sure but have faith in the Big Red! This has not been proven to be true for years at the fieldhouse. It's really a bit of a fallacy in many cases. When people say that, it's usually because a team (any team) is already good, and might drop 3 matches a season total, on the road. If it's so tough, how did Stanford come back from 2 down? Minnesota had a 3 year streak going, so there "might" be some evidence there, but again, it's a good team with few losses. If you had a team that was say 10-0 at home and 5-5 on the road, that might mean something, but it also might mean they are a bad road team, not that they are great home team. Nebraska and Penn State are examples the other way. They lost a few at home in the last three years because they weren't as good. |
|
|
|
Post by SportyBucky on Oct 10, 2017 13:50:19 GMT -5
Nebraska in three, unless Wisconsin changes its lineup. Wisconsin just hasn't shown anything to indicate that it has the ability to play at a consistent high level for the duration of an entire match. If you look at five of the last six sets they've played, they look like they're regressing vs. progressing. Still think that Gillis, Duello, and MacDonald need to find spots on the bench. I agree. All things point towards Bucky getting bucked in 3: Um yeah, because we did so poorly against NE in NE. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Oct 10, 2017 13:52:53 GMT -5
I agree. All things point towards Bucky getting bucked in 3: Um yeah, because we did so poorly against NE in NE. That was then, this is now. |
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Oct 10, 2017 14:09:31 GMT -5
The problem in 5 of the last six sets for the badgers has been defense, and especially the block. The badgers can't give up 0.300 - 0.400 HPs and compete for that long. Most teams can't. That's largely down to the other team being in system too often. Based on what happened when Bell came in, it basically comes down to the serve.
|
|
nutty
Sophomore
Posts: 175
|
Post by nutty on Oct 10, 2017 14:20:50 GMT -5
Nebraska in three, unless Wisconsin changes its lineup. Wisconsin just hasn't shown anything to indicate that it has the ability to play at a consistent high level for the duration of an entire match. If you look at five of the last six sets they've played, they look like they're regressing vs. progressing. Still think that Gillis, Duello, and MacDonald need to find spots on the bench. What is your proposed lineup? You can't use Hart. MacDonald is the bad spot? She's not playing more than a rotation or two right now, so any perceived "damage" in my view, is limited. If anything, she should be serving more. If Gillis and Duello are both benched, then we have Whalen (who appears to be hurt), Shanahan, and Loberg available. Would you have Loberg play 6 rotations, since you are benching a small (these are real questions, not snarky). Would Bell play 3 rotations in the back row, or get on a regular SS rotation? Ok, here's a scenario: Bates/Loberg, Shanahan/Williams, Rettke, Hilley, Clark. I agree in your (presumed) skepticism on the proposal to bench Gillis, Duello and MacDonald. I really think you can only replace one of Duello or Gillis with the avialable players, assuming that Danielle Hart is not going to burn her presumed redshirt. I thought Shanahan looked good in her time replacing a suspended Tionna, but she was not any kind of offensive threat. I really don't think you gain anything in dropping Gillis or Duello, moving Rettke to RS and adding Shanahan as an MB. That's change for the sake of change. Really, the discussion from a fan's standpoint, and Sheff may not even be having it based on what he sees day-to-day, is Loberg in place of Gilly (Not likely) or Duello (More likely than Gilly). He's never been afraid of elevating a player over another player who has been successful in the past (Think Deme Morales in 2014 and Kelli Bates last year). If Loberg is not playing, I assume it's not out of any loyalty to Duello or Gillis. She's just not ready. The question he'd have to answer is that if they are aiming to be at their best in December, is a Loberg who would have played a lot of ball between now and the tournament likely to be better than Gillis or Duello. If the answer to that is yes, you play her. Period. As to AMac...are Dodd or Bell any better than she is? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2017 14:26:55 GMT -5
Nebraska in three, unless Wisconsin changes its lineup. Wisconsin just hasn't shown anything to indicate that it has the ability to play at a consistent high level for the duration of an entire match. If you look at five of the last six sets they've played, they look like they're regressing vs. progressing. Still think that Gillis, Duello, and MacDonald need to find spots on the bench. What is your proposed lineup? You can't use Hart. MacDonald is the bad spot? She's not playing more than a rotation or two right now, so any perceived "damage" in my view, is limited. If anything, she should be serving more. If Gillis and Duello are both benched, then we have Whalen (who appears to be hurt), Shanahan, and Loberg available. Would you have Loberg play 6 rotations, since you are benching a small (these are real questions, not snarky). Would Bell play 3 rotations in the back row, or get on a regular SS rotation? Ok, here's a scenario: Bates/Loberg, Shanahan/Williams, Rettke, Hilley, Clark. That's the exact lineup I posted in the Wisconsin thread a few days ago. MacDonald has been playing Duello's back row for the last couple matches after Dodd went to the bench. She was particularly bad against MSU. I don't think her serve makes a difference and it certainly doesn't make up for her very poor receiving and digging. Like I said in that other post, perhaps Wisconsin can line Shanahan up opposite Hilley like Minnesota did with Lohman in 2015 and 2016 so that they weren't stuck with her in a two-hitter rotation. That would also ensure that neither Shanahan/Williams would have to serve or that a sub would have to be wasted there. This lineup then has a senior (Gillis) and Whalen available in relief: L1: Bates - they don't use her out of the backrow as the L2 so let's get our most efficient pin hitter at L1 L2: Loberg - Rettke will take some attention and limit the amount of tough swings she has to take M1: Williams - will need to play one rotation on the right (ro 3) M2: Rettke - runs slides exclusively in serve-receive (they like that play); plays on the right in transition OPP: Shanahan - plays in the middle, not a huge part of the offense (won't really need to be); allows team to run double-quicks in trans and SR S: Hilley L: Clark DS: Dodge - plays Shanahan's backrow and serves for her; they need the better passing when Hilley is up front so Williams can get the ball more DS: Bell or Dodd - plays Loberg's backrow and serves for her (one of them needs to step up and be able to play) This lineup would get Hilley, Bates, Clark, Bell, Rettke, and Dodge serving still. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2017 14:29:34 GMT -5
What is your proposed lineup? You can't use Hart. MacDonald is the bad spot? She's not playing more than a rotation or two right now, so any perceived "damage" in my view, is limited. If anything, she should be serving more. If Gillis and Duello are both benched, then we have Whalen (who appears to be hurt), Shanahan, and Loberg available. Would you have Loberg play 6 rotations, since you are benching a small (these are real questions, not snarky). Would Bell play 3 rotations in the back row, or get on a regular SS rotation? Ok, here's a scenario: Bates/Loberg, Shanahan/Williams, Rettke, Hilley, Clark. I thought Shanahan looked good in her time replacing a suspended Tionna, but she was not any kind of offensive threat. You don't need the M2 to be an offensive threat if the other four attackers can handle the load. She just needs to get touches on the block and not make errors. |
|
|
|
Post by milkmandan on Oct 10, 2017 14:46:53 GMT -5
Wisconsin in 4.
If the Badgers can pass, they can swing with anyone. Nebraska's blocking is still pretty leaky and Foecke's recent offensive struggles are concerning.
The Huskers aren't going undefeated in the Big Ten and this is as likely a place as any to drop one.
|
|
|
|
Post by wiscvball on Oct 10, 2017 14:59:25 GMT -5
The Huskers aren't going undefeated in the Big Ten and this is as likely a place as any to drop one. If Nebraska makes it through this match, they have a very good shot at running the table. No more Minnesota, no more Penn State, @ MSU, @ Purdue would be their toughest matches left. They still get Rutgers 2x, Maryland 2x, Indiana, Northwestern, Iowa... so far they have gotten 'up' for the big matches since Hunter has been back. No reason to see that changing now. I think Nebraska wins in 4, unfortunately. Badgers have won every first set of every match except Marquette this year, which they lost 24-26. They need to keep that streak alive and not let down in set 2 and 3 to have a chance. |
|
|
|
Post by wyredneck on Oct 10, 2017 15:40:09 GMT -5
After the first match I thought that the smart money would be on Wisconsin to return the favor at home. As usual, I think it will come down to passing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2017 15:44:37 GMT -5
What is your proposed lineup? You can't use Hart. MacDonald is the bad spot? She's not playing more than a rotation or two right now, so any perceived "damage" in my view, is limited. If anything, she should be serving more. If Gillis and Duello are both benched, then we have Whalen (who appears to be hurt), Shanahan, and Loberg available. Would you have Loberg play 6 rotations, since you are benching a small (these are real questions, not snarky). Would Bell play 3 rotations in the back row, or get on a regular SS rotation? Ok, here's a scenario: Bates/Loberg, Shanahan/Williams, Rettke, Hilley, Clark. If Loberg is not playing, I assume it's not out of any loyalty to Duello or Gillis. She's just not ready. And Gillis is?
| Sets | K | E | TA | | MSU | 5 | 10 | 6 | 44 | | Michigan | 3 | 11 | 3 | 24 | | Iowa | 3 | 8 | 1 | 17 | | Nebraska | 5 | 13 | 8 | 40 | | Minnesota | 5 | 12 | 10 | 52 | | Michigan State | 4 | 16 | 7 | 40 | | TOTAL | 25 | 70 - 2.80 kps | 35 | 217 - hitting .161 |
Fun fact: together, Duello and Gillis are hitting .138 with 1.88 kills per set in Big Ten play - combined. That's just not going to do it. |
|
nutty
Sophomore
Posts: 175
|
Post by nutty on Oct 10, 2017 15:45:16 GMT -5
I thought Shanahan looked good in her time replacing a suspended Tionna, but she was not any kind of offensive threat. You don't need the M2 to be an offensive threat if the other four attackers can handle the load. She just needs to get touches on the block and not make errors. I don't think any of us have seen enough of her to say she can get touches on the block in B1G play and not make errors on the few opportunities she would get offensively. Maybe it's worth finding out. She played against Marquette and Southern Miss and, at least in the box score, got a fair number of blocks. I know Marquette is a decent enough team. But, they're no Nebraska/Minnesota/PSU/MSU, etc. You probably give up something offensively by moving Rettke. So, it's finding a balance. Is the gain of Rettke in place of Duello more than the loss of Shanahan for Rettke? And, you can dismiss any stats anyone accumulated against Southern Miss, her other extensive playing time. That was a total mismatch and drubbing. |
|
